HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-02-18; Design Review Board; MinutesMINUTES
Meeting of: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (Regular Meeting)
Time of Meeting: 5:OO p.m.
Date of Meeting: February 18, 1987
Place of Meeting: Safety Service Center, 2560 Orion Way
MEMBERS '
~~
CALL .ro ORDER:
Chairman Rombotis called the Meeting to order at 5:OO
p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Rombotis, Members Hall, Holmes and
McCoy. Member McFadden arrived at 5:03 p.m.
Absent: None.
Staff Present: Chris Salomone, Community Redevelopment
Manager
Brian Hunter, Assistant Planner
Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman Rombotis.
DEPARTMENTAL :
1. RP 84-7 - TOWN SOUARE. RP 85-22- TRAUTMAN AND RP 86-10 - ROBINSON
Chris Salomone, Community Redevelopment Manager, gave the
staff report on these items, stating these were three
housekeeping actions, with all of these being inactive
requests. Transparencies were used to show the three
sites. In order to comply with State law, the Design
Review Board must take some action. Mr. Salomone reported
staff was requesting all three items be denied without
prejudice.
RP 84-7 - Town Square. Chris Salomone reported this
project was not in a state to be approved or disapproved
and the recommendation was to deny without prejudice. The
applicant could continue to process and this would relieve
staff of automatically granting approval due to action.
RP 85-22 - Trautman. Chris Salomone reported this parcel
had been sold and the applicant had not responded to any
correspondence.
RP 86-10 - Robinson.
property is in the railroad right-of-way and the applicant
Chris Salomone reported this
requested a Redevelopment Permit to install small storage
units. However, those storage units were already in
place. The railroad right-of-way has been designated a
transportation corridor and this would not be a use
permitted in that corridor.
Member Hall inquired whether these requests had been
before this Board before, and Chris Salomone stated they
had not.
Member Holmes inquired whether building permits had been
issued on any of these requests, and Chris Salomone
answered there had not been any building permits issued.
MINUTES
February 18, 1987 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PAGE 2
DEPARTMENTAL: (continued)
Sara Garner, 2968 Garfield, addressed the Board on Item RP
84-7 - Town Square. She stated she represented her
parents, the Gardners, the owner of Town Square. She
wanted to go on record as being very eager to work with
staff and asked they will be submitting plans for approval
by the end of the year.
Design Review Board adopted the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 094 DENYING WITHOUT PRE3UDICE A
REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR REMODELING AND ADDITIONS TO
2971 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD.
EXISrING BUILDINGS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 2939-
Design Review Board adopted the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 095 DENYING WITHOUT PRE3UDICE A
REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW
OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL BUILDING ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
AT 3259 TYLER STREET.
Alton Ruden, 2733 Mese Drive, Oceanside, addressed the
Board on RP 86-10 - Robinson. He stated he was
representing the applicant and the storage units were
placed on this property at the request of some of the
tenants. The storage units are portable, and they are
painted box structures. The owner was not aware he needed
a Redevelopment Permit in order to install the units. The
Code Enforcement Officer said this was in violation and
they had to have a permit.
out he needed a Redevelopment Permit.
prepared and filed in April of 1986. However, the
Planning Department stated they wanted to hold this
application for a while. The applicant later found out
the reason the Planning Department did not want to act on
this application was because the City was going to
consider changing the zone. The permit was held until
after the City changed the zone.
notified he could not have a permit in that zone. Mr.
Ruden stated with the changing of the zone there will be a
lot of nonconforming uses along that area of the railroad
tracks. He stated he was not fighting the rezoning, but
he felt the Board should not reject his permit until he
has had a chance to recuperate part of his investment. He
asked the Board to allow the permit to be processed with
the zoning that existed at the time he submitted the
request. The other alternative would be make some kind of
a phase-out to allow him time to recuperated some of his
investment.
At that time the owner found
The application was
Then the applicant was
Chairman Rombotis stated the railroad right-of-way was not
covered in the General Plan and a GPA was processed to
change the zone to a transportation corridor.
Member Holmes inquired of Marty Orenyak, Director of
Community Development, whether building permits were
required and Mr. Orenyak stated with 68 portable storage
modulars, a building permit was required.
MEMBERS '
Rombot is
Hal 1
Holmes
McCoy
McF adden
Rombot is
Hal 1
Holmes
McCoy
McFadden
February 18, 1987 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PAGE 3
y\\\
\ MEMBERS
DEPARTMENTAL: (continued)
Member McCoy stated there had been no land use in that
area at the time these units were installed. If the
applicant had checked with the City, he would have found a
Redevelopment Permit was necessary and he would not have
put them in that area. This installation was in violation
of zoning laws at all times.
Member McFadden stated she had a fire hazard problem with
this installation, as the firemen would not be able to get
through there at all.
Assistant City Attorney Ron Ball stated it would not be
legally possible to judge this application under the old
zoning. It must be considered under the new zoning. The
applicant's request to judge under the old zoning would
not be possible, as there was nothing allowed in the
railroad right-of-way at that time. The amortization of
uses applies only to legal uses.
established a legal use of property, it could be amortized
over a period of time. Staff had indicated there was a time limit for public bodies to take action and that is
what they are asking this Board to do at this time.
not legally possible to deem approved an application for
an illegal use. If this application is denied within the
time limit, there would be nothing to present before a
court.
If the applicant
It is
In answer to a question regarding a variance, the
Assistant City Attorney stated the application has to be
consistent with the zoning and the uses allowed. A
variance request would not be appropriate in this
instance. The zoning is the question on this
appl icat ion.
Design Review Board adopted the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 096 DENYING WITHOUT PRE3UDICE A
REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO PLACE 68 MOVABLE RENTAL STORAGE
GENERALLY LOCATED BEHIND 2531 STATE STREET.
MODULES IN THE AT & SF RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ON PROPERTY
Chairman Rombotis reminded those in the audience the
decisions of this Board may be appealed to the City
Council.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
\ The Minutes of the Regular Meeting held February 4, 1987,
were approved as presented.
Chris Salomone stated the March 18 meeting would be a long
meeting, as there will be some major projects which are
recommended for denial. Chairman Rombotis said he would
not be present for the 18th meeting.
Chris Salomone said these would be precedent setting
applications, and a special meeting might be called. He
will inform the Hoard Members.
Rombot is
Hal 1
Holmes
McCoy
McFadden
Rombot is
Hall
Holmes
McCoy
McFadden
MINUTES
February 18, 1987 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PAGE 4 Y MEMBERS
DEPARTMENTAL: (continued)
Member Holmes inquired about the right or ability of Board
Members to go on property to make a proper judgement on an
application. Assistant City Attorney Ron Ball replied
that right of, access on a pending application is subject
to whether or not the applicant has given express or
implied permission to do so. If such permission has not
been given the Board Members, the right to access cannot
be presumed.
AD30URNMENT :
By proper motion, the Regular Meeting of February 18, 1987, was adjourned at 5:34 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
CHRIS SALOMONE
Community Redevelopment Manager
Harriett Babbitt
Minutes Clerk
HB: tb