HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-05-15; City Council; Resolution 2001-1171
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
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 Carlsbad, California does hereby resolve
as follows:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the municipal code the Planning
Commission did, on November 15, 2000 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. That the City Council denies the five-lot subdivision proposed by the
2 applicant including a panhandle or flag shaped lot because:
3 a. The panhandle or flag shaped lot is not necessary or desirable
4 or in harmony with the residential neighborhood. The site is too small for five lots and
5 not compatible with the neighborhood and the property can be adequately served with a
6 public street without panhandle lots which do not result from unfavorable or unusual
7
8 topographic conditions, surrounding land development or lot configurations.
9 b. The 1.3 acre site is not physically suitable for the proposed
10 density of the development and a four lot subdivision would provide more openness,
11 result in lot sizes that are more compatible with those in the existing neighborhood and
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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 .I 6 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
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
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 2 g mum ys7 s7 3::: 13
ju, 0)
SOT.jS 14
c tia5g
9 IS" 15 a>rni ZWUJO %S&- 16 EC52 a:; c-3 l7 u 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, Carlsbad, California
92008.”
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting ,of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad held on the -__lsth ,200l by the day of May
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Counicl Members Lewis, Finnila, Nygaard and Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Council Member
ATTEST:
(SEAL)