Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-02-06; Planning Commission; Minutesr- PLANNING COW4ISSION MINUTES CITY OF CARLSBAD ADJOURNED MEETING February 6, 1980 NOT OFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED AT SUBSEQUENT MEETING OF THE CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. by Chairman Schick. ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Chairman Schick, Commissioners Marcus, Larson, Leeds, Jose, Friestedt. Commissioner Rombotis arrived at 6:20 P.M. Ex Officio members present: James C. Hagaman, Planning Dir- ector; Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney; Margaret Gold- stein, Housing Consultant Staff present: Charles Grimm, Associate Planner; Bill Hofman, Associate Planner; Bud Plender, Principal Planner PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - The pledge of allegiance was led by Chairman Schick. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING CPA-54, Housing Element EIR, Proposed housing goals and policies for Carlsbad for next five years. Commissioner Schick advised the audience that this adjourned meeting would have a 10:00 P.M. limit and the members of the public who wished to speak on the subject must do so within a five minute time frame. He further instructed that there was no necessity for submitting a request to testify. Staff' Report: The staff report was presented by Charles Grimm, who informed the Commission that the State law requires that every juris- diction adopt a Housing Element as part of its General Plan. He stated that the Government Code establishes several stan- dards to be followed in preparing a Housing Element. The Housing Element is to consist of standards and plans for the improvement of housing, provision of adequate sites, and to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all eco- nomic segments of the provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the provision for the housing needs of the community. The State law also directs the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to develop guide- lines to help local jurisdictions draft their Housing Ele- ments. There has been much debate by the State, by legisla- tors and by attorneys as to whether or not these guidelines are advisory or mandatory. Mr. Grimm then referred to a Memorandum from Carlsbad's City Attorney explaining their stance that the guidelines are advisory. The City adopted its existing Housing Element in 1970. Last April, the Council authorized a contract with Margaret Goldstein, a Consultant, to draft a new Housing Element which would meet the State guidelines. At the same time a nine member Citizen's Committee was named to review the document and provide public input. Thirteen meetings between June of 1979 and January of 1980 were held by the Committee. The State is anticipating the completion of Carlsbad's Housing Element by March 31. The Housing Element is divided into four major sections, to- wit: the introduction, which states the general theme and describes the relationship of the Housing Element to the State law and other elements of the General Plan; the goals and policies section, which recommends the housing policies and programs for the next five years (this section is de- signed to be responsive to the State Guidelines by recom- mending programs which will help provide low and moderate income housing.); the implementation, which establishes priorities and designates responsibility and estimates costs: and the appendicies which identifies the housing problems in Carlsbad intended to be solved by the Housing Element. The Guidelines require regional planning agencies (CPO) to project a regional five year need for low income housing and then divide that need among the local jurisdictions. This is the "fair share need." Carlsbad's fair share was deter- mined to be 2-l/2% which translates into 825 dwelling units of low income housing by 1985. Many of the programs in the goals and policies section are intended to provide these 825 units. This figure has been adopted by the City Coun- cil. There has been some discussion between the State and CPO as to the adequacy of these numbers. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE Reso- lution 1595 asking the City Council to adopt the draft Housing Element. PUBLIC INPUT A member of the audience stated that he wished to repudiate the Housing Element. Commissioner Schick instructed the par- ticipant that the Commission would approach the situation in a parlimentarian manner and that at the proper time the audience could approach the podium, properly identify them- selves, and state their views. Commissioner Schick further explained that the Commission is a "staff element" for the City Council; that the Council has the final say. The Commission is attempting to air the document before the public and expose it as much as possible. He stated that once the Commission begins examination of the document, the public would be allowed to participate at appropriate times. At this point the Commission proceeded to specifically exa- mine the document. Page 1 - Growth Trends and Projections C Commissioner Schick feels type of houses should be spe- cified, i.e., apartments, condos, mobile homes or whatever. Commissioner Rombotis inquired as to the source for the 1979 and 1985 projections. Ms. Goldstein stated that the 1979 projection was an estimate from the State Department of Finance. She said new estimates would be made soon. The 1985 projection is taken from the Series IV Forecasts, done in 1977, and approved by the City of Carlsbad. The estimate is a forecast based on trends, availability of land, fa- cilities and services in given jurisdictions. A Series V forecast is currently under development. The initial figures for Series V are available at this time and show a difference but have not yet been adopted which is the rea- son for using the Series IV figures. Commissioner Rombotis asked if Series V was in great dis- parity with Series IV: Ms. Goldstein answered Series V is definitely larger. P'ag'e' 3 - guidelines, issued in November, 1977. Commissioner Schick asked if this is what is referred on page 115 of the basic document, Exhibit C. Ms. Goldstein stated this supercedes the 1977 guideline. Commissioner Rombotis asked if there has been any Council direction that the City should ach&ve the goal. Dan Hentschke indicated that State law requires that the Housing Element make adequate provision for all economic sectors of the community; this is the standard which the Council and the Commission must followin developing the Housing Element in the General Plan. The Commission, while not bound by the HCO guidelines, should take them into con- sideration in determining what is adequate for Carlsbad. Additionally, the State law now mandates that the element consider all aspects of current housing technology, to in- clude provisions for not only site-built housing, but manu- factured housing, including mobile homes and modular homes. Implementation of these requirements is a policy decision for the Commission. While the Commission does not have to meet all of the HCO guidelines, they do have to provide for all economic sectors of the community. Each individual community will handle this differently. Commissioner Schick mentioned that Carlsbad once had a referendum for low income housing but was turned down. Joe Ba's'tone; 72'25 San Lucas, Carlsbad: Stated that the City could pick and chose whatever dlrectlves they wish. He feels the Commission should have some kind of positive direction. Commissioner Schick said certain problems must be solved; first, the financial obligation and secondly, to satisfy the needs of the community. Commissioner Rombotis asked clarification of the Administra- tive Code. Mr. Hentschke explained the function and authority of the Administrative Code and stated that some directives of the Code are advisory and other mandatory. Re- garding the Housing Element guidelines, the Commission should follow the guidelines unless it has a good policy reason for deviating therefrom. 4 Page, - Limit and encourage large scale development....... Commissioner Friestedt feels this statement is ambiguous. Would like it to read: "Limit to areas most appropriate for development and encourage..." - .- Commissioner Rombotis asked if "Choice" is limited to the kinds of housing types mentioned in the report; Ms. Goldstein said other types of housing could be added. The draft is meant to encompass a wide range of house types. Commissioner Schick pointed out the positive statement "TO the extent that conflicts arise between the Housing Blement and the Land Use Blement, the policies of the Land Use Ele- ment shall prevail." Page 5 - Managed Development Commissioner Larson wished clarification of "leap frog" and asked if it could occur in Carlsbad. Public Input: Jack Swerm, 7212 San Lucas, Carlsbad, California. On page 1, he wished clarification of the 2-l/2% figure; also does this figure include new projects such as the re- servoir being built at the La Costa area; does it include the approximate estimate of 2,500 homes expected to be built in that area. He said he was questioning plans that show Carlsbad has already laid out plans for future develop- ment which doe not seem to show more moderate and low in- come housing. He does not think the regional plan is cor- rect. Commissioner Schick explained these items to Mr. Swerm, pointing out that this is a general document; as the Com- mission delves into specificss, his questions would be answered. Jim Hicks, 2530 La Grande, Carlsbad, California. Made the recommendation that the Commission first go through the document and perhaps take notes and return to the spe- cifics after having an overview of the document. Commissioner Schick inquired whether or not Village Rede- velopment fits under the Managed Development paragraph. 'Page 6 - Low and Moderate Income Rent Ranges Commissioner Larson wished to know if the annual update will '- '. include a revision of the low income rent and was advised it will. A general discussion ensued with Commissioner Rombotis questioning whether or not specificity needed to be included in the element of the General Plan, stating a broader defini- tion might suffice. He also mentioned he feels the need to have these updated annually and this should be stated in this section. Commissioner Larson feels the figures should be shown, but as a footnote; he also would like an explanation for the reasons and occasion for updating. Page 7 - Inclusionary Systems With reference to the last paragraph on this page, Commissioner Jose wished to know what concessions the developers gener- ally are interested in; Ms. Goldstein replied that the den- sity bonus seemed to be the one of the most interest. Commissioner Jose then asked who would make the final deci- sion and was told by Ms. Goldstein that it was discretionary with the City. Commissioner Rombotis asked if we were getting close to sub- sidizing with this type of bonus; he also mentioned that the developer does not pay for anything. Page 8 - Goals With reference to number 4, Commissioner Larson asked if it is possible to build housing in Carlsbad that would be con- venient to major facilities and services; if major facilities, services and transportation routes are existent in the City of Carlsbad, where could housing be built that would not be con- venient, considering the small land area of the City. Commissioner Rombotis stated that the current trend in Carls- bad's housing is in conflict with moderate and low cost housing, taking fees, etc., into consideration and asked how this could be resolved. Ms. Goldstein stated this was a problem which the committee was aware of and had attempted to resolve by recommending concessions such as smaller lots and more dense development, as well as concessions on certain faci- lities and services. Commissioner Rombotis then asked how long it would take a developer to present a typical program like this and how many consultants would have to be hired by - . . ,- by him to get this application processed. Commissioner Rombotis stated that he felt the City's development stan- dards is pricing low-cost housing out of business and feels we should take a hard look at the overall basis. Ms. Goldstein stated that for the program recommended by the general plan would take several new ordinances and the re- writing of some policies by the City. Commissioner Rombotis stated that he felt the Commission was giving lip service to a project handed them by Sacra- mento and questioned whether or not this community really wants low-cost housing. Ms. Goldstein replied that the Citizen's Committee reported that the people want high standards for the City but, at the same time, recognize a need for low cost housing. - Commissioner Jose recalled to the Commission that an ordinance restricting the size of lots has been adopted by the Council, and asked if this would be re-written to accommodate the con- cessions. Ms. Goldstein responded that some of the standards may have to be modified to achieve the goal of moderate in- come housing in specific instances. She stated that the Planning Commission and City Council need the authority to modify these standards when indicated. Ken Speed, 668, No. 8, Tamarack, Carlsbad, California. Mr. Speed stated the need for low income housing for Carls- bad; he informed the Commission that most of the citizens are wage earners and are having to struggle to make ends meet and thus the need for low income housing and apartments is apparent. Page 9 - Policies and Action Programs Commissioner Schick feels that the responsibility for moni- toring should be spelled out at the onset. Commissioner Rombotis feels a reasonable phase-out time or implementation time should be stated. Page. 10 Commissioner Schick questioned whether or not Action 2 qualifies under a Capital Improvement Program. 7 . . P Commissioner Rombotis feels "Historic properties" should be defined. With reference to Action 2, page 10, Commissioner Friestedt stated there is a problem getting assistance through the block grant program. He feels this should be more specific. Page 11, No 3 Commissioner Jose is not satisfied with the expression “needs group". Ms. Goldstein said that it could be rephrased. Commissioner Larson asked whether the 825 figure in Section 3 includes or is in addition to the Section 8 housing; Ms. Goldstein stated it was over and above Section 8. Commissioner Rombotis inquired how the 825 figure was arrived at. Ms. Goldstein stated the figures are regional forecasts and are not accurate to reflect the actual needs of the community; that the figure will have to be revised upwards: the figures are projections only and are subject to change, depending upon new requirements and new facilities and services that are approved. Commissioner Rombotis inquired if Carlsbad's fair-share takes into account the moratorium on certain public services; Ms Goldstein stated the figures were taken from the Series IV projection when there was some indication of the moratorium. Page 12 Commissioner Friestedt asked about the revised rents being consistent with the coastal area market prices; Ms. Goldstein answered they had not been revised high enough. The question arose as to whether or not the 250 units referred to in Action 4 was a one-time figure or a phased figure over the next five years; Commissioner Friestedt recommended that a committee be established for the purpose of securing funding from the State as referred to in Action 5. Commissioner Jose would like clarification the funds referred to in Action 5. Ms. Goldstein answered this could be handled in several ways. One would be to have Carlsbad write down the development costs for a private developer and in return a portion of his rent would be to low and moderate income. Also, if the City had a paying fund under this act, the City could then purchase some units to be rented as low and moderate income housing in a regular market rental which would be funded by the State government. Commissioner Rombotis asked the implications of receiving monies from the State for this type of funding. Ms. Goldstein replied that the Bill has already been passed and the monies are available; a problem might arise because the State has not done this before and does not know how it is going to work. Commissioner Schick wants clarification of Action 3 as it relates to an additional 250 units. Page.13 Commissioner Larson commented on the need to have available comparable rentals when allowing condominium conversions. Commissioner Schick stated that there are many variables concerning Action 7 that should be discussed. Commissioner Rombotis feels Action 7 is argumentative with reference to the condo conversions. Assistant City Attorney Hentschke instructed the Commission with reference to regulating condo conversions through vacancy rates. Such regulations must be addressed in the Housing Element of the General Plan. The Council could implement the General Plan by use of vacancy factors when considering condo conversion under zoning and subdivision laws. Since the Housing Element in and of itself is not self-executing; it would be executed through an amendment to Title 21, after hearing by the Planning Commission, the Council, and subsequent Council action. Commissioner Rombotis stated he did not want to see this as a part of th e General Plan. Commissioner Larson feels Action 7 needs more teeth. Mr. Grimm stated that the section does not change the existing ordinance but it does give the Council the power, if they wished, to change the ordinance to relate condo conversions to vacancy rates. Commissioner Marcus asked for clarification of the last sentence of Action 7. Ms. Goldstein stated that condominium conversion takes low and moderate income units out of the rental market; however, sometime the only opportunity for low and moderate income housing ownership is from conversions. She stated that the Commission or the Council should have the lee-way to make the decision based on what kind of housing is needed in the City at that particular time. . ./” Lynn, Huniphri'es 668 Tamarack Avenue, No. 7, Carlsbad. Ms. Humphries stated to the Commission that she agrees with the housing element; the points she supports are the statements on page 13 to the effect that conversion applications should include some statement of current rents, planned sales prices and vacancy data for rental units. She stated it would tell the Commission whether or not low-to-moderate income housing is being converted to upper-income housing and if there is a likelihood of tenants being forced to move out of their area to find housing. She feels the conversion should be denied if it will affect the supply of rental housing in the area. She feels a provision should also be added to the housing element that provides that the owner of the contemplated conversion will help in relocation of the tenants, especially hardship cases. Jim Ah'de,r:son,, 3075 Blenkarne, Carlsbad Mr. Anderson advised the Commission that the Section had been thoroughly discussed by his committee. He stated that the committee recognized that condominium conversions at times provide a form of home ownership that would not be available otherwise. He stated that the tenants have the right of first refusal after the conversion. He further stated that a discussion was had by his committee relative to relocation fees and the committee was adamant against fees of this type, nor should the conversion be turned down because of the lack of comparable rental units. He stated the committee felt obliged to recognize property rights as well as concerns for tenants. Ly'nn' Huiriphri'es Stated that relocation in and of itself is such a hardship on low income families that they are not able to handle it, and this point should be taken into consideration by the Commission. Commissioner Rombotis asked for a poll of the Commission on relocation fees. Commissioner Marcus asked where the fees are to come from; that eventually the new buyer is the person who pays the fees. She does not oppose the fee but stated it works against keeping the price of the unit down. I .- P. C. Minutes 2/6/1980 Page 10 Commissioner Larson supports relocation fees; said it probably should be a separate ordinance. Commissioner Jose feels relocation fees should be a part of the condo conversion ordinance and not a part of this document. There was a general agreement among the Commissioners that relocation fees should be required. Pages 13 and 14, Policies Chairman Schick stated he feels many of these are political in nature. The consensus of the Commission was that a policy statement could be developed to support the concept of the housing program rather than the words "Support federal or state legislation..." Page 15 Action 2-Commissioner Larson asked if it is appropriate to develop any type of housing by CUP; both Commissioner Rombotis and Jose concurred in this question. Commissioner Larson also wished clarification of "mixed use of commercial and residential units". Jim Andersen stated to the Commission that this was another area discussed by his committee. He pointed out there is a problem in downtown Carlsbad with units which have six units on a 50 x 120 lot versus those that have four. He stated that when four units instead of six are constructed, the construc- tion cost is about the same; but when spread over four units instead of six, the rental charge on those units are considerable more. Relative to Action 1, he wanted to stress to the Commission that this was voluntary; the committee was against mandatory inclusionary zoning. The committee felt that additional densities in a large project may be afforded so that the developer would not have to charge more for the other units in order to get the 20 or 15 percent low-to-moderate income units. The committee tried to give incentives for voluntary low-to-moderate income units. Mr. Grimm stated that there are probably other, better ways to handle development referred to in Action 3 than by Condition- al Use Permit. .- . ’ Commissioner Schick feels this might be approached in Action 1. Commissioner Larson feels the item should be by itself, but should be handled by a Zone Code instead of a CUP. Commissioner Schick stated that the feeling of the Commission was to modify Action 3 and leave it in as a separate item. Change the sentence to state "Amend City Ordinances to allow development of moderate income rentals..." Relative to Action 1, Commissioner Friestedt asked for clarifica- tion of the 20 percent density bonus in exchange for 15 percent of units reserved. Ms. Goldstein answered by example: if 100 units were developed, the developer would get 120, and of that 120, 15 would have to be reserved for moderate income. Relative to Action 6, Commissioner Larson asked if the reserve 10 percent is a goal for moderate income rentals; Ms. Goldstein answered there is a ten percent contingency. Commission Jose inquired what percentage Action 5 refers to; Ms. Goldstein answered this would give the Commission lee-way to forgive certain fees; that in some cases only a portion of the fee would have to be waived to produce moderate income units. - Commissioner Jose feels the Commission should have some kind of a mean to be guided by. Commissioner Friestedt said that unless there is a definite percentage stated, the matter would become an open debate, which will cause the issue to start all over again. Commissioner Schick mentioned that this type of housing could be exempt from the facilities fee. Commissioner Jose agreed but added that the services and evaluation fees are over and above the facilities fee. Commissioner Friestedt added that the project might qualify as moderate income at the on-set but by the time the project is finished, it is no longer a moderate income unit. Ms. Goldstein stated that what the Commission is looking at is what would be a moderate income rental as started under Action 1 which states "moderate income rent should be equivalent to maximum fair market rents set by Department of Housing and Urban Development for Carlsbad", which escalates every year. , - - - Commissioner Jose forsees a hassle if the percentages for all citizens are not uniform. Commissioner Friestedt suggested that the words "by established formula or by established procedure set by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad". Commissioner Larson suggests the wording "by adopting or establishing a formula by the City Council, the Commission could allow the waiving of facilities, services, etc.", rather than saying "permit". Commissioner Leeds feels the 10 percent figure at the end of page 15 is ambiguous. Ms. Goldstein suggested perhaps not naming a percentage but indicating some portion might be waived. Page 16 Re Action 7, Commissioner Friestedt suggested that if the philosophy behind preparation of a Master EIR is to reduce the time of individuals with smaller parcels of land, it would not be necessary to have a Master EIR, but perhaps a mechanism whereby they could use an existing EIR. /- Mr. Grimm informed the Commission that the intent of the Master EIR is to eliminate having developers provide an EIR because the City would have already identified the environmental constraints throughout the City; this proposal has already been adopted by the City Council in the budget. Re Action 3, Commissioner Larson asked if zone changes or recommend- ing ordinance changes might be necessary; Mr. Grimm said this could be a part of a master plan which could develop a mobile home park within a certain area; that individual zoning would not be necessary; but it could be handled through the master plan process. Commissioner Schick stated that affordability should be a point of consideration. Ms. Goldstein suggested that a refer- ence to affordability belongs in the policy itself. Page 17 Commissioner Jose asked if any information relative to revised forecasts that were to be available in January 1980 was yet accessible. Ms. Goldstein answered that Series IV forecasts have more status in that they have been adopted already and Series V has not. Page.18, Action 1 Commissioner Schick asked where this fit in within the City structure: Ms. Goldstein stated this would be administered by the City through City Council action as a housing and redevelopment commission. Page 19 With reference to Action 2 relating to mobile home development, Commissioner Friestedt questioned the intention of the committee regarding the "open park" versus the "closed park" concept: Ms. Goldstein informed the Commission that the Committee wished the City to indicate its knowledge of open park laws and its intention to require compliance with those laws. Commissioner Schick stated that he felt the first sentence of page 19 was political. Ms. Goldstein advised the Commission that Article 34 requires a referenda to develop certain kinds of low income housing. The consensus of opinion of the Commission was that a referendum should be put on the ballot to let the people decide. With reference to Action 2 of page 19, Commissioner Jose questioned the phrase "Direct staff to work with local non- profit and limited profit groups", he stated this should be phrased "assist..." Page.20 Commissioner Schick inquired whether the update would be annual: Mr. Grimm advised that the element would be reviewed annually, with a major review after five years. Commissioner Schick was informed by Mr. Grimm that it was the responsibility of the Planning Department to prepare the report; that the report would be subject to review by the Planning Commission and City Council. Commissioner Friestedt suggested that the Planning Director furnish input and recommendations at the end of the year to the Planning Commission and the City Council. - At 9:40 P.M. a motion was made to adjourn the meeting to the next regularly scheduled Commission hearing date, February 13, 1980. MOTION: Rombotis SECOND: Friestedt AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose, and Leeds ABSENT: None Attested: JAMESC.HAGAMAN - Planning Director ,-