HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 106; Lusk Mobile Home Park; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (28)CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
“AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER”
801 PINE AVENUE CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 92008
May 27, 1975
Mr. Donald A. Agatep
Planning Director
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Dear Mr. Agatep:
Reference: Case No. CUP-106, John D. Lusk and Son
and
Case No. SP-122(A) , Covington Brothers
This is to inform you that the Board of Education of this school district
has not to date had an opportunity to review the above two cases. John D.
Lusk and Son requested a delay of school board action until a representa-
tive of that firm had an opportunity to personally appear before the board
to discuss the possibility of being exempted from making a developers
contribution for school construction. The Covington Brothers development
is scheduled for review by the b oard at its meeting this evening, May 27.
It is hoped that the following information may provide some clarification
regarding these two proposed developments:
1. John D. Lusk and Son
When the school board reached a determination as to the per unit
contribution amount for dwellings, it was discussed as to whether
or not adult only units should be excluded from the computations.
The board, by official action, determined that they should not,
and the general reasoning given was that all properties pay school
taxes whether there are children in residence or not. Therefore,
the per unit contribution amount was calculated on all types of
residences and the district has signed agreements with several
developers building condominiums and townhouses for adults only,
the most noticeable being the forthcoming additions to be constructed
at Altamira. The San Diego County Counsel’s office advised the
district superintendent some time back that while the intent of the
developer is to have an adult only subdivision, that this may not
hold true for some years in the future and there would be a
possibility of some school age children in residence.
ADMINISTRATION 729-9291
Mr. Donald A. Agatep
May 27, 1975
Page Two
2. Covington Brothers
The original Covington Brothers' specific plan was approved by
the city prior to the actions taken by the school board and the
City Council in providing resolutions and policies covering the
requirement to provide school facilities. Therefore, Covington
Brothers was originally not involved in obtaining a letter from
the school district for this purpose. It is the district's
understanding that the original approval for this development
has expired and that Covington Brothers is now submitting a
revised plan, which, we understand, may be for adult only units.
Under the agreement with the city, it is understood that this is
for all purposes a new application and that a letter will be
required from the school district advising the Planning Commission
that school facilities will be available for this subdivision.
In order to obtain the letter, it will be necessary for Covington
Brothers to enter into a signed agreement with the district pledging
school facilities contributions.
The district has an agreement with Occidental Land, Inc., which
specifically outlines certain land to be made available for
school use in which the agreed value will be credited against
certain proposed developments which for the most part lie north
of Poinsettia Lane. Apparently, since Covington Brothers sub-
division had been approved by the city prior to this agreement,
the Covington property was not included with the other wherein the
dwelling units would receive uniform credit for the school land.
Should the Covington Brothers wish to be included in this arrange-
ment, it appears that it would be necessary to revise the agreement
between the district and Occidental Land, Inc. providing both parties
are agreeable to such a revision.
We have a letter from John D. Lusk and Son advising us that that firm
intends to sign an agreement (under protest) with the district to provide
contributions.
Brothers, however the district has been contacted by that firm's
attorneys to obtain clarification on that proposed development, which has
been described to you above (No. 2).
To date, we have not had any such agreement from Covington
It is hoped that this information will be of some
discussing these matters with the Planning
% .-.__.
Fred H. Lance
Business Manager
FHL : aw