Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-02-05; Planning Commission; ; AV 13-08 – ROSS RV PARKING The City of Carlsbad Planning Division A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item No. Application complete date: September 24, 2013 P.C. AGENDA OF: February 5, 2014 Project Planner: Chris Garcia Project Engineer: Jason Geldert SUBJECT: AV 13-08 – ROSS RV PARKING – An appeal of the City Planner’s decision to approve Administrative Variance, AV 13-08, to allow a recreational vehicle (RV) to be parked in the required front yard setback of a lot located at 3024 Garboso Street. The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15305 – Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations for a setback variance, of the state CEQA Guidelines. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7033 DENYING the appeal and upholding the decision of the City Planner to approve AV 13-08, based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The appellant, Tom Erwin, is appealing the decision of the City Planner to approve an Administrative Variance (AV 13-08) to allow an 8.5 foot wide by 23 foot long recreational vehicle (RV) to be parked in the required front yard setback of a residential lot located at 3024 Garboso Street. On June 24, 2013, a code violation case was opened for the property located at 3024 Garboso Street for the property owner parking an RV in the required front yard without an approved Administrative Variance. On September 3, 2013, an Administrative Variance application, AV 13-08, was submitted to the Planning Division by the property owner (John & Susan Ross) requesting approval to park an RV in the required front yard. A public notice was mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on September 24, 2013 and several letters of opposition were received along with requests for an administrative hearing. A notice of administrative hearing was mailed on October 21, 2013 to all residents that submitted comments and the hearing was held on November 4, 2013. Several concerned residents as well as the applicant attended the hearing and were able to voice their concerns to staff. The majority of the comments focused on the fact that the existing CC&R’s for the neighborhood did not permit parking of an RV anywhere on a lot for more than 48 hours. Additionally, there was concern that the RV does not fit in aesthetically within the single family neighborhood. 1 AV 13-08 – ROSS RV PARKING February 5, 2014 Page 2 After considering everything submitted by the applicant and concerned residents, and applying the applicable sections of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Section 21.44.060(A)(4)), AV 13-08 was approved on November 21, 2013. On December 2, 2013, an appeal of the approval of AV 13-08 was received from Mr. Tom Erwin who owns property located at 7706 Garboso Place. Mr. Erwin’s appeal letter makes the following two points: 1. The approval of this variance invites more people to request a variance to park their RV’s in their front yard setback in violation of their own CC&R’s. The property in question has CC&R’s in effect from March 5, 1973 to the present. They state “No living trailer, house car or “campster,” boat or boat trailer shall be parked on any road or building site either temporarily or permanently…longer than forty-eight hours (48) outside of a garage on any street, lot or building site”. 2. The City of Carlsbad knowingly gives a resident a variance to park their RV in their front yard setback, when the City is aware that the resident’s more restrictive CC&R’s do not allow it. The City’s position is that they have to enforce this code even though another provision of Carlsbad Code states that our CC&R’s, which are more restrictive, supersede the City code.” “The City of Carlsbad has a provision of Section 21.44.060(A)(4) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) which specifies: “The provisions listed in this section are not intended to supersede more restrictive homeowner provisions contained in approved conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs). If the provisions of any such CC&Rs are less restrictive than the ordinance codified in this section, then the provisions contained herein shall apply.” In response to number one above, staff has received a copy of the CC&R’s for La Costa Vale Unit 1 which the subject property is a part of. Staff informed the applicant of the CC&R’s but also informed the applicant and appellant that the enforcement of CC&R’s are typically a private matter not enforced by the city. The appellant also met with the city attorney’s office which concluded that the city has no obligation to enforce the CC&R’s. In this case, any violation of the CC&R’s due to RV parking would be a private matter. Furthermore, the current language in the code, allowing RVs to be parked within the required front yard, has been in place since 1984 (ZCA 154(A)). The wording has since changed slightly, but the content and findings remain the same. Residents have been able to request an administrative variance for over 29 years but few have done so. The pertinent CC&R has been in force since April 11, 1973. In response to number two above, the city attorney agrees with staff’s interpretation of the city code referenced. The code acknowledges that it is not intended to supersede more restrictive CC&R’s. The code also states that if CC&R’s are less restrictive than the code, then the city code shall override the CC&R’s. This means that home owners associations are permitted to pass CC&R’s that are more restrictive than city codes, but not less restrictive. However, the section does not state that the city will enforce violations of CC&R’s that are more restrictive than the city’s code. On another note, the CC&R’s restrict an RV to be parked anywhere on a lot longer than 48 hours. This is more restrictive than the city’s code (Section 21044.060 of the CMC) that allows for RVs to be parked in the side or rear yards (CC&R’s are allowed to be more restrictive). On November 12, 2013, staff observed at least six RVs or trailers parked in the front or side yards of properties located within the La Costa Vale Unit 1 subdivision. The RVs that are parked in the side yard meet the city’s code, but appear to be in violation of the CC&R’s AV 13-08 – ROSS RV PARKING February 5, 2014 Page 3 III. ANALYSIS Subject to city planner approval, open parking in the required front yard is permitted if the parking area does not exceed the maximum paved area permitted for passenger vehicles, and that access to the side or rear yard cannot be provided. In making this determination, the city planner shall give notice pursuant to 21.54.060.B and shall consider: 1. Whether parking in, or access to, the side or rear yard would require structural alteration to the existing residence, or would require the removal of significant or unique landscaping. A fence shall not be deemed to prevent access to the side or rear yard; 2. Whether parking in or access to the side or rear yard would require extensive grading; 3. Whether, because of the configuration of the lot, existing landscaping, the location of the structures on the lot, and the size of the recreational vehicle, parking of the recreational vehicle in the front yard would interfere with visibility to or from any street; and 4. Whether allowing parking of the recreational vehicle in the front yard would interfere with traffic on the street or sidewalk, or would encroach into the street and utility right-of-way. In reviewing the administrative variance request to park an RV in the required front yard, the following findings from Section 21.44.060(A)(4). Table E of the Carlsbad Municipal Code were evaluated and made by the city planner: 1. That parking in or access to the side or rear yard would require structural alteration to the existing residence or will require the removal of significant or unique landscaping in that the largest side yard (east side) is 9 feet (‘) and 1 inch (”) wide including the roof eaves which extend 1’ into the side yard, making it very difficult to locate the 8’6” wide recreational vehicle (RV) within the 9’1” wide side yard. Specifically, there would only be a clearance of 3.5” (9’1” – 8’6” = 7”) on each side of the RV. A structural alteration involving the removal of a portion of the roof eave would be required in order to have more room to potentially fit the RV within the side yard. Furthermore, existing utility boxes located directly in front of the eastern side yard restrict maneuverability of the RV on this side of the property. 2. That parking of the recreational vehicle in or access to the side or rear yard would not require extensive grading to the side or rear yard. However, it is very difficult to fit the 8’6” wide RV within the side yard given the limited 9’1” wide space between the existing structures and the property line as described above and makes getting into and out of the RV virtually impossible in the 3.5” of space on either side of the vehicle. 3. Parking of the recreational vehicle in the front yard would not interfere with visibility to or from Garboso Street in that adequate sight distance is provided and the lot in question is an interior lot located on a relatively straight portion of Garboso Street which affords appropriate sight distance. AV 13-08 – ROSS RV PARKING February 5, 2014 Page 4 4. That the recreational vehicle would not interfere with traffic on the street or sidewalk or encroach into the street and utility right-of-way in that the RV does not encroach into the public right-of-way since the recreational vehicle is 23 feet in length and the available parking area in the driveway is approximately 26 feet outside of the public right-of-way. The appellant and other opponents do not dispute any of the above findings in the appeal or in previous correspondence with the exception of one. One letter received states that the RV would interfere with visibility to or from the street. However after review, it was determined that parking this RV in the driveway outside the public right-of-way would provide adequate sight distance and visibility to and from Garboso Street. In conclusion, staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the city planner to approve Administrative Variance AV 13-08. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15305 – Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations for a setback variance, of the state CEQA Guidelines. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7033 2. Location Map 3. Reduced Exhibit 4. Exhibit “A” dated November 20, 2013 5. Appeal letter from Tom Erwin dated December 2, 2013 6. Correspondence GARBOSO S T AZAHAR PL AZAHAR CT GARBOSO P L MORADA STAV 13-08Ross RV Parking SITE MAP SITE EL CAMINO R E A LLA COSTA AV ALGA RD C A R L S B A D B L