Questions delay the decision of the Town Planning Association on certain parts of the Cuvier Street vacation plan
With lingering questions about who owns which part of Cuvier Street, the La Jolla Community Planning Association did not vote on July 1 on key elements of a proposal for the city of San Diego to evacuate part of it. pavement.
The plan has been circulating with local community advisory groups in recent months, gaining approval from the La Jolla Development Permit Review Committee, the Traffic and Transportation Council, and the Ordinance Committee. planned district.
The LJCPA board of directors was tasked with considering whether to support the vacations of part of Cuvier Street bordering the La Jolla recreation center and Bishop’s school, a lot line adjustment and a permit coastal development to remove parking spaces and replace them on Prospect Street by making the spaces diagonally rather than at the top.
Holidays on the streets are seen as a necessary part of the recreation center’s planned renovation to help expand its offerings.
Get the weekly La Jolla Light delivered to your inbox
News, reports and sports on La Jolla, every Thursday for free
You may occasionally receive promotional content from La Jolla Light.
While on vacation in the street, the city waives a public right of way or a public service easement and cedes it to one or more adjacent landowners.
The requested vacation of Cuvier also includes an adjustment to the lot line, dividing the property widthwise instead of the usual method of drawing a line down the middle of the road.
The recreation center would take the frontage along Prospect Street, rising to 11,106 square feet, according to La Jolla architect Trace Wilson, a member of the recreation centre’s vision committee. The southern portion, 8,061 square feet, would go to Bishop’s School.
New recreation center facilities in the space would include a trellis, pÃ©tanque court, panel courts and open space.
Wilson said the street vacation plan would reduce ownership in a way “much more useful” to both parties – horizontally rather than vertically.
“The property of the bishop [the property] on one side of the center line of rue Cuvier, and the Center de loisirs is the owner of the [other side] to Cuvier’s midline. Therefore, both parties must leave a street. We have teamed up to make this happen, âhe said.
But it raised a few eyebrows, with several board members questioning whether Bishop’s actually owns half the street or if the city owns the entire street.
“I haven’t seen anything that clearly shows it,” said administrator Ray Weiss. âI know the city owns the street in front of my house, not the other way around. If Bishop’s actually owns half the street, he would probably pay to maintain the streetâ¦ then that’s a good thing. But if it’s the city that gives half of its street to Bishop’s and keeps the other half, I think there are problems.
In a typical street vacation, the city cedes the property without compensation.
Bishop’s facilities manager Brian Williams said the city told the school Bishop’s owns half the street, “and that’s the principle we operate on,” he said.
Wilson said the plaintiffs were given permission from the city to proceed as if Bishop’s owns half the street and the city owns the other half, but he could not produce documents to prove it.
City officials could not be reached immediately for comment on July 2.
Some trustees have asked for proof of ownership or an affirmation statement from the city.
But administrator Helen Boyden said she was comfortable with the declared ownership of the land and was “happy that something is benefiting the community by coming to this underutilized land.”
Some at the meeting questioned whether the planned allocation of space was fair for each party and whether there were enough public benefits in the city that was giving up the land.
âThere are questions here as to whether this is legal. I am convinced that what is proposed is legitimate, âsaid administrator Greg Jackson. âBut there is also the question of fairness. Does this sound like a fair deal to you? “
Administrator Glen Rasmussen didn’t think so, arguing that because Bishop’s School would get a âbuilding plot,â the square footage would have to be smaller so the public would have more open space.
“The counterpart would be to give more space to the recreation center,” he said. âThe public is the entity that deserves the open space. Bishop’s gets a huge advantage by getting a building plot.
Plans for what Bishop’s School would do with its part of the land were not finalized, but a new development would likely be a dance studio. Whatever the final development, the school would have to obtain a coastal planning permit for it, which would be submitted to local groups for review.
Council members also questioned whether the deviation from the typical lot line adjustment was allowable and whether there would be other municipal costs associated with the adjustment.
âI’ve spoken with the city and it’s okay,â said Williams. âWe want to keep talking to make sure Bishop’s covers its fair share. It is not a land grab for us.
The board decided to split the items into two votes: one on the street vacation and one on the unconventional lot line adjustment.
A motion to support street vacations was passed by 9-3, with three abstentions. Those who abstained did so because they did not have minutes of the AOP committee meeting. Those who voted against did not comment.
A motion to adjust the lot line has been extended until the next meeting so that applicants can provide proof of street ownership. The point having been postponed, the board of directors did not vote on the coastal development permit either, holding it until the next meeting on Thursday 5 August. â