Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 98-05; Jensen Tentative Parcel Map; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (4)87/29/1998 16:40 768-743-3793 JENSEN AND ASSOC PAGE 02 JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES ATTORNEYS AT LAW THE SCIUPK BANK CENTEX 431 SOUTH ESCONDIDOBOULEV AM) ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA MOM TELEPHONE (760) 743-7*« FACSIMILB (7») 74M7J3 July 29,1998 Bob Wojack Principal Civil Engineer City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 Re: Modifications to Proposed Conditions/ Coastal Development Permit CDP- 98-05 and Tentative Parcel Map MS 98-01 Dear Mr. Wojack: As you are aware, I have received a copy of a draft report to the Planning Commission including conditions from both the Planning Department and the Engineering Department. As you are also aware, a meeting has been set up for Thursday, July 30, 1998 for the purpose of attempting to reach a consensus on the proposed conditions. In order to make the meeting more productive, I have decided to write to you and to include my thoughts regarding certain and specific items which are to be discussed or included in the conditions. While I would like some clarifications of certain or specific conditions at the meeting, my primary concern and items that would require an appeal or some kind of affirmative action center around the issues of the bluff top setback and proposed open space easement inside the setback area. First, and while I have known all along that a particular and specific bluff top setback would be required, my only concern regarding the amount of the bluff top setback was to ensure that such setback was consistent with appropriate engineering standards. In this regard, I sought the best expert I could find on the subject matter and an expert which has done extensive bluff top analysis and geotechnical work. When the expert submitted his report to the City of Carlsbad, his recommendations stated that a foundation system which was built on caissons into bedrock could be placed no closer than 25' from the bluff top edge. He further stated that if one desired to use a post and beam type of foundation system, that such system could not be placed any closer than 30' from the bluff top edge. Finally, he 07/29/1998 16:48 760-743-3793 JENSEN AND ASSOC PAGE 03 JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES ATTOMffiYSATLAW Bob Wojack July 29, 1998 Page 2 recommended that all other types of foundation systems should be placed no closer than 40' from the bluff top edge. Therefore, and upon such submittal, I requested that the bluff top setback be flexible enough to handle any type of foundation system and that the conditions of the map regarding bluff top setback incorporate different criteria for different foundation systems. In addition to the above, it should also be noted that the geotechnicai work that was done by the most recent expert took into consideration the actual caisson drillings, at the bluff edge, for the beach stairs that were recently completed, the confirmation of actual geotechnicai conditions on the property as well as the elimination of foot traffic along the face of the bluff due to the new stairs. Also, the new report took into consideration the possibility of diverting drainage away from the bluff edge which has been included and shown on the map. For all of the above reasons, I believe that the most recent reports are predicated upon better and more precise fundamental engineering than any prior reports. Notwithstanding the above, I continue to understand the City's concern regarding a setback and perhaps even the difficulty in attempting to utilize multiple setbacks. For this reason, I would like to suggest that a 40' setback be utilized which setback encompasses the worst case scenario for all three of the alternatives set forth by the expert consultant. In this regard, please note that I have attached a sheet of paper which suggests certain modifications to the present conditions. Please note that the first suggestion deals with changing the above setback to 40'. Second, and in addition to the above, your number 15 condition, deals with a deed restriction regarding certain types of uses and construction and development within the setback area. Please note that I have made a correction to 15.0. which clarifies and restricts certain types of construction or development, but does not incorporate the word "use" in the condition. The reason is because the word "use" has a significant legal meaning and it is tantamount to impossible to, "clearly identified permitted and prohibited uses" within a particular setback area. On the other hand, it is very easy to describe construction and development or the lack thereof in such setbacks. Third, please also note that I have made a correction to condition number 21. In condition number 21, I have provided that the condition is operative with the exception of other conditions or approvals. As you are aware, the present existing stairs have been constructed within the setback area and are subject to other approvals including, but not 37/29/1998 16:40 760-743-3793 JENSEN AND ASSOC PAGE 04 JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES ATTORNEYS AT WW Bob Wojack July 29,1998 Page 3 limited to, their maintenance and other issues. Also, and should any coastal protective devices ever be needed for the property, which is an owner's absolute right under the laws of the State of California, such condition would not interfere with that right. Fourth, please also note that I have modified condition 23 to show that drainage must be provided to convey roof run off to approved drainage courses as opposed to require one diversion method which is the use of a rain gutter. Fifth, and finally, we come to condition number 24 which is the most important concern that I have regarding the proposed or draft conditions. This most important issue concerns itself with the new attempt to incorporate an open space easement within the setback area in addition to the deed restriction that controls construction or structures within the setback. As you are aware, the use of a construction setback is ordinary and normal, and I have no objection to a structural setback, For example, the property has a front yard setback, a side yard setback, and now it has a backyard or bluff retreat setback. In this regard, it is anticipated that the residential structure on each particular lot will be built right to the back setback, and that contiguous or next to the structure will need to be the placement of decks, porches, planters, sidewalks, decorative walls, and of course, roof overhangs. In addition, it is proposed that this area will be used by families for the ordinary and normal incidental uses of a homeowner. To place an open space easement at someone's back door is clearly not feasible and none of the engineering reports by any consultants or experts have suggested the need for such an open space easement to protect bluff tops. Notwithstanding the above, I am mindful and sensitive of the need to divert water away from the bluff edge and to accomplish all the goals commensurate with keeping water away from the bluff edge. In addition to the water issue, there is also a potential bearing load issue. As a result of the two primary ingredients that need to be protected, I have therefore redrafted the condition to eliminate the open space easement, while continuing to provide for construction, structural, and drainage prohibitions. Also, it should be pointed out that even though certain construction is permitted within the setback area as defined in the condition, and which do not create a drainage or bearing load issue, the City of Carlsbad has appropriate safeguards and guidelines to ensure that these are planned and approved under their ordinances. For example, a Coastal Development Permit will be required for the new residences and for all purposes incidental to those residences. Therefore, the City is fully and completely protected by its ordinary 07/29/1998 16:40 760-743-3793 JENSEN AND ASSOC PAGE 05 JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES ATTORNEYS AT LAW Bob Wojack July 29, 1998 Page 4 and normal approval process and no further requirements or conditions, other than those which I have attempted to compromise on in the new proposed condition 24, should be necessary. As an alternative, however, and if you feel it is too cumbersome of a condition, I would also be willing to delete both the original and my redraft of the condition. I hope the above sets forth my concerns regarding the present draft conditions. I will be pleased to attend the meeting and go into each one of these in specific detail. If, however, you believe that it is in the best interest of everyone to modify the conditions accordingly before the meeting, please notify me and the meeting will not need to occur, nor will any further work on the conditions be necessary. Very truly yours, JON A. JENSEN & ASSOCIATES omeys at JAJ/nb n V Jensen/Ei Enclosure cc: Mike Grimm Clyde Wickham 07/29/1398 IB: 40 768-743-3793 JENSEN «ND ASSOC Document wide changes: please change 45' to 40' Specific paragraph changes: 15. D. The deed restriction shall also include and show the 40' bluff top setback and clearly identify permitted and prohibited types of construction or development in the setback. 21. No grading has been shown or proposed by the Coastal Development Permit or by the Minor Subdivision application. A grading permit may be required depending on proposed site plan for future development. Except as provided in other conditions or approvals, all grading, drainage and future development shall occur outside of the 40* bluff setback restriction conditioned here. 23. Drainage must be provided to convey roof run off to drainage shown on the approved parcel map or to an approved drainage course or street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Site drainage for improvements across the bluff towards the ocean is not permitted. 24. A 40' bluff top setback shall be established and shown on the parcel map for this site. The setback shall be in a form where only specific construction is permitted within the setback. Exceptions, clarifications, and additions to any use or construction proposed in this 40' setback area shall be reviewed, and if applicable, approved by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. Specific construction that is permitted in the setback area are as follows: • Coastal protective devises or walls or access pursuant to the laws of the State of California • Yard landscaping, planters or gardens with drainage devises away from the bluff edge to an approved drainage area shown on the parcel map • Decorative fencing, walls, safety rails or stairs • Patios, walkways, or hard surface areas with drainage to approved drainage areas shown on the parcel map • Cantilever roof overhangs and decks with drainage to an approved drainage area shown on the parcel map Specific construction that is prohibited in the 40' setback are as follows: • Buildings, structures, or sheds except as described above • Swimming pools, saunas, spas, or hot tubs • The construction of buildings, structures, or improvements that would drain excessive water and require excessive watering over the natural bluff top