HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-04-09; Housing & Redevelopment Commission; Resolution 276I
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
0 a
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 276
A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
APPROVING A MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT (RP 95-02)
AND A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (CDP 95-02) TO ALLOW FOR A CHANGE IN LAND USE AND THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND RELATED SITE
IMPROVEMENTS TO PERMIT A RETAIL VIDEO STORE ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 660 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE IN SUBAREA 1 OF THE VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. CASE NAME: BLOCKBUSTER VIDEO, INC. APN: 203-304-26
CASE NO: RP 95-02/CDP 95-02
WHEREAS, on November 1, 1995, the Carlsbad Design
Review Board held a duly noticed public hearing to consider
a Major Redevelopment Permit (RP 95-02) and Coastal
Development Permit (CDP 95-02) for a change in land use and
construction of a new commercial building to permit a retail
video store at 660 Carlsbad Village Drive and adopted Design
Review Board Resolutions No. 241 and 242 recommending to the
Housing and Redevelopment Commission that Major
Redevelopment Permit (RP 95-02) and Coastal Development
Permit (CDP 95-02) be approved; and
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission
of the City of Carlsbad, on December 12, 1995 held a duly
noticed public hearing to consider the recommendations and
heard all persons interested in or opposed to Major
Redevelopment Permit (RP 95-02) and Coastal Development
Permit (CDP 95-02); and
....
.... ....
i 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
20
HRC Resolution No. 276 Page 2
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission
did on December 12, 1995 deny the applications for Major
Redevelopment Permit (RP 95-02) and Coastal Development
Permit (CDP 95-02) without prejudice and instructed the
applicant to revise plans, specifications and renderings for
the proposed project to provide €or more architectural
relief and then return to the Commission for further
consideration; and
WHEREAS, the applicant for Major Redevelopment
Permit (RP 95-02) and Coastal Development Permit (CDP 95-02)
did revise plans, specifications and renderings to provide
€or more architectural relief and did resubmit these
documents to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission for
further consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission
did hold a public hearing on April 9, 1996 to consider the
revised plans, specifications and renderings for Major
Redevelopment Permit (95-02) and Coastal Development Permit
(CDP 95-02), as submitted by the applicant, and to consider
the recommendations and hear all persons interested in or
opposed to the subject permits; and ....
0.0. .... ....
#
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
HRC Resolution No. 276 Page 3
WHEREAS, as result of an environmental review of
the subject project conducted pursuant to the Guidelines for
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of
Carlsbad, a Negative Declaration was issued for the subject
project by the Planning Department on September 19, 1995 and
approved by Design Review Board Resolution No. 240 on
November 1, 1995.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the
Housing and Redevelopment Commission as follows:
1.
2.
3.
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct .
The Major Redevelopment (RP 95-02) and Coastal Development (CDP 95-02) Permits are
approved - as shown on the Exhibits "A" - "C" as presented to the Housing and Redevelopment
Commission on the date of this resolution and on file in the Housing and Redevelopment Department and incorporated herein by this reference. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed development substantially different from this approval shall require an amendment to this approval.
The Major Redevelopment (RP 95-02) and Coastal Development (CDP 95-02) Permits are approved as indicated in Paragraph No. 2 above and subject to conditions set forth in Design Review Board Resolution Nos. 241 and
242 approved on November 1, 1995 and with the following additional condition:
"The color of the building shall be changed from white to a more neutral, earth tone color which is compatible with surrounding buildings. The final color for the building shall be approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Director."
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
-25
.- .- .-:"- -' 26
-..
"
" -
"
"
5 1 c7. .- -
-_ 28 -. .- . -
HRC Resolution No. 276 Page 4
4. That this action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Commission, The provision of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall
apply :
"NOTICE TO APPLICANT"
"This 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 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. ''
P "SED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a special meeting
of the Housing and Redevelopment Commission of the City of
Carlsbad, California, held on the 9th day of April, 1996 by
the following vote to wit:
AYES : Commissioners Lewis, Nygaard, Kulchin, Hall,
NOES : None
ABSENT : None
ABSTAIN: None
and Finnila
-