HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-05-19; Housing & Redevelopment Commission; 80; California Builders, HOUSliVG, AND r.tDEVELOPMENT COMMISS[-\I - AGENDA BILL
a<- ;o
. * fica
\B# 8o TITLE: RP 86-21 CALIFORNIA BUILDERS DEPT. HD.
AT& 5119187 CITY AmV-
IEPT. RED CITY MGR.r;)\Q
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
If Commission concurs, your action is to adopt Housing and Redevelopment Commission Resolution No. W approving RP 86-21 California Builders. Qf7
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The applicant, California Builders, is requesting approval of a major redevelopment permit to develop a professional office building at the southwest corner of the Jefferson Street, Grand Avenue intersection in Subarea 1 of the Village Redevelopment.
Design Review Board at their meeting of March 25, 1987 recommended denial of this project because of various design issues which were felt did not meet compliance with the goals of the redevelopment area.
The applicant, at the request of the Design Review Board, worked with staff and the project was redesigned.
At their meeting of April 22, 1987, the Design Review Board recommended approval of RP 86-21 California Builders.
FISCAL IMPACT
No detailed economic impact analysis of this development has been determined.
EXHIBITS
l- Housing and Redevelopment Commission Resolution No. W O$'v
2- Design Review Board staff report dated April 22, 1987
APPLICAT -N SUBMITTAL DATE:
NOVEMBER 24, 1986
w
STAFF REPORT
DATE: APRIL 22, 1987
TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: RP 86-21 - CALIFORNIA BUILDERS - Request for a major
Redevelopment Permit to develop a professional office building at the southwest corner of the 3efferson
Street/Grand Avenue intersection in Subarea 1 of the Village Redevelopment area.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Design Review Board recommend APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Resolution No. 091 recommending APPROVAL of RP 86-21, based on the findings
and subject to the conditions contained therein. .
DISCUSSION
On March 25, 1987, this project, RP 86-21, was heard before the Design Review Board. At that time, staff was recommending denial of the project because it did not contribute towards the attainment of a village atmosphere, because of the structures
height, bulk and absence of adequate relief.
The Design Review Board overall concurred with staff’s recommendat ion, citing more specific concerns over (1) the
projects non-village like architecture, (2) overall massive appearance, (3) inadequate alley lighting, and (4) potential traffic impacts to the alley to the west.
The project applicant indicated that he would be willing to work
with sta?f to resolve these concerns. In accordance, the Oesign
Review Board passed a motion to send the project back to staff
for redesign.
As shown on Exhibits “A” through “G”, the projects architecture
has been extensively redesigned in order to reduce the overall height and massive appearance of the structure, while creating a structure with a true village flavor.
The former projects non-village appearance and height have been effectively revised on the street side elevations through the incorporation of the following architectural features into the structure; (1) changing the roof to a mansard style with varying
pitches and wood shake
shingles, (2) staggering the windows and including muntin, wood
window frames, with window overhangs (wood shake roofs), (3) insetting wood trim boards into the stucco siding instead of
using tack-on materials, (4) including exposed false rafters at the base of the roof overhangs,
the ground .floor, (5) popping out the windows along (6) incorporating brick materials into the facades of the structure,
to the parking areas. and (7) pitched roofs over the entrys
The changes to the roof in particular, have reduced the buildings height by approximately 3 feet. The increased facade relief and enhanced architectural treatments function to reduce the structure’s mass. In addition, the entryway to the building has been widened in order to create a
more open, pedestrian oriented appearance from the 3efferson
StreetjCrand Avenue intersection. Staff believes that the redesigned structure does respond to the architectural concerns
expressed by the Design Review Board, as well as being in
compliance with all relevant development standards.
In terms of building mass, the applicant reduced square footage to open the entryway which staff feels is greatly improved.
Most of the reduced square footage, however, was added back on in another area. Overall, the buildings square footage has only been reduced by a total of 76 square feet (from 17,677 SF to 17,601 SF). .
If th.e Design Review Board believes that the project should
redface, square footage, then the project can be approved conditioned on this requirement. In accordance, staff has added
a condition (Condition No. 18) requiring that the project be further redesigned to reduce its total square footage. If the Design Review Board does not believe that the square footage of
the project need be reduced, they can approve the project subject
to the deletion of this condition.
Staff is also somewhat concerned over the proposed structures
southern and western facing elevations. Neither of these
elevations have been adequately enhanced with architectural
treatments relative to the Grand and 3efferson Street facades.
In that the project is in a very visible, high profile location,
staff feels that all elevations should be treated with as much attention to quality and detail. In accordance, staff has added
Condition No. 19, which requires that these elevations be
comparably enhanced subject to the approval of the Planning
Director, prior to the issuance of building permits.
Overall, staff feels that these architectural revisions serve to
create a building that appears more pedestrian in scale and exemplary of a village oriented structure. The architecture of
this structure is very similar to and clearly compatible with Dooley McCluskey’s, which is located one block west of the site.
-2-
The project applicant has also agreed to include two high-
pressure sodium lights along the adjacent alley to the west.
These lights will be adequate to ensure visibility and safety.
With regard to the Design Review Board’s concern regarding
potential traffic impacts associateed with parked vehicles backing onto the alley, the project applicant is in process of
preparing a traffic study. In that the traffic study could not be completed prior to this public hearing, staff has added a condition to the project requiring that a traffic study be prepared addressing this concern prior to the issuance of
building permits. The traffic study could be brought back to the Design Review Board at a later date.
With these revisions, the project still complies with the overall goals of the Subarea I and the development standards of the V-R
zone and the Village Design Manual. In addition, it now complies with one of the primary goals of the Village Design Manual, to
create a “village atmosphere”.
Overall, because the project applicant has been willing to
redesign the project and its architecture so that it now - contributes toward the creation of a “village atmosphere”, staff
recommends approval of RP 86-21. For additional details, please see the attached staff ,report to the Design Review Baord dated March 25, 1987.
ATTACHMENTS
1) Design Review Board Resolution No. 091
2) Staff Report, dated March 25, 1987
3) Exhibits “A” - “C”, dated April 14, 1987 (not attached)
CDD:bn
4/10/87
-3-
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 091
A RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO
DEVELOP A 17,677 SQUARE FOOT PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING
ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
THE JEFFERSON STREET/GRAND AVENUE INTERSECTION.
APPLICANT: CALIFORNIA BUILDERS
CASE NO.: RP 86-21
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the
City of Carlsbad and referred to the Design Review Board; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request
as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal
Code, the Design Review Board did, on the 22nd day of April, 1987,
hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider said application on
property described as:
Lots 17-22 of Bl’ock 49, Carlsbad Townsite, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 535, filed in the Office of
the County Recorder, County of San Diego, May 2,
1888.
WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering
all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be
heard, said Board considered all factors relating to RP 86-21.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Design
Review Board of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing,
the Board APPROVES RP 86-21, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1) The project complies with the overall goals of Subarea 1 of
the Village Design Manual and the development standards of th
V-R zone and the Village Design Manual.
///I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
- 16
19
20
21
2%
22
24
25
26
27
28
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
DRB
The project is in compliance with one of the primary goals of
the Village Design Manual, because it contributes toward the creation of a “village atmosphere”.
The site is physically suitable for the type and density of
the development since the site is adequate in size and shape
to accommodate the professional office as proposed.
The project is consistent with all City public facility pol-
icies and ordinances since:
a) The Design Review Board has, by inclusion of an
appropriate condition to this project, ensured building
permits will not be issued for the project unless the Cit] Engineer determines that sewer service is available, and
building cannot occur within the project unless sewer
service remains available, and the Planning Commission is
satisfied that the requirements of the Public Facilities
Element of the General Plan have been met insofar as they apply to sewer service for this project.
b) All necessary public improvements have been provided or
will be required as conditions of approval.
c) The applicant has agreed and is required by the inclusion
of an appropriate condition to pay a public facilities
fee. Performance of that contract and payment of the fee
will enable this body to find that public facilities will
be available concurrent with need as required by the
General Plan.
This project will not cause any significant environmental impacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by the
Planning Director on March 14, 1987 and approved by the
Design Reveiw Board on April 22, 1987.
This project requires the construction of the improvements or facilities listed in the conditions of approval or the paymenl
of fees in lieu of construction. This project creates a direct need for the improvements or facilities for the reason!
stated in the staff report. If the improvements or faci-litie: are not provided the project will create an unmitigated burder
on existing improvements and facilities. Further, the improvements and facilities are necessary to provide safe, adequate and appropriate service to future residents of the project consistent with City goals, policies and plans.
The applicant is by condition, required to pay any increase Ir
public facility fee, or new construction tax, or development
fees, and has agreed to abide by any additional requirements
established by a development management or public facility
program ultimately adopted by the City of Carlsbad. This will ensure continued availability of. public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts created by the project..
RESO NO. 091 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
12
14
15
16
17
If
19
2c
21
2:
2:
24
2:
26
27
2E
8) The project is consistent with the provisions of Chapter 21.9
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the plans adopted pursuant
of this Chapter or has signed an agreement to be subject to
such plans when they are adopted.
Conditions:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Approval is granted for RP 86-21, as shown on Exhibits “A” -
” G ” 9 dated April 14, 1987, incorporated by reference and on
file in the Planning Department. Development shall occur substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in these
conditions.
This project is approved upon the express condition that
building permits will not be issued for development of the
subject property unless the City Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of application for
such sewer permits and will continue to be available until time of occupancy. This note shall be placed on the final
map.
This project is also approved under the express condition tha the applicant pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Council on April 22, 1986 and any development fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth management system or facilities and improvement plan and to fulfil1 the subdivider’s agreement to
pay the public facilities fee dated November 25, 1986, and th agreement to pay the Growth Management Fee dated April 14, 1987, copies of which are on file with the City Clerk and are incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not paid thi application will not be consistent with the General Plan and
approval for this project shall be void.
Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all
sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable Cit
ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance.
Water shall be provided to this project pursuant to the Water
Service agreement between the City of Carlsbad and the Costa
Real Water District, dated May 25, 1983.
Pl’anning Department:
6) The applicant shall prepare a 24” x 36” reproducible mylar of
the final site plan incorporating the conditions contained herein. Said site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building
permits.
///I
//I/ DRB RESO NO. 091 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1C
17
1E
19
2c
21
22
22
24
25
26
27
26
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
The applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape and irriga-
tion plan which shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Director prior to the issuance of grading or buildin! permits, whichever occurs first. All trees shall be of a
specimen variety and all shrubs shall be a minimum of five gallon size.
All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and
thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris.
Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in conformance with the City’s Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs.
Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a six-foot high masonry wall with gates pursuant to City standards. Location
of said receptacles shall be approved by the Planning Director.
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be
architecturally integrated and concealed from view and the.
sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets, pursuant
to Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction o’
the Directors of Planning and Building.
Building identification and/or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identif Lcation and/o] addresses shall contrast to their background color.
If any condition for construction of any public improvements
or facilities, or the payment of any fees in lieu thereof,
imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this project arc
challenged this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section 65913.5. If any such condition Is
determined to be invalid this approval shall be invalid unles:
the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with all requirements of law.
No outdoor storage of material shall occur onsite unless required by the Fire Chief. In such instance a storage plan will be submitted for approval by the Fire Chief and the Planning Director.
Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever comes first, a soils report shall be prepared and
submitted to the City of Carlsbad. If the soils report
indicates the presence of potential fossil bearing material
then a two phased program shall be undertaken to avoid
possible significant impacts on paleontological resources.
I///
DRB RESO NO. 091 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
1c
11
12
1:
14
1:
1E
17
U
1:
2c
21
2:
21
24
2f
2E
2:
2E
16)
A) Phase 1 shall consist of a qualified paleontologist doing a literature and records search, surface study, subsurfac
testing if necessary, the recordation of any sites, and a recommendation regarding the need for further work.
B) If it is determined during Phase 1 that further work is
necessary it shall consist of the following:
1) A qualified paleontological monitor shall be present
at a pregrading conference with the developer, gradin
contractor, and the environmental review coordinator.
The purpose of this meeting will be to consult and
coordinate the role of the paleontologist in the
grading of the site. A qualified paleontologist is a
individual with adequate knowledge and experience wit
fossilized remains likely to be present to identify
them in the field and is adequately experienced to
remove the resources for further study.
2) A paleontologist or designate shall be present during
those relative phases of grading as determined at the
pregrading conference. The monitor sh.all have the authority to temporarily direct, divert or halt
grading to allow recovery of fossil remains. At the discretion of the monitor, recovery may include
washing and picking of soil samples for micro- vertebrate bone and teeth. The developer shall authorize the deposit of any resources found on the
project site in an institution staffed by qualified
paleontologists as may be determined by the Planning Director. The contractor shall be aware of the random nature of fossil occurrences and the possibility of a discovery of remains of such scientific and/or educational importance which might
warrant a long term salvage operation or preservation
Any conflicts regarding the role of the paleontologis
and/or recovery times shall be resolved by the
Planning Director.
This project is approved subject to the condition that no medical offices be allowed to occupy/lease any portion of the building. Should the applicant at a later date intend to
lease any of the structure for medical office use, additional
parking shall be required to be provided at a ratio of one
space/200 sq. ft. of gross floor area.
///I
//I/
//I/
//I/
DR8 RESO NO. 091 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
ia
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
17) Prior to the issuance of building permits, the projects southern and western elevations shall be architecturally
enhanced, comparable to the northern and eastern facades of
the structure, subject to the approval of the Planning Director.
Engineering Department:
18) This project is approved upon the express condition that
building permits will not be issued for development of the
subject property unless the City Engineer determines that
sewer capacity is available at the time of application for
such permits and will continue to be available until time of
occupancy.
19) A separate grading plan shall be submitted and approved and a separate grading permit issued for the borrow or disposal sitt
if located within the city limits.
20) Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to any
proposed construction site within this project, or
construction debris to an approved disposal site, the developer shall submit to and receive approval from the City
Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall
comply with all conditions and requirements the City Engineer
may impose with regards to the hauling operation.
21) Addi.tional drainage easements and drainage structures shall bc
provided or installed as may be required by the City
Engineer.
22) Prior to issuance of a building permit, an additional 2 feet
of right-of-way of the existing alley adjacent to this projecl
shall be dedicated by the developer in conformance with City
of Carlsbad standards.
23) Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all improvements shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Cit!
Engineer. Prior to issuance of building permits, the
Subdivider shall install, or agree to install and secure with
appropriate security as provided by law, improvements shown OI
the tentative map and the following improvements to City
Standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer:
a) Full half street improvements of Grand Avenue adjacent to
the project,
b) Full ha.lf street improvements of 3efferson Street adjacent
to the project,
/l/l
/I//
!!!I DRB RESO NO. 091 -6-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
2c
21
22
22
24
25
26
27
28
24)
25)
26)
27)
28)
29)
I /,I /
///I
/I//
//I/
/I//
/I//
cl Sidewalks,
d) Street lights,
e) Street trees,
f) Wheelchair ramps,
Reconstruct alley apron at Grand Avenue,
The developer shall ensure that proper site distance at
all driveways will be accomplished.
Improvements listed above shall be constructed within twelve
months of final map approval and/or improvement plan approval whichever occurs first.
All driveways and private drives shall be a minimum 24 feet
in width.
Unless a standard variance has been issued, no variance from
City Standards is authorized by virtue of approval of this
site plan.
The developer shall comply with all the rules, regulations ant
design requirements of the respective sewer and water agencie: regarding services to the project.
The developer shall be responsible for coordination with
S.D.G.&E., Pacific Telephone, and Cable TV authorities.
All plans, specifications, and supporting documents for the
improvements of this project shall be signed and sealed by the
Engineer in responsible charge of the work. Each sheet shall
be signed and sealed, except that bound documents may be
signed and sealed on their first page. Additionally the firs’
sheet of each set of plans shall have the following
certificate:
“DECLARATION OF RESPONSIBLE CHARGE”
I hereby declare that I am the Engineer of Work for this
project, that I have exercised responsible charge over the
design of the project as defined in Section 6703 of the
Business and Professions Code, and that the design is consistent with current standards.
DRB RESO NO. 091 -7-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I understand that the check of project drawings and
specifications by the City of Carlsbad is confined to a revi
only and does not relieve me, as Engineer of Work, of my
responsibilities for project design.
(Name, Address and Telephone of Engineering firm)
Firm:
Address:
city, St.:
Telephone:
BY
(Name of Engineer) Date:
R.C.E. NO. #
30) Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for thi project, the owner shall give written consent to the
annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the si plan into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and
Landscaping District No. 1.
Fire Department:
31)
32)
33)
34)
35)
36)
DRB
Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building
plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire
Department.
All required fire hydrants, water mains and appurtenances shall be operational prior to combustible building materials being located on the project site.
Proposed security gate systems shall be provided with “Knox” key operated override switch, as specified by the Fire De-
partment.
All private driveways shall be kept clear of parked vehicles
at all times, and shall have posted “No Parking/Fire Lane-Tov
Away Zone” pursuant to Section 17.04.040, Carlsbad Municipal
Code.
All fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, extinguishing systems, automatic sprinklers, and other systems pertinent to the project shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approve
prior to construction.
Building exceeding 10,000 sq.ft. aggregate floor area shall t sprinklered or have four-hour fire walls with no openings therein which shall split the building into 10,000 sq.ft. (01
less) areas.
RESO NO. 091 -8-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 I
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Water District:
37) The applicant’s engineer shall be required to schedule a meeting with the Water District Engineer to review the preliminary water system layout prior to preparation of the water system improvement plans.
38) Prior to the issuance of building permits the entire water
system for the subject property be evaluated in detail to ensure adequate capacity for domestic landscaping and to ensure that fire flow demands are addressed.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Design Review Board of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on
the 22nd day of April, 1987, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES :
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
3ERRY ROMBOTIS, Chairman
CARLSBAD DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
ATTEST:
CHRIS SALOMONE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT MANAGER
DRB RESO NO. 091 -v-
APPLICATJ-QN SUBMITTAL DATE:
NOVEMBER L, 1986
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 25, 1987
TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUB3ECT: RP 86-21 - CALIFORNIA BUILDERS - Request for a major
Redevelopment Permit to develop a professional office
building at the southwest corner of the 3efferson
Street/Grand Avenue intersection in Subarea 1 of the
Village Redevelopment area.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Design Review Board ADOPT Resolution No. 091 DENYING RP
86-21, based on the findings contained therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION w
.&Pi ;+. FT+“;!
The applicant is requesting a major redevelopment permit to
develop a professional office building located as described
above. The proposed office structure, which is 35 feet tall and
17,677 square feet in area, consists of two floors of office
space above one level of below grade parking. The below grade
parking is accessed via a rear alley located along the western
side of the property. A portion of the ground level floor of the structure also contains a parking area which is accessed via 3efferson Street and the aforementioned alley to the west. The
proposed office building includes a courtyard opening within its
c’enter which extends down into the below grade parking lot,
thereby providing natural light and ventilation. This courtyard
is surrounded by interior facing arcades which provide access to
the offices. The proposed building has been set back from the corner’ of 3efferson Street and Grand Avenue for purposes of creating an open landscaped area (1,400 square feet) which ties
into the building’s entry plaza. The architectural materials of
the structure include light colored stucco with stained resawn wood plant -ens. The roof will be composed of composition asphalt
shingles. Window dormers and brick veneer planters will be
included for purposes of providing some architectural relief.
The proposed project site is currently developed with two older
single family residences. The property is surrounded by single
family residences to the north and south, the 3efferson
Professional building to the east and a medical office to the
west.
III. ANALYSIS
Planning Issues
1) Does the proposed project conform with the goals of Subarea
1 and the development standards of the Village Design
Manual?
2) Does the proposed project conform with the development standards of the V-R zone?
3) Does the proposed project contribute toward the attainment
of other goals of the Village Design Manual?
Discussion
The goal for Subarea 1 is to function as a major financial,
specialty commercial center for the downtown area. As proposed, this’ project appears to conform with the overall goal of Subarea
1 and the development standards of the Village Design Manual.
The proposed project is also generally in conformance with the development standards of the V-R zone. The only exception to the projects full compliance with these standards is that the projeqt includes too many compact parking spaces. Per the City’s amended Parking Ordinance, the project is only allowed 15 compact parking
spaces (25% of the total required spaces). As proposed, it
includes 25 compact spaces. In unique circumstances, the Design Review Board can approve up to 40% compact spaces. Staff does not feel that this situation is unique. Compliance with the
parking requirement can however, be achieved by reducing the parking aisle driveways from 24 feet to 19 feet, thereby creating one-way directional flows instead of two-way within the projects
par king areas. This can be supported by staff because integrated parking has been provided and two-way directional flows are not
required.
Although the proposed project is generally in conformance with
the applicable zoning and development standards of the V-R zone
and the Village Design Manual, staff cannot justify recommending
support of the proposal because it does not appear to contribute towards the attainment of other primary Village goals, most
notably, the creation of a village atmosphere.
The project as proposed, being 35 feet tall with little
architectural relief, does not appear exemplary of a Village
oriented structure. In reality, the structure because of its
height, and overall scale is more closely associated with higher
intensity urban forms. The Design Guidelines Manual clearly
states that “as a general rule, lowrise buildings are
preferable”, for purposes of maintaining the redevelopment areas
low profile. Staff acknowledges that several other redevelopment projects along 3efferson Street within the immediate project
-2-
vicinity have been built (3efferson Professional Building, Austin Pacific) at a similar height. At least one of these structures
was approved when the City’s Redevelopment Program was at its
inception, and economic revitalization was the primary driving
force behind redevelopment. It is staff’s opinion that economic
considerations are still very important, other planning considerations such as, village character, architectural continuity and use compatibility, the creation of active street
scapes, open space amenities and pedestrian orientations through
design should be equally as important.
Staff does not believe that the proposed project adequately addresses these other important considerations which are important if a functional, pedestrain scaled Village environment is to be attained. By not addressing these important planning considerations with regard to proposed projects within the
Village Redevelopment area, it is staff’s conclusion that we will
in essence reaffirm the precedent of tall, massive, non-village
like structures within this vital central core of Carlsbad.
In summary, because the proposed project does not contribute
towards the attainment of a Village atmosphere, because of the - project’s height, bulk and lack of adequate relief, staff is -
recommending denial of RP 86-21.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that this project will not
have a significant impact on the environment and, therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration on March 14, 1987.
ATTACHMENTS
1) Design Review Board Resolution No. 091
2) Vicinity Map
3) Background Data Sheet
4) Disclosure Form
-“‘Q -’ Environmental Document
6) Reduced Exhibit 7) Exhibits ttAtt - “I”, dated March 9, 1987
CDD: bn
3/12/87
-3-
SITE EE
QENERAL PLAN.
R1SIDINNAL. .’ RL IowDFrwn(O.I 0
ZONINQ
P.C %A RE R- I Lt.2 Ft.3
R- 31
RD.54
nD.H
RWHP R-P RT RW
RISIDlNNAL PLmZD COIfNl’NIlYYLONE Rf3DENTLU AGRIL~Ln’RU LONE RlML RESIDENTLAL EST.\T’E ZONE ‘.I%E~fCVILY R.E%DE?.-l-L4L ZONE NO~FWtLYllESlDENTLU ZONE V11 n1’t.F. FWILY RBIDE.NTLU LOM LLWI I’ED .W’LTt F.,,WLY RESIDENTLU ZONE RESIDEhXLU DESSITY.MCLTtPLE ZONE RESIDENTLAL DENSITY.HIGti ZONE RJL5IDENTL.U .\WBILE HOME PARK ZONE
REStDENTLU PROFESStONAL ZONE RESIDE!WAL TOURIST ZONE RESIDENTLU WATERWAY ZONE
RLM RY I.VH RH
LOU’-VEnlC’H DEP;sITY(O-4) MEI>tI’.V DESStTY(4.8t C(EDttW HIGH DENSlTY18.15) HIGH DENFITY, 15.2))
COMMeRCIAl INTESSI~E REGIONAL RETAIL (es EXTENSIVF REGIONAL RETAIL te* REGIONAL SERVICE ( O.Wtl’NI IT COMMERCLAL SEl~;llRORt100DC~~~t(\IERCtAL
Ptarr Camtno Rat t Cu Country CarMad)
1: N City of carlsbad rs 0
CBD PI G
TR.U EL SERVICES COM\lEFX:,A~ PROFEWONAL REL4fED <.FNt RAL BLSINESS DISTRICT PLANHEI) INDI’STRIAL GO\ ERYMENT FAClLlTtES PI’BLIC L TILlTIES
RE( RE\TlON COMMERCIAL
sCHOOls FLEIIEsrT4RY Jt Xl(lR tIWH ~~&t~$li”L
OPEN SPACE NON RESIDENTLIL RESERVE
0 c. I c-2 CT C.M
P-E
CoMMeRcIAl OFFICE ZONE
NEIGHBORHOOD CON,MERCL4L ZONE GE\ER4t. COMMEMXALZOYE C(>VV “( I.,L TOC’WTZOtiE H&I) (.OM~lERCLU.UMllTD INDCZTNAL I.tIW5,3,AL ZONE PLANNED lNLX’STRlAL ZONE
OWER
c RC
ZONE
E J tt P -..._._ F.P FWODPLUN O\‘ERIAY LOHE L.C LLHITED CONTROL 05 OPEN SP.%CE t>s NRR P.t! PLBlJC uTlLJTYZOM
CALIFORNIA BUILDERS RP 86-21
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE No: RP 86-21
APPLICANT: CALIFORNIA BUILDERS
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for a major redevelopment permit to develop a
professional office building (17,677 SF) at the southwest corner of the
3efferson Street/Grand Avenue intersection.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 17-22 of Block 49, Carlsbad Townsite, in the City of Car&bad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof
No. 535 filed in the Office of the County Recorder, County of San Diego, May
2, 1888. APN: 203-303-19,20
Acres .48 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 2/o
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation CBD
Density Allowed ----
Existing Zone C-2 0/R)
Density Proposed ----
Proposed Zone C-2 (VR)
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
Zoning
Site VR 2 SF Residences
North VR SF Residence
South VR
East VR
Land Use
SF Residence
.
.
Jefferson Professional Bldg.
West VR Office
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU’s
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated November 25, 1986
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
X Negative Declaration, issued
E.I.R. Certified, dated
March 14, 1987
Other,
- l ‘. . . I ’ .
APF?LIcANr:
AGEm:
‘. . DISCLOSURB FORI
Leon & Sonja Per1
Name (individual, a~, qmAkMh+
'215 North Palm Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Business Mdress
(213) 938-3820
TelephoneNmber
Charles F. Rowe / California Builders
NaitB
. 2910 Jefferson Street, Suite 202 Carlsbad, CA
Business Address
(619) 434-3125 TelephoneNunber
Name (individual, partner, joint venture, corporation, syndication) Address
Business Address .
TeleghoneNunber Telephone Nmber
Hane Address
Business Address
TelephoneNunber Telephone Nurber
. (Attach nrxe shwts if necessary)
The applicant in required to apply for Coastal Conmission Approval if located in the Coastal Zone.
I/Me declare under penalty of gwjurythatthe disclosure is true ard correct and that it will r relied upon as,being true and correct mtil
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859
(619) 438-l 161
Qitp of CarISbab
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PRWECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: The project is located at the southwest
corner of the 3efferson Street/Grand Avenue intersection.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project, RP 86-21, will include a 17,677
square foot professional office building over a .40 acre site in the
V-R (Village Redevelopment) zone.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the
above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said
review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the
subject project . kstification for this action is on file in the
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on
file in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, CA.,
9 2009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (IO) days of date of
issuance.
DATED: March 14, 1987
MICHAEL 3. HOLZMMER
CASE NO: RP 86-21 Planning Director
APPLICANT: California Builders
PUBLISH DATE : March 14, 1987
ND4
11/85
4 j’; y
e , rt *, ; 1 ‘L.. yi
“’
‘! I
- 8 4-n I-
‘.. ‘i.
.! i.’ fi $;
.i
1 ’ !
i.
i ’ I ie i
/ /I
j
1
I
16 1, .-
pi
.=I r D 0, r .Y
I: ! I ;..: , 86, :,a ,1.- !( )I__ IL (‘1 !,N ‘r ( // Id\ I/<
I I\’ I- i;;
i/; 1 0
PL c. ..-
f I- I ,- - I I
:i i i F F I , -f---i9 I
ati-P w-m .tv
CITY OF CARLSBAD
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
SPECIAL MEETING c,. ' APRIL 22, 1987 5:00 pm Safety Service Center 2560 Orion Way ************************************************************
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC:
IF A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WISHES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON A NON-PUBLIC HEARING MATTER, A WRITTEN REQUEST FORM MUST BE FILED WITH THE MINUTES CLERK PRIOR TO THE TIME THE BOARD CONSIDERS THE ITEM. THE PRESIDING OFFICER MAY, IN THE ABSENCE OF OBJECTION BY A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD PRESENT, DECLINE TO PERMIT SUCH PRESENTATION.
IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO FILE A WRITTEN REQUEST TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC HEARING MATTERS.
WHEN YOU ARE CALLED TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER. ************************************************************
CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIMCE ROLL CALL
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
ABSENT:
1. RP 86-21 -CALIFORNIA BUILDERS RFSO NO. 091 Request for a major permit to ACTION: develop a professional office VOTE: at the s/w corner of the CC DATE Jefferson and Grand intersection in subarea 1 of the redevelopment area.
AWOURNMENT TIME:
i .i ix& ‘
. 5’ ,.y
1: 1: ( j: G!
//I
,.i 1 :- ,.:
i.:t .:j
:.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
34
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 0874
A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT PERNIT TO CONSTRUCT A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE
AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE JEFFERSON AND GRAND
INTERSECTION IN SUBAREA 1 OF THE VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. CASE FILE: RP 86-21 APPLICANT: CALIFORNIA BUILDERS
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the
City of Carlsbad and referred to the Housing and
Redevelopment Commission;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal
Code, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission did, on the
19th day of May, 1987, hold a duly noticed public hearing to
consider said application on property described as:
Lots 17-22 of Block 49, Carlsbad Townsite, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 535, filed in the Office of the County Recorder, County of San Diego, May 2, 1888.
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and
considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all
persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all
factors relating to RP 86-21 California Builders.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Housing and
Redevelopment Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
11 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
21 That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission APPROVES RP 86-21, California Builders, for the reasons stated in Design Review Board Resolution NO. 091. The findings of the Design Review Board shall constitute the finding of the Housing and Redevelopment Commission in the matter.
////
////
c ‘ .
. 7
i
.
;
1
I .
I
!
l(
1:
1:
1:
lf
l!
1t
1:
1t
19
2c
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Housing and Redevelopment Commission of the City of Carlsbad,
California, held on the 19th day of May, 1987, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Lewis, Kulchin, Pettine, Mamaux and Larson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:
//I/
//I/
////
//I/
Car&bad Journal
Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San DIego County
Mail all correspondence regarding publlc notcce advertising to
North Coast Publishers, Inc. corporate offices: P 0. Box 878, Encinitas, CA 92024
(619) 753-6543
Proof of Publication
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO.
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid;
I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter.
I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbtid Journal a newspaper of general circulation,
published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which
newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and
which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying
subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular intervals in
the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next
.-xl? nT,DT 7n IY”I,Lp. VP l-UDLIb Nn 535 tiled in the Office of the .‘-’ preceding the date of publication of the notice
HEARWr- L.” COU nty Recorder. county of San Diego. May 2.1888. hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of
- ,“nrVPN ‘hat Those persons wishing to speak al are cordially in- which the annexed is a printed copy, has been
the public hearing. published in each regular and entire issue of said )u have any questions please the Redevelopment Office at newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on
‘e’s;,_‘=y-fi’m 4344311. 8ng.z the redevelop- the following dates, to-wit:
NOTICE IS HEREI. - v-r I.. . ..-. the Housing and Redevelopment on tn,S propos
Commission of the City of Carlsbad vited to attend
will hold a public hearing at the If Y(
City Council Chamb --- -. call
Avenue. Carlabad. ~ti,no~nr~. VII Tuesday. May 19. 1987. at fWl0 p.m., If you challe
t0 consider OpprOVal Of B major ,,,ent perm,t jr
redevelopment permit to develop e li,,,,ted to ra,sj
prOfeSSiOnai oMee building gener- you or .wmeOn
ally located atthesouthwertcorner publlchearing
of the JefTeraon Street/Grand Ave- t, 42, or In written corre*ponaenee
nue Intersection In subarea 1 ofthe drllvered to the Clty of Csrlsbsd et
V-R Zone and more particularly de- or prior to the public heerlng.
rcrlbed II: Case File: RP ~2~
Lots 17.22 of Block 49, Carlrbrd Applicant: CALIFORNIA BUILD. ERS . . . . ...__.._.._.._....._,,, Town&e, In the Clty of Carlsbad. County of San D&o. State of Cali- Cl’lY OF HOUSING AND
fornlr. accordlnl( to Yap thereof REDEVELOPMENT COMMlSSlON
I court, you may be nc only tho8e issues e-else-raised at the dcserlbed in thjs no- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.8.7. May 8
19.
LOCATION MAP
/;’
4 ‘.\ : .- 1
86-2 1 CALl#O&dA ‘BlJILb~ ’ _
................................. 19 ....
................................. 19 ....
................................. 19 ....
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of
;;;fomia onM the 8th ap: 1987
Clerk of the Printer