Loading...
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