HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 103; Las Flores Church of the Nazarene; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (7)-.
January 22, 1975
Carlsbad City Council
I, Joe A. Martin, do formally hersby file an aTyeal to the Carlsbad
City Council ah a decision made at a public hearing held. 3y the 2ity
Plannin? CommiTsion Pe: Conditional Use Fernit (xJP-~o~) on Zanuary, 14.
Tirst I want to apaologize to Commisionzr ?. I,. Watson for the
lambasting I had to take in publlc hearing amongst my neighbors, but I
do no?, apologize for the fact that the statements that I mde on Jan-
uary 14 were also made at a public hearing of the same issue at a time
vihev ?-Y-. 'Vatson at that time w'+s not a Coumisiv-~ar, and I thereby retract
my apology on ?he basis of a misconception that he as unaware of.
To refresh the Council's memory of over a year ago on or about
March or April of 1973 the Xazarene church purchased property in question
and then asked the city for a conditional use permit to Suild a church
on said property. The Same neys as published in local papers to the
public as this renewal vas, and it was also published before the public
hearing that the city staff had its recommendation of approval. Tho is
this city staff? What is it's function? Is it to recommend to the
public before a public hearing is heard on the matter? Opposition was
brought forth at this public Eieming, so strongly in fact the the public
thought that itms a cut and dried situation (and their voict?s of
opposition were many.) I am..not, speakins for all the people that were
present in it's opposition I am only speaking for one in this instance, aid
me only, but I can say this for a fact, the others that were present to
express their views yere dealt with some such as I, and some more harshly
than I. L --\ 1 * I
JAB 23 191s
.. , 2
Bor ;sa rmbiased public hearing 2s fcr 2s I'm concerned was that I
was denied the floor after the floor was closed to the public to contest
a proposed 113 presented by the church's legal counsel, and tmt said
counselor carried on an open conversation with the Commisioners on the
issue of a Conditional Use Permit. I was also told by the Commisioners
that if I had any grief in so far as a tax acempt organization coining into
the community as a detriment I should have a talk with my congressman that
it vas out of the City's jurisdiction to control taxes, yet they voted
unanimously when the problem was presented. This they did have the control
of by voting on the issue. Uy Opposition at that time was over a year
ago. It was the basis of my opposition this year, even more so because
my taxes have increased in the meantime (and so have yours.) I am opposed
to supporting any more tax exempt or,anizations especially in an area that
was presented to the Council that was in a highly taxed R-1 neighborhood.
This church after much opposition at it's first p=iblic hearing mas
granted a conitional use y:jrmit. It. not only violated these conditions
of the permit but it also let the permit expire. Wny of these things
weren't even present at it's first hearing which even led to more oppositioh
this second time for renewal, and the public was still denied for a second
time on it's opposition. Like any other permit or license, in my opinion,
when you go asking or pleading for something you surely don't violate it's
condition. If you think enough of the generosity surely you don't let
it expire.
We were told at this first hearing that Highland Drive would not be
used for parking for church people and that the house on these prexises
would not be used to hold church ser?-ices and that a paved parking area
would be provided on the property before any church meetings of any kind
3
would be permitted. All three of %!lese conditions were violated and even
went so far as to violate my privacy and abuse my property as follows,
Services were held in this residence that carries the addreaa of
2675 Highland Drive, parking did take place on both sides of Highland Drive
even shough one side of the street being so narrow carries such signs as
NO PARKING T3IS SIDE AT ANY !PI?JX.
driveway on this crown of the hill and also being convenisntly located next
to the church property it became a public turn around to pull in and back
onto Highland Drive and then park in front of the church (house.)
night service the car lights are constantly flashed through the house that
sits directly at :he end of the driveway, I have a nervous dog (watchdog)
that barks every time a car pulls into the driveway whether its day or night
services. This to you may sound like nit picking and if it only hcpppened
once or twice by some inconsiderate person I could put up with it, but can
you imagine it occurring by every other person at a church? Even the
Being that my driveway is the only flat
If' a
preacher himself having a driveway all of his own found it more convenient
to use mine as a turn around and then park in front of his residence.
I brought up these violations of the original CUP and the parking
problem on the narrow Highland at this second public hearing of it's
renewal and I got the brilliant reply to my unsatisfied mind from one of
the Commissioners that this sounds like to him that it was a pirlice
departmmt problem and that he was unaware that parking was on one side of
Highland Drive only. Yet he voted unanimously for it's approval. This is
basically the same reTly I got on another matter' on the first hearing of
over a year ago. When I told the commission that our groperty waxes were
so high in this area and that the &ax exempt school of approximately
thirteen acres -.vere $st at the lower end of this property and that waa all
us tax paye'rs need in this neighborhood mas another free-loading tax
4
exempt neighbor. I got that same selfish reply from the commission then
that 'we don't control the taxes. If you have a tax grief go see your
congressman and take it up with him.'
I was told at a very early age nothing would get an argument started
quicker that discussing politics and religion and in this argument I'm a
third party, but to imagine a person sitting in an
hearing such statements made tha-, my problems need to be taken to tho
police (already overworked) departmerlt or my problems need to be taken to
my congressman. Yet this big advisory committee is the one that can
control the vote to meat the pmlic's wants by majority vote. These
policies make me shudder to think what the future holds for us in the
neighborhood.
I don't care to philos2phize but
open public meeting
This approximate two acres that the church proposes to build on has
further opposition by public opinion as follows.
of che neighborhood with over eighty signatures for the first appeal of
this conditional uae permit;. We were told that duet property owners
that xere within 300 feet of the property would be entitled to petition,
yet the church showed up with its petition for approval with signatures
f;om it's congregation and some completely out of Lhs city, some in Viata
We presented a pezition
some iti Oceanside and who knows where else. Yet the majority of the
neighoorhood was still detlied a just open puolic hearing on the matLer. If
you care to go to the map you will plainly see that these lot p8,rcels (most
of t,hem) are well over WU feet through them to the surrouuding properties
$0 De able LO volce their opinion or1 the suDject according the planning
commissions tactics, which Dritlgs up my rinal opposibiocl -0 _tils ~~ti~~e
matter.
I said ve were in -hc high rent district and ae have had ;t whop:iing
big Froperty tax increase .chis past year -:hich wkes :ratters xorsz and
even more so for the future wiic1-i I said before, I s!?lldder to t'link wilat
it holds for us tax payers.
through are goin,; to become
only frontage or, Las Flores
should they ever be split.
5
Our large parcels
I and - 1 o c ke *. . T7 i t!.:
to evs-r zet to the
of ground over 300 feet
this ciiurc’n taking up the
inside parcels of ground
to split at this time, it nil1 surely prevent it for future owners, rve
can’t live fore8’3r.
year. So property does chaRL,e hands.
I’ve had tliree neighbors to pass away just this past
Then I purchased my .7 acres parcel four years ago I was sold on the
belief that the city of Carlsbad owns a pie shaped parcel of frontage on
Las Flores and that it met the oveEall plan to open up some of this land
locked propsrty. Eost of the property owners were in favor of tnis
situation so I yurchased here under that assumption. I sven vent so far
as to check vith the Engineering Depar‘ment at taa- time and was told that a
proposed street would come in by my of Las Flores at Korning Glory Lane
apd turn iVest and tie with Chuparosa Yay and that it met the overall plan
of improvements and co~uld come under the 1911 Act. I saw no reason to be
mislgd or lied to so I assumed it as a fact. The curb and gutter and
sidewalk on this city omned parcel was put in on a temporary gatch Then
Las Flores vas put through with curb and gutter and sidewalks and it looked
like something :iTas going to 33 done in the near future. So now you see, it ’.
behooves me to ?now that the city planning commissign and city council
approves of a church to go in this parcel that could be developed into a
better usage. Not only for taes, but for the betterment of he neighborhood.
Sven though the street niil;ht not ever 33 put in in t.he future to open
some of the-.e larger pa-cels of ground, its not giving the citizens of this
neighborhood a fair break to plan one thing and t’ien do anothsr. The 1.8 acres
that the church would be taking up will destroy eight city lots with
frontage on Las Flores only. That is a lot of assessed valuation that this
city looses yearly because houses built in this R-1 area are iTi the 3~0,000
- ,. ..
6
to .$60,000 bracket. It is strictly a choice view piece of land. I feel
the church could find another suitable piecz of property in an area that
would serve both parties equally as well and eliminate aome of the tax
bu-den that we have in my neighborhood such as thirteen acres at the
school, city owned property that will have no further use to anyone
on Las Flores.
I was shocked at the Planning Commission meeting (January 14, 1975)
when I was informed by one of the Commissioners that this city has no rules
and laws adopted governing churches as to what they can do and can't do
should this situation ever arise again, and it surely will happen again
because they a.-e getting about as frequent as service stations. And also
show me one that moves into a tract R-1 neighborhood.
I think Commissioner R. L. Watson summed the hearing up very well the
other night when he made the statement 'this city has never done anything
for me' meaning free city service when it comes to developement. I have to
admire the man as a builder because I understand his position. I too have
been at the building trades for 28 years and we both know what good homes can
do to make an enjgyable neighborhood to live in.
In my closing, and you well know the wishes of the majority of this
neighborhood, 1 have but one thing to say.
guide, but if it becomes inevitable upon your decision that this broke
church group (I say broke because they couldn't build based on their first
proposal and now they want to build it a piece at a time in four stages
over five years with their handymen) does get approval, then I say develop
it all the way and that means curb and gutter and sidewalk on Highland
Drive just like all the other developers have to do when developing a
parcel of land in this city, not just 30 feet from center of street
dedication of frontage that has been put into the conditions of permit
Let your conscience be your
- ,. ..
7
(condition # 17) after all, if it shoxld not get done now, guess what
taxpayer will be footing the bill in the future, even under she 1911 Act
their share willoe tax free.
Yours truly, r--
2635 Highland Drive
Carlsbad, California