Carlsbad planning commission approves 397-unit Sauk Avenue apartment project, 5-0

The Carlsbad Planning Commission on June 3 approved the Sauk Avenue apartment project, a five-story, 397-unit development proposed by the Hanover Company, adopting staff’s SB130-focused initial study and mitigated negative declaration and approving the site development plan by a 5-0 vote.

Senior planner Kyle Van Lewen told commissioners the project sits on a 9.78-acre parcel designated Housing Site 7 and was rezoned in 2024 as part of the city’s housing element update. The development would rely on a 35% density bonus to add 103 units to the base allowance, producing the proposed 397 units, and meet the city’s inclusionary requirement by setting 59 units (20% of the base density) as low‑income housing. Van Lewen said the project is proposed at five stories with a building height of about 59 feet (with projections just under 75 feet) and includes waivers allowed under state density‑bonus law, including height, parking‑dimension flexibility, a limited fence/retaining‑wall height waiver and eight waivers from objective design standards.

The staff presentation and environmental analysis identified a small patch of coastal sage scrub in the northwest corner of the site that provides potential habitat for special‑status species. Van Lewen and the city’s environmental consultant said the application qualified for the state’s AB 130 near‑miss pathway, so staff prepared an initial study/Mitigated Negative Declaration focused on the biological resource issue. The draft IS/MND was posted for public review; staff reported receiving two letters from members of the public and one supplemental letter from an advocacy group raising concerns about whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was required.

Bob Stark of Michael Baker International, the consultant who authored the CEQA document, told the commission the comment letters were thorough but did not present new evidence requiring an EIR. "We did complete the protocol surveys and coordinated with Fish and Wildlife; the city biologist reviewed and concurred with the methods and mitigation program," Stark said. Staff concluded mitigation measures, including surveys and avoidance protocols for birds and pollinators and monitoring, would reduce biological impacts to less‑than‑significant levels.

Commissioners also examined transportation and parking questions. Van Lewen said the project team completed a full Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) study, a local mobility analysis and a Transportation Demand Management plan; staff review found no intersections would be degraded below acceptable service levels and mitigation measures (for example, transit passes) were proposed to address VMT impacts. City engineering manager Jason Gelder said the geotechnical report did not prohibit below‑grade parking, noting the report contained no restrictions that would prevent constructing underground parking if the applicant elected to do so.

Applicant representatives said the project is designed to concentrate parking at the rear in a five‑story parking structure largely out of view from Salk Avenue and to provide a mix of indoor and outdoor amenities. Joe Gamble of the Hanover Company said the design seeks to "take advantage of the beautiful views of Carlsbad," noting about 11,000 square feet of indoor amenities and roughly 40,000 square feet of outdoor amenity space across three courtyards. Commissioners asked why the project included features such as a golf simulator rather than additional playgrounds or walking paths; the applicant said the amenity program reflects site planning trade‑offs and local market considerations.

Several commissioners praised the project as a tangible step toward meeting the city’s housing‑element obligations and adding affordable units. Others urged caution about long‑term community character and the visual effect of allowing five‑story buildings outside a central downtown core. Commissioner Lafferty and others flagged the waiver of some outdoor recreational standards and questioned whether design changes (including lower building height or below‑grade parking) could be used to reduce visual impact; the commission requested those policy topics be considered separately on a future agenda rather than in the course of this item.

Chair Means moved to approve the project based on staff recommendation; Vice Chair Foster seconded. The motion carried 5-0. As a condition of approval, staff noted that an affordable housing agreement will be required and must be executed before grading permits are issued.

The commission closed the public hearing, adopted the resolutions for the IS/MND and the site development plan and adjourned the meeting at 6:04 p.m.