HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 98-05; Jensen Tentative Parcel Map; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (7)JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
THE SCRIPPS BANK CENTER
451 SOUTH ESCONDIDO BOULEVARD
ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92025
TELEPHONE (760) 743-7966
FACSIMILE (760) 743-3793
January 12, 1998
Bob Wojack
Principal Civil Engineer
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576
Re: Jensen Parcel Map
Dear Mr. Wojack:
The purpose of this correspondence is to transmit to you my application and supporting
documents for the proposed parcel map which we have previously discussed. As you are
aware, I intend to process this parcel map administratively, and to also administratively
process a Coastal Development Permit. In this regard, I have had a conference with Mr.
Gary Wayne in the Planning Department, and Mr. Rich Rudolf in the City Attorney's office.
I have also had a prior informal review by your department, and a meeting with you
following my original transmittal letter dated November 6,1997 and your response dated
November 13,1997.
Please note, that the new application incorporates all of your requested changes.
Specifically, the map addresses the parking issues described in item number I of your letter
and is identical to the exhibit and map shown to you during our meeting. In addition the
map also provided a note regarding any open space easement needed which was
described in number 2 of your letter. In addition, please allow this letter to acknowledge
that the driveways must be constructed to the ultimate finish elevation of Carlsbad
Boulevard at the right of way line described in item number 3 of your letter, and the need
to have the planning department accept the width of the beach access lot as provided
below and as described in number 4 of you letter.
I believe that the parcel map is self explanatory, except for the southern most parcel which
is 10' in width as we discussed in our meeting and which is intended to be designated as
a non-buildable parcel. This parcel is deemed to be necessary pursuant to §846 of the
California Civil Code, which provision identifies and clarifies the obligations and duties of
JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Bob Wojack
January 12, 1998
Page 2
a specific parcel of land opened up by the owner for recreational access and purposes.
In this regard, the City, by the through their attorneys, and myself have previously entered
into an agreement regarding the use of the proposed parcel which has already been
recorded. Notwithstanding this fact, the agreement may need to be reviewed by the City
Attorney's office in order for them to ensure that the City has appropriately restricted and
controlled the use of the beach access and recreational parcel for the non-buildable parcel.
To this end, I envision having further meetings with the Planning Department and/or the
City Attorney's office to ensure that their concerns are incorporated into any conditions of
approval that might be forthcoming regarding the project as such would relate to the non-
buildable parcel.
I have also had discussions with Mr. Gary Wayne, in planning, regarding this issue and
fully understand that I need to ensure that planning is satisfied with the non-buildable lot
ownership issues. To this end, I am presently researching some alternatives such as (1)
further agreements between myself and the city, or (2) lot tie agreements.
During the process, I am confident that all parties will be able to resolve this specific
planning issue. Other that this issue, I am not presently aware of any other concerns of
planning, but I would encourage and welcome their direct participation to ensure the best
project that I can produce.
I would also like to point out that the stairway shown on the access and recreational 10'
parcel on the south of the project is presently under construction and anticipated to be
completed in approximately three weeks. This project, as you will recall was processed
and approved under a separate Coastal Development Permit.
Please also allow this correspondence to remind staff that in the stairway coastal
development permit process, we already addressed the issue of the interim parallel
parking issues. In this regard, it was determined that the ultimate improvement of Carlsbad
boulevard would ultimately resolve any interim parking issues. This is because the
improvement of Carlsbad boulevard will ultimately be planned and completed to the desires
of the City. Until that time, and during the processing of the stairway plan we discussed
a choice between interim diagonal and parallel parking options. At that time it was
determined that diagonal parking was unsafe, violated various safety and traffic concerns,
and simple did not work since the cars would have to back out onto Carlsbad Boulevard.
Therefore, we decided to propose and get approval to install a curb to require parallel
parking along the property's eastern frontage so that cars wishing to park along Carlsbad
JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Bob Wojack
January 12, 1998
Page 3
Boulevard, pending the improvement, would not interfere with traffic flow and safety. During
this process it was also determined that the elimination of any spaces was well worth the
safety issues, and that the total distance that a pedestrian would be traveling would be
less since the stairway ran directly to the beach and did not require any traversing down
the bluff. During this process and during the public hearings on this stairway, it was also
set forth that the beach access was primarily for local users and the subdivisions to the
east of the stairway from which people would be walking to the beach. Thereafter the
stairway was approved and the curb is presently be installed to allow for interim use
pending the improvement of Carlsbad boulevard. The plan also called out for standard
driveway access openings pursuant to the City's standard plan and the driveway entrances
shown on the parcel map were left open at the same time the curb was being installed. In
addition, I also met with you personally to show you and discuss the proposed
configuration of the parallel spaces until Carlsbad boulevard is improved. At that time,
please note that the original proposed tentative map was changed to maximize the parallel
parking to the largest degree possible. As you are also aware, we even attempted to
eliminate one of the driveway openings, but a detailed study showed that the elimination
of one entrance was not required inorder to achieve the maximum number of spaces. In
fact, the elimination of a driveway entrance even made the interim parking worse due to
the fact that an inside parallel space is 24' in length and an end parallel space is only 20'.
At any rate, the parking and traffic issues have been addressed.
During the stairway application, an environmental assessment was completed and a
negative declaration was approved at the public hearing. This conclusion was reached
taking into consideration the construction which had to be completed during the
construction of the stairs through the bluff. As you are aware, the parcel map merely
created three buildable parcels, but no construction. Also, it should be pointed out that
there use to be two parcels on this property at one time, and there are old survey maps
showing that the present 60 foot parcel currently owned by Mr. Larry Richards to the north
of my present site, use to be, prior to a boundary line adjustment, a 60 lot on the south of
my property. Therefore, and at various previous times, this property had been partially
configured in a similar manner as one of the lots that I am proposing. Apparently, however,
the configurations and assessment are somewhat a moot issue and my present
understanding is that no further assessment is required. If this is not the case, please
notify me as soon as possible. Notwithstanding further assessment, I believe the ultimate
affect of any new review, if required, would be consistent with the prior negative
declaration that was previously approved.
JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Bob Wojack
January 12, 1998
Page 4
The only other issue that I wanted to be understood and brought to the attention of you and
or your staff, is the depth of each of the parcels as shown on the map. As you are aware,
this project is located next to the Pacific Ocean. As you are also aware, the mean high tide
changed during tidal cycles and therefore at any given time, portions of the property
described on the actual legal description are under water. This is the case for all ocean
front land that fronts on the ocean and is affected by various mean high tides. This is being
pointed out, because the actual depth of the lot, as such depth is determined by the mean
high tide, fluctuates, but is well within your criteria for depth to width ratios after considering
tidal conditions. Notwithstanding the above, and due to your responsive letter dated
November 13,1997 to our preliminary review, we have also provided a note on the map
to show that open space easements may be obtained and provided, if needed.
As you know, I am quite eager to process the administrative parcel map as soon as
possible, and to this end will be available at any time to answer any further questions or
concerns by yourself or any member of your staff which this project may be assigned to.
Therefore, I would like to respectfully request that I be notified as soon as possible
following the assignment of this application to a staff member.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you in advance for your time and cooperation.
Very truly yours,
JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES
Attorneys at Law
Jon A. Jensen, Esq.
JAJ/nb
jajAwojack.1
Enclosure