HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-08-21; City Council; 5869-2; Appeal of V 290 - Zipser)
AGENDA BILL NO:
-DATE:
DEPARTMENT:
SUBJECT:
(
CITY OF CARLSBAD
5869-Supplement 2
August 21, 1979
Planning
APPEAL OF VARIANCE 290, ZIPSER·
STATEMENT OF THE MA'l"I'ER: ,,
(
.INITIAL '1#:2 I I
Dept . Hd "''tf'-: :_J/)l'f-
City Atty. VFL3·
I 0 _City Mgr. ~
The Planning Commission denied the variance for parking reduction for a
3-unit apartment presently under construction, situated on the west side
of Ocean Street between Pacific Avenue and Ocean Street •
. The applicant appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the Council
and the Council, at their June 5, 1979rmeeting, continued the matter
per the request of the applicant. ·
On June 19, 1979 Council directed the City"At-torney·to prepare the
necessary·documents denying the appeal of Variance 290.
City Council Resolution 5843 was presented· at the July 3, 1979 meeting
of.the City Council, as was a letter from Stanley Zipser, dated June 21,
1979. Following discussion,· Council d.ontinued the matter as per the
appellant's request, and indicated that the matter would be renoticed
for public hearing on August 21, 1979. The matter was re-noticed and Mr.
Zipsei dbly notified.
Per Mr. Zipser•s· request and Council's direction, staff met with the
applicant and hip representatives to review.alternative parking designs.
Although some were found acceptable by the City .Engineer, none have _been
formally proposed by the applicant. Therefore, staff still recommends
denial of the existing application.
Exhibits:
Gity_Council Resolution No. 5843
Letter from s. Zip~er, dated Jurie 21, 1979
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1519
Planning Commission minute excerpts, dated May 9, 1979
Appeal letter from Stanley Zipser, dated May 22, 1979
Staff Report, dated May 9, 1979
9-4-M~morand~m from the Planning Department dated August 30, 1979~ RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Staff and Planning Commission have.recommended denial of the
variance to reduce visitor parking •. If the City Council concurs, your
action is to adopt Resolution No. 5843. If; however,. City Council wi.shes
to consider approving the appeal or review the matter further, you should
direct the J;>lanning Commission to reconsider their action and report back.
FORM -PLANNING 79
·. \ 0~ )
!
\ V:; q o
2/pse~
(
AGENDA BILL 5869 -Supplement #2
Council Action:
(
Page 2
8-21-79 Council continued the appeal to enable staff to study the
design presented by applicant during the meeting, and to
report back to Council at the next meeting.
9-4-79 At the request of the appellant, the matter was continued to
the next regular meeting of 9-18-79.
9-18-79 Council considered approval of V290 and directed the matter
returned to the Planning Commission for further study and
recommendation with regard to applicant's contribution to
a future parking district.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
(
RESOLUTION NO. 5843
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA UPHOLDING THE
PLANNING CO:t1MISSION RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION
AND DENYING THE APPEAL FOR A VARIANCE FROM
SECTION 21.47.130(2) TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN
THE REQUIRED VISITOR PARKING FROM TWO SPACES
TO ONE SPACE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF OCEAN STREET BETWEEN
PACIFIC AVENUE AND OCEAN STREET. CASE NO.V-290(1),
APPLICANT: STANLEY ZIPSER.
WHEREAS, on May 9, 1979, the Carlsbad City Planning
Commission adopted Resolution No. 1519, which is herewith
referred to and made a part hetecif, denying a Variance (V-290(1))
from Section 21.47 .130(2) to allow a reduction in visitor
parking, on propetty gerietally located on the wets side of
Ocean Street between Pacific Avenue and Ocean Street, more
particularly described as:
Lot 2, Granville Park, in the County of San Diego,
15 State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1782,
filed in the Office of the Recorder of San Diego County,
16 February 21, 1924, exce~ting therefrom that portion
thetecif, if any, lying below the mean high tide line of
17 the Pacific Ocean;
18 and
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, on May 22, 1979, a proper appeal was filed by
the applicant in protest of the Planning Commission's denial;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has determined V-290(1)
to be exempt from environmental review according to Section
19.04.090(c) (4) of the Carlsbad Environmental Protection
Ordinance which exempts minor alterations in land use
limitations; and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the
City Council on June 19, 1979 to consider the appeal of said
J.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
0 <( ca co en 13 _J 0 0 • 0:: N 0:: <( O') -, u 14 0 u.. w::;
00~~
Z >-w O Q1->u.. 15 ca-<(-u :;; _J
u..: ' --' <( >-w u 16 I-W O • ~z~~ uo:~ca z O en 17 -I-_J > I-0:: <( <(
>-u
I-18 u
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
( (
denial at which time all persons interested in or opposed to the
proposed variance were heard and the decision of the Planning
Commission considered;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Carlsbad as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the findings of the Planning Commission as
set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 1519 constitute
the findings of the City Council.
3. That the City Council hereby denies this appeal and
affirms the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the
variance.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the day of ----
, 1979 by the following vote, to wit: --------
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
RONALD C. PACKARD, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
-2-
-
LAW OFFICES
PASTOR AND ZIPSER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
JEROME PASTOR
STANLEY ZIPSER
MIKAEL KOLTAI
LEONARD J. MEYBERG, JR.
OF COUNSEL
Clerk
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Street
Carlsbad, California 92008
Re: 2459 Ocean Street, Carlsbad
Dear Sir:
June 21, 1979
While visiting the City offices yesterday, regarding
a matter currently pending with the Engineering Department,
I was, to put it mildly, abruptly surprised to learn that the
appeal of my wife and me from an adverse Planning Commission
decision on a variance application was on the city Council
calendar for June 19, 1979 -the previous day!
My letter of June 1, 1979 asked for a postponement
from the originally assigned date of June 5 "to the next hearing
date convenient to the Council's calendar." (See attached
copy of letter). As has been true with prior hearing matters, I
had anticipated some written notice or telephone communication
of the hearing date and received neither. I, therefore, assumed
that some date in July would be assi~-~d -a fact mentioned during
a telephone discussion with the Clerk J or City Manager's office
prior to sendiqg my letterrequesting the continuance.
Please be assured that the variance application is of
the utmost importance to us and that we would not knowingly allow
the matter to be decided without exercising our right to address
the Council personally and, hopefully, to present relevant facts
and factors which should be considered in the decision making
process.
The purpose of this letter is to request that the matter
be restored to the Council's future calendar.and that, if deemed
appropriate, I be allowed to appear personally at your July 3, non-
public hearing to explain more fully the nature of some alterna-
tive solutions which have been, and are being, studied.
Clerk
City of Carlsbad
June 21, 1979
Page 2
I understand that on July 3 some documentation from
the Planning staff is to be furnished you for your examination.
It is, therefore, my further request that such procedure be
delayed until after a rescheduled heari.ng has taken place.
I sincerely hope you will act favorably on these requests
and will not permit the recent inadvertence to foreclose further
exploration of this most important issue, the resolution of which
will have extremely far· reaching personal and, of course,
economic consequences.
M§"I have a reply at your earliest convenience.
SZ/b
Enclosure
cc: Paul Bussey,
City Manager
Ronald C. Packard, Mayor
and Council Member
Ve~y.--t.ruly y7ou2~s ,
( . ' ·• . .--\<;...:, . _) t~-¢, ..... ,vL~
Stanley ;i•. ~-7" ··; ·
1..___-..-/
Anthony J. Skotnicki, Vice Mayor
and Council Member
Claude A. Lewis
Council Member
Mary H. Casler
Council Member
Girard Anear
Council Member
. ....
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
•
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1519
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A VARIANCE FROM
SECTION 21.47.130 (2) TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE
REQUIRED VISITOR PARKING FROM TWO SPACES TO ONE
SPACE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST
SIDE OF OCEAN STREET, BETWEEN PACIFIC AVENUE AND
OCEAN STREET.
CASE NO:
APPLICANT:
V-290 {l)
ZIPSER, STANLEY
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, to wit:
Lot 2, Granville Park, in the County of San Diego,
10 State of California, according to Map thereof No.
1782, filed in the Office of the Recorder of San
11 Diego County, February 21, 1924, excepting there-
from that portion thereof, if any, lying below the
12 mean high tide line of the Pacific Ocean, ,
13 has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the
14 Planning Commission; and
15 WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request
16 as p~ovided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
17 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 9th day of May,
18 1979, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law
19 to consider said request; and
20 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has determined V-290(1) to be
21 exempt from environmental review according to Section 19.04.090
22 (c) (4) of the Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance which
23 exempts minor alterations in land use limitations,
24 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering
25 the testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to
26 be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the
27 Variance (V-290(1)) and found the following facts and reasons
28 to exist:
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
• •
1. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally
to the other property in the same vicinity and zone.
The condominium ordinance was designed to require the amenities
usually available in ownership housing. The ordinance applies
to all condominium conversions regardless of underlying zone and
date and circumstances of construction.
2. The variance is not necessary for the preservation of a
substantial property right possessed by other property in the
same vicinity and zone.
A.
B.
The property has been developed as is allowed by the
zone.
The condominium ordinance contains special regulations
to assure quality ownership housing within the City.
A condominium permit is not a right guaranteed by the
zone but a privilege granted at the discretion of the
Planning Commission and the City council.
3. The granting of this variance will adversely affect the
General Plan by circumventing the requirement of the Circulation
Element concerning adequate off-street parking.
4. This variance will be detrimental to surrounding properties
by increasing parking needs without supplying additional off-
street parking.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by the following vote,
denied V-290(1) for the reasons as set forth above.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
L'Heureux, Rombotis, Marcus, Schick, Larson
None
Wrench, Jose
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the above recita-
tions are true and correct.
ATTEST:
-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
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CARLSBAD
ss
I, JAMES c. HAGAMAN, Secretary to the Planning Commission
of the City of Carlsbad, California, do hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was duly introduced, approved and adopted
by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad at a regular
meeting of said Commission held on the 23rd day of May,
1979, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
V-290
L'Heureux, Marcus, Schick, Larson
None
Wrench, Jose
Rombotis
-3-
/·
' PLANNING 1COMMISSION 1-._1..:JUTES NOl jFFICIAL UNTIL
APPROVED AT SUBSEQUENT
MEETING OF CARLSBAD
CITY OF CARLSBAD
May 9, 1979
Page One (1) ·. PLANNING COMMISSION
I.
II.
i
CAL' TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman L'Heureux.
ROLt CALL
Commissioners present: Chairman L'Heureux, Commissioners
Rombotis, Marcus, Larson, Schick
Commissioners absent: Commissioner Wrench, Commissioner Jose
Staff present: Bud Plender, Assistant to the Planning Director;
Dave Abrams, Current Planning; Dave H3.user, Engineering; Les
Evans, City Engineer.
I
III. AGEfDA ITEM COMMUNICATIONS
A. A memorandum from Commissioner Jose commenting oh the various
items of the agenda was distributed.
B. A letter from Mrs. Elisabeth Skeete voicing concern with the
Planning Commission decision on PDP-1 (Encina) was discussed
and it was generally agreed that the letter should be forwarded
-on to the City Council for their information and review when
-
considering the item.
c. Revised conditions as proposed by staff on CT 79-4 (Ayers)
was circulated.
D. A letter from C.E. Bartley, 2489 Ocean Street, Carlsbad,
opposing V-290 (Zipser) was distributed.
E. A letter from Roy Palmateer, M.D., 2497 Ocean Street, Carlsbad,
opposing V-290 (Zipser} was distributed.
F. A letter from Dr. and Mrs. Paul G. Alberton, neighbors of
Mr. and Mrs. Bonagura (V-289) expressing general approval of
the proposed project-was distributed.
G. A petition, signed by twelve individuals, opposing V-290
was distributed.· ., -,··
H. Attorney Bob Knauf requested that agenda item 11 B11 be moved
up on the agenda, as he is recovering from recent medical treat-
mept. The request was met with favor.
I. Mr. Roy Ward, representing Magee Park (CUP-118B) asked that
item "F" be moved up on the agenda to enable him to meet a
prior engagement. The Commission agreed to do so.
PLANNING COMMISSION M..-.JTES
May 9, 1979
Page Five (5)
Sta££ replied that the ratio is 2:1 in accordance with existing
policy.
Chairman L'Heureux addressed condition #31 as to when said map
would expire.
Staff replied that the Zoning Ordinance specifies that the map shall
expire 18 months from the date of filing of the original tentative
map. Any time lost during the sewer moratorium will not count
the 18 months.
Commissioner Schick related his agreement that ·further action should
be tabled pending the filing of a correct map, and further voiced
his desire .for more information as to the exact method of drainage.
Chairman L'Heureux asked that a condition be added regarding the
hours of operation of construction.
Staff replied that the hours of operation are controlled by the
grading permit"as well as City Ordinance.
Commissioner·Jose's comments regarding dust control during the
grading phase of tlie project were noted.
Commissoner Larson indicated that the particular slopes to be
hydroseeded should be specified in the conditions; that possibly
conditions #18 and #19 should be combined, as they address the same
issues; that the responsibility for future maintenance of the
desiltation basin should be specified, with a look into the title
thereto.
Chairman L'Heureux noted that conditions #22 and #27 are repetitions
of the same condition; also a condition regarding slope ratio and
one regarding dust control should be added.
A motion was made to reopen CT 79-4 and continue same to June
13, 1979.
CONTINUED
MOTION:
SECOND:
AYES:
Larson
Schick
L'Heureux, Rombotis, Schick, Marcus, Larson
D. V-290, iipser, a variance from Section 21.47.130 to allow a
reduction in the required visitor parking from two spaces
to one; and to allow less than the required 480 cubic feet of
Storage spaCE\ for two uni ts ■ ~~frg .\~~~
Mr. Dave Abrams presented the staff report, recommending denial
of the proJect as the appropriate findings for a variance are not
present. Several letters from neighboring property owners were
noted, requesting denial of the project.
-
LAW OFFICES
PASTOR AND ZI PSER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
JEROME PASTOR
STANLEY ZIPSER
MIKAEL KOLTAJ
LEONARD J. MEYBERG, JR.
OF COUNSEL
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Clerk
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Dear Sir:
-
1901 AVENUE OF THE STARS
SUITE 888 • CENTURY CITY
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067
(213) 277-3411
May 22, 1979
This letter is intended as a request that the
decision of the Planning Commission made May 9, 1979 on
Item C (V290, Zipser Variance from Section 21.47.130 of
Ordinance No. 9516, to allow a reduction in visitor park-
ing) be appealed to the Carlsbad City Council at the next
available date on the council's calendar.
If there is any charge necessary to accompany
this request, please advise and same will be forwarded.
SZ/b
i\iic324cs26~
f~'l; ♦ ~
S>.i" '<ib ,;;; MAY1979 ~
C:::: RECEIVED ~ c.o ' ....... ~ City Clerk's Offfcei I\,
~ City of Carlsbad· ~ ½ °>~ c;(,, W 6 S \,. OJ
Very -8:-uly y6U:;~
( ,---_) ~ ltll kd\i> -, S<aJ1ey t:e'fa ·Ir-{
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
August 30, 1979
City Council
Planning Department
ZIPSER VARIANCE
Planning staff and the City Enginee~ have reviewed the
exhibit presented by Mr. Banche at the August 21, 1979,
City Council hearing regarding this case. Our conclu-
sions are as follows:
1. The exhibit submitted by Mr. Banche (attached as
Exhibit A) would not only require encroacl').ment into
the recently dedicated five (5) feet of additional
right-of-way, but would also requir'e a one ( 1) foot
encroachm~nt into the original right-of~way. This
design, once sidewalks were installed, would also
eliminate virtually all possible landscaping from
the front of the units. Staff could not recommend
this desig-n.
2. If the City Council were to determine that Ocean Street
was never going to be widened along the westerly side,
it might be possible to redesign the parking to utilize
only one driveway which would permit two on-street
parking spaces. However, staff has spent much time
looking into this possibility and has not yet found an
acceptable design. It should also be noted that a sub-
stantial part of the necessary additional right-of-way
has already been dedicated along the westerly side of
Ocean Street north of Pacific Street, all the way
arourid to Carlsbad Boulevard.
3. It appears that the design on the building plans
(attached as Exhibits Band C) is still the best,
both from an engineering and aesthetic point of view.
However, this design requires two driveways and does
not provide two guest parking spaces as required by
the condominium ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION:
After this additional review, staff still supports the
Planning Commission denial for the.requested variance to
waive one required guest parking space. This recommenda-
tion is based on the inability to make the necessary
findings for the granting of a variance.
Attachments·:
Referenced Exhibits A, Band C
Memo fr0m City Engineer, dated 8/29/79
Letter· from Mr. Banche, dated 8/28/79
MZ: jd