The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1991-10-08; City Council; 11384; DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL APPLICANT:MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT CASE NO: SD 83-11C|CUP 91-05c L ca 0 &5. a k$ 3 .. z E! 5 a 6 5 2 0 CITiOF CARLSBAD - AGENWILL DEP DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING AB# j ,5L/ TITLE MTG. 10/8/91 THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL cir CA APPLICANT: McDONALD 1 S RESTAURANT C,f CASE NO: SDP 83-ll(C)/CUP 91-5 DEPT. RECOMMENDED ACTION: If Council wishes to deny the appeal1 and uphold the Commission's denial of SDP 83-11(C)/C!UP 91-5, your acti adopt Resolution No. I!- '>5G ITEM EXPLANATION The City Council, at your meeting of October 1, 1991 dirt City Attorney to prepare the document denying Site Develop: SDP 83-ll(C) and Conditional Use Permit: CYP 91-5. That dol attached. The Council should satisfy itself that the fin( conditions accurately reflect your intentions in the mat the Council concurs, your action is to adopt Resolution N EXHIBIT Resolution No. -, - 1 5L I L 1 1 2 3 e a RESOLUTION NO. 91-336 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA DENYING THE APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT TO SDP 83- 7l 8 9 lo 11 j2 00, -aaS 14 -OW8 OLLU L3o-l4 S>iZ +-u mGzg u ,ai 15 ,->m4: wmo 621 2uJE ,3 m> E&?- $052 qgy hu >zs 17 18 19 20 21 auo '7 WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed w City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; WHEREAS, said verified applica.tion constitutes a as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; an WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the mu code, the Planning Commission did, on the 21st day of August consider said request on property described as: ''That portion of Lot "Htl of Rancho Agua Hedionda, according to Map 823, filed November 16, 1896, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California.'I WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public he: August 21, 1991 and upon hearing and considering all testir arguments of all persons desiring to be heard, the I Commission denied said application; and WHEREAS, appellant appealed the decision of the 1 Commission to the City Council by letter dated August 26, 1' 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly notice< hearing on October 1, 1991 as prescribed by law in c consider said appeal and at said hearing after consideratic the evidence, testimony and arguments of those persons pre desiring to be heard, the City Council denied appellant' and directed the City Attorney to prepare documents uphol decision of the Planning Commission and denying the appea I , i I 1 2 31 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 am mu8 yz-; 13 %am$ -vu gbzz 141 Z>iZ 0 (Yarn gL5g 5$gy nu 15 ~wmo >-ma EZE!~ 16 >2% 17 Lo 18 19 ~ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 u ,<i ZOZ$ ~ 0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and coir 2. The City Council finds that the requested use properly related to the site, surroundings, or enviro settings in that! a. The existing proximity of a three-way decision point to the entrance for tl causes stacking olnto Avenida Enci secondary arterial roadway. This fc deceleration lane in the public right to serve as a queuing lane for the entr the parking lot, jeopardizing safe flow on the public street; b. The inadequate stacking distance fr proposed menu boards and order posit. the resulting potential for cutting off to parking spaces and circulation thro parking lot. This would increase con and confusion, aggravating the e situation rather than alleviating it; c. The conflicts occurring upon exiti drive-thru. The proposed exiting circ travels through a double-loaded parki: and the loading zone for Marie Calle This impedes both automobile circulat truck loading access and increases volume in an extremely congested area. The City Council further finds that the origin Development Plan (SDP 83-ll(c)) and Conditional Use Permit ( 5) approved the site for a restaurant grouped with buildings southeast corner of the project site in order to accommod applicant's desired location in order to ensure maximum visibility. This design necessitated access to the bu through the parking areas and resulted in an on-site circ pattern which was constrained and the Planning Corn conditioned this original site approval such that no dri 3. 2 1 21 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 0 ;ug ,>a, 13 &Em 5a:og o;g% no<< 14 g>s +Fa: mgog 15 slurno tmq ZO$$ '$f= t22 17 to 0 18 19 20 21 22 I 23 ~ 24 25 26 27 28 LL <-I ~a:a:d ZJ 16 1 0 e facilities would be allowed. There are no new facts prese consideration of this matter which would cause the City COL 4. The city Council further finds that appc modify or remove that restriction. proposed use is not consistent with thle various elements General Plan because it neither improves the existing circ situation nor guarantees sufficient lolading facilities s inhibits the adjacent restaurant Is existing loading 1 directing traffic through the loading area as more fully ex in the memorandum from the Traffic Engineer dated May 13 The request is also detrimental to existing uses and ad impacts the site, surroundings, and traffic circulation a not certain to be compatible with the adjacent restaurant's zone or the current parking lot circulation. 5. The City Council further finds that the s times, barely accommodates the traffic circulation and park the existing uses. Addition of a drive-thru facility withoL site redesign would increase existing on-site circulation p and, therefore, the site is not adequate in size and SI accommodate the proposed use. The Council further finds t the same reasons set forth above, appellant's appeal Planning Commission's denial of CUP 91-5 is denied. "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 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 3 .I 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Om $2~ 13 ,+Ern 550: ou$m 14 ooaa Z>AZ 55% moo'L 15 ~$26 16 $urn0 ZO$S '5813 E-5 LL <J >ma ma: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 27 28 a * 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 withiin 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 ei.ther 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 5)2008.gg PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting day of - City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 8th 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Member Lewis, Kulchin, Larson, Stanton, ar NOES: None ABSENT: None y /( 4, ~ ! , (f?( fJ - r , CLAUDE A. ZEW S, Mayor ATTEST: ALETHA L. UUTENKRANZ, City Clerk (SEAL) 4 I, 6 October 22, 1991 Robert Paradise McDonald's Corporation 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92122 Enclosed for your records, please find a copy of the following Resolution 91 -336 adopted by the Carlsbad City Council on October 8, 1991. LEE RAUTENKRANZ CITY CLERK LR:lw Enclosures (1)