Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 198; City of Carlsbad City Hall Expansion; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (2)Mr . Ronald Packard, Mayor City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Dear Mayor Packard: d6 Stratford Lane Carlsbad, California. 92008 June 25, As a result of a telephone call I placed to City Hall last Thursday, June 18, and a subsequent telephone call to me the following day, by city staff, it was learned that the city has purchased the approximate one-acre parcel of land located at 1265 Stratford Lane in Carlsbad , and, further, has prepared a plan €or constructing a parking lot thereon to accommodate city vehicles. It was also learned that the city expects to accomplish this plan via a five-year conditional use permit which can be renewed for an additional five years at maturity. The proposed plan also includes future relocation of this same parking lot to a site--probably on Elm Avenue--at which time the abandoned parking area would then be used to accommodate modular-type city buildings. In addition, it was learned that the city has already held one meeting concerning the intended use of this parcel of land and the need for some type of variance by which to alter or circumvent the established residential zoning of this property. No notification of ‘ this meeting , as required by ordinance, was provided to any of the residents of Stratford Lane, the property interests of whom would be severely adversely, and permanently affected by such a land use change. My interest in this matter--my residence and the immediate adverse affect thereon, since it lies directly across the street at 1266 Stratford Lane, to the North, and faces the property in questian. In further conversation, city staff indicated that the meeting already held regarding this property’s use change was ”probably illegal” becase of fdiura to provide proper notification as required, and that a subsequent meeting would have io be scheduled notica of which would be sent to Stratford Lane residents. To date, no notice has been received. On Tuesday afternoon, June 23, I received a telephone call at my place of emgIoyment from the assistant city manager inquiring whether I might allow city staff to hdd an informal meeting in my home on July 6 at 7: 00 p .m., the purpose of which would be to present to ‘the residents on Stratford the city’s proposed plan, and to obtain direct ,-personal response to the plan. I thought this to be a rather unusual request from a city official. In summary, your Honor, recent events have r&sed some serious questions, and considerable doubt, about the manner in which the City of Carlsbad appears to be con- ducting its business. It is common knowledge throughout the local community and, indezd, throughout much of the southern county that Carlsbad is one of the most solvent communities -_ Mr. Ronald Packard, Mayc City of Carlsbad Carlsbad , California June 25, 1981 2. to be found anywhere, both dollar-wise and property-wise. The tax base income from the mall is a fact almost anyone can grasp and appreciate. €t is also a matter of public record, although interestingly not readily available through normal channels at city hall in Carlsbad as in other communities, that the city owns property on Elm Avenue, between Pi0 Pic0 and Highland Drive, which is far better suited for a parking lot for obvious reasons. Why , then, is it necessary for the city to proceed in the manner it has to obtain a long established residentially zoned piece of property for misuse a5 a city vehicle parking lot? Indeed, to invade a secluded residential area of high value homes most with ocean views, Particularly is this action questionable when the present long-range plan already calls for the relocation of this parking lot at some future date-supposedly at maturity of the five-year conditional use permit if it is not renewed. I cannot imagine anyone naive enough to believe that the city would willingly and voluntarily vacate at the end of the first five years after spending taxpayers' money to construct the parking lot. In fact , they would no doubt use just such expense to the taxpayers as their argument in pressing for renewal of the permit for an additional five years. And surely, no one would accept for one ninute that temporary modular-type buildings , if erected, would enhance the value of any of the surrounding properties , particularly if they bear any resemblance to the modular recently erected by the city on Pi0 Pico. The most simple intelligence is cognizant of the scarcity of Ian$ in Carlsbad . Property values have soared in the past half-dozen years, and no one knaws that better than city representatives responsible for acquiring properties on behalf of the city, who are, by profession , real estate experts ! It is inconceivable, and totally unacceptable, that the individuals involved in this proposed plan are not intimately and acutely aware of the permanent and adverse affect a city vehicle parking bt and/or temporary modular-type structures would have on the value of the surrounding homes! What possible justification can be offered for such irresponsible and unprofessional action by city staff and with obvious disregard for the rights and well-being of the prcgerty owners on Stratford Lan5, i I do not believe that you , Mr . Mayor, nor any of the elected council presently charged with the responsibility of protecting as well as representing the interests of those who have placed them in office, nor any hired or appointed city staff member, would tolerate any plan to construct a city vehicle parking lot directly across the street from their home. - Copies to: Councilmen Girard Anear and Claud? Lewis ouncilwomen Mary Casler and Ann Kulchin 2 City Manager Chairman , Planning Commission