HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-02-08; City Council; Resolution 2011-0191 RESOLUTION NO. 2011-019
2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF
3 TENTATIVE MAP CT 04-13, HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
. PERMIT HDP 04-06, HABITAT MANAGEMENT PERMIT
HMP 09-10 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
5 AND REMANDING THE DESIGN OF THE TENTATIVE
MAP TO THE PLANNING DIRECTOR FOR APPROVAL OF
6 A TENTATIVE MAP WITH FIVE RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND
ONE CIRCULATION ROAD ACCESSED FROM EL
7 FUERTE STREET AND APPROVING THE HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, HABITAT MANAGEMENT
8 PERMIT, ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND APPROVING THE GENERAL PLAN
V AMENDMENT
10 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a number of public hearings on
11
this proposed subdivision, the last of which was October 6, 2010 and approved a
12
Tentative Map, a Hillside Development Permit, Habitat Management Permit and
recommended adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of General
15 Plan Amendment and Zone Change for a seven residential lot single family subdivision;
16 and
17 WHEREAS, the decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the
18 appellant, Architectural Committee, La Costa Meadows Unit 3 Home Owners
19 Association; and
20 WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on January 11, 2011 in
21
order to hear the appeal and consider all arguments and evidence both in favor and
22
against the appeal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered its other legislative actions
25 necessary for the approval of the subdivision; and
26 WHEREAS, after considering all the evidence, public testimony and
27 considering arguments both for and against the proposed project, the City Council
28
1 closed the public testimony and continued the matter for deliberations to its meeting of
2 January 25, 2011; and
3 WHEREAS, the City Council received additional written material following
4
the close of the public testimony and before the time of its deliberations and made part
5
of the record; and
6
WHEREAS, the applicant and the appellant or other members of the
7
affected neighborhood are encouraged to meet and confer over the final designs of the
8
9 tentative map to be approved by the Planning Director; and
10 WHEREAS, after carefully considering the evidence, arguments, and public
11 testimony, the Council finds as follows:
12 1. That the proper environmental analysis was conducted in accordance with
the procedures established by the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the
Mitigated Negative Declaration is appropriate in this case and an environmental impact
report is not appropriate given all of the evidence in the record including the Biological
Resources Surveys that were conducted and reports submitted in June 2003, May
15 2004, March 2005, January 2006 and May 2009. The Council is persuaded that the site
does not contain significant biological habitat or other features, which if eliminated,
16 would be considered a significant adverse impact. The Council further determines that
no California Gnatcatchers have been identified on site and that there are no significant
impacts to Gnatcatchers which could be mitigated. The appellant has not presented
any substantial evidence to the contrary and has not presented a fair argument that any
8 onsite resource or impact created by the project is significant.
19 2. The Council further determines that the proposed project site is not within
a hardline preserve area and that all references to hardline preservation, the
20 equivalency findings or HMP hardline amendment protocols do not apply. Figure 28 of
the Habitat Management Plan mistakenly included this property as a hardline even
21 though there was no agreement between the property owner and the City and the
appropriate wildlife agencies to designate it as hardline preserve. The Council further
22 finds that the site has been designated as developable as single family residential on
~~ both the existing General Plan and zoning maps. The Council further finds that the
California Department of Fish and Game and the US Fish and Wildlife Services have
24 agreed that the property was never intended to be designated as hardline preserve and
have confirmed so in writing.
25 3. After having reviewed the reports by the applicants' geotechnical
engineer, by the City staff and by third-party independent geotechnical engineers, the
26 Council is persuaded that there are no geological hazards resulting from the approval of
27
28
1 this project. Nevertheless, prior to grading of the site, all grading of the site will be
under the direct supervision of a geotechnical firm approved by the City.
2 4. Architectural review by La Costa Meadows Unit 3 Architectural Review
3 Committee is irrelevant to the Council's decision on this project and disputes, if any,
may be resolved by the parties without action by this Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
5 Carlsbad, California, as follows:
6 1. That the above recitations are true and correct
7 2. That the appeal of the La Costa Meadows Unit 3 Home Owners
g Association Architectural Review Committee is denied but, based on the independent
review of the City Council, a revised tentative map is approvable and the matter is
9 remanded to the Planning Director to approve a five residential lot subdivision with a
private road providing circulation for these lots and being accessed from El Fuerte
10 Street. The decision by the Planning Director shall be final and an appeal of his
decision, if any, shall be returned to the City Council for determination.
12 3. The Hillside Development Permit, the Habitat Management Permit, the
General Plan Amendment are approved, the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this
13 permit is adopted and the findings of Planning Commissions Resolutions No.'s 6669,
6670, 6671, 6672, 6674 and 6675, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by
14 reference, constitute the findings of the City Council in this matter.
4. Appellant has obtained significant relief on its appeal, and its appeal fees
16 shall be refunded.
17 ///
18 ///
19 ///
20 ///
21 ///
22
///
23
///
24
///25
26 '"
27 >»
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council
of the City of Carlsbad on the 8th day of February, 2011, by the following vote to wit:
AYES: Council Members Hall, Kulchin, Blackburn, Douglas and Packard
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ORRXlNE M. WOOD, City Clerk
(SEAL)[