HomeMy WebLinkAbout17-21 - CC Uphold Decision on PA-15-08 - 2068 Maple AvenueRESOLUTION NO. 17-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA TO
UPHOLD THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY ONE-YEAR TIME
EXTENSION FOR PLANNING APPLICATION PA -15-08 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
2015-108 FOR A FOUR -UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 2068 MAPLE AVENUE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY RESOLVES AS
FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, an application was filed by Ramin Favakehi, authorized agent for the
property owner, Mohammad Gharavi Ghouchi Family Trust, to appeal the Planning
Commission's decision to deny a one-year time extension of Planning Application PA -15-08
and Tentative Parcel Map 2015-108 for a four -unit development in the Mesa West
Residential Ownership Urban Plan.
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on
February 13, 2017, with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the
proposal;
WHEREAS, at the February 13, 2017, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning
Commission voted to deny the project in a 4 to 0 vote (Ayes: Chair Andranian, Vice Chair
de Arakal, Commissioner Navarro Woods and Commissioner Kerins; Absent: Commissioner
Harlan);
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2017, an appeal of the decision of the Planning
Commission's denial of the project was filed by the applicant/authorized agent;
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on March 21,
2017 with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the proposal.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the original
project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
under Section 15332 for In -fill Development.
Resolution No. 17-21 Page 1 of 4
BE IT RESOLVED, therefore, that based on the evidence in the record and the
findings contained in this resolution, the City Council hereby UPHOLDS the decision of the
Planning Commission and DENIES one-year time extension for PA -15-08 and Tentative
Parcel Map 2015-108 with respect to the property described above.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase
or portion of this resolution, or the documents in the record in support of this resolution, are
for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions.
The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this resolution and shall forward a copy
to the applicant, and any person requesting the same.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 21st day of March, 2017.
ATTEST:
� a_ 0_tA 9 La
Brenda Green, Qty Clerk
APPROVE S>R
Thomas Duarte, City Attorney
Resolution No. 17-21 Page 2 of 4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF COSTA MESA )
I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY
that the above and foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 17-21 and was duly passed
and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the
21 sc day of March, 2017, by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: STEPHENS, GENIS, AND FOLEY
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: MANSOOR AND RIGHEIMER
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the Seal of the City
of Costa Mesa this 22nd day of March, 2017
JCA LY U zP
BRENDA GR N, CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 17-21 Page 3 of 4
EXHIBIT A
FINDINGS (DENIAL)
A. The proposed time extension does not comply with Costa Mesa Municipal Code
Section 13-29(k) because:
1. The approval of the Planning Application and Tentative Parcel Map was valid for
24 months of time from the original approval date. Given that the project was
comprised of only four units the Planning Commission concluded that adequate
time was available to concurrently secure financing, develop construction
drawings, receive final map and building permit approval and begin construction.
2. The time extension proposal does not meet the requirements of Costa Mesa
Municipal Code Section 13-29 (k), which requires approval of a time extension
of one year upon showing good cause by the applicant. The Planning Commission
determined that a good faith effort to meet the deadline has not been
demonstrated by the applicant in that the purchase of the property by the applicant
in December 2016 and inadequate due diligence review of the entitlement
expiration during the purchase is not a sufficient good cause to grant an extension.
B. The Costa Mesa Planning Commission has denied time extension of Planning
Application PA -15-08 and Tentative Parcel Map No. PM -2015-108. Pursuant to
Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section
15270(a) CEQA does not apply to this project because it has been rejected and will
not be carried out.
C. The project is exempt from Chapter IX, Article 11, Transportation System
Management, of Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code.
Resolution No. 17-21 Page 4 of 4