HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 64; Eugene Chappee; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (3)MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY ATTORNEY
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: EUGENE CHAPPEE - AUTO WRECKING YARD - PONTO
DATE : JANUARY 20, 1972
Background:
1. On January 26, 1970 Mr. Chappee applied for a building permit to construct a fence and establish an auto repair facility. The
permit to construct a fence was approved by Bob Johnston on
January 26, 1970, but no auto storage was to be allowed without a Conditional Use Permit.- A i ona la, -;?=e as s i s tan t ,C i ty 1 L. .
trk$E Fdr' a b'bi di w-m? t . 4+Tmi%-awm) Joe Spano ) r&pJ a'*pq~e~'~ spij-k4_+n$ fid~V%'be .'\ L, on .\ -.. . L1.
2. A variance request was submitted to the Planning Department
on April 7, 1970 asking that a parcel split be allowed for two(2)
parcels facing an existing sixty(60) foot private easement.
a. The request was denied by the Planning Commission on October 13, 1970. (staff r.ep-ort-"crP"S~pt.--P7',' 19'70 at t a c ked 3
b. The Planning Commission decision was appealed to the
City Council on November 4, 1970 per agenda bill 293.
Resolution 1809 as amended, with conditions, was adopted
by the City Council on December 1, 1970. (Res. No. 1809
attached).
3. In September of 1970, Ordinance #9252 of the City of Carlsbad
adopted land uses that would require a Conditional Use Permit.
Auto wrecking/dismantlingrNas a land use that required a C.U.P. brticle 14, Section 1400, Paragraph 6, sub-paragraph b) if the
use was in an M (industrial zone).
. Chappee states that he purchased the subject property 199 early 1970's .). At that time, a C.U.P. /&
for an auto wrecking/dismantling facility was not required
under Ordinance 9060.
a. Paragraph (2), section 1360 of Ordinance 9060 states:
"Automobile assembly, dismantling and used parts storage when operated or maintained wholly within a building"
b. Also refer to Paragraph 36 and 37 of Section 1300,
(3rd. 9060.
1
Page Two Memo 1-20-72
5. A parcel map prepared by E. Brian Smith Engineers was submitted to the Engineering Department for approval on February 19, 1971 and returned for correction on April 5, 1971. To date, the revised map has not been returned to the Engineering Department for review.
6. The City does not recognize two land uses on one legal parcel without the approved parkel map. The Chappee parcel is an illegal parcel, therefore the use is illegal.
'3.r. Conditions as set forth in the staff report of October /'
13, 1970 could be satisfied by future agreement, i.e. street improvements, thereby potentially allowing the parcel map to be approved.
8. A wxx-n-t request for a C.U.P. for the Gaycrest Kennel directly to the west was allowed to enter into future improve- ment agreements. -Cfee attached staff report for Gaycrest Kennels dated Oct. 12, t-9-71)
9. The issue is the dedication and improvement of water, sewer, and a public street in the-Psnto area. There is an existing 60' easement for access from Ponto Drive to the parcel owned by Mr. Barton, to the north. (see attached map) The easement was granted by Mr, Barton and still is held in fee by Mr. Barton. Apparently he is willing to dedicate the street but not provide the improvements.
10. To date the Gaycrest Kennel interests have agreed to a 1/2 street improvement per Condition of Planning Commission Resolution #730 (sttwhed).
a. The adjoining property owners, Mr. Kelly. and Mr, Chappee have not formally agreed. Although I believe they would be more than willing to participate. The remaining property labeled "Weston" would improve as property wwt4-d develop. This improvement would complete the street development of the 60' easementfpubl ic street.
JZ. From a planning point of vtew, the Ponto area is in a .. -' state of flux and transition. Property to the east (H.B./ Occidental, 368 acres) is currently under a Planned Community Master Plan. The first phase, 55 acres, is developing as
section of the Carlsbad Planning area south of Palomar Airport Road between the Pacific Ocean and the eastern limit of the CMWD boundary is under an active planning/annexation program. The Ponto area is included.
i
' a 386-unit mobile home park. Additionally, the entire
Page Three Memo 1-20-72
Concl us i on:
Mr. Chappee has several alternatives:
1. A future improvement agreement subject to approval of City Engineer. This would necessitate a Planning Commission Resolution revising Resolution No.tBoS, therefore allowing the creation of a legal parcel, if that is legal.
2. A condition51 use permit application for an auto wrecking dismantling facility that would establish a new set of conditions i.e. future improvement agreements, in conjunction with the parcel map. This would alleviate the requirement of an immediate improvement prior to parcel map approval.
3. Court action.