The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1971-11-09; City Council; 588; Amendment to Ordinance no.9060THE C I T O F C A R L S B A CALIFORNIA Agenda Bill No. , Referred To: City Council Date: November 9, 1971 subject: Amendment to Ordinance No. 9060, Article "^".35. Planned Community Zone (P-C Zone). Revision frftitle only to Planned Residential Development Zone (PRO Zone). Submitted By: Planning Commission & Department Statement of the Matter The Planning Commission hearing on October 12, 1971, resulted in a recommendation of approval for the revision in title of Planned Community Zone (P-C Zone) to Planned Residential Development (PRO zone). The reasons for approval are as follows: (1) To allow development of smaller parcels that are suitable for a planned unit concept; (2) This change would allow the smaller properties to develop without the semantic stigma of a wide range of residential, recreational or commercial land use associated with a planned community; (3) This change would not affect the concept presently employed in the existing Planned Community ordinance. The documents and hearing. below complete this application for your further review Exhibit 1 - Staff report of 10-12-71 2 - Planning Commission Resolution No. 733 3 - Resolution #1925- Announcing findings and decision. 4 - Ordinance #9286 - Changing zone title. - Staff Recommendations Staff recommendations, as more completely outlined in referenced staff report, approves this amendment to Ordinance No. 9060, Article 13.75. STAFF REPORT/MEMORANDUM October 12, 1971 TO: Planning Commission FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Revision of the Planned Community Zone (P-C) in Title Only APPLICANT: Planning Department Report submitted by: City Manager, Fire, Engineering, Building, and Planning Departments General Discussion The term planned community implies a developmental concept that incorporates residential, recreation and commercial land uses. The number of land uses and the intensity of each is dependent upon the relative size of the parcel being developed. The larger developments, Rancho Bernardo, Lake San Marcos, usually provide the wide range of residential, recreational, and commercial activities. Normally associated with a Planned Community. The term community implies then, a diversity of residential, recreational and commercial activities. However, if the concept of a Planned Community, i.e., varied living environments, design flexibilities, and open space requirements is to be applied to smaller parcels, developmental criteria should be flexible and requirements set for each prospective planned development. The staff recommends that a change to the title of Planned Community zone be effected to allow development of smaller parcels that are suitable for a planned unit concept. It is recommended that the title for section 13.75 Planned Com- munity Zone (P-C) oF Ordinance 9060 be revised to read: Section 13.75 Planned Residential Development (PRD) Zone. This change would allow the smaller properties to develop without the semantic stigma of a wide range of residential, recreational or commercial land use associated with a planned community. This change would not affect the concept presently employed in the existing Planned Community ordinance. It may be desirable for the. commission to assign developmental criteria and a classification to the different degrees of the Planned Community concept. For example: For parcels 25 acres or less. Page Two Staff Report October 12, 1971 a specific set of residential criteria should be developed and termed Planned Residential Development (PRO). For parcels 25 acres to 150 acres, a developmental concept employing residential and recreational/open space guidelines could be established and possibly be called Planned Unit Development. Parcels larger than 150 or 200 acres then would suggest a more complete community concept with a wider range of land use activities^ therefore, the Planned Community Zone (P-C). All variations of the Planned Community concept strive for a conscientious use of land, open space, density and design. The zones are still performance oriented. However in light of the recent applications for reclassification to Planned Community Zone on parcels 20 acres and less, the staff feels this change in title only is necessary for the smaller P-C developments, but that additional study and thought be given to those larger parcels whose activities and criteria for development are functions of development size. JACK ^. ARNOLD, City Manager JBA:sl 3 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 733 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL AN AMEND- MENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 9060, ARTICLE 13.75. PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE (P-C ZONE) 4 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Ordinance No, 9060, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad did on October 12, 1971, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider Planning 9! Commission Resolution of Intention No. 80, regarding certain ji 10 ! itmes to be amended as follows: 1. Section 13.75 Planned Community Zone (P-C Zone), to be revised in title only as follows: To be revised to read: Section 13.75 Planned Residential Development Zone (PRO Zone) PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Planning Commission, held on the 12th day of October 1971, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Jose, Hermsen, Dominguez, Dewhurst, Formaji Palmateer, Chairman LittleNOES: None ABSENT: No one 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23| ROBERT T, LITTLE', Chairman 24 25 i ATTEST: 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ! JAC/K/L. "FORMAN, Secretary 8- ,- .n 2- 0 e & 1 2 3 4 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1925 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM INDUSTRIAL (M TO RESIDENTIAL PROFESSIONAL (RP) ON PROPERTY GENERAL1 LOCATED ON BOTH SIDES OF PASEO DEL NORTE SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO: ZC-256 6 I/ WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, to 7 8 9 A portion of Parcel A of Parcel Map 2949; Parcels 4, 6, of Parcel Map 6022, all being portions of Lot H 0: Hedionda, in the County of San Diego according to Ma] filed in the County of San Diego, November 16, 1896. lollhas been filed with the city of Carlsbad, and referred to the 11 12 13 Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request as provi( Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and 14/( WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 28th day of 1 1511 1982, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law 16 17 consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considl 18 19 20 21 22 23 all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Change; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 24 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public heari 25 the Commission recommends APPROVAL of ZC-256, based on t: following findings: 26 IIFindings: 27 28 the 0 (Professional and Related Commercial) land use 1) That the RP (Residential Professional) zone is consisten designation of the General Plan. If - L * I' 0 e 1 2) That uses allowed in the RP zone are compatible and cons: with surrounding land use designations and zones. 2 3) That the development standards of the RP zone will ensurt 3 4 5 ' 5) That the R-P zone will be consistent with the Specific P 7 for this area which was adopted pursuant to Sections 654 65452 of the Government Code. 8 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tht 9 Planning Commission of the city of Carlsbad, California, held compatibility with surrounding uses. 4) That this project will not cause any significant environl irnpacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by thc Planning Director, dated February 23, 1982, and approved the Planning Commission on April 28, 1982. lo the 28th day of April, 1982, by the following vote, to wit: 11 12 13 AYES: Chairman Farrow, Commissioners Rombotis, L'Heul Jose and Friestedt. NOES : Commissioners Marcus and Schlehuber. ABSENT : None. x* I 15 16 17 18 ABSTAIN : None. ?LJJJ&d2"e< VERNO I J. \,FARROW, R. ,\, Chi CARLS r AD P~ANNING c wss: . 2 19 I/ATTEST : I 24 25 26 27 28 PC RES0 #1925 I -2-