Res 86-057RESOLUTION NO. B6-057
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF POWAY, CALIFORNIAv DETERMINING THAT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83-04R HAS NOT LAPSED.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the following facts to be
true and correct:
In January 1984, the City Council approved CUP 83-04.
Subsequent to that date the developer obtained a grading permit
and permits to install public improvements and between that date
and this date has essentially completed the grading and the
public improvements required of the project. This grading has
been performed and the improvements installed at substantial
expense to the developer. Both the grading and the public
improvements were site specific and in many reSpects do not lend
themselves to aQy other project other than the project approved
by the City Council. In March 1985, the applicant filed its
application for a revised Conditional Use Permit for this project
which was designated by the Staff as Conditional Use Permit No.
83-04R. On April 16, 1985, the City Council granted CUP 83-04R
enumerating certain conditions in the resolution of approval and
subject further to all of the provisions of the Poway Municipal
Code including Section 17.48.080 thereof.
On June 13, 1985, the developer submitted building plans
which were subsequently returned with corrections on several
occasions. On December 20, 1985, the Department of Planning
Services indicated to the applicant that the plans were
satisfactory and building permits would issue upon request.
On January 8, 1986, the developer wrote to the City Council
requesting "an extension of our plan check" time of an additional
180 days. The Department of Planning Services did not formally
respond to that request until its letter of April 14,1986. By
that letter the Department of Planning Services granted the
developer's request "for extension of building permit
application" to June 13, 1986.
The developer has relied upon the three-month silence of the
Staff between January and April and on the letter of April 14,
1986, in not requesting the issuance of building permits. The
extension of time to pull building permits was granted pursuant
to UBC Section 304(c). It was reasonable for both the Staff and
the developer to believe that one extension of time to pull
permits after the plans had been approved by Staff was authorized
by the UBC.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the following local law
applies to this Conditional Use Permit:
Poway Municipal Code Section 17.48.080 provides that a
Conditional Use Permit shall lapse and become void one year
following the date upon which the use permit was approved unless
prior to the expiration of one year any one of four events occur.
The one-year period for Conditional Use Permit 83-04R was April
16, 1985, through April 16, 1986.
Section 17.48.080(A)(4) provides that the Conditional Use
Permit does not lapse or become void if prior to the expiration
of one year "the use which was the subject of the use permit
application is commenced." This is so even if a building permit
is not issued within that one-year period. Issuance of a
building permit within the one-year period is an entirely
separate and alternative method of preventing the lapse of the
Conditional Use Permit. That alternative is provided in Section
17.48. 080 (A) (1).
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY DOES
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Conditional Use Permit 83-04R did not lapse if any one
of the four alternatives provided by Poway Municipal Code Section
17.48.080(A) occurred within the one-year period.
2. The City Council finds that in the instant case
virtually all of the grading for the project and all of the
public improvements have been performed and installed; that the
nature of the grading and the public improvements were site
specific and in many respects do not lend themselves to any
project other than the project approved by the City Council; that
the costs of performing the grading and installing the public
improvements was substantial and was expended in reliance upon
the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit; that the building
plans have been submitted by the developer and have been approved
and are ready for the issuance of building permits; that a timely
request for the extension of time for the issuance of building
permits was made and granted and that the developer relied first
upon the silence of the Staff in its delay in responding to said
request and then upon the approval of said request; and that for
all of the reasons stated herein the City Council finds that the
use has been commenced as contemplated by Poway Municipal Code
Section 17.48.080(A)(4).
3. The City Council further finds that the delay on the
part of the Staff in responding to the developer's letter of
January 8, 1986, together with the issuance of the Staff letter
of April 14, 1986, caused the developer to delay pulling building
permits, that the reliance of the developer was reasonable, and
that the City would be legally precluded from denying this
developer the additional time period to June 13, 1986, within
which to pull building permits.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Poway, State of California, this 277~ay of May, 1986.
CARL R. KRUSE
ATTEST:
Marjorie~.K. Wahlsten, City Clerk