HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-03-20; Planning Commission; Resolution 6948
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
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A THREE (3)
YEAR RETROACTIVE EXTENSION (THROUGH NOVEMBER 7,
2015) OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ALLOW THE
DEVELOPMENT OF AN 8,074 SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY
COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND OFFICE BUILDING ON A
VACANT 0.58 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE SOUTH
CORNER OF THE LA COSTA AVENUE AND RANCHO SANTA
FE ROAD INTERSECTION IN THE P-C ZONE,
NEIGHBORHOOD SE-15 OF THE LA COSTA MASTER PLAN,
AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 11.
CASE NAME: RANCHO LA COSTA BUILDING
CASE NO.: SDP 05-15x2
WHEREAS, Harkishan Parekh, “Developer,” has filed a verified application
with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Santa Fe La Costa, LLC, “Owner,”
described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 12586, in the City of Carlsbad, County
of San Diego, State of California, Filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, February 25, 1983
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site Development
Plan Extension as shown on Exhibits “A” – “M” dated May 7, 2008, on file in the Planning
Division, RANCHO LA COSTA BUILDING – SDP 05-15x2 as provided by Chapter 21.06 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2008, the Planning Commission approved SDP 05-15,
as described and conditioned in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6418; and
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2010, the Planning Commission approved SDP 05-
15x1, as described and conditioned in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6695; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on March 20, 2013, hold a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider SDP 05-15x2; and
. . .
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6948
PC RESO NO. 6948 -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
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Site Development Plan Extension.
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.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission APPROVES RANCHO LA COSTA BUILDING – SDP 05-15x2
based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. All findings contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6418 dated May 7, 2008
for SDP 05-15 and Planning Commission Resolution No. 6695 dated June 16, 2010
for SDP 05-15x1 are incorporated herein by reference and remain in effect.
2. That such permits and approvals as extended are consistent with the requirements of Title
21 of this code at the time of the extension of the site development plan.
3. That the City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that
the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the
environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the
preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15332 of the state CEQA
Guidelines for “In-fill Development Projects” where the project is consistent with the
applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well
as with applicable zoning designations and regulations; the proposed development
occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially
surrounded by urban development; the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; approval of the project would not result in
any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and the
site can be adequately served by all required utilities, and public services. In making
this determination, the City Planner has found that the exceptions listed in Section
15300.2 of the state CEQA Guidelines do not apply to this project.
4. 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.
. . .
. . .
PC RESO NO. 6948 -3-
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
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to issuance of a
building permit or grading permit, whichever shall occur 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 Site Development Plan
Extension.
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Site Development Plan Extension 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. Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws and
regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
4. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment
of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project are
challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section
66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid, this approval shall be invalid
unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with
all requirements of law.
5. Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold
harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims
and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising, directly
or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this Site Development Plan
Extension, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary
or nondiscretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c)
Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including
without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of
electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation survives until
all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City’s approval is not
validated.
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of
Restriction executed by the owner of the real property to be developed. Said notice is to
be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the City
PC RESO NO. 6948 -4-
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
Planner, notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad
has issued a Site Development Plan Extension by Resolution No. 6948 on the property.
Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file
containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any
conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The City
Planner has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which
modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or
successor in interest.
7. All conditions contained in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 6418 dated
May 7, 2008 for SDP 05-15 shall remain in effect except for Conditions No. 34, 35,
and 36, which are superseded by Conditions No. 10, 11, and 12 below.
8. All conditions contained in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 6695 dated
June 16, 2010 for SDP 05-15x1 shall remain in effect except for Condition No. 8, which is superseded by Condition No. 9 below.
9. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this
project by November 7, 2015.
10. Developer shall complete and submit to the city engineer a Project Threat Assessment
Form (PTAF) pursuant to City Engineering Standards. Concurrent with the PTAF,
developer shall also submit the appropriate Tier level Storm Water Compliance form and
appropriate Tier level Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as determined by
the completed PTAF all to the satisfaction of the city engineer. Developer shall pay all
applicable SWPPP plan review and inspection fees per the city’s latest fee schedule.
11. This project is subject to ‘Priority Development Project’ requirements. Developer shall
prepare and process a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP), subject to city engineer
approval, to demonstrate how this project meets new/current storm water treatment
requirements per the city’s Standard Urban Storm Water Management Plan (SUSMP),
latest version. In addition to new treatment control BMP selection criteria in the
SUSMP, the developer shall use low impact development (site design) approaches to
ensure that runoff from impervious areas (roofs, pavement, etc.) are drained through
landscaped (pervious) areas prior to discharge. Developer shall pay all applicable SWMP
plan review and inspection fees per the city’s latest fee schedule.
12. Developer shall submit documentation, subject to city engineer approval, demonstrating
how this project complies with Hydromodification requirements per the city’s SUSMP,
latest version. Documentation shall be included within the Storm Water Management
Plan (SWMP).
NOTICE TO APPLICANT
An appeal of this decision to the City Council must be filed with the City Clerk at 1200 Carlsbad
Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, 92008, within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the
Planning Commission’s decision. Pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 21.54, section
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
21.54.150, the appeaJ must be in writing and state the reason(s) for the appeal. The City Council
must make a determination on the appeal prior to any judicial review.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approvaJ 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 fees/exactions. 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 fees/exactions
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 fees/exactions 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 March 20, 2013, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Chairperson Siekmann, Commissioners Black, L'Heureux,
Montgomery, Scully and Segall
Commissioner Schumacher
~ \ • • u ABSTAIN: ~: '
1 yv'l ./\ s~Cvi1AA ,
25
26
27
28
KERRYK. SIEKMANN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
DONNEU
City Planner
PC RESO NO. 6948 -5-