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