HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-05-18; Planning Commission; Resolution 59091
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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5909
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
CONDOMINIUM PERMIT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF
AN EIGHT (8) UNIT MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL AIR-
SPACE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT ON A .425-ACRE SITE ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE
OF NAVARRA DIUVE AND WEST OF VIEJO CASTILLA
WAY IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 6.
CASE NAME: MATCHPLAY AT LA COSTA
CASE NO.: CP 04-20
WHEREAS, Michael Crews Commercial Development, “Developer,” has filed
a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Wellington homes
Corporation, “Owner,” described as
Lot 41 of La Costa Unit No. 1, in the City of Carlsbad, County
of San Diego, State of California, According to Map thereof no.
6117, filed in the office of the County Recorded of San Diego
County, June 3,1968
(“the Property’); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Condominium
Permit as shown on Exhibits “A” - “J” dated May 18,2005, on file in the Planning Department,
MATCHPLAY AT LA COSTA - CP 04 -20 as provided by Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 18th day of May, 2005, hold a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Condominium Permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
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
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
APPROVES MATCHPLAY AT LA COSTA - CT 04-20, based on the
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinps:
1. That the proposed project complies with all applicable development standards included
within Chapter 21.45, in that the proposed driveway measures a minimum of 24 feet
wide; all units include a private rear yard or balcony; all units include at least 550
cubic feet of storage area; and the proposed structure includes at least three
separate building planes per elevation as well as ornamental metal handrails, stucco
finish, decorative sheet metal gutter, varied roof planes, and decorative vinyl framed
windows and accent materials.
2. That the proposed project’s density, site design and architecture are compatible with
surrounding development, in that the site is surrounded by multifamily residential
uses at similar densities or vacant properties that are currently zoned for
multifamily.
3. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed
to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the
degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to grading or
final map, whichever occurs first.
1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; record a notice of violation on the
property title; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said
conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer
or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of this Condominium Permit.
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Condominium Permit documents, as necessary to make them
internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development
shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
3. This approval is granted subject to the approval of CT 04-20 and is subject to all
conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5908 for those other
approvals incorporated herein by reference.
PC RES0 NO. 5909 -2-
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
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees, dedications,
reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions. ’’
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feedexactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of May 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Cardosa, Dominguez,
Heineman, and Montgomery
NOES:
ABSENT: v JEFFRE N. SEGALL, C airperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
DON NEU
Assistant Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5909 -3-