Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-38 - Reversing Decision of Planning Commission and Denying Planning App PA-05-42IT��iIl�ll[il. �. GIrL'3ScI:3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION PA -05-42. WHEREAS, an application was filed by Pete Volbeda, representing the owner of the property, Jim Cefalia, with respect to the real property located at 2590 Orange Avenue, requesting approval of variances from lot area (12,000 square feet required; approximately 4,000 square feet proposed) and lot width (100 feet required; 58 feet and 62 feet proposed) in conjunction with a development review to construct two, 2 story, 3,200 square foot single family residences; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on February 13, 2006. WHEREAS, on February 21, 2006, PA -05-42 was appealed to City Council; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on March 21, 2006, and continued to April 18, 2006. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Costa Mesa does hereby reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and does hereby deny Planning Application PA -05-42, based on the evidence in the record and the findings contained in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 18th day of April, 2006. A'/ '4" ALLAN R. MANSOOR, MAYOR ATTEST: �ULIE FOLCIK, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: KIMBERLY HALL BARLOW, CITY ATTORNEY STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss CITY OF COSTA MESA ) I, JULIE FOLCIK, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that foregoing Resolution No. 06-38 was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the 181" day of April, 2006, by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MANSOOR, DIXON, AND FOLEY NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BEVER ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MONAHAN IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 19� day of April, 2006. &. ULIE FOLCIK, CI CLERK (SEAL) I FURTHER HEREBY CERTIFY that this is the original of Resolution No. 06-38 adopted by the Costa Mesa City Council at the regular meeting held April 18, 2006. �,� vJULIE FOLCIK, CITY CLERK (SEAL) 1//� EXHIBIT "A" FINDINGS FOR PLANNING APPLICATION PA -05-42 A. The information presented does not comply substantially with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(g)(1) in that special circumstances applicable to the property do not exist to justify granting of the variances from lot size and lot width requirements. There are no special circumstances applicable to this property such as unusual lot size, lot shape, topography or similar features with regard to the requested variances. Specifically, the property can be developed with two residential units in conformity with the City of Costa Mesa Zoning Code and there is no deprivation of a property right that is enjoyed by other properties with the same zoning within the residential neighborhood. Applicant offered no evidence of any property right which would be denied to him which is available to other similarly zoned property by denial of the variance request. B. The information presented does not comply substantially with Costa Mesa Municipal Code with regard to the development review in that the project does not comply with the intent of the City of Costa Mesa Zoning Code and Residential Design Guidelines with respect to compatibility with the mass, scale and character of existing buildings and natural surroundings within the residential neighborhood. C. The proposed project does not comply with Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-29(e) because: a. The proposed building and site development is not compatible and harmonious with uses both on-site as well as those on surrounding properties. b. The proposed building and site development is not consistent with the General Plan. c. The planning application establishes a precedent for future development. D. The project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and the City environmental procedures, and has been found to be exempt from CEQA. E. The project is exempt from Chapter XII, Article 3, and Transportation System Management, of Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code.