Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-02-19; City Council; 3005; La Costa View- Specific Plan and Tentative Map• ^ ~ v • Trie OATY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORiV-** %~• /) -/' Aqenda Bill ^'o. t %. 0d*\ • • .Date February 19, 1974•, " ."V • yfr r -r -^— ^ . Referred .To: CITY COUNCIL • r.ASF NOS: SP-151 and CT 73-60. ' '._ i . Subject: SPECIFIC PLAN AND TENTATIVE MAP-: consideration Submitted By: o.f Specific Plan and Tentative- Map for a 102 unit condominium -m ANN ING COMMISSION• development, generally located southerly .of and adjacent to La Costa PLANNING tumibMUiN Avenue, approx. 610 ft. westerly.of the Intersection of Nueva Castillo . ' > ..Way and La Costa Avenue, approx. 8.18 acres. APPLICANT: D. L. LACAVA for \ '• — — ; ; (LX» C.o£T4 ViBWS). LA LOSTA LAND. ; ~7^ ;— " Statement of the Matter • . ; - . -^ ' At their regularly scheduled meeting of January 22, 1974 the Planning Commission;' did consider and does recommend the following: ' . . ' ' • . * " . 1 By Resolution'No. 1036, the Planning Commission recommends approval of a.Specific Plan to allw an increase in height from 35 ft. .to 88 ft., subject to. some two-(2) conditions. Said orope-rty is lorated-in the RD-M zone drstrict. which-does allow this ' increase in height by a Specific Plan. The 88 ft. is measured from the curb heiaht of the adjacent street? Approximately 52 ft. is the height of the highest building from, • adjacent ground level. . ; .. ». • • • • -.- .; • • .. .- • 2. By Res-ofution'Mo: 1035, -the 'Planning Commi"ssion recommends approval of the requested Tentative'.Map subject to some two (2) conditions. ' - - . - -. The subiect property property.is on Lot 185, la-Costa.South Unit No..l. Prior to - • JonsfdSSloRTSse mStters'by the'Planning Commission, the applicant.-had compTied. - . with .City. Council. Policy-No.-17 regarding _Publ-ic.FacTlities. .. ..-••• •• As a.part-of their action,'the Planning Commission, did.grant a-Resource Management Permit. Exhibit ".-..'• .... . •• 1. Certification of Ownership . ' • . • - 2. Planning Department" Staff Report • •"'"•'.• '3. Letters-of Protest . ' • 4. Applica-nt'Cs-Exhibits (Maps) '. • •-.'•„ '•• .5 Planning Commi-ssionP.es. 1035 approvirrg Tentative Map- .- , -•-• . . L 6. Planning Commission Res. 1036 approvihg^Specific Plan • 1. City Council Resolution No^££^_ 8. City Council Resolution No.$$tf y 9. Ordinance No. y^y/0 • Staff Reconmendations to the City Manager: That it be recommended to the City Council to follow r«n,HHand approve the requested Specific Plan and-Tentative Map,-subject to the Conditi. outlined in the Planning Commission Resolutions, Justification is. based upon the • reasons outlined 'in the P.C. Resolutions. COPY AB No .Da fce: February 19, 1974 City Manager's Recommendation Concur with staff recommendation, Council Action 2-19-74 Resolution No. 3356 was adopted. Ordinance No. 9380 was introduced for a first reading. Resolution No. 3357 was continued. 3-6-74 Resolution No. 3357 was adopted; and Ordinance No. 9380 was given a second reading and adopted. — 2 — PLICATION .FOR APPROVAL TENTATIV^AC! MAP Q n. 11V-^^^o <aA vu^' i&K OWNER AND/OR OWNER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT: Donald L. LaCava [Print Name) (Signature) 9171 Wilshire Blvd. , Suite "A" (Mailing Address) Beverly Hills, Calif. 90210 (City and State) (Area Code) 213-273-6750 _ (Telephone Number) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE HE THIS DAY ^973. (Notary Public) OFFICIAL SEAL \ PAUL M. LA CAVA /NOTARY PUBLIC • CALIFORNIA \ PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN 5 LOS ANGELES COUNTY My Commission Expires Mar. 11, 1976 /*•»», CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR January 22, 1974 TO: REPORT ON: CASE NOS. APPLICANT: PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION CONSIDERATION SP-151 CT 73-60 D. L. La Cava 9171 Wilshire Beverly Hills. OF SPECIFIC PLAN OF TENTATIVE MAP for La Costa Land Blvd., Suite A Ca. 90210 Co *• REQUEST; That the Planning Commission" consider and approve a specific plan to p-ermit an increase of the permitted height of a development from 35 ft. to 88 ft. and to proval to the City Council of a Tentative.Map condominium development. II. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS; recommend ap- for a 102-unit A. RE OPEN SPACE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PERMIT That it be moved that the Planning Commission grant a Resource Ma- nagement Permit to this development. Said property is within the RM-3 District requirements. However, all pro- posed development is occurring within the area of the pro' perty that does not exceed a 15% slope ratio. B- RE: SPECIFIC PLAN 151: That it be moved that the Plan- ning Commission recommend to the City'Council that SP-151 BE APPROVED subject to the conditions outlined below: .1.. Conformance of the increase in height to the objec- tives of the recently-adopted Open Space and Conser- vation Element of the General Plan. By developing at a greater height, the existing substantial slopes are not affected. 2. Due to the existence of a bank immediately adjacent to La Costa Avenue, the increase in height will not be as apparent from La Costa Avenue. In addition, the existence of an approximately 132 ft. high bank along the southerly property line will act as a back- drop to the proposed development and lessen the ef- fect of the project as viewed from the westerly side . of the La Costa golf course. 3. The applicant (see attached) has agreed to conply to all the requirements of the Municipal Ordinance and applicable policies presently in effect. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; 1. All requirements of Sec. 4.03 of City Council Ordinance No. 9375, dated December 28, 1973, shall be met as a part of this development. 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, detailed building elevations shall be submitted to the Planning Department for consideration and approval. C. RE; TENTATIVE MAP 73-60: That it be moved that the Plan ning Commission recommend to the City Council that CT 73-60 BE APPROVED subject to the conditions outlined below. Justification is based upon: 1. Conformance of the Map to the adopted General Plan. 2. Conformance of the Map to the State of California Subdivision Map Act. 3. The applicant (see attached) has agreed to comply to all the requirements of the.Municipal Ordinance and applicable policies presently in effect. With re- spect to the Parks Ordinance, it is recommended, and the applicant has agreed, that, in lieu, fees be re- quired. Justification is based upon the fact that the General Plan does not indicate a park on the sub- ject property. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; 1. The applicant shall install full street improve- ments along the full frontage of the subject property on La Costa Avenue to City's standards. 2. The proposed driveway areas to La Costa Avenue shall be perpendicular to the-street right-of- way and shall be no steeper than 5% within 20 ft. of the street right-of-way. 3. Drainage shall not flow over any public sidewalks III. BACKGROUND: A. DESCRIPTION - Lot 185, La Costa South Unit No. 1. B. LOCATION - Southerly of and adjacent to La Costa Avenue approximately 610 ft. westerly of the intersection of Nueva Castillo Way and La Costa Avenue -2- y""*, ' •*"*"*> C. SIZE - 8.18 Acres.' D. TOTAL UNITS - 102 D.U. E. DENSITY - 12.5 DU per Acre. F. NUMBER OF BEDROOMS - 268 Bedrooms. G. TYPE OF UNITS'-Type 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 bdrm bdrm bdrm bdrm bdrm bdrm bdrm bdrm & & & & & den den den den den Sq 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 . Ft. ,140 ,165 998 ,528 ,315 ,422 ,305 ,738 Number 8 20 12 6 24 24 4 4 TOTAL 102 D.U.'s in 6 Buildings H. COVERAGE - 22% (1.8 Acres). I. PROPOSED POPULATION -.316 Persons. 0. E.I.R. FINDING - Based upon an expanded Environ- mental Impact Report form (see attached), the Planning Depart- ment did find that the proposed development would not find a sig- nificant impact on the environment. K. EXISTING ZONING - RD-M' (Residential Density - Multiple). L. ADJACENT ZONING - North - R-l-75' East - RD-M South - R-2 West - RD-M M. GENERAL PLAN COMMITMENT - The approved La Costa Master Plan which has been incorporated into the adopted'General Plan indicates the property to be potential high density residential with up to 43 D.U. ' s per acre. N. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT - RM-3. 0. PARKS ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE - Yes, if in-lieu fees paid. P. PARKING COMPLIANCE - Proposed - 220 spaces total with 185 underground Ord. Req.- 193 spaces Planning Commission Policy Req.- 164 garage spaces. -3- - Q. COMPLIANCE TO ALL POLICIES - Yes. IV. DISCUSSION OF SPECIFIC ITEMS: A. SPECIFIC PLAN: Pursuant to Sec. 21.24.03 of the Municipal Code, the applicant is requesting by Specific Plan to in- crease the permitted building height from 35 ft. to 88 ft. Building height is measured from the official sidewalks of property line grade of the highest abutting street at the center of the building structure to the highest point of the roof. The applicant has submitted a building profile (Exhibit A) which reflects this height. The subject property is impacted by the RM-3 (Hillside and Soil Resource Management District) in that the average slope does exceed 15%. This high percentage results from two substantial slopes with a minor one located adjacent to La Costa Avenue and a major 50% slope located along the southerly property line. Said slopes and the pad area are presently in existence. The proposed grading will be mi- nor. The actual .development is to occur totally within the area that does not exceed the 15% slope ratio. There- fore, other than complying to the landscape requirements for the new slopes created as a part of this development, this development does meet the requirements of the Hill- side and Soil Resource Management District. V. ATTACHMENTS; 1. Environmental Impact Assessment Form from La Costa . Land, December 18, 1973 2. Apartment Count Form (Exhibit B). 3. Letter to Planning Department from G. J. Nowak, County of San Diego Department of Sanitation and Flood Control, December 26, 1973. 4. Letter to Planning Department from J. B. Askew, M.D., Director of Public Health, City of Carlsbad, December 28, 1973. 5. Letter to Planning Department from J. Dekema and T. C. Martin, State of California Department of Transporta- tion, December 27, 1973. 6. Letter to Planning Department from William A. Berrier, Superintendent, San Dieguito Union High School District, December 26, 1973. 7. Affidavit from D. L. La Cava for La Costa Land Co. for SP-151. 8. Affidavit from D. L. La Cava for La Costa Land Co. for CT 73-60. .4. ENVLg"C0!iMEMTAL IMPACT ASSESSMEfj£ - :Date: December 18. 1973 _ Name of Applicant: La Costa Land, A Limited Partnership . Permit Applied For: ^Tentative Map and Specific Plan Location of Proposed Activity: The proposed pn the south side of La Costa Avenue approximately 350Q,feet east of its intersection v/ith El Camino Real. 1. Background Information. '. ,- . 1. .Give a brief description of the proposed activity. .The proposed project involves the construction of 102 condominium units consisting of 4 three-story buildings over parking, 2 two-story buildings, 1 one-story building and a one story maintenance building. . . The site has previously been graded, however, some additional grading •will be required to accommodate the proposed buildings. Approximately 5,000 to 10,000 cubic yards of earth will be removed from the toe of the bank paralleling the southern property boundary. .A retaining wall will be constructed at the toe of the finished bank. All -grading operations will be performed under the supervision of a qualified soils engineer. The construction of the proposed three-story buildings will require the .approval of a site plan because the structures will exceed the 35-foot height limitation. The height of the proposed buildings is 88 feet, mea- sured from the curb elevation at La Costa. Avenue to the highest point on the roof. The top of the slope bank is 132 feet above the curb elevation at La Costa Avenue. Therefore, as the top of the slope bank is 44 feet above the roof line of the.proposed buildings, the-view from the existing homes on the top of the slope bank will not be affected by the proposed construction. • . 2. Describe the activity area, including distinguishing natural and manmade characteristics. The project site is located on the southerly slope of San Marcos Canyon overlooking the La Costa Golf Course. The Canyon is quite wide at this point and the slopes create a natural ampitheater.. The slopes have been terraced to allow development with lagoon and ocean views. APPENDIX B. -II. Environmental Impact Analysis. ' .' Answer the following questions by placing a check in the appropriate space. 'Yes . No 1. Could the project significantly change present land uses in the vicinity of the activity? . _ x 2. Could the activity affect the use of a re- .. creational area, or area of important aesthetic value? 3. Could the activity affect the functioning of an established community or neighbor- hood? • 4. Could the activity result in the displace- ment of community residents? 5. Are any of the natural or man-made features in the activity area unique, that is, not found in other parts of the County, State, or nati on? • ' . 6. Could the activity significantly affect a ' • • . historical or archaelpgical -site or its • . ; setting? ' .' ' x 7. Could the activity significantly affect : ,- | •the potential use, extraction, or con- . . • •• I ' • servation of a scarce natural resource? ,__• •;.•. x I • •' ' •! 8. Does the activity area serve as a habitat, | food source, nesting place, source of water, • etc. for rare or endangered wildlife or • fish species? . • . . ~'_l_l_i_ X..._ 9. Could the activity significantly affect ' fish, wildlife or plant life? . . ' x ! 10. Are there any rare or endangered plant .species in the activity area? '• . ' X 11. Could the activity change existing features of any of the city's lagoons, bays, or • tide lands? . X. Yes No 12. Could the activity change existing features of any of the City's beaches? ' 13. Could the activity result in" the erosion ' or. elimination of agricultural lands? . _ : . x 14. Could the activity serve to encourage : .- development . of presently undeveloped ' areas or intensify development of already . . developed areas? - . m X . •. 15. Will the activity require a variance from established environmental standards (air, •' • water, noise, etc)? _ y 16. Will the activity require certification, authorization or issuance of a permit • ' • by any local, State or Federal en- ' • vironmental control agency? . . ' _ y 17. Will the activity require issuance of a variance or conditional use permit by the City? . . ' . X 18. Will the activity involve" the application, use, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials? • •• _ T^X. 19. Will the activity involve construction of facilities in a flood plain? • _ x 20. Will the activity involve construction • of facilities on a slope of 2.5 per cent or greater? - _ , y 21. Will the activity involve construction ' of facilities in the area of an active fault? . • . . _ x1 r «k~ "" 22. Could the activity result in the • " gene ration of significant a mounts of noise? - . ' ' _ . x 23. Could the activity result in the gen- eration. of significant amounts of dust? . . __ _ t_ x 24. V/ill the activity involve the burning . of brush, trees, or other materials? _ x 25. Could the activity result in a significant change in the quality of any portion of the . region's air or water resources? (Should note surface, ground water, off-shore) ' _ . • y Yes N£ .26. Will theW be a significant change""**™ existing land form? • X (a) indicate estimated grading to be done in cubic, yards .5,000 to 10, pop cubic yards (b) percentage of alteration to the . ' present land form. Minimal _ . (c) maximum height of cut or fill Slopes. Existing 90-foot siove 27. Will the activity result in substantial .increases in the use of utilities, sewers, drains' or streets? " . III. State of No Significant Environmental Effects If you have answered yes to one or more of the questions in Section II, but youthink the activity will have.no significant enviro mental effects, indicate your .reasons below: •• . ' • ' • SEE ATTACHED . IV. Comments or Elaborations to Any of the Questions in Section II "Hf additional space is needed .for answering any questions, attach additional sheets as may be needed.) • Signature: __ __ (Person completing report) Date, signed: z2a*=.. /9^/973 • V. Conclus ions (To be completed by the Planning Director) Place a check in the appropriate box. [] Further information is required. It has been determined that the project will not have significant environmental effects. [] • It has been determined that the project could have significant environmental effects. An environmental impact statement must be submitted by the following date, . . . BY: PLANNING DIRECTOR (Or Representative) Date Received: Environmental Impact Assessment December 18, 1973 III. Statement of No Significant Environmental Effects. 14.) This development could intensify the development of this developed area if it is a financial success. This area has a large number of graded building sites that are not built on yet. If this project has above average market acceptance it could encourage development of surrounding lots at a faster pace. 17.) This project as planned will exceed the height limits allowed by the City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance. This departure from the City standard will be applied for on a Specific Plan. EXHIBIT £> JVPE P, OESCPUPTIOI^J ASPIEA (s'ca. FT?) CPUjUT,BY BUILPii^JQ SA ; S a TOTALS Uf5 -3 \ 2- n 2^ fc^tHc^:—i-.-iz»-~'i=71 -C : I ' S? K=*=t^ft.—P* 2s i-. ' -is=;D « ->_., Hw c*-«a 4 : •<••«-*• -"'•r 12 ' . . 12. •' "4- V-1-1 ...-2-•o •24' rj^^i==^;;i^_^r3aiu^as^=sa«S!»a»dta«aJlaw-« t-—-.....——_-._.„......{._. . • ._..i- i. ._. , ^ •c^T'^§^f^H^|^:>/^^ .'..;.: -.,!-. f •' V':'Vi;^vV':'^'^'^.'; V"'•-'•'. -: '•' iV-/'1'.).' 'j> . }•'• i#j?•?•!•'•. * /; «••/•'..••• '^-,v;. .>';. • *f ^ i.V.;^-f %'^.Vif A•.'•:.'- = "•;/•:•:: •••; .'• .-/v-: v- £>v"s- .->/^.-.^r: y.- -,..",.-iv?,..-..•/.L-,.-.,^•/•,.•,;*:.«'•:; .•••:. v «v.-«-.-^/:;-; • :•••'.'"» ,:-:v^;.;vv;- .-, ?-:••-,••••; .<, .»•'«"' •''..:j :.' ^ '••'.'-.•;•',''- :•' " '•; .; /: . •.•••'. * \- COUNTY OF Sjy DIEGO PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY C.J. HOUSOH Director Department of Sanitation & Flood Control County Operations Center, 5555 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California 92123 565-5325 26 December 1973 Mr. Donald A. Agatep Director of Planning City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: SP-151, La Costa Views. ; We are currently reviewing the grading plan for the subject development and will make our comments on flood control and drainage through the plan checking process. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. C..J. HOUSON _ G. Principal Civil Engineer GJNtpg i 200 ELM A VENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA $2003 Citp of Carfe&ab December 28, 1973 Mr. Donald A. Agatep Director of Planning City of Carlsbad 1200 ElJta Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mr. Agatep: Your request for our recommendations concerning Specific Plan No. SP-151 has been received and reviewed by this department. This department lias no objections to the specific plan provi- ded each building is connected to the Carlsbad City Water Com- pany and the Carlsbad Public Sewer System. 7ery truly yours, TELEPHONE: (714)729-1181 ifi. '3. B. ASKEW, M.D. Director of Public Health JBA:GQ:sd STATE OF CAUfORKiA— BUSINESS AND TRANSPORH^^I AGENCY RONALD REAGAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 11, P.O.BOX 81406, SAN DIEGO 92138 December 27, 1973 Planning Department City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92003 Attention: Mr. Donald A. Agatep Planning Director Gentlemen: Your recent memorandums request comment on the following tenta- tive maps and Specific Plans: CT 73-60 Specific Plan 151. - La Costa Views - a condo- minium development located south of La Costa Ave, East of El Camino Real. CT 73-59 Pacesetter Homes development, a portion of West 1/2 of section 21, TWN 12 S, R 4 W in City of Carlsbad located east of Lowder Lane, north of. Camino De Los Ondos. SP 152 Shoppers World, located between San Diego Freeway and Avenida Encinas South of Poinsettia Lane, a portion, of North 3/4- of the Southwest Quarter of Sect. 28, TWN 12 South, Range 4 west. At the present time, we have no route studies which would affect these properties. Thank you for keeping us informed. Sincerely, •#> J. Dekema District Director of .Transportation T. C. Martin District Project Planning Engineer RLH:mmb cc:TCMartin HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 2151 NEWCASTLE, CARDIFF, CALIFOSiMA 92007 714-753-6491 December 26, 1973 City Council City of Carlsbad c/o Mr. Don Agatap 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Dear Mr. Agatap: . Re: Carlsbad Tract No. 73-60 I have been asked to comment on the possible effect, that the proposed Carlsbad Tract No. 73-60 will have on school facilities in the San Dieguito Union High School District. At the present time secondary school facilities are extremely overcrowded within the district. The Trustees of the San Dieguito Union High School District cannot assure the availability of school facilities concurrent with need without some type of assistance on the part of the developer. At the present time there has been no agreement reached between the district and the developer that such assis- tance will be provided. Sincerely, 00,O. & William A. Berrier Superintendent DEC 2 8 1973 bfs cc: John Daily OltV 0? CARLSBAD PbKrtiiq Department BOARD OF TRUSTEES: ADMINISTRATION: David H. Thompson, President Douglas M. Pouquet, Vice President Willioin A. Ucrricr, Superintendent Jack. R. Stevens, Clerk Robert A. Morton, Assistant Superintendent Daniel J. Rodriguez Don W. Mitchell John J. Daily, Business Manayor « AFFIDAVIT APPLICANT: D. L. La Cava for La Costa Land Co., 9171 Wilshire Blvd. Suite A lf"/V Beverly Hills, Ca. 90210 CASE NO.: CT 73-60 I,\. uc.on , 1974, did review the proposed requirements to be attached to any approval of Case No. CT 73-60 by the Planning Commission. In addition, I-, Js._^A?/^ ..y c r~y I .-.. Cyi ^--A. x.) J^ > ani aware that any development must comply to all requirements of the Municipal Code; and I, [ .4->,ox f_T> L . L-A C^A-^^ » also have read Standard Conditions Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (in-lieu fees), 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. n, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. 17, 18, 19, 20 of Planning Commission Res. No. 1000, dated November 27, 1973, and do agree by the follow- ing signature to comply with these conditions as a part of any de- velopment of representing) Sgnature -^ /c ~ \4A. , --v C~,*T->\, V—-4 Company ATTESTED:AddresX--&? .cf ss V Phone COPY ,»*«*, W AFFIDAVIT APPLICANT: D. L. La Cava for La Costa DATEr Land Co. , 9171 Mllshire Blvd. Suite A ' ii \ Beverly Hills, Ca. 90210 CASE NO.: SP-151 I, J.L. LA on f / , 1974, did review the proposed requirements to be attached to any approval of Case No. SP-151 by the Planning Commission. In addition, I, JL3^ f-? 4^ r? L . L. A C --<-^ A » am aware that any de- velopment must comply to all requirements of the Municipal Code; and I, ,JL. Jr>/o £„ ^ o L, wAV^^^i- also have read Standard Con- ditions N.os. 1 (Exhibit A). 2B, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 15. 16, 17, 18, 20, 23, 25 of Planning Commission Res. No. 999, dated No- vember 27, 1973, and do agree by the following signature to comply with these conditions as a part of any development of La Costa Views (SP-151). (representing) Signature Company ATTESTED: ,T & Address 3. Phone T RECEIVED FEB 81974 CITY OF CARLSBAD Plannlna Department ri FEBRUARY 5, 11974 CARUSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1200 ELM AVENUE CASLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RE: YOUR NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVAL FOR SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-151) SUBMITTED BY LA COSTA LAND COMPANY To ALL CONCERNED: IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 19, 1974, AT 7:00 P.M. , IN YOUR CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, I AM STILL FIRMLY AGAINST PERMITTING AN INCREASE OF THE ESTABLISHED HEIGHT LIMIT IN THE RD-M ZONE, AS STATED IN MY EARLIER LETTER TO YOU DATED JANUARY 16, 1974. SINCERELY YOURS, BF/DS COPY OF 1/16/74 LETTER ENC. BENJAMIN Fox 1473 Hampton Road Hydal, Pennsylvania 19046 JANUARY 16, 1974 CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUHCIU CHAMBERS •.' 1200 BUM AVENUE . CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Rat APPROVAL FOR SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-1SI) SUBMITTED BY LA COSTA LAND COMPANY To WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: v . IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEADING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FOB APPROVAL OF THE ABOVE-CAPTION ED SPECIFIC PLAN, I AM FIRMLY ACAINST PERMITTING AN INCREASE OF THE ESTABLISHED HEIGHT LIMIT IN THE RD-M ZONE, AS DESCRIBED, A3 1 AM THE OWNER OF L.OT #07, AND THE PARCEL. OF LAND UNDER CONSIDERATION IS IMMEDIATELY PACING MY PROPERTY. t ALSO HOTS, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THAT WHEN THIS LAND WAS SOLD TO ME, IT WAS DEFINITELY STATED BY THE LA COSTA LAND COMPANY THAT THE GROUND UNDER CONSIDERATION WOULD NEVER BE , USED FOR CONDOMINIUMS OR ANY OTHER HIGH RISE STRUCTURE, BUT WAS TO BE UTILIZED ONLY FOR HOUSES. SINCERELY YOURS, BF/DS r BENJAMIN Fox Albert L. 2^12 Sevilla Way Rancho La Costa California 92008 January 15• ' Planning Commission City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, California 92008 Dear Sirs: JAN 1 \ 1974 CITY OF CARLSBAD Planning Department In reference to the proposed "Zoning Change" of Lot #185 La Costa South, Unit #1. I would like to voice my objections.. Many people, including myself, have purchased property and have built homes to live in La Costa because it was a new and planned Community. Now we find, while still in its* undeveloped stage with every chance to mature in the right direction, the first atempt of "Rape" is being made on its' Zoning. How the Commission acts on this attempt will set a pattern to encourage or halt all other developers in this area. We have located in La Costa after living and experiencing the same style of "Zoning attempts" in Florida as witness the complete destruction of the natural beauty of the East Coast of Florida, where mile after mile of High-risers now exist.. We have experienced, over crowded roads, crowded schools, Hospitals, Parks plus inadequate Police protection, Ambulance and Fire Equipment to handle any of these High Rise Units. A c-olorful presentation was always made but never did the finished product,, resemble the Artists Rendition. I sincerely feel an obligation to contact all of my representing Officials, the local Newspapers, Neighbors, Organizations and my Attorney to endeavor to halt this change'in the Zoning. With all of the available land in La Costa yet un-used, there appears to be absolutely no need for the change in the existing Zoning rules that were in effect when I and my neighbors purchased our property. The owners of Lot #185 La Costa South, were well aware of the Zoning Restrictions when they purchased their property and this definately is not a hardship case. The re-zoning of this property would devalue all the property in the area and force a hardship on the present owners. Thank you for your attention and consideration. Sincerely, P.S. we have lived in La Costa for over ijand £ p3TS,. and have been receiving our mail at"our present address from the City, County and State for all this time. Why \;as this notice sent to our "Old Address".. W .ECEIVED Planning Department . JAH 1 8 1?™ ' 16 January 1974 Carlsbad, California 92008 CITY OF CARLSBAD Dear Sir: . Planning Department It has been brought to my attention that the LaCosta Land Company is requesting approval of a Specific Plan (SP-151) which permits an increase in the building height limit from 35 feet to 88 feet. I wish to firmly object to this plan for two'reasons: 1. The construction of a building of this magnitude could cause a view blockage of many surrounding lots. Many of these lots were purchased as "view" lots and any change in this status could mean a financial depreciation of considerable magnitude. These losses would not be for the general welfare of the area but strictly to allow the owners of the property in SP-151 to realize a greater pi-ofit on their investment. I fail to see the justice of this. s*' 2. The notice I read announcing this request indicates that the LaCosta Land Company is playing a significant role in this endeavor. I wonder if this is the same LaCosta Land Company which sold all of the lots they are now threatening? If things are as they appear on the stirface, then the ethics of the motives of the LaCosta Land Company are questionable. They certainly have considerable acreage left. to sell in the LaCosta Community and one would certainly have to pause before recommending any investment here when it could be jeopardized by the very group that is selling it. My property overlooks the site in question and as such I am vitally interested. Business, out of state, prevents me from attending the public hearing but I would like to be on record as being strongly opposed to approval. Respectfully yours, (Andrew J. Sjyeeney 2426 Torrejon Place Carlsbad, California 92008 Chicago Packing Reality Co. 2410 Sevilla Way Rancho La Costa, Calif. 92008 RECEIVEDCarlsbad City Planning Commission Carlsbad JAM * 1 \QUCalifornia «JflN ? | jy/4 Dear Sirs: CITY OF CARLSBAD Reference is ma.de to the Specific Plan (SfanSfng)Qep^fljfcftted by La Costa Land Co. by Donald L. LaCava at Public Hearing on January 22, 1974 at 7:30 ?.?>>. - concerning specifically: All of Lot 185, La Costa South Unit No. 1, according to Map No. 6117 on file in the Office of the County Recorder of Sazi Diego County, in . the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. We disapprove without reservation as land owners in Rancho La Costa and more specifically as it pertains to our home which is directly above said property. Vfe paid a high price for our property with the assurance that our land would remain good value and namely that our view could not be obstructed according to strict building codes, established height limit in the RD-M Zone of 35 ft., which would not be Violated for any individual or group. There are many areas to build such a large complex but not at a High Class Resort area as Rancho La Costa. The plan and purpose of Rancho La Costa would be hindered and degraded by a building of such height as 88 ft - It is obscene and should be vetoed. Chicago Packing Reality Co. Merle D. Polen ?/llO Se villa Way Carlsbad Ci1r~ Planning Carlsbad California Dear Sire? CITY OF CARLSBAD Eefereact is asd® to the specific ?by &s Oosta I»aad Co* fey DcmaLd i« L&Cava at Public {-tearing on <fsimary 22, 1974 at 7*30 IVI» *- eonoe-jralag specif ieally* All of L«t 185* La Coot* Smith. Unit Ho* lfaccording ta lap I©* 6117 o» file ia the Office of the Oountj B«corder of San Bl©g® County t in th« City of Caristosdf Couaty of Sim Blego> Stateof Califonaia, We disapprove without reservation m Isa^ owatm ia Hanelio La Costa and more specifically « it pertain© to emr horn® which i® dirtetly above said property. We paid a ktgfe price for 0ur proftrty with tfa® aseuraa.ce tbat our l&md w©«14 remain good ir©i»© fyad asmely tluit omr- view could not to© ©¥stfucted mocordija^ to strict buftidiitg codes yhei^bt limit in tbe EB*« Sow© of J5 ft«, which not be tiolsted for say individual or maay area® t© teaild sucfe, a large complejc tout aot at a Bigb Glass fteeort area ae Bancfeo La Costa* f he plan aad pmrpos® o* Saaofeo Lm 0ost® would b® hifedered and 4tgra,d«d by © Mildiag of «uoh h«i^t ae 88 ft ~ It isobscene and ehould. "b© vetoed* Merle D. Polen. H e r m an Ale ;c an d e r 2410 Sevilla Way Rancho I.a Costa, Calif., R F P F T V^fPlftCarlsbad City Planning CommisFion H.J^\^rL<l t Hi LJ Carlsbad California JAN 2 1 1974 Dear Sirs* crrY OF CARLSBAD leferenee is made to the Specifics Planf^^t^l^j^itlwfi^ilited by La Costa Land Go* "by Donald L* LaGava at Public Hearing on January 22, 1974 at 7*30 P*I. - concerning specifically* All of Lot 185, La Costa South Unit No, 1, according to Map Ho* 6117 on file in the Office of the County lecorder of San Diego County, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. We disapprove without reservation as land owners in Hancho La Costa and more specifically as it pertains to our home which is directly above said property, We paid a high price for our property with the assurance that our land would remain good value and namely that our view could not be obstructed according to strict building codes, established height limit in the SD-1 gone of 35 ft*, which would not be Violated for any individual or group, There are many areas to build such a large complex but not at a High Class Resort area as lancho La Costa* fhe plan and purpose of Raneho La Costa would be hiMered and degraded by a building of such height as 88 ft - It is obscene and should be vetoed* Sincerely, F e rm an Al e x an d e r PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1035 1 'A RESOIUTION OF THE PLANNIN.- COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH ITS FINDINGS AND 2 RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL, APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE MAP (CT 73-60) TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A 102 UNIT 3 CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX, CN PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHERLY OF AMD ADJACENT TO LA COSTA AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 4 610 FT. WESTERLY OF THE INTERSECTION OF NUEVA CASTILLO WAY AND LA COSTA AVENUE. 5 APPLICANT: D. L. LACAVA, for LA COSTA LAMP 6 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad did receive 8 a verified application from D. L. LACAVA, for LA COSTA LAND, requestinq approve of a tentative map (CT 73-60) to permit the development of a 102 unit condo- 10 minium complex, on property generally located southerly of and adjacent to La 11 Costa Avenue, approximately 610 ft. westerly of the intersection of Nueva Casti 12 VJay and La Costa Avenue, and further described as: 13 All of Lot 135, La Costa South Unit No. 1, according to Map No. 6117 on file in the Office of the County 14 Recorder of San Diego, City of Carlsbad, State of California. 15 16 WHEREAS, said application has met the requirements of the City of 17 Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972, and has been declared 18 to have a "Non-Significant" impact on the environment, and; 19 WHEREAS, the proposed development has met the requirements of the 20 Interim Open Space Zoning Ordinance and the Planning Commission did grant 21 a Resource Management Permit for the RM-3 District requirements, and; 22 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did find that the subject Tentative 23 Hap does substantially comply with City of Carlsbad Subdivision Regulations 24 and the State of California Subdivision Act; and, 25 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does find that the provisions for 26 design and improvements of this tentative map are consistent with the 27 General Plan of the City of Carlsbad, and: 28 WHEREAS, the applicant has agreed to comply to all the requirements •29 of the Municipal Ordinance and applicable policies presently in effect. 30 NOH, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City 31 of Carlsbad, that it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of the 32 City of Carlsbad, the herein described Tentative Map (CT 73-60), subject to lo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 fulfillment of the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall install full street improvements alonq the full frontage of the subject property on La Costa Avenue, to City standards. 2. The proposed driveway areas to La Costa Avenue shall be perpendicula to the street right-of-way and shall be no steeper than 5% within 20 ft. of the street right-of-way. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, at their regular meeting held on the 22nd of January, 1974, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Dominguez, Forman, Casler & Hrench NOES: Commissioner Little ABSENT: Commissioner Palmateer E. W. DOMINGUEZ, Chairman ATTEST: DONALD A. AGATEP", Secretary -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 PLANNING COMMISSION MO. 1036 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH ITS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL, APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-151) TO ALLOW AN INCREASE OF PEWITTED HE I OUT FROM 35 FT. TO 88 FT. FOR A 102 UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHERLY OF AND ADJACENT "" TO LA COSTA AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 610 FT. WESTERLY OF THE INTERSECTION OF NUEVA CASTILLO MAY AND LA COSTA AVENUE APPLICANT: D.'L. LACAVA. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad did receive a verified application from D.' L. LACAVA, requesting approval of a Specific Plan (SP-151) to allow an increase of permitted height from 35'"ft. to 88 ft. for 102 condominium units oh property generally located southerly of and adjacent to La Costa Avenue", approximately 610 ft.'westerly"of the intersection of Nueva Castillo Way.and La'Costa Avenue^ and more particularly described as: All of Lot 185, La Costa South Unit No. 1, according to Map No. 6117 on file in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego, City of Carlsbad, State of California. WHEREAS, the Planning Director did find that this application meets the requirements of the City of Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972, and will have a "Non-Significant" impact on the environment, and; WHEREAS, the proposed development has met the requirements of the Interim Open Space Zoning Ordinance, and the Planning Commission did grant a Resource Management Permit for the RM-3 District requirements, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a duly noticed public hearing, and 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 recommendation for approval of this Specific Plan necessary to carry out the provisions and general purpose of Ordinance Mo. 9050: 1. Conformance of the increase in height to the objectives of the recently adonted Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan. By developing at a greater height, t!ie existinci substantial slopes are not affected. 2. Due to the existence of a bank immediately adjacent to La Costa Avenue, the increase in heinht will not be as apparent from La Costa Avenue. In addition, the existence of an approximately 132 ft. high bank along the southerly property line 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 will act as a backdrop to the proposed development and lessen the effect of the project as viewed from the westerly side of the La Costa golf course. 3. The applicant has agreed to comply to all the requirements of the Municipal Ordinance and applicable policies presently in effect. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, that it does hereby recommend to the City Council the adoption of a Specific Plan, subject to the following conditions: 1. All requirements of Section 4.03 of City Council Ordinance No. 9375, dated December 28, 1973, shall be met as a part of this development. 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, detailed building elevations shall be submitted to the Planning Department for consideration and approval. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 22nd day of January, 1974, by the following vote, to wit: • Commissioners Dominguez, Forman, Casler and Wrench NOES: Commissioner Little ABSENT:£omnrjssjoners jose anc| palmateer. E. W. DOMINGUEZ, Chairman ATTEST: DONALD A. AGATEP, Secretary -2- o RESOLUTION NO. 3356 9 10 11 12 13 14 J 8 is<r < en ~ O 16O UL " |§0 11 §£>£st<t<o 17 H >§S 18 o: O j-o 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ANNOUNCING FINDINGS AND DECISION ON A SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-151) FOR A 102-UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHERLY OF AND ADJACENT TO LA COSTA AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 610 FEET WESTERLY OF THE INTERSECTION OF NUEVA CASTILLO WAY AND LA COSTA AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 8.18 ACRES, APPLICANT: D. L. LaCAVA FOR LA COSTA LAND , A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was held on January 22, 1974 before the Planning Commission to consider adoption of a Specific Plan (SP-151) to allow for a 102-unit condominium development generally located southerly of and adjacent to La Costa Avenue approximately 610 feet westerly of the inter- section of Nueva Castillo Way and La Costa Avenue, approximately 8.18 acres, and more particularly described as: All of Lot 185, La Costa South Unit No. 1, according to Map No. 6117 on file in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego, City of Carlsbad, State of California; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said hearing on January 22, 1974 the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad adopted Resolution No. 1036 recommending adoption of said plan which is herewith referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, on the 19th day of February , 1974, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing on the matter and received all recommendations and heard all persons interested in or opposed to the proposed Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirement of the City of Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972i and will have a nonsignificant impact on the environment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A. That the above recitations are true and correct. o 00 "5 O u. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 i-z O £• - mZ P w 5 Ig 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 B. That the findings of the Planning Commission as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 1036 constitute the findings of the City Council. C. That the approval of the proposed Specific Plan is necessary to carry out the general purpose of Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. D. That the City Council of the City of Carlsbad intends to adopt an ordinance to effectuate the proposed Specific Plan subject to certain conditions. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 19th day of February 1974, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council men Dunne, McComas, Lewis, Chase and Frazee. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. AVID M. DUNNE, Mayor ATEST : (SEAL) 2. c 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 S 14 tn CO.1 i 15c < g o £ 5 I 16 = 3 | 5 17 "•",: EiS 5 S § 3" 18 Z O c/) 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 RESOLUTION'NO. 3357 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS TENTATIVE MAP (CT 73-60) TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A 102-UNIT CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHERLY OF AND ADJACENT TO LA COSTA AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 610 FEET WESTERLY OF THE INTERSECTION OF NUEVA CASTILLO WAY AND LA COSTA AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 8.18 ACRES. APPLICANT: D. L. LaCAVA FOR LA COSTA LAND, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. WHEREAS, on January 22, 1974 the Carlsbad City Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1035 recommending to the City Council that Tentative Map (CT 73-60) be conditionally approved; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 6th day of March r 1974, considered the recommenda- tion of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the require- ments of the City of Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972 and has been declared to have a nonsignificant impact on the environment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of"Carlsbad as follows: A. That the above recitations are true and correct. B.That Tentative Map (CT 73-60) is hereby approved, subject to the execution and/or fulfillment of.the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall install full street improve- ments along the full frontage of the subject property on La Costa Avenue, to City standards. 2. The proposed driveway areas to La Costa Avenue shall be perpendicular to the street right-of-way and shall be no steeper than 5% within 20 feet of the street right-of-way. C. That said Tentative Map together with the provisions for its design and improvement and subject to the above conditions is consistent with all applicable general and specific plans of f • o CA CO _J ° -» o " §""- D 5 ° i i2* ^ uj i *^3i z-|8o-^ ^ y < Z O co>^ i o ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ^BBS*" •*%&!&• the City of Carlsbad. adjourned PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at an/regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the 6th day of March , 1974, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Councilmen Dunne, McComas, Lewis, Chase and Frazee NOES: None ' ABSENT: None • ^^^J>^^^f^Ji.^KWTD M.' DUNNE, Mayor ATTEST: I 7^7 / X' ^ ////v /d/i4$/fo£/ I/L (_ //^Lds&t&S/' •MAK^AfflBT"E. ADAMS, (City Clerk (SEAL) • * - 2. VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR.CITY ATTORNEY - C!TY OF CARLSBAD1200 EUM AVENUE ' •CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 920084 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ORDINANCE' NO. 9380 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING A SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-151) FOR A 102-UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTHERLY OF AND ADJACENT TO LA COSTA AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 610 FEET WESTERLY OF THE INTERSECTION OF NUEVA CASTILLO WAY AND LA COSTA AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 8.18 ACRES. APPLICANT: D. L. LaCAVA FOR LA COSTA LAND, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: A Specific Plan (SP-151) is hereby adopted for a 102-unit condominium development generally located south- erly of and adjacent to La Costa Avenue approximately 610 feet westerly of the intersection of Nueva Castillo Way and La Costa Avenue, approximately 8.18 acres, and more particularly described as: All of Lot 185, La Costa South Unit No. 1, according to Map No. 6117 on file in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego, City of Carlsbad, State of California, said plan to consist of a plot plan marked Exhibit A and an application with attachments on file in the office of the City Planning Department and incorporated by reference herein, subject to all terms and conditions of this ordinance. SECTION 2: Findings. The findings and decision on Specific Plan (SP-151) contained in City Council Resolution No. 1036 and said resolution are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION 3: Development Conditions. The Specific Plan (SP-151) is approved subject to the following conditions and restrictions and the development of the property, as described in Section 1 hereof, shall be subject to all such conditions and restrictions which are in addition to all requirements, limitations and restrictions of all municipal ordinances and State and Federal laws now in force or" which may hereafter be in force : COV) g rr **~ ^ ~* ° rf O "- 3 5P o 5 £ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 z £ 8 d -i«uu 2 CM <[ O.Ou SE " 52 o 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 . 1. All requirements of Section 4.03 of City Council Ordinance No. 9375, dated December 28, 1973, shall be met as a part of this development. 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, detailed, building elevations shall be submitted to the Planning Department for consideration and approval. SECTION 4: Administration and Enforcement. The Building Department shall not approve any building for occupancy until the Planning Director has certified that all the conditions of this Ordinance have been satisfied. EFFECTIVE DATE: This Ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at least once in the Carlsbad Journal within fifteen days after its adoption INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a /regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the 19th day of February , 1974, adjournedand thereafter PASSED AND ADOPTED at an^regular meeting of said Council held on the 6th day of March , 1974, by the fol- lowing vote, to wit: AYES: Councilmen Dunne, McComas, Lewis, Chase and Frazee NOES: None ABSENT: None DAVID M. DUNNE, Mayor ATTEST : City Clerk (SEAL) 2.