HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-08-24; Planning Commission; ; GPA/LU 83-07|ZC 279 - KELLYSTAFF REPORT
DATE: August 24, 1983
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Land Use Planning Office
SUBJECT: GPA/LU 83-7/ZC-279 -KELLY -A Request to amend the
General Plan Land Use designation from NRR (Non
Residential Reserve) ·to P-I (Planned Industrial), and a
zone change from L-C (Limited Control) to P-M (Planned
Industrial) on property located approximately 60 feet
north of the future intersection of College Boulevard
and Statler Street.
I. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the
Negative Declaration issued by the Land Use Planning Manager and
ADOPT Resolution No's 2161 and 2138: recommending approval to
the City Council of GPA/LU 83-7 and ZC-279.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting that the Land Use Element of the
General Plan be changed from NRR (None-Residential Reserve) to
P-I (Planned Industrial) and that the zoning be changed from L-C
(Limited Control) to P-M (Planned Industrial) on property
located as described above. The property is .53 acres in size
and is bounded on the southern and western sides by the Signal
Landmark property. Topographically, the site slopes downward in
a northwesterly direction towards Macario Canyon.
When the applicant for the Huntington Properties applied for
annexation into the City of Carlsbad, LAFCO included this parcel
as part of the annexation and gave it a General Plan and zoning
designation of NRR and L-C. The applicant is proposing the
General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to Planned Industrial so
as to keep it consistent with the adjacent industrially
designated parcels of the Signal Landmark property.
III. ANALYSIS
Planning Issues -GPA/LU 83-7
1. Is the proposed General Plan designation of Planned
Industrial appropriate for this site?
2. Is the proposed designation compatible with existing and
future land uses in the area?
Discussion
The applicant has requested the P-M designation for the property
since it is on the same elevation as the adjoining Signal ~1 ~
Landmark property and is best suited for industrial uses.
Staff concurs with this proposal since this area is bounded on
two sides by i~dustrial uses. and the proposed P-I designation
would be consislent with existing and future uses in the area.
Overall, Staff feels it can make the required findings for a
General Plan Amendment and, therefore, recommends approval of
GPA/LU 83-7.
Planning Issues -ZC-279
1. Is the proposed P-M zone consistent with the General Plan
designation of P~I.
2. Are the allowed uses in the P-M zone consistent with the
surrounding zoning and land uses.
Discussion
The requested zone change would be consistent with the General
Plan designation of P-I for the subject property. Also, Staff
feels the proposed zone change and uses allowed within the zone
will be consistent with the surrounding zoning and land uses.
The properties which bound the subject property have been
designated for industrial development. Overall, Staff believes
the required findings can be made and, therefore, recommends
approval of ZC-279.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Land Use Planning Manager has determined that this project
.will not have a significant impact on the environment and,
therefore, issued a Negative Declaration on July 22, 1983.
ATTACHMENTS
1. PC Resolution No's 2161 and 2138
2. Location Map
3. Disclosure Statement
4. Environmental Documents
5. -Exhibit "A", dated June 22, 1983
6. Exhibit "B", dated June 22, 1983
EVR/ad
8/11 /83