HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-08-08; Design Review Board; Resolution 040L
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
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 040
A RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE EXTENSION OF CUP 88(A)
FOR AN EXISTING AUTO STORAGE AND DISMANTLING YARD AND
ADJOINING PARCEL.
CASE NO.: CUP-88(A) APPLICANT: MATTHEW HALL
WHEREAS a verified application has been filed with the City
3f Carlsbad, California, and referred to the Design Review Board;
and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as
grovided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code the
lesign Review Board did, on the 8th day of August, 1984, hold a
3uly noticed public hearing to consider said application on
?roperty described as:
Lot 5 Industrial Tract, Carlsbad, as per map
thereof No. 1743, filed in San Diego County,
January 3, 1923, in Book 203, Page 013.
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering
311 testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be
neard, said Board considered all factors relating to CUP-88(A).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Design Review
Board of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
4) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
3) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the
Design Review Board APPROVES an extension of CUP-88(A), based
on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
///
’//
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
'indings:
L) The site is physically suitable for the type of development
since the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
development as proposed.
2) The auto storage and dismantling yard is consistent with the
goals of the General Plan and Design Manual for Subarea 4.
5) The approval of this CUP is not detrimental to the surrounding
uses or uses specifically permitted in Subarea 4 of the
Redevelopment Plan.
L) The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
storage yard. The yard is in use and is expanding in order
to store additional vehicles.
i) The street system serving the auto storage yard is adequate for the proposed use and expansion.
j) All yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the use to existing or permitted
future uses will be provided and maintained. These have been
satisfied through conditions of approval.
7) This project will not cause any significant environmental
impacts and a Negative Declaration was issued by the Land
Use Planning Manager on April 2, 1979.
5) This extension is necessary because CUP-88(A) has expired and in no longer in effect.
WHEREAS, the Design Review Board, by the following vote,
iPPROVED an extension of CUP-88(A), subject to certain conditions:
-) Approval is granted for the extension of a CUP on property shown on Exhibit A.
!) All conditions of the originally approved CUP-88(A) shall apply to this extension,
I) This conditional use permit is granted for a period of ten years. This conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the Land Use Planning Manager on a yearly basis to determine if
all conditions of this permit have been met and that the use does not have a significant detrimental impact on surrounding
properties or the public health and welfare. If the Land Use
Planning Manager determines that the use has such significant
adverse impacts, the manager shall recommend that the Design Review Board, after providing the permittee the opportunity to be heard, add additional conditions to mitigate the
significant adverse impacts. This permit may be revoked at
any time after a public hearing, if it is found that the use
has a significant detrimental affect on surrounding land uses
"-- A
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
and the public's health and welfare, or the conditions imposed
herein have not been met. This permit may be extended for
a reasonable period of time not to exceed five years upon
written application of the permittee made not less than 90 days prior to the expiration date, In granting such extension,
the Design Review Board shall find that no substantial adverse
affect on surrounding land uses or the public's health and
welfare will result because of the continuation of the
permitted use. If a substantial adverse affect on surrounding
land uses or the public's health and welfare is found, the
extension shall be considered as an original application for
a conditional use permit. There is no limit to the number
of extensions the Design Review Board may grant.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
3esign Review Board of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on
the 8th day of August, 1984, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: MC COY, SCHLEHUBER, HOLMES and ROMBOTIS
NOES: NONE
ABSENT : MARCUS
ABSTAIN: NONE
n fl U
3HRIS SALOMONE,
3ommunity Redevelopment Manager