HomeMy WebLinkAboutAV 82-06; RICK KENNEDY CONSTRUCTION; Admin Decision LetterDc:V!-:LOPMi?.NTAL
SEHVICES
U A:ssistan: City Mar:;,g,)r
(? i ,,) <133,5596
[l t:JuHcllng Di>par!rnent
(i'H) 433-5S2:i
[] Enrlne-ering n,ipMtrnent
(714) 438-~C,,11
Cl fi,.:,,_;:;;ill'.J & fl11d,;vnlopment Department
2::'95 Ha,Gir,g St
(711) 438-56~ 1
/
J::ri1,.,mina Dep;,rtmi1nt
(7H.) ,.\:,3-55') 1
December 21, 1982
Rick Kennedy Construction
742 Crestview Road
Vista, CA 92083
1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Subject: Administrative Variance No. 82-6, Request to Allow a
10-Foot High Fence Within the Rear Yard Setback at
7117 Obelisco Circle, Carlsbad
The Land Use Planning Office has completed a review of your
application for an administrative variance at 7117 Obelisco
Circle.
After careful consideration of the circumstances surrounding this
request, the Land Use Planning Manager has determined that the
four findings required for granting an administrative variance
cannot be made and, therefore, d~!_es this request based on the
following findings:
Findings
1) Thaf there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
or conditions applicable to this property that do not
generally apply to other property in the same vicinity and
zone, as the surrounding neighborhood contains numerous
through-lots with similar sloping topography.
2) That the requested variance is not necessary for the preser-
vation of a substantial property right posses by other
property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to
the subject property since the rear yard is adequate to
accornmodate rec1:-eat ion al uses, including a tennis cou:ct
without the necessity of a variance. Furtherr a similar
variance request for a tennis court fence in the rear yard
setback, of Lot 681 of Obelisco Place, was denied by the
Planning Commission as not satisfying the required findings
for approval of a variance.
December 21, 1982
P~ge Two
3) That the granting of such variance could be materially
detrimental to the general public and injurious to property
in the vicinity since the visual impact of a 10-foot fence on
top of a small retaining wall in the rear yard setback would
be considerable, not only on adjoining property but the area
in general as the lot is located on one of the highest points
in Lil Costa and the fence would, therefore, be visible for a
great distance.
Unless appealed as provided by the Carlsbad Municipal Code, this
action of denial is final the date this resolution is adopted by
the Planning Commission. The provision of Chapter 1.16 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall
apply:
"NOTICE TO APPLICANT
The time within which judicial review of this decision must be
sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6,
which h~a been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by
Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petitio~ or other
paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate
court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on
which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days
after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the
proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount
sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparatton of such
record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court
is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the
date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed
to the party or his attorney of record, if he has one. A
proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad,
1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008."
CITY OF CARLSBAD
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Land Use Planning lfan9 er) ,,,~7 ( . , C. c;.-af:;;1/ ;,?_c '/.-✓-1/44)
By: Catherine D. Nicholas
MJH:CDN:kb
cc: Sid and Genevieve Craig
I
0