The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1992-09-01; City Council; Resolution 92-2721 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 'I 0 1 1 1 2 20, Lug I)> ;Em 1 3 x08 Jwgj *iF Lf.3 244 14 nu 15 555 22 ;Yo 1%0 16 203 >2% - 17 50 -o(o <a1 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I I 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 92-272 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SDP 83- 11(D), NONRESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD 92-4 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 92-1 FOR THREE RESTAURANTS, ONE WITH DRIVE-THRU FACILITIES, ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF AVENIDA ENCINAS NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD. APPLICANT : PALOMAR PLACE CASE NO. : SDP 83-11(D)/PUD 92-4/CUP 92-1 WHEREAS, a verified application for a tentative map for certain property to wit: Parcels 1 & 2 of Map No. 13955, Parcels 1 & 2 of Map No. 13937 and Parcels 1, 2, 3 & 4 of Map No. 14014, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on July 1, 1992 , hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said application for Site Development Plan Amendment SDP 83-ll(D), Nonresidential Planned Unit Development PUD 92-4 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 92-1: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on July 1, 1992 , after hearing and considering all the evidence and testimony of all people desiring to be heard, adopted Resolutions No. 3415, 3391, 3392 and 3392 respectively approving the Negative Declaration, Site Development Plan Amendment SDP 83-ll(D), Nonresidential Planned Unit Development PUD 92-4 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 92-1; and WHEREAS, by letter dated July 8, 1992 McDonald's appealed Planning Commission approval of Resolutions No. 3415, 3391, 3392 and 3392 respectively approving the Negative Declaration, Site Development Plan Amendment SDP 83-11(D), Nonresidential Planned 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 '1 0 11 12 Sm ~wZ $SA 13 3;: Lom 14 344 ;<g 2Ou. O 15 190 16 202 2;; PC2 - 17 a<; "00 <a1 50 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 0 Unit Development PUD 92-4 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 92-1; and WHEREAS, on August 18, 1992 the City Council of the City of Carlsbad held a duly notice public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said appeal and at said hearing after consideration of all the evidence, testimony, argument of those persons present and desiring to be heard the City Council approved the Negative Declaration, Site Development Plan Amendment SDP 83-11(D), Nonresidential Planned Unit Development PUD 92-4 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 92-1 and directed the City Attorney to prepare documents which would deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission in Resolutions No. 3415, 3391, 3392 and 3392 respectively approving the Negative Declaration, Site Development Plan Amendment SDP 83-11(D), Nonresidential Planned Unit Development PUD 92-4 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 92-1 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein constitute the findings and decision of the City Council. 3. That the Planning Commissionls approval of. Site Development Plan Amendment SDP 83-ll(D), Nonresidential Planned Unit Development PUD 92-4 and Conditional Use Permit CUP 92-1 is hereby confirmed and the appeal of that decision is denied based upon the facts set out in the Planning Department Staff Report dated July 1, 1992, the evidence before the Planning Commission, the evidence as set forth in City Council Agenda Bill 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 1 0 '1 1 '1 2 - im ~wZ n> +E & '13 ro8 jug 2 a a '14 nd$ J z L? 15 95s 7 9 6 16 20s L 2 9 '17 La *A- :si -om co-. - 50 '1 8 '1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 0 No. 11,851, and the testimony before the City Council all of which are incorporated herein by reference. 4. The Council further finds that the proposed drive- thru traffic enters the site through a two way high use driveway and travels through wide circulation aisle before entering the drive-thru restaurant portion of the site. The entrance to the drive-thru is located such that no conflicts with the circulation of the overall site and adjacent street system will occur. 5. That the proposed drive thru lane is functionally integrated within the site. Adequate stacking distance from the menu order board lessens the opportunity for potential parking lot circulation conflicts and a screening wall with landscaping will shield the drive-thru headlights from oncoming freeway traffic. 6. That the proposed drive-thru exit is located close to the exit for the site, allowing exiting traffic to leave the site without travelling through any parking areas. This streamlines the site circulation and lessens chances for vehicular conflicts. 7. The Council further finds that signs and entry monuments at each location along the frontage of Avenida Encinas will direct motorists to the correct driveway for each facility and thereby reduce congestion and possible conflicts. 8. That delivery to the proposed Claim Jumper restaurant, building B on the site plan adjacent to the stacking lanes for the proposed restaurant identified as building C, will not cause conflicts because a special loading zone is provided. 9. That adequate provisions for the parking of recreational vehicles, trucks, busses, campers and other oversized vehicles is provided through the use of double parking through the 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 n sw; 22, 13 608 ow2 066 14 >iF t5rr va? 15 >rn< KIT uu '6- y20 tcqo 16 p$ rS1q - 17 601 - 20 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ~ 0 a utilization of the availability of parking spaces arranged end-to- end without parking barriers to such vehicles and adequate stacking of vehicles is provided for vehicles from the order board through the queuing lane into the parking lot. 10. This action 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 become final; however, if within ten 'days after the decision 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 /// /// /// /// /// /// /// 1 /// /// 4 0 e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 'I 0 'I 1 1 2 lm :r <08 LO 'I 4 154 :A: i z B '15 SLU? c K cb -13 Jwg 8 ai ;;s 589 'I 6 c 2 9 '17 -m -007 <=-I jv 1 8 1 9 20 :2 1 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California 92008." PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 1st day of SEPTEMBER 1992, by the following vote, to wit: AYES : Council Members Lewis, Larson, Stanton, Nygaard NOES : None ABSENT: Council ATTEST : ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City)Clerk 5 I