HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-04-01; City Council; 6209; Reqeust for expansion of non-conforming useCITY OF CARLSBAD
INITIAL /s/RP
AGENDA BILL NO. 6? 2^7 Dept. Hd. /s/JCH
/« /VF'R
DATE: April 1, 1980 __Cty. Atty.
,.. M /s/R /s/FADEPARTMENT: PLANNING __Cty. Mgr'. [______
SUBJECT:
APPEAL CUP-171, REQUEST FOR EXPANSION OF NON-CONFORMING USE
APPLICANT: COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT
STATEMENT OF THE MATTER
The request is a Conditional Use Permit to allow the expansion of a non-conforming
use in the RD-M zone. The property is located on the east side of Ponto Drive,
south of Palomar Airport Road in the Ponto area. The property is used as headquarters
and operation site for the Coast Waste Management refuse operation. Presently there are
only two small buildings on the site and most of the operation and maintenance of
the vehicles is done in the open. Since the weather affects the ability to maintain
these vehicles, the applicant requested a Conditional Use Permit to allow the
construction of an enclosed maintenance building.
This application is based on the recently adopted section of the non-conforming
regulations which permits the expansion of non-conforming uses by Conditional Use
Permit under certain circumstances. The applicant's request is for a maintenance
building on the east property line of'the property. The adjacent property owner
indicated a dissatisfaction with the location since the building wo uld reduce the
amount of sunshine into her yard. The Planning Commission approved the request with
a condition that the building be relocated to the north and setback ten feet from
the easterly property line to meet Zone Code requirements for rear yards.
The applicant was satisfied with the Planning Commission's action except for the
relocation of the building. Therefore, the applicant has appealed to the City Council
to delete conditon #8 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 1600. For the City Council
to do this however, a Variance application would first have to be approved. (See
memo dated 3/26/80).
EXHIBITS
Memorandum from Bud Plender dated March 26, 1980
Letter dated March 6, 1980, from Arie DeJong, President of Coast Waste Management
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1600
Staff Report dated February 13, 1980
Staff Report dated January 23, 1980
Exhibit "A" dated November 28, 1979
Exhibit "B" dated January 5, 1980
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council direct the City Attorney to prepare documents
DENYING the appeal on CUP-171.
Council Action:
4-1-80 Council referred the matter to the Planning Commission for processing of a Variance.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 26, 1980
TO: Frank Aleshire, City Manager
FROM: Bud Plender, Planning Department
SUBJECT: APPEAL CUP-171, COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT
This request has a relatively complex history and Planning Commission
action. Therefore, a brief history and analysis is presented for your
information.
Originally the Ponto area was developed as an industrial area prior to
annexation. Shortly after the property was annexed the city rezoned
Ponto to the RD-M zone, a residential zone in conformity with the general
plan. At that time the property owners appeared satisfied with the new
zone since they felt the future use of the property would be residential
not industrial. The tenants of the industrial uses were generally satisfied
to continue operating as existing non-conforming uses.
An existing non-conforming use means that the uses could continue unless
the city processed an amortization, giving each property owner sufficient
time to relocate. However, the uses could not be expanded nor additional
development be permitted as long as the use was non-conforming. For
various reasons, such as the sewer moratorium, financial, etc., the
conversion of these non-conforming uses to residential has not taken
place as originally envisioned. The applicant of this appeal, Coast
Waste Management, is planning to move out of the area in a few years.
In the meantime, the applicant's business has been increasing and is in
need of expansion.
Presently the vehicle maintenance and repairing is done in the open.
This is very difficult, especially when the weather is bad or for night
emergencies. The applicant, therefore, wishes to construct a repair
building as an expansion of a non-conforming use. The city recently
modified the non-conforming provision to permit such expansion under
certain circumstances. CZCA-105). The code now permits the expansion of
a non-conforming use up to 25% of it's replacement value by Conditional
Use Permit. In this process the Planning Commission is to establish a
date which all non-conforming structures and uses on the site shall be
made conforming or removed.
The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to assure the compatibility
with respect to a particular use in relation with other existing and
potential uses within the general area.
The applicant, in his haste to get the building finished, illegally
initiated construction prior to issuance of building permits or a Condi-
tional Use Permit. Staff placed a stop work order on the project but
the floor and part of the supports are in place. This building is
being constructed on the rear property line adjacent to a dog kennel
operation to the east. The RD-M zone requires a 10' rear yard setback.
Originally staff considered the proposed building an accessory building
that could be constructed within the rear yard and therefore accepted
the CUP application with the proposed building within this setback.
However, upon further review, staff ascertained that this industrial
type building in a residential zone could not be considered accessory
and that to approve this expansion of a non-conforming use all setbacks
must be met. Therefore, the only way to permit this building within
10' of a rear property line is by a variance. Since staff could not
find reason for a variance and that we knew the impacts the building
will have on the adjacent property, we did not require a variance
application. Instead we recommended approval of the CUP with the
building moved out of the 10' setback area.
The applicant's appeal is two-fold. 1) He is requesting that the
Planning Commission requirement that the building be placed on the
northerly portion be deleted and 2) he is requesting that the building
be within the setback.
The City Council could not grant the applicant his second request.
If the City Council did wish to approve such location, a variance
application would first have to be approved. Therefore the matter
would have to be returned to the Planning Commission for further hearing.
The owner of the adjacent dog kennel protested the location of the
repair building on the property line indicating that the building would
block afternoon sun from her kennel area. Sun is needed to warm and dry
out the area after daily cleaning. The building will be constructed
at a height of 22 feet to permit the large vehicles to enter the building.
The Planning Commission agreed that the building at that heiaht and location
would have a detrimental effect on the adjacent property.
There are various areas on the applicant's property that the repair
building could be relocated. However, all alternative areas have some
drawbacks due to the relatively small size of the property and the
intensity of the use. Staff and the Planning Commission believe that
the location on the north end of the property is an acceptable compromise
for a workable plan that will allow proper functioning for Coast
Waste Management and protect the neighbors.
Re c ommendati on
Staff recommends that this appeal be DENIED thereby requiring the relocation
of the maintenance building as required by Planning Commission
Resolution No. 1600
BP:ar
PHONK: 75?-9412
or 452-9810
ll 't?
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
720i PONTO DRIVE. P.O. BOX 'J47, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA r?20U8
McDOUGAL SANITATION DEL MAR DISPOSAL CO.
. CARLSBAD DISPOSAL CO. RANCfiO SANTA FE DISPOSAL CO.
SOLANA BEACH DISPOSAL CO. SORRENTO VALLEY DISPOSAL CO.
March 6, 1980
Lee Rautenkranz
City Clerk
1200 Elm Ave.
Carlsbad, Calif. 92008
Ref: C-U-P #171, Coast Waste Management.
Dear Ms. Rautenkranz:'
This is to inform you of our decision to appeal to the City
Council the decision made by the Planning Commission on Feb-
ruary 13th regarding the location of our proposed new repair-
facility.
If any questions^feel free to contact me regarding this matter.
i^Qjirs sincerely,
COAST WAJ
AD:dd
, INC
A SATISf-ll-.'D CUSTOMER IS OUR FIRST CCS'SIDF RATION
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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1600
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE
EXPANSION OF A NON-CONFORMING USE IN THE RD-M
ZONE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PONTO DRIVE
BETWEEN LA COSTA AVENUE AND SAN DIEGO GAS &
ELECTRIC POWER PLANT.
APPLICANT: COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT
CASE NO: CUP-171
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the
City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request
as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code,
the Planning Commission did, on the 13th day of February, 1980,
hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider said application
on property described as:
That portion of the south two-thirds of Lot 4 (southeast
quarter of the southeast quarter) of Section 29, Township
12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, in the
County of San Diego, State of California, according to
official plat thereof recorded in the Office of the County
Recorder on November 4, 1948.
WHEREAS, the subject property has complied with the require-
ments of the City of Carlsbad's Environmental Protection Ordinance
of 1972 and the State Environmental Quality Act in that the
project has been processed through environmental review and a
Negative Declaration, Log No. 628, has been issued for the
following reasons:
1. The site has been previously developed and therefore the
proposed structure will not have any adverse impacts on
any significant environmental resources.
**" J
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
2. No additional landform alteration or site modifications
is proposed which could result in any potentially
significant environmental impacts.
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and
considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons -
desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to CUP-171.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY resolved by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A. That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing
the Commission finds the following findings and conditions
to exist:
Findings:
1. This project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use
Element since it meets the provisions for unique and
special uses.
2. This project is consistent with all applicable public
facility policies and ordinances and with the public
facilities element since:
a. Sewer service is currently provided by the City of
Carlsbad's County Water District.
b. Water service is currently provided by the City of
• Carlsbad.
c. Gas and Electric service is provided by SDG&E.
d. All necessary on-site and adjacent public improvements
are existing or will be required as conditions of
approval .
e. The applicant has proposed, and is required by the
inclusion of an appropriate condition, to pay a
public facilities fee. Payment of this fee will
ensure that public facilities will be available
concurrent with need as required by the General Plan.
3. This use is desirable for the development of the community
and is not detrimental to existing or proposed uses because
/////
////-2-
fe •
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
a. The proposed use is existing and the proposed building
will enclose the repair and maintenance operations.
b. The use will be removed within 5 years of approval
of this Conditional Use Permit.
4. The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
use because:
a. There will be no change in use. The proposed building
will house activities already conducted on-site.
b. The proposed building will be located in a currently
under utilized area.
5. The use has been adequately adjusted to the surrounding
areas because:
a. The building will be located in an area that will not
. affect any adjacent uses.
b. The use will be removed within 5 years of the approval
of the Conditional Use Permit.
6. The street system is adequate to service the use because
the property is located adjacent to Carlsbad Boulevard,
which is capable of handling the traffic from this use.
7. This project: meets all other requirements of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code.
Conditions:
1. Approval is granted for CUP-171 and development shall occur
substantially as noted in these conditions. The applicant
shall submit a revised site plan to the Planning Department
incorporating these conditions prior to issuance of
building permits.
2. The proposed building shall meet all the requirements
established by the City Building Official and the
Uniform Building Code (Section 18.04.005).
3. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement
of any work on the proposed building (Section 18.04.025). -
4. All non-conforming uses and structures shall be removed
from the site within 5 years from the date of approval of
this CUP. In the event such uses and structures are not
removed, the City shall institute zone enforcement proceedings
to insure compliance with the existing RDM zone (Section
21.48.080(d) (3)) .
/////
/////
•7.
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
5. This Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded at the
Office of the County Recorder within 5 days of approval
of the resolution for CUP-171. The applicant shall provide
evidence of this prior to issuance of building permits
(Section 21.48.080(d)(3).
6. An employee parking area for 20 cars shall be provided
on-site. The improvement plans for the parking area shall
be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
7. The storage area along the west property line shall be
screened by use of landscaping or wood slats in the chain
link fence. Such screening shall be approved by the
Planning Department prior to final occupancy of the structure.
8. The proposed building as shown on Exhibit A dated 11/28/79,
shall be relocated to the north and setback 10' from the
eastern property line to alocation acceptable to the
Planning Director. The building shall not be located
adjacent to any existing uses or structures. The applicant
shall submit a revised site plan indicating said relocation
which shall be subject to the approval of the Planning
Director prior to the issuance of a building permit.
9. The applicant shall eliminate all drainage from the subject
property onto adjacent lots. The drainage on the property
shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
prior to the issuance of a building permit.
10. This approval is expressly conditioned on the payment by
the applicant: of a public facilities fee as required by
City Council Policy No. 17, dated August 29, 1979, on
file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by
reference, ar.d according to the agreement executed by
the applicant, dated January 11, 1980, is on file with the
City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. If said
fee is not paid as promised, this application will not be
consistent with the General Plan and the project cannot
proceed and this approval shall be void.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held
on the 12th day of March, 1980, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:EDWIN S. SCHICK, JR., Chairman
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
JAMES C. HAGAMAN, Planning Director
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION _4_
STAFF REPORT
D7\TE: February 13, 1980
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Department
SUBJECT: CUP-171 - COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT - Request for
Conditional Use Permit to allow for the expansion
of a non-conforming use in the RD-M zone.
I. BACKGROUND
As the Planning Commission will recall, this item was
continued from the January 23, 1980 meeting to allow
staff time to work with the applicant to relocate his
proposed structure. As originally submitted, the site
plan showed the buildings located adjacent to the east
property line. The Commission indicated that a minimum
setback of 10' would be required and directed staff to
work with the applicant to find a more suitable
location on the site which would minimize the impact
on adjacent properties. Since that meeting, staff has
met with the applicant at the site to determine a more
appropriate location.
II. ANALYSIS
Three alternative sites were discussed. The first
alternative was to relocate the building about 75'
to the north and setback 10' from the east property
line. This would place the building away from all
adjacent uses and residences. The property to the
east of this location is currently vacant and is not
expected to develop prior to relocation of the Coast
Waste facility. Staff feels that this is the most
acceptable location for the proposed building because
it has the least impact on adjacent properties.
The applicant does not feel that this location is
acceptable because there is no existing blocktop
or concrete in this area. In addition, the applicant
feels that this location would disrupt the on-site
circxilation patterns and not be as accessible to the
existing office and supply area. Staff feels that
paving can be accomplished as a part of the paving
of the employee parking area. Further, the location
is close to an existing electrical source, and will not
in staff's opinion hinder on-site circulation patterns.
The second alternative, the one most acceptable to the
applicant, is to relocate the proposed building 10
feet to the west of the original site to provide a
10 foot rear yard. This site is not acceptable to
staff because the building 'would still have a sub-
stantial impact on the neighboring property.
The third alternative site is adjacent to Ponto Drive
just south of the existing office structure. Staff
feels this site is least desirable because of its
proximity and visibility to Carlsbad Boulevard.
There are no other sites acceptable to the applicant
or to staff. Staff is recommending that Alternative
No. 1 be accepted and placed as a condition of approval.
III. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends APPROVAL of CUP-171, based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings
1. This project is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Element since it meets the provisions
for unique and special uses.
2. This project is consistent with all applicable
public facility policies and ordinances and with
the public facilities element since:
a. Sewer service is currently provided by the
City of Carlsbad's County Water District.
b. Water service is currently provided by the
City of Carlsbad.
c. Gas and Electric service is provided by
SDG&E.
d. All necessary on-site and adjacent public
improvements are existing or will be required
as conditions of approval,
e. The applicant has proposed, and is required
by the inclusion of an appropriate condition,
to pay a public facilities fee. Payment of
this fee will ensure that public facilities
will be available concurrent with need as
required by the General Plan.
-2-
10,
3. This use is desirable for the development of the
community and is not detrimental to existing or
proposed uses because:
a. The use is existing and the proposed bxiilding
will enclose the repair and maintenance
operations.
b. The use will be removed within 5 years of
approval of this Conditional Use Permit.
4. The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
the use because:
a. There will be no change in use. The proposed
building will house activities already con-
ducted on~site.
b. The proposed building will be located in a
currently under utilized area.
5. The use has been adequately adjusted to the
surrounding areas because:
a. The building will be located in an area that
will not affect any adjacent uses.
b. The use will be removed within 5 years of
the approval of the Conditional Use Permit.
6. The street system is adequate to service the use
because the property is located adjacent to Carlsbad
Boulevard, which is capable of handling the traffic
from this use.
'•&
1. This project meets all other requirements of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Conditions
1. Approval is granted for CUP-171 as shown on Planning
Commission Exhibit A dated 11/28/79 and Exhibit B
dated 1/5/80, incorporated by reference and on file
in the Planning Department. Development shall occur
substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in
these conditions.
2. The proposed building shall meet all the requirements
established by the City Building Official and the
Uniform Building Code (Section 18.04.005).
3. A building permit shall be obtained prior to
commencement of any work on the proposed building
(Section 18.04.025).
— 3—
4. All non-conforming uses and structures shall be
removed, from the site within 5 years from the
date of approval of this CUP. In the event
such uses and structures are not removed, the
City shall institute zone enforcement proceedings
to insure compliance with the existing RDM Zone
(Section 21.48 . 080 (d) (3) ) .
5. This Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded at
the Office of the County Recorder within 5 days of
approval of the resolution for CUP-171. The
applicant shall provide evidence of this prior to
issuance of building permits. (Section 21.48.080
An employee parking area for 20 cars shall be
provided on-site. The improvement plans for the
parking area shall be submitted to and approved
by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
The storage areas along the west property line
shall be screened by use of landscaping or wood
slats in the chain link fence. Such screening
shall be approved by the Planning Department
prior to final occupancy of the structure.
The proposed building shall be relocated to the
north and setback 10' from the eastern property
line to a location acceptable to the Planning
Director. The building shall not be located
adjacent to any existing uses or structures. The
applicant shall submit a revised site plan
indicating said relocation which shall be subject
to the" approval of the Planning Director prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
The applicant shall eliminate all drainage from
the subject property onto adjacent lots. The
drainage on the property shall be designed to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior
to the issuance of a building permit.
^
Locato Map
Disclosure Form
Staff Report dated Jan. 23, 1980
KLtar
2/7/80
DATE: January 23, 1980
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Pla.nn5.ng Department
SUBJECT: CUP-171, Coast Waste Management
REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE EXPANSION
9Z b. J^JL^1!!^^11^ ^C^
BACKGROUND
Location and Description of Property
The subject property is located on the east si.de of Ponto
Drive, south of Pa Ionia r Airport Road. The property is
currently used as a headquarters and operations site for the
Coast Waste Management operations. The site contains one. acre
and there are two buildings on the property. The property is
surrounded by a chain link fence. Construction has begun on
the new building although no permits have been issued.
Existing_ _Zoning_
Subject Property: RDM
North: PC
South: RDM
East: RDM
West: Open Space
Existing Land Use
Subject Property; Coast Waste Management
North: Vacant
South: Single Family Residences
East: Kennel, Auto Wrecking Yard
West: Highway, Carlsbad State Beach
General Pl_an Information
A. Land Use Element
The land use element designates this property as RMII, Residential
Medium High Density, 10-20 du/aore. However, the land use
element also specifies that certain unique and special uses
shall be allowed in any category subject to zoning controls.
Since this CUP is permitted as per Section 21.48.080, it is
therefore consistent with the General Plan if it meets the
requirements of Section 21.42.02.0.
13,
B. Public Facilities
Q-^yL- iir^-i2JI: This project is being serviced by the City of
Carlsbad.
•Sc:hoo_ls: This is an industrial project and will have no
effect on the school system.
Ci_ty Water: Water service is currently provided by the City of
Carlsbad.
G a s and El. ec tr i c: SDG&E now supplies services to this project.
Ori-site and /Adjacent Public Improvements: Any necessary public
improvements will be -required per the City Public Improvement
Ordinance and/or as conditions of approval.
Other Public Facilities: All other public facilities necessary
to serve this project will be available concurrent with
need as a result of the public facilities fee.
• Other Elements of the General _P_lan_: This project is consistent
with other elements of t'he City ' s current general plan.
Environmental Impact Information
This project has been processed through environmental review
and a negative declaration has been issued based on the
following findings:
1. The site has been previously developed and therefore the
proposed structure will not have any adverse impacts on
any significant environmental resources.
2. No additional landform alteration or site modifications '
is proposed which could result in any potentially
significant environmental impacts.
History and Related Cases
ZCA-105, Non-conforming Uses, Ordinance No. 9538.
On October 2, 1979, the City Council approved ZCA-105 which
allows for the expansion of non-conforming uses by Conditional
Use Permit. This amendment limited the amount of expansion
to 50% of existing value for those uses which provide a
service to the City. This amendment also allowed for the
establishment of a date of abatement. The CUP will expire 3
months after issuance.
*!? ° 3L J-l:!:a Ilfl n c' S:°P s 2J^£ L1 j; 9.ns_
1. When shall the use be abated?
2. What conditions should be applied to this expansion to
adjust the use to the existing and fiature uses in the
neighbourhood?
Discussion
Section 21.48.080 allows the expansion of a non-conforming use
The expansion is limited to 50% of value since the use is one
which provides a public service traditionally provided by the
City, This section also requires that a date be set for
amortization of the non-conforming use.
The major issues associated with this project include the
building setback, screening of storage areas from street
right-of-way, on-site employee parking and the establishment
of an amortisation date.
Exhibit A shows the proposed building on the east property
line adjacent to an existing kennel. Locating the building
on the property line will have a detrimental affect on the
neighboring kennel, by creating an adverse visual impa.ct
and blocking sunlight from the property. Since the RDM
zone requires a 10 foot'rear yard, and conditional uses must
meet the requirements of the underlying zone, a 10 foot
setback will be required.. The 10 foot setback will lessen
the impact on the neighboring kennel.
At this time, there is no screening of the storage areas which
are visible from Carlsbad Boulevard and the State Beach.
A condition willyrequire screening of the storage areas along
the west property line with landscaping or wood slats in the
chain link fence.
There is an area designated for employee parking on-site,
although the area is unpaved. The applicant will be required
to pave and improve the parking area to provide parking for
20 cars.
The applicant is requesting a 5 year amortization date for the
use. This amount of time is adequate to allow the applicant
to obtain necessary approvals and permits to purchase a new
site and to relocate. The requirements for parking and
screening of storage arcc^s will help to adjust this present
use to the surrounding uses. According to Section
21.48.080, the non-conforming use must be removed by the date
established in the CUP and the amortization date must be
recorded on the deed. This will be required as conditions
of approval.
_ o _
R c c oirurion dojvl on
Staff: recommends APPROVAL of CUP-171, based on the following
findings and subject to the following conditions:
1. This project is consistent with the General Plan Land
Use Element since it meets the provisions for unique
and special uses.
2. This project, is consistent with all applicable Public
Facility Policies and Ordinances and with the Public
Facilities Element since:
a. Sewer service is currently provided by the City
of Carlsbad's County Water District.
b. Water service is currently provided by the City
of Carlsbad.
c. Gas and Electric.service is provided by SDG&E.
d. All necessary on-site and adjacent public improve-
ments are existing or will be required as conditions
of approval.
e. The applicant has proposed, and is required by the
inclusion of an appropriate condition, to pay a
public facilities fee. Payment of this fee will
ensure that public facilities will be available
concurrent with need as required by the General Plan.
3. This project will not have any significant adverse environ-
mental impacts. A Negative Declaration, Log No. 628, was
issued on December 19, 1979, for the following reasons:
a. The site has been previously developed and therefore
the proposed structure will not have any adverse
impacts on any significant environmental resources.
b. No additional landform alteration or site modification
is proposed which would result in any potentially
significant environmental impacts.
4.- This use is desirable for the development of the community
and is not detrimental to existing or proposed uses because:
a. The use is existing and the proposed building will
enclose the repair and maintenance operations.
b. The use will be removed within 5 years of approval
of this Conditional Use Permit.
5. The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
use becau.se:
a. There will be no change in use. The proposed building
will house activities already conducted on-site.
6. The use has been adequately adjusted to the surrounding
areas because:
a. A 10 foot, setback will be provided between the
building and the east prope?:ty line.
b. The use will be removed within 5 years of the
approval of the Conditional Use Permit.
7. The street system is adequate to service the use because
the property is located adjacent to Carlsbad Boulevard,
which is capable of handling the traffic from this use,
8. This project meets all other requirements of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code.
Condition s_
*""*'~~ —— • • - ^
1. Approval is granted for CUP-171 as shown on Planning
Commission Exhibit A. dated 11/28/79 & Exhibit B dated
1/5/80, incorporated by reference and on file in the
Planning Department. Development shall occur substantially
as shown unless otherwise noted in these conditions.
2. The proposed building shall meet all the requirements
estbalisiied by the City Building Official and the Uniform
Building Code (Section'18.04.005).
%»
3) A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement
of any work on the proposed building (Section 18.04.025).
4. All non-conforming uses.and structures shall be removed
from the site within 5 years from the date of approval
of this CUP. In the event such uses and structures are
not removed, the City shall institute zone enforcement
proceedings to insure compliance with the existing RDM
Zone (Section 21.48.080 (dj (3) .
5. This Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded at the Office
of the County Recorder "within 5 days of approval of the
resolution for CUP-171. The applicant shall provide
evidence of this prior to issuance of building permits
(Section 21.48.080 (d) (3).
6. An employee parking area for 20 cars shall be provided
on-sit.e. The improvement plans for the parking area
shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer
prior to the issuance of a building permit.
7. The storage areas along the west property line shall bo
screened by use of landscaping or wood slats in the chain
link lance.
8. Tills Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed in 90
days to insure compliance with the above condition.
9. This approval is expressly conditioned upon payment of
the applicant of a public facilities fee required by
City Council Policy No. 17, dated August 29, 1979, on
file with the City Cleric and incorporated by reference,
acco.rd.ing to the agreement executed by the applicant for
payment of said fee. If said fee is not paid as promised,
this application will not be consistent with the General
Plan.
Attach men ts_
Location Map
Disclosure Form
Exhibit A dated 11/28/79
Exhibit B dated 1/5/80
KL:ar
1/16/80
-6-
LoCa//bi\ 'I/Via
I CASE NO. (^ijp !:11 Date Rec'd_
Description of F.erusst: f-y r- ^.-- :.
__ DCC Date; • | /,o /f'QPC Date i/.3-'3/SO. f
Address or Locc.i-z.in of Re.quesr.-.
Applicant: ,_^___
Engr. or Arch.
Brief Legal: ~\\, „
('}
Assessor Book: .. ^ - . ,!^rr : ^^ _ ^J __ _^
General Plan Lani l-'se Descrip-iDn:
Existing Zone :
Acres : j , Q j
School District:
/Pae:Parcel:
Kc. of Lots:
Proposed Zone: _
' DU/Acrc"
V.'ater District: , \. ( •. V,-:<.^ fH./r'C^ P^AiLi-^rjl Sanitation Dj strict:- ..—.- -^ - «—
^ Coast Permit Area:
1C
. ; • i . <]:,. ii,f '..-; i?..:>.
1, r.:rL':,.r j nf i.v M.U .
" .1 hove f;i:!.-'ril' lt.\'i liar; )«:.M: '."•' .i\ ,
i r. ) i-'4uii.ed , ycu will '.x: :,« .1 ivireu.
"~ Is deteri'.;ino:>.
AWM.JCA::/:
Willie (:i.!irliv.uli';i) , par t norf.iij i>, joint: von''.ii;e, corrornl'.ion, syndjcation)
AGEt!']1:
MEMBERS:
I Ju;: i IK- ;; M Add r o f;;;
Number
Name //
Business 7\ddrcr,E
Name (indivJdC/.nl, partner , joint
venture, corporation, syndication)
_. -
Business Address
Telephone Humber
Home Address
'cTI C/?*:','/^ <?-> t:
Z/
Telephone: Number
Name Home Address
businer-r. Address
Telephone Number Telephone Number
• (Attach more sliccts if necessary)
I/We (teclare ruidor penalty of perjury that tho information contained in this dis-
closure is true and correct and that it will reinniii true and correct and may be
J'.oliccl upon aw brting true and correct until amended.
^.'HOr, /1'rtner
1
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Carlsbad City
Council will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, April
1, 1980 at 6:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers,
1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, to consider the appeal of
a Planning Commission denial of a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP-171) for erection of a metal building to
be used for the repair and maintenance of refuse
trucks on property generally located on the east
side of Ponto Drive between La Costa Avenue and San
Diego Gas & Electric Power Plant.
APPELLANT: COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
PUBLISH : March 22, 1980
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
PHONE: 753-9412
or 452-9810
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
7204 PONTO DRIVE, P.O. BOX 947, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
McDOUGAL SANITATION
. CARLSBAD DISPOSAL CO.
SOLANA BEACH DISPOSAL CO.
DEL MAR DISPOSAL CO.
RANCHO SANTA FE DISPOSAL CO.
SORRENTO VALLEY DISPOSAL CO.
March 6, 1980
Lee Rautenkranz
City Clerk
1200 Elm Ave.
Carlsbad, Calif. 92008
Ref: C-U-P #171, Coast Waste Management.
Dear Ms. Rautenkranz:
This is to inform you of our decision to appeal to the City
Council the decision made by the Planning Commission on Feb-
ruary 13th regarding the location of our proposed new repair
faci1ity.
If any questions^eel free to contact me regarding this matter,
Yje-yrs sincere.
i d e n t
EMENT, INC
AD:dd
A SATISFIED CUSTOMER IS OUR FIRST CONSIDERATION
WRITE IT—DON'T SA* IT INTER DEPARTMENT
A.M.
TO CS^ CL>V-^X' DATE 19 P. M.
On 3/5/80, Arie DeOong telephoned with regard to his appeal letter,
indicating that Bud Plender had told him to write another letter to
the City Clerk in the proper form and he wanted to know what Bud
meant.
I explained you were in receipt of his letter and unless you had
tried to phone him with regard to some question, his appeal would
be processed in due course and he would be advised of the date.
I then talked to Bud about it, who said he had told Mr. DeOong that
the appeal period did not commence until the Planning Commission
formally adopted their Resolution denying his application. Therefore,
processing of the appeal would have to wait until March 13. Additionally,
Bud didn't think the letter was acceptable in that it indicates "intent"
to appeal, rather than specifically stating that the letter was an
appeal, etc.
Anita
REPLY ON THIS SHEET FROM
W1LMER "SERVlCt" UME STANDARD INTER DEPT. MEMO FORM 11-24 —PD
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
PHONE' 753-9412 7204 PONTO DR'VE, P.O. BOX 947, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
or 452-9810 McDOUGAL SANITATION DEL MAR DISPOSAL CO.
CARLSBAD DISPOSAL CO. RANCHO SANTA FE DISPOSAL CO.
SOLANA BEACH DISPOSAL CO. SORRENTO VALLEY DISPOSAL CO.
February 27, 1980
FEB 29 1980
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Ralph CBud) Plender
Assistant to Planning Director
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, Calif. 92008
Dear Mr. Plender:
This is to inform you of our intent to appeal to the City Council, the
decision made by the Planning Commission on Wednesday, February 13th,
regarding the C-U-P #171 from Coast Waste Management,
Please contact me regarding any forms that may be necessary to be com-
pleted in order toxexpedite this procedure.
Yours Sincerely,/'
\NAGEMENT, INC,
AD/dd
a~—**~-
A SATISFIED CUSTOMER IS OUR FIRST CONSIDERATION