Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-04-08; Planning Commission; ; V 321|MS 515 - CRISMAN------ STAFF REPORT DATE: April 8, 1981 TO: Planning Commission :FROM: Planning Department SCJBJ:IOC!T: V-321 AND MS-515, CRISMAN -Request for a minor subdivision crea- ting a panhandle lot and a variance of the zoning ordinance to al- low a reduction in the minimum lot width from 60 feet to 41 feet on property located on the west side of Valley Street in the R-1- 7,500 zone. I. PROJECT D]SCRIPTION As shown on Exhibit "A", the applicant proposes to subdivide a .51 acre parcel into two lots one of which would be a panhandle lot. The resulting panhandle lot would be 12,018 square feet in area while the other lot would be 7,500 square feet. To create the proposed lots, the applicant is re- questing a variance to reduce the width of parcel 1 from 60 feet to 41 feet. The applicant is also planning to relocate the existing single fam- ily residence from the front of the property to the rear. His intent is to reduce noise impacts created by the traffic associated with a school loca- ted across Valley Street. The subject property is surrounded by single family residences to the north, west and south while a school is located to the east of the property. II. ANALYSIS Planning Issues 1. Can the necessary findings required for approval of a panhandle lot be made? 2. Does the proposed minor subdivision conform with the requirements of the Carlsbad Subdivision Ordinance and is a variance the proper mechanism to modify the requirements of this ordinance? Discussion Before the Planning Commission can approve a panhandle lot, the follow- ing findings must be made: 1. The property cannot be. served adequately with a public street without panhandle lots due to unfavorable conditions resulting from unusual topograpphy, surrounding land development, or lot configuration. 2. Subdivision with pmhandle lots will not preclude or adversely affect the ability to provide full public street access to other properties within the same block of the subject property. Staff feels that the Planning Commission can make the first finding that this property cannot be adequately served by a public street due to unfavorable lot configuration. As shown on the location map, it appears very unlikely that a public street will be constructed within this block that could give access to the rear of the subject property. Secondly, the creation of this pm.- handle lot will not preclude or adversely affect the ability to provide full public street access to other properties within the same block. The other :p3.I'Cels surrounding the subject property all have adequate frontage on existing public streets. staff can therefore make the re- quired findings for approval of a panhandle lot. As shown on Exhibit "A", the subject property is nearly five times as deep as it is wide, with a single family residence located on the front of the property. This has resulted in the majority of the property being left vacant without access to a public street. Also, as shown on the location map, directly to the north of the subject property there are two other pm.- handle lots that do not comply with the requirements of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance. The creation of these lots was approved by Planning Commission on March 28, 1967. The two lots in the rear are served by a pair of panhandles with a combined width of 26 feet rather than the 30 feet required by the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance. Also, both of the lots fronting on Valley street have a width of 52 feet rather than the 60 foot minimum required by the Zoning Ordinance. Although the findings for a panhandle lot can be made, the proposed lot split does not comply with the requirements of the Carlsbad Subdivision Ordinance. The ordinance prohibits the creation of lots whose depth exceeds their width by three times. As shown on Exhibit "A", the depth of pn-cel 1 exceeds its width by three times. If the depth of parcel 1 were reduced, it would not meet the 7,500 square feet area require- ment of the R-1 zone. In an attempt to alleviate this problem, the applicant suggested a var- iance to reduce the width of the panhandle from 20 feet to 15 feet. The Carlsbad Subdivision Ordinance, however, states that the panhandle portion of a panhandle lot must be at least 20 feet wide and there is no variance procedure to deviate from the requirements of the Subdivi- sion Ordinance. A panhandle may be reduced to 15 feet if the panhandle is adjacent to the same portion of another such lot thus creating a 30 foot joint easement. As shown on the location map, this is not the case in this instance. -2- Because there is no variance procedure to reduce the Subdivision Ordi- nance requirements, the Planning Commission has no alternative but to deny this request. In fact, if staff would have known of this procedural problem at the time the application was submitted, staff would have consulted the applicant not to submit the application. Therefore, if the applicant indicates a desire to withdraw the item rather than having it denied, staff would have no objection to the Planning Commission approving a withdrawal. In either case, staff believes that the Commission should discuss whether staff should be directed to consider amending the Subdivision Ordinance to allow a certain mechanism to waive requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance such as a width reduction of the panhandle portion of a panhandle lot from 20 to 15 feet if exceptional circumstances exist. If the Commission directs staff to study this matter, staff would attempt to determine how many similar lots exist in the city. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project is cate~orically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 19.04.070 (f) (4c and 4d) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission DENY without prejudice V-321 and MS-515 and ADOPT Resolution Nos. 1774 and ffl5 based on the findings contained therein. It is also recommended that the Planning Commission direct staff to research the problem and consider an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance if the investigation indicates that there are a significant number of lots faced with the same or similar problems. The intent of this study would be to determine if there is a need to add some flexibility to the Subdivision Ordinance by providing a mechanism to allow consideration of waiving certain requirements of the ordinance when approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. ATTACHMENTS Resolution Nos: 1774 and 1775 Background Data Sheet Location Map Disclosure Form Exhibit "A", dated January 8, 1981 MH:ar 4/1/81 -3- ~DATASHEE.T e ,CASE ro;,MS-515 -·Y-321 J\PPLIC\Nr: KENm'm AND PAMEIA CRtSM1\N RB;:lUEST AND ux:::ATION: Minor sub:livision and variances to create ~ lots one of which will have a width of .46 feet-and the reduction of the panhaJXlle width £ran 20' to 15' on the west side of Valley.Street. r.rn DESCRIPl:10N: __ A--=-IX>-~_t_:L_on_o_f_·_'l'ract ___ 24_4_o_f_Thum __ Lands ___ in_th_e_c __ 1._· tx_o_f __ _ . . . ·carlsbad, aca>?:din} to Map N:>. 1681, filed Decanber 9, 1916. Assessors Parcel Ntmber: 205 130 31 Acres . 57 • No. of Lots • • 2 ------------------ • • -.... ,l"' .• ,t,,f'"r ' ., ·. GENERAL PIAN AND ZONllG General Plan Lam Use Designation --------RIM Density Al.l..owed -------0-4 Density-Proposed -------4 Existing zane __ R_-_1_-1_s __ o_o ______ _ Proposed Zone __ N __ r/A _____ _ SUrrouixling Zoning am Land use: brlD;J N:lrth R-1 ____ ........... __ I· . ' South ---:R:.:..--1 __ East 0-S Sch::,ol lest R-1 --------- ·Lam.Use sm SFJ) Scoool SFD PlJBLIC FACILITIES School District t Water District Sewer District carlsbad carlsbad carlsbad .. .mu's ---------------------- Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated __ Dec __ etber ___ 2 __ , _1_9_8_0 _______ _ (Other: ____________________________ ) ENVIRONMEN.rAL IMPACT ASSESSMENr ___ Negative Declaration, ·issued _______ Log No. _____ _ ____ E.I.R. Certified; dated ________ _ · Other, _..;;:Ex;;,;;,;;:arpt~:;...per,.._;;;;;:...;;.sec.;;;..;..;ti.;;;0..;;..on;.;.....l_9_.0_4_._07_0....;(;....f.:...) _(,__4_c_and __ 4_d __ ) __________ _ .. LOCATION . ,;_ POR. TC1: 244 ,. ~ f I ._ \...::il_.,I ,-·r ,,. ,·"··~ ~--€;LI \""',.Tlll.J.IJT -~r1 C:..,Tl'• \;,~,+----___ , ______________ _ CASE NO~ V-32/ /M5-515 A PPL IC A Ni_C_R_..,;..\_S...._M.__~_t-1 ___ _ -MAP ---~~- ··•:•1· · . ., • J-f ·aft~r t.he infor.·miltlon l-hav·~ submitte<l has been revie -,, it is determlncifl that further in!orm.tlion is required, you will be so c1clviscu. 1\l?PLIC1\NT: 1\GENT: MEMBERS: Kenneth·J. Crisman and Pamela J. ·Crisman Name (individual,. partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndic,>tion) 2879 Jefferson Street, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Businr.~·s Address 729-4082 • Telephone Number E. Brian Smith @,BRIAN SMITH ENGINEERS, INC. N • . ~~i6 State Street, Carlsbad, CA 92008 BusincHs 1\<ldress 729-898_1 Telephone Number Name (individual, partner, joint ve~ture, co~poration, syndi~ation) Home Address ---:----~---------------------:.......-------·---Business Address .. Telephone Number Telephone· Number . ' Name Home Address Business Address . .. Telephone Number Telephone Number (Attach more sheets if necessary)· I/We. declare under pcna·l ty of per.jury thnt the in!onncttion contained in thin <lj fl- closur.c is true-and correct and that it will rematn true and correct anrl may b~ relied upon as being ·true and correct' until amended. • . LJ . , . ~~/.t .. • B MI' I ~NGI_N IJY . /4-e"'l. ' \, •.