Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-12-17; City Council; Resolution 83021 2 3 4 5 6 7 e S ZC 11 12 t. 0 1t l! 2( 2: 2; 2; 21 2! 2t 2' 21 RESOLUTION NO. 8302 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA DENYING TENTATIVE MAPS AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN AREA. APPLICANT: THE CALAVERA HILLS COMPANY (CESCO) CASE NO. : CT 84-37/CP-300 (VILLAGE U) CASE NO. : CT 84-38/PUD-76 (VILLAGE W, X, & Y) CASE NO. : CT 85-4/PUD-79 (VILLAGE L-2) WHEREAS, on November 13, 1985 the Carlsbad Planning Commission adopted Resolution Nos. 2510 (CT 84-37/CP-300), 2511 (CT 84-38/PUD-76) and 251 2 (CT 85-4/PUD-79) recommending to the City Council that these tentative maps and planned unit developments be denied; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on December 3, 1985 held a public hearing to consider the recommendations and heard all persons interested in or opposed to CT 84-37/CP-300, CT 84-38/PUD-76 and CT 85-4/PUD-79; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director was unable to issue Neqative Declarations for these projects: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California as follows: A. That the above recitations are true and correct. B. That CT 84-37/CP-300, CT 84-38/PUD-76 and CT 85- 4/PUD-79 are hereby denied because of the facts set out in Agenda Bill No. 8424 dated December 3, 1985 and incorporated by reference herein and based on findings and conclusions of Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2510, 2511 and 2512 and on the following: 1. The applicant has not entered into an agreement for the orderly provision of public facilities in the Master Plan area. The Planned Community Zone requires as a precondition of development that the property be under single ownership or ' ._ c 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 1% t I€ 0 1s 2c 21 22 22 24 2: 2E 27 2€ unified control. This requirement is necessary to ensure that all of the master plan public facilities necessary to support thc development will be provided concurrent with need. In the absence of an agreement satisfactory to the City Council the basic zoning prerequisite to development cannot be met and the subdivision maps must be denied because they are inconsistent with the zoning. 2. The applicant has filed a legal brief challenging the City Council's authority to require public improvements necessary to accommodate this development as a condition of the master plan. In view of that fact, the City Council cannot make the finding required by the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan that all necessary public facilities will be available concurrent with need to serve these subdivisions and, therefore, the subdivisions must be denied because they are not consistent with the General Plan of the City of Carlsbad. 3. The proposed projects do no appear to be consistent with recent City policies adopted as part of the review of the Land Use Element of the General Plan, specifically, portions of the sites consist of 40% slopes. If no density credit were given for these slopes these projects would probably exceed the allowable density for this site. 4. These projects are proposed at densities which are at the high end of the ranges and there are no amenities or othe special aspects of these projects justifying approval at the hig end of the range. Under the General Plan and applicable zoning the City Council has determined to not approve the proposed densities. Since the zoning approvals necessary for the subdivisions have not been received and the planned unit development and condominium permits have been disapproved the subdivisions must be disapproved. C. This action of denial is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The provision of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: "NOTICE TO APPLICANT" The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision 2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 becomes final a request for the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008 ." D. These denials shall be without prejudice in that a successor in interest to the Calavera Hills Company (CESCO) may process applications for these villages pursuant to the master plan without waiting a year. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on tht 17th day of December , 1985 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Casler, Lewis, Kulchin, Chick and Pettine NOES : None ABSENT: None ATTEST / &€&!FHA L.'RAg?2ENKmNZ City Clerk KAREN R. KUNDTZ, Deputy 3.