Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-10-05; City Council; 7175; COUNCIL CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION OF HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT INCREASED HEIGHT BE PERMITEED IN VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AREA"4h c 0 P Q p: 8 9 !% RECOMMENDED ACTION: 4 rd 4 4 -d 3 ITEM EXPLANATION : B :g c -ti 4 4 cr -rl -sl 2 8 4J 4-1 In M 3 3 c by the consultant. 8 8 3 E rd rl -d Review Board. 82 FISCAL IMPACT CJ 88 Could result in increased property tax. co I In I 0 4 .. z 0 F 0 a =! 0 z 3 0 0 < e e \ REPORT d CARLSBAD REDEVELOPMENT AREA a HEIGHT SUITABILITY STUDY a e 4i e July, 1982 e e GEORGE S. NOLTE AND CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS / e 1 a Sacramento San Dtego San Jose 0 Exhibit A ASSOCIATES PIANNERS / SURVEYORS / Walnut Creek m i e t e Table of Contents Chapter 1 a INTRODUCTION EXISTING CONDITIONS EXISTING REGULATIONS VILLAGE AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DESIGN MANUAL * Chapter 2 a IMPACTS OF BUILDING HEIGHT LOCAL EXPERIENCE Chapter 3 e FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Areas Suitable for Increased Building Height Design and Review Guidelines a APPENDICES I. Photographs of Multi-Story buildings (Coronado, Oceanside, San Diego, and El 3 11. Illustrated Design Guidelines (excerpts from City of San Diego Planning Photographs of Gateway Off ice Building La Jolla Village 111. 3 3 / - c GEORGE S NOLTE AVD ASSOCIATES $& t YL AWENY RONYEhT4L ENGNE'IS %A%waq SUWEIODC i 'L -2 ,' 1 \ m Page 1-2 2-3 4-5 5-7 8-9 9-1 2 13-14 14-15 15-1 6 Cc.]on) Studies) a c 0 c CARLSBAD REDEVELOPMENT AREA HEIGHT SUITABILITY STUDY CHAPTER 1 0 e INTRODUCTION The staff of Carlsbad's Housing and Redevelopment Ag a development proposal for the Royal Palms property southwest corner of Elm Avenue and Carlsbad Boulevar plan for the mixed-use commercial recreation develop component for time-share condominiums which would ac 65 feet, and thus exceed the City's existing 35-foot limitation. has received e e The Design Manual for the Village Redevelopment Plan maximum height for buildings shall not exceed 35 fee development disposition agreement is approved by the development Commission. In addition, the Design Man that increased landscaping and amenities should be r the impact of multi-story buildings. However, the D not specifically address the issue of appropriate lo story buildings through the redevelopment area, and that permitting such development may establish a pre have undesirable impacts in other areas of the City. - 3 3 3 - ,-- k 1 - GEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES ilh3EVY90NKEhT41 rNGNc iiC ?.Lh'i "S SUWVElOFr - \ - I e L 0 k @ The purpose of this study is to undertake a comprehe multi-story development, and provide guidance to the of Carlsbad as to whether any exemptions to the 35-foot height the Redevel- opment area should be granted. This first chapter upon existing conditions within the Village Redevel Area, and will examine the present planning and zoning which appl area and the issue of building height. The second chapter of will address the impacts of high-rise development, and will re of other communities in dealing with the issue of height. The final chapter of the study will. include recommend ness of high-rise development, its location and d e study will focus e he experiences * the appropriate- a EXISTING CONDITIONS The present visual image of Carlsbad's downtown and two-story village. Viewed from both the free the old City Reservoir on Vista Way, it is quite tallest elements of the cityscape are not buildi especially the eucalyptus trees located along Gr most prominent visual elements are the freestand Avenue near Interstate 5. The buildings that ar church on Harding Street which is located outsid area, and the gymnasium of the Army-Navy Academ e a * 2 \ C-3 GEORGE s NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES /- -\ & ~ JL *..D LVd RONwEh-XL :YG?CfPs R*2% as su9y€"oRs m ., j '\ 2 - i a * e I, runs through the downtown area roughly paralleling of-way, which reduces the visibility of many of the in downtown, * a main tower. Due to the tall eucalyptus trees surro Inns is barely visible from the freeway or the old 0 most well known visual and historic landmarks along coast of San Diego County. The proposed multi-story project wh for this study would be on the grounds of the Roya diagonally opposite the "win Inns. There is conce multi-story condominium project would have a signi upon the visual qualities of the nearby Twin Inns, lishing a precedent for high-rise development that * a whole. 0 3 x a a 6 0 EXISTING REGULATIONS Carlsbad's zoning ordinance restricts the height of a City to 35 feet, with three exceptions - the R-W (Res zone, the P-M (Planned-Industrial) zone, and C-2 (Ge Commercial) zone. The R-W zone applies only to the Bristol Cove area imum height of 45 feet. The P-M zone states that n ing shall exceed a height of 35 feet unless a specific plan providin higher maximum height is adopted. Similar to the P-M zone, the C- allows the City Council to approve a height in exess of 35 feet whe exceeds 40 acres in size, and where it can be foun uildings in the ti a1 -Wa te rwa y ) e c 0 (1) There are other buildings which are with which exceed the 35 foot height limits; (2) The height of the buildings will not adve surrounding properties; (3) The buildings will not be unduly dispropo buildings in the area. - 9 Although not applicable to the Redevelopment Area, 4b Plan provides €or the approval of building heights or 70 feet, whichever is less in the RM and RMH nei this exception to the height limitation is not gran * would be approved through discretionary action by t mission and City Council. Carlsbad has recently approved a new general plan d higher density residential land use. Staff is now (RDH-Residential Density High) to implement the ne and is considering allowing a height of up to 45 feet. 3 4 w ---\ 1 ' SEORGF 5 NOITF ANn ASSnPlATCC ' L e e a Coastal Cornisison replicates the existing zoning a e r) a VILLAGE AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DESIGN MAFJAL ning documents which provide the most specixic gu a uses and related policy considerations while the a supportive urban design plan that contains rec height, intensity, and siting of buildings, land and open space. However, the Design Manual is i B e L c 0 9 c a standards. The responsibility for applying and inter ing the guide- lines of the Design Manual will be that of a yet to b Design Review Board, and the Redevelopment Commission Addressing the subject of building heigh following : e "As a general rule, lowrise buildings are prefer scale of the central village commun ance of the project area's low prof towers wh ich occas iona 11 y punctuate the urban core might improve the ov Village Redevelopment Area and add interest and a thereto. The maximum height for ne ject area shall not exceed 35 feet, disposition agreement is approved by the Housi opment Commission, (i.e., where mu1 are proposed for the development, additional o scaping and amenities should be required to re increased impact) ." A development disposition agreement is defined as b between City/Agency and a developer where the condi are established and agreed to in a legal e To complement the general guidelines whi as a whole, the Redevelopment Area has b areas. The sub-areas contain more speci land uses, and additional design criteri areas are further divided into special treatment €or sub-areas 1, 5, 6 and 7 contain stat a 0 \ 6 RGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES c E~~~PONUEN -. ENGIGE~S FLAWS sumfvms c e SUB-AREA MAP \ , e L a a * a a e VILLAGE AREA LAND USE MAP -7 COMMERCIAL AREA e ............. ............. n ............. COMMERCIAL - LlMtTED INDUSTRI kra COMBINATION DISTBLU (RM, RMH - QPEN SPACE, (I) 7. 0 e the potential of increasing density exists, the a teness of intro- ducing multi-story development can likewise be ad overlays the traditional central business di str ic 0 0 town area. Sub-area 5 is proposed to serve as proposed to maintain its existing residential office-professional uses located along Rooseve 7 is intended to permit and encourage mixed-us a 0 - density, its location and pro@osed land uses high-rise or multi-story development. Sub-ar jacent to 1-5 at the Elm Avenue interchange, e e EORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES “1 *hO NYIF.ohUFk-- E*G VECiS hb....dEqS SUWE’W /I e' 0 0 CHAPTER 2 IMPACTS OF BUILDING HEIGHT e Concern about building height is , in most instances, action to the structure being out of scale and character with the In questions relating to scale, building height usua attention; however, building bulk frequently has the significant visual impact upon its surroundings. According to the urba ign element of the City of San Diego General Plan, "The bulk of a ng is a function of height, width, breadth, and design, and because se factors it is also one of perception." Perception may be the key deration because in the final analysis the visual impact of a buildi the result of a subjective interpretation by the individual. ing community. eceives the most 0 Tall or bulky buildings located within neighborhoo acterized by lower profile structures of ten create problems with shad nd, privacy, visual impact, and view blockage. However, the visual in? f exceptional bum ing height or bulk can be largely mitigated'throug quality site and building design principles result location, and variation in height and setback. be made more visually compatible with lower stru mid-level height elements are introduced. 0 pplication of 0 e GEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES ' 8 r) / a' e The pteceeding discussion has focused on the more s ive and personal aspects of increased building height. However, the impacts of intro- ducing taller buildings into an area that can be ad d objectively and quantitatively. Specifically, those impacts building intensity and public safety. Increased bu intensity is the simple result of additional square footage being ac through high-rise construction. The impact of increased building int which has the greatest potential for negative consequences is inc traffic generatior which can overload adjacent streets. An addi evaluated is the availability of sewer and water se The public safeti aspect of increased building height is a matter of rotection. In othe words, to what building height can the equipment of ire department be operational, and are building codes dealing with fi ty adequate? e e 1. LOCAL EXPERIENCE a Rather than continuing the discussion of the impac gh-r ise deve lop- ment in abstract, the remainder of this secti and communities in the San Diego region have 0 building height. In general, where building heigh come a public issue it is the result of a strong negative r of exceptionally tall, out of scale buildings negative reaction in many cases is the passag height limitation ordinance - sometimes throu local experiences that will be examined here 0 the City of San Diego, and El Cajon. Coronado was among the first cities in San Di with the issue of high-rise structures being intr to a lower-profile community. When the first phases or' Coronado Sh foot high condom- 3 7- --_ I 9 ,'\ g GEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES ' &@ Y L 4ND ENVIRONM:~-AI ENGIVi.'lS airrh\'1S SURVEYORS L2 \ 3 e* 0 inium towers) were constructed in the early 1970's, tallest structures surrounding San Diego Bay, includ owntown Sari Diego. Although there was considerable negative public reac the developer had established a vested right to complete the proje Soon thereafter, Coronado adopted a strict 40 foot height limitation 11 zones, and established an Environmental Design Review Board. S r to the situation facing Carlsbad, the Coronado example also illustrat e impact of high- were among the 8 c rise structures being constructed in close proximi a lower profile building of visual and cultural value (Hotel Del Co ) . (see appendix 1 for photographs) 0 Oceanside also has an interesting history dealing w high rise development. In addition to a 12-story c (Marina Towers) that is considerably taller than an City, Oceanside also has an example of extreme buil in North Coast Village. Again, the overall public projects was not positive. In responding to the si Community Development Commiszion was farsighted en issue of building height regulation in a positive hood Plan for Oceanside's Redevelopment District height limitation scale that results in an order1 to taller structures. Along the Strand, building the height of the bluff, along Pacific Street it two stories, and along Myers Street to three and excess of four stories can be constructed, but on - Oceanside's Community Development Commission. In side's electorate approved Proposition "A", which recommendations of the Neighborhood Plan. (see a a 0 3 1 - 7- =-I -; GEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES 10 / * - \ & . "8 A~OI~YIRONY-N-AL ENG~ '95 PLLNN ar SVWEI~I' \LL a’ Probably no other city has had to deal with more c rsy over the 0 of the construction of condominium towers along th line in Pacific Beach (Capri by the Sea) and La Jolla (939 Coast 33 d) . San Diego‘s 0 height limit over the coastal areas of the City. 0’s planning staff 0 still in existence today, and because it allows * a inappropriate regulatory tool, they are supporti adverse impact on the development of Mission Bay. restricting tourist e (see appendix 1 for photographs) One of the few cities in the County that has been to introduce a e rn 3EORGE S NOLTE AFvD ASSOCIATES “8 AND EN~OYIENTA. ENGN:ERS MNN ?I SURVEYOQS 0 u * I II) 0 the Central Business District which set forth no height limitation as long as all other development requirements are met, and required the project be approved by the Redevelopment Agency. El Cajon has since erected a six-sto City Administration Building and a nine-story County Administration Center now under construction. (see appendix 1 for photographs) e e 0 e e e e 0 ,-- . 12 GEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES <# Ah3 ENYIPONYFWAr ENGNEtPS ShVYZ'IC SUWE'rlR' L- L 0 3 e 0 0 e CHAPTER 3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a It should be realized that any discussion of building height cannot escape being somewhat subjective, in that the reaction to building height is real11 a matter of individual perception. It must also be acknowledged that an analysis of the impacts of increased building height must take into account the relative nature of the issue. In other words, while a 10-story buildins would be considered high-rise in Carlsbad, it would be judged mid-, or even low-rise in downtown San Diego. 8 a Responding to the subjective nature of the issue, definitions for this stud: are proposed with the understanding that they are applicable only to Carlsbz Village Redevelopment Area: 0 low-rise = 35ft / 3 stories and below high-rise = 80ft / 8 stories and above a mid-rise = 35 ft to 80 ft/ 4 to 7 stories High-rise development is inappropriate for Carlsbad's downtown area. The introduction of a building 80 feet or higher would destroy the village-like character of Carlsbad's Redevelopment Area. In addition to the adverse visi impact, the increased building intensity resulting from the high-rise deve1( ment would generate undesirable increases in traffic volume. 0 0 Although high-rise development is considered to be unacceptable, there are several locations within the redevelopment area that are suitable for build heights in excess of 35 feet. It should be explained that the areas design €or potential increases in building height were selected only after a thoro) e 7 LA/ \ &$ GEORGE s NOLTE AND ASSOC ATES & iviL Ah0 ENYIRONM'N AL cNGINEE'1S PLI%NERS SuRv.YDII 13 , 0 a 0 inspection of the redevelopment area, and a comprehensive review of the Redevelopment Area Planning documents. The recommendations for increased building height are made with the belief that they are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Area, and maintain the visual character of the downtown area. Furthermore, it is not intended that in- creased building height be granted as a matter of right, but only following the discretionary review of the City of Carlsbad pursuant to the Village De: Manual and the supplemental Design and Review considerations recommended he] * e Areas Suitable For Increased Building Height (Keyed to Village Design Manual Sub-areas) Sub-Area 1 - The core area located between Elm and Grand Avenues, and * and Jefferson Streets, and the remainder of the sub-area. Maximum height - Core Area - 65 feet / 6 stories Remainder of Sub-Area - 50 feet / 5 stories Redevelopment Plans indicate that the core area is to be 1 focal point and major attraction of downtown. A low pin1 in the land along State Street and the tall Eucalyptus alc Grand Avenue will serve to mitigate and visually buffer ti increased height. To enhance pedestrian orientation, bot{ floors should be commercial rather than office use. 0 - Sub-Area 2 - Located adjacent to the Elm Avenue - 1-5 freeway interchai and one of the major areas designated for tourist-commrc. uses. Maximum height - 50 feet / 5 stories This area will serve as the primary eastern gateway to thc Village Center. Special care should be taken to ensure v from the freeway - down Elm Avenue are not obstructed. e Sub-Area 4 - A small portion along Oak Avenue below Roosevelt is incluc e as a transitional - element. Maximum height - 50 feet / 5 stories Sub-Area 5 - Located on the sites of the Royal Palms and Twins Inns. each case behind the existing development. Maximum height - 50 feet / 5 stories a 7- EGEORGE &x%- S NOLTE AND 4SSOCIATES , 14 & Yi iih^CV"RONMENi*lC'Yrl. 9s P -.+c=s SJWE"0iiS i 0 \ 'L /' > * e a L Sub-area 5 is designated in the Design Manual for the mos intense tourist-commercial development. A location behim the existing development will fully mitigate any adverse visual impacts on Carlsbad Boulevard. Also, the preservat mature trees on each site would further mitigate - visual ii Sub-Area 6 - That portion of sub-area 6 located immediately adjacent tc e area 1, would be suitable for higher buildings to buffer idential to the north. Maximum height - 50 feet / 5 stories The Village Design Manual designates this area for office professional uses, and indicates that increased density a tions maybe appropriate. e Sub-Area 7 - A linear portion along Oak Avenue is recommended as a tra e or buffer element. Maximum height - 50 feet / 5 stories Design and Review Guidelines The key to ensuring that increased building height does not have adverse visual impacts is design review. Based upon general development goals and guidelines, such discretionary review should result in the highest quality and most desirable product. While a comprehensive set of detailed specifications will not quarantee a quality design, a review board employins design goals can produce superior results. The Village Design Manual conta: suitable review procedures and design objectives. Supplemental points will be recommended here to consider when multi-story development is being propos a I) * 1. Public Safety - Carlsbad's Fire Department indicates that the maxia height it can protect is 35 feet. Therefore, any structure over 35 should be required to conform to - more restrictive building codes: ( Type I1 Fire Resistive Building; Steel, Iron, Concrete, or Masonry elements; sprinkler and smoke detection systems.) e 2. Infrastructure - Because taller buildings could result in the devel of more square footage, the availability of water and sewer service accomodate it should be reviewed to determine if improvements will necessary. Also, the impact on traffic circulation should be anal1 to determine if features such as curb cuts, parking (etc.) are pro5 designed, sized, located, and whether further improvements will be e F 1 7 \ 15 @GEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES @ -YL AND EW"WMN.dEhll NSlhC is 'Ilnhv 'Is S"W'"CC)S / '\ a \ , \-- 1' .. 0 e * 0 necessary (e.g. signalization, turn pockets) . 3. Design Guidelines - Again, quality design cannot be guaranteed through ordinance. In addition to the specific considerations mentioned for each sub-area, these supplemental guidelines to the design manual are suggested for multi-story buildings. e o encourage variation in height and setback: o locate taller building elements toward the interior of of the lot, away from street frontages: o a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 2 is reasonable and should not be exceeded; o retain mature landscaping on site, especially tall trees along the pe r ime ter s ; o encourage pedestrian orientation, and commercial use of firs t floors . 0 e CONCLUSI ON From the investigations of several other cities in the San Diego Region and their experiences, it is apparent that Carlsbad is indeed wise to deal with the issue of high-rise construction prior to its construction. Of the otheI cities studied, with El Cajon being the only exception, all suffered severe negative reactions after high-rise buildings had been erected. Frequently t backlash result took the form of overly restrictive buiding height limitatic In the case of San Diego, development in the coastal zone is limited to a he of 30 feet. While preventing high-rise development, this inflexible height striction also has direct negative consequences (Mission Bay Park Land). El Cajon was the only City studied that planned for the introduction of high-rj development, and consequently has suffered little ,if any, controversy and j now benefitting from high-qualtiy multi-story development. It is strongly recommended that Carlsbad pursue a similar course. a e e e ,- - / 16 LEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES i~ LhD ENVIFOIIN'UI& cNt NE'% 9ANNERS 5dWE"ORC \ \L i a 3 * 0 e Appendix I e Photographs of Multi-Story Buildings 0 1&2 Coronado Shores e 3 & 4 Marina Towers North Coast Village 5 6 a Capri by the Sea 939 Coast Blvd. 7&8 a El Cajon Civic Center 0 a 0 -., '! ,r GEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES i @ -"LAND EhY*OUME*TFL LNG(NEL9S P GrriilS SVW'FIO- -. / e \ @ w 0- e e e e a a - 0 e 0 Coronado Shores 0 -0 W o* I e 0 e 0 0 Marina Tower s 0 0 e 0 North Coast Village 0 0 w a' 0 e e e Capri by the Sea Pac if ic Beach e e e 0 e 939 Coast Blvd. 0 e w e’ e e a e e e e El Cajon Civic Center ,' 0 w * a Appendix II e Illustrated Design Guidelines (excerpts from City of San Diego Planning Studies) e * e e e a *' 1 g GEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES Ah2 ENtPONMf* 4L CYG N-:?, p.ii..*-*s SJR"r"o?> &$ . i i o \ L- 2' e e ‘T - e POLICY: THE SCALE OF NEW BUILDINGS SHOULD NOT RADICALLY CHANGE THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING NE I GHBORHOOD . A. Relate the hefght of new buildings to the height of existing development. e P The mZutiaMhip kawm and mew of talk or mre can be de mre oonpat5bh height icr grurchal. meal of Low profile bdrtnlirige if the tnmsitia in hitding ,i 0 Aiglralty prominent buitdiyr 1- __ THT? e Ezceptktty tat2 bui?dir,-s Mned-iatet3 a&faceat to LCG buiiEings umliy cmts probZema such a8 e-essiue ak~dor~e, UPuieSirabl8 &d kmnete, Zaek of prima md via, bZOcPsy0. a rpoT TBE a e a ,-*,-.-.----4------ e . .\ -. - -'e . ._ - _- -. . . . .-. I . . . ., -. .-- e 2) Use of angled walls, and asymmetrical patterns setbacks, use of pronounced faceting, canring sculpturing techniques to avoid a square, boxy flat silhouette. a * * - e e a Tii_T;" - e a e ,? * e w c e daa&Lfr-.aak -e-.-". . L - -- . ---*- . ._ _._ --. a ___I - 0 3) Building surfaces should be articulated and textured to reduce their apparent size. Buildi can be articulated with canopies, balconies, terraces, cornices, small windows and other e architectural details. Buildings can be textur by using different materials, colors or facaues produce separate elements. e THIS N3T TRTS Peat upper fioor6 60 that thty '2C%CiL) or seem t.2, sei &.IC% and meah. 0 e 0 I - 0 s E c, ep P w ta s E %: e a e *9 5 3 2 8 e H P e L $- 32= .?5= F” - -oz= oz E gr-2 L 5- a. -43 1 C”L t: $?:& 3z:: $),-g’k .> - - 3T- .- -- - - - --_ - -- --_ -- - - i-- a-- L r 7- L--V * w 9&.+ * * 0 a Appendix I11 Gateway Off ice Building in 0 La Jolla Area (excellent example of sensitive architectural treatment of multi-story development) Photos No. 9, 10, 11, & 12 e e a e e -____.- . 7-- , m &i SEORGE S NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES 0 & "/ Aht LIVmNMrY- NtYL "5 PAhNCCIC SYNC"0E' / e w e '+b ~ c a e I 0 e e e a Gateway Off ic e Build ing 0 e Y +#* -I) v 4 e 0 0 0 e * 0 e 0 Gateway Off ice Building 0 -- IC-v- BEACH AND TENNIS CLUB e WEDDING 3001 CARESBAD BLVD. P.O. BOX 136 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 (714) 729-0971 October 4, 1982 Honorable Mayor and City Counci 1 City Hall - 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: It should be remembered that the original Twin Inn Hotel, built in the 1800's, was seven stories according to an authentic historical photograph of Carlsbad that hangs on the wall in my office. Kay Fennel Christiansen also pointed out, at the Ilowntown Carl sbad Merchant's Meeting, that A1 t Karlsbad was given a special variance to build the existing forty feet structure in 1964. It is not economically feasible to develop the 3oyal Palms, a site which was recommended for 50 feet mid-rise in the George Nolte Report of July, 1982, without the City Council approving increased height density on a 1 imi ted and control led basis. hotel, it is necessary that the height for the proposed project be increased to 150 feet, The land prices, building and financing costs are productive but prohibitive without increased dens? ty and height in this economy. Nithout new development, there is no successful redevelopment. Oceanside, i, e, and hopefully not Carlsbad. In order to provide abundant parking for the proposed For reference, observe San Bernadino, CJS: tb TENNIS COURTS (Day and Night Play) 0 FINE DINING @ RESTAURANT e DANCING HEATED POOL @ JACUZZI e PRIVATE BEACH @ WEDDING CHAPEL SURFING e GLORIOUS SUNSETS e RARE TREES ALL EN ONE LUXURIOUS MEDIITE NEAN SETTING BY-THE-SEA WEo %WE URJDE31SB6~D0 THE CBTY'S CURBENT 35 0 HXLlU3E OR HX6H4ISE Ik4MA6E AID I8ESBGSY~'~F %-3B 0 CQASTU ZONE, - .-..----. -.--"--. *- . ‘i c@?BOY PlE BIUa I_____rp_c __ . -- __- _- .___. _____ ___- - - __ -. T 21MG16 AH6 DESIGN OF’ TME B Q . _- --.. % - ___ c -_ _- _____- ---- _. _- - -- , i I’ -4 . ---- I , t -, KllLBHSE OR HIGH-RISE AMI CRE4TE THE A 8 @G THE COASTAL ZONE, c- . d.Tlpl.a-- - *--.....- I u____ _r_.U__ ~ I=2 u-*--.-.. .. ~ A. -Imx-”__w_ ”,., ..,--- ,_ ~~~~~~~ ZOHE, i.._?l_v-_n _uI _-__ ---1.- - .- -- ->---- -- &--+y___.Ij_l *-.-,q.---_Y ~".,"----*IILI.a.Y11- --YY__Y _____ .I_.-I " _" _.,.^-...~ cL.T-me-- , p BPPQSE CHANGING l+¶ID4IS OR HIGHaISE CQQS ~~~~~~~ THE BIUGE 8 t THE COASTAL ZONE, --- --- 9 QPPOSE CHANGING mD-RIa OR HHGH4XSE INMAGE AND DESHCM QF TRE DO1 DESTRQY THE BaCUGE A$LOHG THE COASTAL ZONE, -$=-a’ rrnr -_- -“ “ - --”a. sar., .-s ,.*-%“.“*-a--.b*-- _a__- -.---* - i - -..- . ib p THE ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ giF e 8 OPPOSE ~~~G~~~ MDaIa OR HSGHdITSE ~~~~~~~ THE BBUGE I Q THE COASTAL ZOHE, ^9i..”-?--.-19-r-r-- .---c_. --.._-AI_ 2 0 3 JH&VJ-y ~. ~~ “1 1--- _- . +c_. ---’..-I*,- 2/.7y/3 K7 - ,. /i? Cd 4- 9 QPPOSE CHANGING ~E~~~~~ THE BILLAGE HID-RESE OR HIGbRISE B A!!D CREATE "$HE * LONG THE COASTAL ZQHE, -----.-- -.-. - * 9 OPPOSE CHW#G%HG HB&%SE OR HIGH-RISE co DESTROY THE YIUGE -,.--+.. - -w.- _--_ -- ,..---- --.-c C.w,-, - UIy--,-cz ---. . .*a -. A -.. -.., I_ -_- -1.-. --^.---- -_11 *.I -__- -. ."---I. --- ---- -... -.-__ - -- -. - I _._ I- I_ - -_-_ -_ I_L ---al--- - _- 4 -- -- -- . ____-------A --c-c"I--.&n-..- iPI--*-Y-L--u.-- _----I-= --_ --- 1 I 1 e 4, e i _.. $1 g OPPOSE ~~~~~~~~ THE CITY*S C WIHG BEHGHT, AS ----Po..-- . ." ~-------7?=--=--vQm --___I__ +-I- -- _- . __-- -- a -- - - --- -- -,-.l.-- .. - . . _.__ -.- -au-.m"Lmawn. YIL.-..a-.L19L.*.-- c.-- .-..------ n.---Q.---\~*--.~--.. -.----- e-- -- -l-...m,l-" - --X-,- ~ m, arm rnrnSIGrnD, mS%D p BPPOSE CHAWGHNG D CREATE THE .I ---- _^.. .r -- --- ...----I .-+-,,A,, --/, ==%-' --.I -a. A irLn7"lnmSnvd.--- --1_ -I_-- -."-.-- ---.- -.-.---..---.--j" ---"-- o OPPOSE CHANGING THE CITYgS CmW 3% EEIID-JtISE OR HIGH&RI%E C IWGE AND DESIGN Ql? 2% ESTRQY THE PILLAGE E CQASTAL ZONE, 3">zF /-%- I-. -.*.-.. I...%* s .-*..... LLI -- - .*..-.s. __ ~~~- ax ."CI.. .-Mu '.A Y,mm>u31~-9 -I.LI- -^_&h x . .._--AL- _.- -..--._I_- --- ...---_ _*---- --- .-. --- --- _-- ----.- -_. ._. --.-.- ---- ----- D, QPP0S.E CHANGING . - - -.- .. 0 IWGE AM%) DESIGH w I ALONG TU GQASTAL %O P -I-- - "---I --- ME, THE mmSIWED, ~~~~E~~~ QE' C 9 QPPOSE CHANGING TWE CITY'S CURRE]$ 35 e BWT ~~II~~~G BEIIGHT, AS DESlYKlY THE BILLAGE x-*-- .- .- 3.. -I ~ -IL.- -..--^ -. I -I--.--. -- ---. - -'- -=.-a --I. ---- .C~~.,.~.rr..mn.-.P.-~~~,)YV. -------- -IC--- .. AD, OPPOSE CHRFJIGING D=B%SE QR HIGH=&%SE CONS RQY THE BILLAGE , UE FOR AH WKB ------a*nm -4.d.Sv-b -c-- - -.. -_l..--- - -= ---a y_31__.__ 9 5ME mm%ZGNF:B, THE CITYPS CWIJT 95 rnDAfS OR HIGHaIsE p OPPOSE CHAMCIHG STROY THE BXUGE T4U ~O~~TAL ZONEo .- 8 OPPQSE CHANGING TROY THE BILLAGE IWGE AND DESIGH QE' ONG THE COASTAL ZONEe -___P_ --..r..--- .'-*-p---.. - ..-. 1-- u* " +^_y_ .- --- -.I----.-. \ _^Ll._-_ I--. -. --I_ Ll . -- ~ -1. .-. "_ - --I..__. -.----I - .-.... A ... -r .e-..- I- .- **;ne ,..+%.-- ---*.- -..'..-. -_ 232- TlE - ~~~~~ 20~~~ 0 .-e-- __I...L/I--.w 4--= __y_____ --” _”-.I “.P --- vwYY-.u_*__ --u---*----e “4 DldaIsE m HIGBaI IMAGE WBB DESIGN OP +- _. - . -. -- . ._ __ -_ I -_-- - -- - ------ -_ .- _L e *. * m%Bediam OR IsIM:g,z% BSTROY m%E Bxma IWGE AND DES16N OB’ ---**x---.%-*-. -i--i(L-- --------_ -------_u_---u_ - -------- - -- - -..--.-*I”-._ 1 - ___m I-&-’- 1- -*-,a --IIL .--_. ____I -_“ .I. _-_ - _I--- -..- I-..-.-.U.III.-...-). .-I,.#* --, w”+ ... h*...’._ ------ --c-> --.-.-Z-?=-=---A. .1=-. --, v- .- --_I_--“- _I-.”----.- -. p OPPQSE CEANGINC < M?XMlllSE QR HXGRaISE cogs %bNGE AND BESIGH OF E COASTAL ZONE, -,*.-*-1.-.--**Prr__ ...-. -.- _I_” - --I- -_ ” _- -,paw-- ,* - >--.x ” .?- ___1_3__* -__u__-.‘- _____o 1 94,- 31 A- I .-, Hm-Rlga OR HIGH41 3iHMAGE AND DESIGN OF cm:=*-v, in , .-I.- . -. IC I 0 i i 5 0 ----- p OYPBSE CHA#6ING -- - 1 .*- ....--- 4-UI-*--cr-- _--_-- p BYPQSE CHAHGING ESTRQP THE BILUGE P 4 w-*..---. Ub+I*Iu-. ~ .- ..-A+.+---- -I 2’irl-r _*_-_ - ._ V(&dSL?TLck - e% “I- -,--*.--i I L,. .-*-_a. -.11--.- -*__I__ -&daw_ ----a -“-. 23.5- 5 €AaesDcQD Pl.4 L . .” *I- ---.I--.-_ - --I- -_ _l-^-.-l ~ \I - ME, THE UNDERSIGMF,B, BESIDE o OPPOS CHANGING !i"HE CITY'S CUlRRENT 35 - PWT MD=BISE OR HIGHaZSE ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~Y THE BILLAGE IMKAGE AND DESIGN QE' TEE ~~~~~~~ D CREATE THE COASTAL ZONE, - ... - I-. --- - - ---"-u- --.uI*y*pIL n -R**-*. . t- --m ---- I_ --.- - I-_--- I- I I) 0 r'f * m. WE, TIiE UNQEFtSIGMCD, RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD, OPPOSE CHANGING THE CITY'S CURREMT 35 - FOOT MAXIMUM BUILDING BEIGHT, AS MID-RISE OR HIGtl-KISE CONSTRUCTIOlf WOULD DESTROY THE IJRdIUAGE XWGE AND DESIGN OF TAE DOWHTOVN AREAp AND CREATE THE POTEI4"UL FOR Ah' UNDBIRABLE IMPACT ALONG THE COASTAL ZONE. -_I --_._-_I_-- -c -.-_.-- ---.....I,...y- % ,- -xI-- i Y ...--I- ---- _I_^--- 4l e :-. ,e y #. UE, THE UNDERSIGNED, RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD, OPPOSE CHANGING "HE CITY'S CURRENT 35 - FOOT MAXIMUM BUILDING BEIGHT, AS MID-RISE OR HIGH-RISE CONSTRUCTION WOULD DESTROY THE YILLAGE IMMAGE AND DESIGN OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA, AND CREATE THE PoTrCatTIAL FOR AN UNDESIRABLE IMPACT ALONG THE COASTAL ZONE. _,.. _.__. - %* GI."_- _-I_^--_ +-A __-____ IYu..*.~^IIIMIxYy..,.,-~? .-_ "- --. -...-- -1-1- ... -I --I_ -rrT -, -2*-P- -.-*-, --_ a- I?",, ?.x*.*-.. . -- ----. hi U'mArh e /- u- /-l-YtIv t . 72 9 - u4-0/ %.& /+a- 729-3c-177 --- -T-Y- - -- J"LI ME# THE ~D~SICN~';Dp RESIDENTS OF CAEILSBAJ), OppOsE CHANCING ?, &.cj+ z WE, THE UNDEHSICNED, RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD, OPPOSE CHANGING THE CITY'S CURRENT 35 - FOOT MAXIMUM BUILDING BEIGHT, AS M'ID-JIISE OR HIGH-RISE COIJSTRUCTION WOULD DESTROY THE VIUAGE IMMAGE AND DESIGN OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA, AND CREATE THE POTENTIAL FOR AN UNDESIRABLE IWACT ALONG THE COASTAL ZONE. I---- -*- ..-- ---.---I- -I-- -^."__-I _..-_ -<x,.--- . . ~ -----.--I--- I , , .I"- UI_ ----*----..-*- -e..- -_ - -I - --___ . ..IX , a-- ......._ < i' 0 q x.. / / /' I August 15, 1982 On August 17, 1981, pursuant to Section 33375 of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California, copies of the following documents were transmitted to your agency: 1. Description of the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment projects boundary and statement that the redevelopment proceedings were instituted as recorded with the San Diego Recorder. 2. Ordinance No. 9591 in the Carlsbad City Council adopting the Village Redevelopment Plan. 3. Map depicting the boundaries of the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment project area. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 9591, enclosed is the revised, corrected map depicting the boundaries of the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment project area. The enclosed map should replace the previous map which you received. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact the City Clerk, or the Redevelopment Department. Sincerely, Aletha L. Rautenkranz, City Clerk ALR/smg enclosures e 6- Jtan Water istvlct of s Office of the General Manager August 23, 1982 City of Carlsbad 1208 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Attention Ms. Aletha L. Rautenkranz City Clerk Gentlemen: Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Project Thank you for your letter dated August 15, 1982, transmitting the revised map pertaining to the proposed Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Project. There are no existing Metropolitan Water District facilities within the boundaries of the project area, which is within San Diego County Water Authority, a member public agency of Metropolitan. informed of your redevelopment activities. We appreciate your cooperation in keeping us Very truly yours, r" <I i: (, &' c1, f #--/ (-_I Frank Aranda Senior Engineering Technici RKY/~ 1111 Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles, Calif / Mailing address Box 54153, Los Angeles, Calif 90054 /Telephone. (213) 626-4282 / /' _L____I_--. D I ST!? x 8u-r I e)] L I ST e-+/+:. State bard of Equalization 1020 N Street < did .--- Sacramento Ca. 95808 .I Court ty Assessor's Office Cottnky of Sari Diego 1699 Pacific Coas t Highway Sari Diego, CA 92101 San Diego Court ty Audi tor County of Ssn Djego . ;6C!O Pacif i c Coast Ni ghway San Diego, CA 92101 Carlsbad Nunic-ipaf bfater District 5950 El . Can1 in0 Reat Czrl sbad, CA 92008 Tri-City Hospi tal District $002 Vista !.!ay Cceariside 3 CR 92054 County of s2n Dri-lgo 1E.CO Paci Fie- Ccxt tii ghway - * * 'Sari Diego, CA 92101 ' $!i ra Costa Col1 ege Otin Bar-nard Drive Oicans-ide, CA 92054 i ,i Lro !.la kir Di stri ct 1111 Stinset Los Angeles, CA 90054 Sm Ilicgo IIatcr Authority 2750 4th Avilnue Sc~t? D~c~o, CA 92010 'f,L Carlsbad Unified School District 891 Pine livenuc Carlsbad, CA 92008 0 W MEMORANDUM DATE: August 11, 1982 FROM: Chris Salomone, Community Redevelopment Manager TO: Lee Rautenkranz, City C1 erk (-5 - SUB J ECT : REVISION TO ORDINANCE NO. 9591- REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Attached is a correspondence from the State Board of Equalization regarding Ordinance No. 9291. Area. The City Attorney suggests that the corrected version of the map should be filed with the appropriate taxing agencies by the City Clerk. states that "Exhibit A" of the Redevelopnent Plan should be revised. I have attached two copies of the corrected blue-line map. more copies, please let me know. Some minor boundary changes were made in the Redevelopmen. Also attached is my memo to the City Attorney with their reply. He also If you need attachments: Letter from State Board of Equalization Memo to City Attorney dated 9/10/82 (with reply) Two blue-line maps of Redevelopment Area CS : a1 w . . -. - ___ --... ____ __..___...-... __.-.. ___ _" .-. _.____I ___-.- ~ -.-. __ __ I 0 1' GEI First Diitric ERNEST SuconJ J. D?( Dis VI1 1.1 I /. Third Disl RI' Fcurth Di JliLy 28, 1962 (9.Ld -[\ J >2,2.-.%3%.3 3 c Confr 01 UC .ha hdrers J, Ai.tken Fxe A.c%ing Re devel oprnent, Prograifi Uarmgz 2 City of CarLsbad Carlsbxi, CA 92008 3.200 ~hl hTefi?J.e --. near Nr, Aitken: Our. mapping unit has processed OrdLixmc= No, 9591 v7iIiT~ch approved the redeveiopment plan for the Village Area RedeveLopmcnt Project o d0in.g so, they found th& the official. rap of the project cnn-tari.nsd se-vera1 errorsB tx2.p e It ~oi,il_d be great,l.y apprwixte d if you. cud,d Iizit-e -Lhe ox*i.gind map corrected ,and then send us two correc-t;.d b2.us-lk~ p no urgency to tillis request, bJ.bi2.e They are shoi,>rn on encl.osed copies of portion:; of -the nt;s, yl11cre .is Sime r ely 9 e---? -3 . h.2 4 (-3 ,4g4f&,<r$,$$.g - 14artj-n C, Rohke Utility Rol-l Anal-yst VALLJAT I ON DIVLS I OX MCR 2 de Encl osw~ 0 v MEMORANDUM DATE: August 10, 1982 TO: FROM : c.5 * Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney Chris Salomone, Community Redevelopment Manager SUB 3 ECT : ORDINANCE NO. 9291- REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Attached is correspondence from the State Board of Equalization regarding the boundaries of the Carlsbad Redevelopment Area. Is there any necessary legal action to adjust these areas? a corrected bl ue-1 ine for your fi 1 es. I have attached f,f&$ I%-&& fl4 07 r$ bhcJ #Ifl /+fe+$fd5?33/9 <a< i4-6 Tk afl % (;@ j& "!y &+&&-uYt& @A 7"ca e JM-%JP /L,a / &wv+4%%4 A +? s4 *A{. &jpc /g& k)Q//l"kkd/ y8/3/@?0+= p""? fd.L CI c, Chfk PgJ/%*k bP'bf. &/ 49 qff& &&h&&fYdP & /& &hY&J lf..$*& kfLL m2/ 4A t+p( "dJC$g 7a, a{mc&J pa/5&& &rA)fld*cfiAh FY-5 /4 w kff%&JC GS(/~< pd.f-.,,.&{j& #@ Wl4d k & /kofY fiw k'&d(*vs 5+ attachment: Letter from State Board of Equalization dated 7/28/82 Corrected Blue--line map of Redevelopment Area. c"j /[ ..._ 9 CC: Ron Beckman Marty Orenyak CS: a1