The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-05-15; City Council; 16157; Denial Of Tentative Map For Jacobs PropertyCITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL b AB# lb&S7 TITLE: MTG. q-W-s 1 DENIAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE CHARLES JACOBS PROPERTY CT-00-09 DEPT. DEPT. HD. CITY All-Y. CITY MGR.q RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Council adopt Resolution No. 200 I* lI7d enying the tentative map CT-00-09 based on the findings contained therein. ITEM EXPLANATION: At its meeting of April 3, 2001, the Council denied (3-2, Mayor Pro Tern Kulchin, Council Member Hall) the request of the applicant for a proposed five single family lots including one panhandle lot on a 1.38 acre parcel. Under section 21.10.080(b) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the City Council has jurisdiction over this five-lot subdivision because it includes a panhandle or flag shaped lot. Under that section, for subdivisions of five or more lots containing a panhandle or flag shaped lot, the City Council becomes the final decision maker. For proposed subdivisions of four or fewer lots containing a panhandle or flag shaped lot, the Planning Director is the final decision maker. The provisions of this municipal code section regulate the size, location, drainage, parking and other land use matters but do not include provisions for architectural review. This code section, however, provides that exterior siding materials must be stucco, masonry, wood or brick unless an alternative exterior material is approved by the Planning Director and he may only do so if the siding material other than the ones listed above are in harmony with other dwelling units in the neighborhood. At its meeting of April 3, 2001, the City Council carefully reviewed a proposed subdivision and, after hearing the recommendations of the Planning Department, the Planning Commission, and testimony from the property owner, the developer and providing an opportunity for interested members of the public to address the subject, denied the proposed five lot subdivision and referred the matter to the City Attorney to return with documents memorializing that denial. Those documents are attached. The Council should satisfy itself that they accurately represent its intent in this matter. FISCAL IMPACT: Denial of this subdivision will not have a fiscal impact on the City. The applicant may propose a four-lot subdivision subject to approval of the Planning Director. It will not return to the City Council unless appealed from the decision of the Planning Director and the Planning Commission pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code section 21 .I 0.01 O(e). ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Projects which are denied are exempt from CEQA review pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines section 15270. EXHIBITS: 1. Resolution No. $00 I - 11-7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2 g mwm yr7 5:: 52 13 OW# 3ucJ m”OSS 14 .Cd$ “G’O 9 I?" 15 a>m$ $j#zs 16 05-f I= 3 ai?& c-5 l7 D 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2001-117 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A FIVE-LOT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP WITH GRADING, STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND UTILITIES ON A 1.3 ACRE SITE LOCATED WEST OF RIDGECREST DRIVE AND EAST OF SEACREST DRIVE IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1 CASE NAME: CHARLES JACOBS CASE NO.: CT 00-09 The City Council of the City of Cartsbad, California does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the municipal code the Planning Commission did, on November 15,200O and January 3,2001, hold duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider a negative declaration and tentative tract map to subdivide five lots on a 1.3 acre parcel including a flag shaped or panhandle lot; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 4859 and 4860 recommending to the City Council the approval of a negative declaration and tentative tract map; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 3’(’ day of April, 2001 held a duly noticed public hearing to consider said matters and at that time received the report and recommendations of the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and the comments of all persons interested in or opposed to the project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 1 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 2. That the City Council denies the five-lot subdivision proposed by the applicant including a panhandle or flag shaped lot because: a. The panhandle or flag shaped lot is not necessary or desirable or in harmony with the residential neighborhood. The site is too small for five lots and not compatible with the neighborhood and the property can be adequately served with public street without panhandle lots which do not result from unfavorable or unusual topographic conditions, surrounding land development or lot configurations. b. The 1.3 acre site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of the development and a four lot subdivision would provide more openness, result in lot sizes that are more compatible with those in the existing neighborhood and result in a quality project that is more in harmony and character with the existing neighborhood and dwelling unit density. 3. That this action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The provision of Chapter 1 .I6 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time Limits for Judicial Review” shall apply: “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 Carisbad 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 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 9 g mwm Yr 7 98, 8 13 OW# iu, $OSS 14 .c:g aU=-O 4 ,2" 15 a>rn< $gz; 16 g”s ~~~ 17 E-3 B 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carisbad, California 92008.” PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting,of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad held on the _ 15th..-day ofpEal by the ,200l following vote, to wit: AYES: Counicl Members Lewis, Finnila, Nygaard and Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: Council Member ATTEST: (SEAL) RONALD R. BALL CITY ATTORNEY JANE MOBALDI ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY DAMIEN B. BROWER DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY CINDIE K. McMAHON DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-l 989 (760) 434-2891 FAX: (760) 434-8367 May 30,200l RANDEE HARLIB SECRETARY TO CITY ATTORNEY ARDIS SEIDEL LEGAL SECRETARY/PARALEGAL Charles Jacobs 5995 Via Madrid Granite Bay, CA 95746-5802 RE: CT-00-09 Dear Mr. Jacobs: As you can see from the letter and envelope enclosed, I sent you notice of the City Council decision on May 22, 2001 at the address in the file. The City Council denied the tentative map for your property. I have enclosed an executed copy of the agenda bill and resolution for your files. ’ Secretary to City Attorney Enclosure c: ‘* City Cler J