HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-03-24; Planning Commission; Resolution 3444, P a
v
I
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION No. 344 -
A RESOLUTION RECOMrvlENDING TO COUI\TCIL CHANGE OF ZONE
FROM R-1 TO R-1-10 /" " sx@?c -ON PROFERTTXT EAST CARLSBAD ANNEXATIC *BO. 2.4.
"
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Ordinance No. 9050 a the Plannil
Commission did on March 24, 1964, hold a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the (application of I
Resolution of Intention of the Planning Commission No. 47 ) for a change
of zone from R-1 to R-1-10 on real property ir:
the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, commonly
known as East Carlsbad Annexation No. 8.4
and more particularly as:
per Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering the
testimony and arguments , if any, of all persons who desired to be heard,
said Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist which
make the (approval/&ex&&j of the application for change of zone necessar!
to carry out the provisions and general purpose of Ordinance No. 9060:
1. That the area is virgin land.
2. That the City should safeguard itself by making it R -1 -10.
3. That there is already a subdivision across the street that is R-1-1
.. .-I w - September 13, 1963 4LzkA3 2'l
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
East Car lsbad Annexation 2 o 4
All that unincorporated territory in the County of San Diego,
State of California, being a portion of Lot J, Rancho Agua Iiedionda,
in said County and State, according to Partition Map thereof No. 823,
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of said San Diego County,
November 16, 1886, being also a portion of Theoretical Section 5,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, and Theoretical Section 32, Township
11 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, being more
particularly described as follows:
1. Beginning at a point in the Easterly boundary line of the City of
Carlsbad, said point being in the Southerly line of said Lot J,
Rancho Agua Hedionda, and also in the Westerly line of El Camino
Real, 80 feet wide as shown on Map of Road Survey No. 682 and 925,
filed in the Office of the County Surveyor of said San Diego County;
2, Thence from said point in an Easterly direction along said South-,
erly line OP Lot J to the Southeast corner of the Northeast
Quarter of said Theoretical Section 5:
3. Thence along the Westerly line of the land described in deed re-
corded July x!, 19498 in Book 3254, Page 339 of Official Records
of said County, North 7" West 1,106 feet to the Northwesterly
corner of said land; *
4.. Thence along the Westerly line of the land described in deed
Recorded Septeniber 8, 1938, in Book 813, Page 485 of Official .
Records of said County as follows: North 49" West 360 feet: *
5. Thence NORTH, 490 feet;
."' 6, Thence EAST, 190 feet:
7 e Thence North 7O West 1820 feet:
8. Thence South 59" West 485.31 feet;
9, Thence North 31" West 466.69 feet:
10. Thence South 59" West 466.69 feet:
11. Thence South 31" East 466.69 feet;
12, Thence South 59" West 20 feet:
13, Thence North 56" 00' West 1243 feet to the most Northerly corner
of that parcel of land described in Deed recorded June 21, 1957
in Book 6632, Page 183 of Official Records' of said County:
~~ i ~~ ~ ~~
-1
t
III v e
6
1 East Carlsbad
Annexation 2 a 8
Legal Description -2- Septemloer 13, 1'
14, Thence alang the Northwesterly line of said hand, Eocth 68O 01
i West to a point in the Westerly line of said El Carl~ri.no Real,
being a poifit in the Easterly boundary Line of tke Ciky of Carlsbad!;
15, Thence in a Southeasterly direction along said 1Vestexl.y line
EL Carnino Real and the Easterly boundary line of tb.~ City of
Carfsbad to the POINT OF BEGINNING,
* e
*
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by Ync Planning Ccrnrnisnion of
the City of Carlsbad that it does hereby (recommend to the Ci,ty Council
the adoption of an amen.l,mcnt to Oydinance No. 956C ckzzgixg the zone frc
R -1 to R-1-10 3cx%b€a
c&saam& on said property.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsl
City Planning Commission held on the 24th day of March 9
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Davis, Ward, Grant, Palmer, Jarvie and La1
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Sonneman.
/? **:a
ATTEST: L/
-2-