HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-04-15; City Council; Resolution 97-4501‘ w 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
n
a>- sw: gzcb an8 ow: ?LC9 $0.35
IrC5K 9 8 a- ODs?
a>m$ gg2o rrrr5d
t25 50
tlZ
E:$ aoA
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 97-450
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA GRANTING , APPELLANT’S
APPEAL ON THE LIMITED ISSUE OF THE SIZE OF THE
SECOND DWELLING UNITS AND OTHERWISE
UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL
APPLICANT: EMERALD RIDGE WEST
CASE NO. SDP 95-05(A), HDP 95-06(A) & CDP 96-07
WHEREAS, a verified application for a tentative map for certain prop€
OF SDP 95-05(A), HDP 95-06(A) AND CDP 96-07.
wit:
All that certain parcel of land delineated and designated as “Descriptio
1, 103.91 acres” on record of Survey Map No. 571 5, filed in the Office
County Recorder of San Diego County, December 19, 1960, be
portion of Lot “G” of Rancho Agua Hedionda, according to map there(
823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego Cc
November 16, 1896, a portion of which lies within the City of Carlsb:
being in the County of San Diego, State of California, also describc
Parcel 2 in that certain certificate of compliance recorded June 27, 19
File No. 1996-0232496 of official records,
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; ar
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on February 5, 1997 hold i
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said application for
Development Plan Amendment (SDP 95-06(A)), Hillside Development F
Amendment (HDP 95-06(A)) and ; and Coastal Development Permit (CDP 96-07); a1
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on February 5, 1997,
hearing and considering all the evidence and testimony of all people desiring to be
adopted Resolution Nos. 4051, 4052 and 4053 approving Site Development
1
r' ' 0 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
om
a08 &EW
iUC3 om2 4055 m
a002 $G$i ZwmQ oz-lo rrnzo-
E:%
$55
&$$
m a01
00 -
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Amendment (SDP 95-06(A)), Hillside Development Permit Amendment (HDP 95-01
and ; and Coastal Development Permit (CDP 96-07); and
WHEREAS, the Housing Commission did on February 13, 1997 hold a
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider Affordable Housing Project
97-002 and approved Housing Commission Resolution No. 97-002 denying ADP 97-
and
WHEREAS, the appellant timely appealed the decision of the Plan
Commission February 18,1997; and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 1997, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad ht
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said appeal and at w
time the Council considered all arguments and evidence concerning the appeal; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing after consideration'of all the evide
testimony, arguments of those persons present and desiring to be heard, the City COI
granted the appeal of appellant on the limited issue of the size of the second dwe
units and otherwise approved the project as modified,
19 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the Cit
2o
21
Carlsbad, California, as follows:
22
1. That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
23 ll 2. That the appeal of appellant on the limited issue of the size of
24 second dwelling units is granted. The City Council previously approved a
25
26
development plan for the project and relied on the conceptual approval that the sec
dwelling units would be approximately 640 square feet and contain one or two bedroo
27
28 2
0 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
am
Y CCr6 an8 ow2 iU,
rrt5“: 0002 <<si zwm$
KUSd 003 5sr p2
Su?
S::$
02”
00 -
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The proposed efficiency second dwelling units of 439 square feet in size are denied.
City Council finds that it relied on the previous approvals where a site development
with conceptual second dwelling units of approximately 640 square feet containing 01
two bedrooms implemented the vision, goals and values contained in Chapter 2A.€
inclusionary units under its Affordable Housing Ordinance and the plans and progr
set forth in its General Plan. It further finds that second dwelling units without a bedr
of the proposed efficiency size do not, in this case, accomplish those goals as well a!
original proposal previously reviewed and approved by the City Council. The Co
further finds that the evidence presented by appellant and adduced before the HOL
Commission indicates by a preponderance of the evidence that the appeal on this i:
should be granted.
3. That except as modified herein, the decision of the Plan
Commission approving Site Development Plan Amendment (SDP 95-06(A)), Hill I I
Development Permit Amendment (HDP 95-06(A)) is affirmed, and the findings
conditions of Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 4051 , 4052 and 4053 on file witt,
City Clerk and made a part hereof, constitute the findings and decision of the
Council.
4. That the second dwelling units are required to be modifiec
substantially conform to the City Council’s previous approval and the units are require
be resized to comport with the conceptual approvals as shown on Exhibit “H” di
January 17, 1996 to SDP 95-06 on file in the Planning Department and as illustratec
3
a *
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
9m mu5
&Em <.a8
dUU oug
dtSU 0002
. ZUrJYQ
2;s:
OZ’? ““90 002 LOUl
>2tq 60
m>
s:;z
aoJ
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Exhibits “A-I” through “A-4” and the Planning Director is authorized to approve
detailed size and architecture consistent with this conceptual approval.
5. That appellant‘s appeals fees are refunded.
6. This action is final upon the date this resolution is adopted by the
Council. The provision of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time Limit
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 I .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 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 Carlsbad
Village Drive, Carlsbad, California 92008.”
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
1111
4
9 a e
1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
@ouncil of the City of Carlsbad on the 15th day of April
following vote, to wit:
1997, b]
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin and Hall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council
ATTEST:
2. Qa- ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerd
om &uF a> 2FW
iZ@ a08
203s &gZ 90"9
g22n
Lam 05s
s$;$
czz a01
G
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 5