The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1987-04-15; Planning Commission; ; AV 86-17 - BOXSTAFF REPORT DATE: +d 15. 1s37 TO : PLANNING COMMISSION FROM : PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: AV 86-17 - BOX - Request a 12-foot encroachment for a patio cover into the required 19-foot rear yard setback I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 2643 DENYING AV 86-17 based on the findings contained herein. 11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant is appealing the Planning Director's denial of an administrative variance to allow a patio cover to encroach 12 feet into the required rear yard setback at 2405 Sonora Court. The applicant applied for a building permit to construct a patio cover to help alleviate faded carpeting and drapes. During the permit process, it was discovered that an administrative variance would be required as the cover would encroach into the required year yard setback. The staff was unable to make the necessary findings and the The applicant is now administrative variance. 111. ANALY S I S 1. Can the four mandatory findings for a variance be made in this case? They are as follows: A) Are there exceptional or extraordinary circumstances of conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to any other property in the same vicinity and zone? B) Is the granting of this variance necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone? C) Will the granting of this variance be detrimental to the public welfare? Dl Will the granting of this variance adversely affect the General Plan? DISCUSSION Staff cannot make the four findings required to grant a variance. The first finding that exceptional or extraordinary circumstances must exist that do not generally apply to other properties in the same vicinity and zone. This property is located on an irregularly shaped lot, Aowever, this irregularity is not significant enough to be exceptional. (See A second finding is whether the applicant is being denied a substantial property right enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity. Review of the area does not reveal patio covers similar to the -cant's request. Staff feels that the Owner has ample room vi e for a patio cover into required ya Wby covering only the patio slab. The house-was built close to the southern sideyard setback. (See Exhibit A.) The natural slope of the land causes this portion of the residence to be closer to the rear property line by about 11 feet. The applicant added a sunroom next to the bedroom at the northern portion of the house, and poured a large patio across the rear of the property. The applicant would like to cover the patio to protect the bedroom from the sun's rays. Staff believes granting this variance would be detrimental to the public welfare and cannot make the third finding. Granting this variance would establish an undesirable precedent. It would encourage construction of home additions that do not comply with the setback requirements without first establishing overriding considerations, and it would grant the applicant an entitlement not enjoyed by the neighbors, The General Plan for this area will not be adversely affected because the density will not be increased. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project is exempt from environmental review based on Section 12.04.07 of the Environmental Ordinance. Attachments 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2643 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Statement 5. Exhibit "A", dated I I IJ 0 {Ab. DC:dm I GENERAL PLAN ZONINQ RISIDINTIAL RLM LOW.MEDIUY DENSITY (0.4) RMH MEDIUM HIGH DENSm(B.15) RL LOW DENSITY (0. I 5 1 RM MEDIUM DENSITY(+B) RH HIGH DENSITY( 15-23) COMMIHIAL RRE EXTENSIVE REGIONAL RETAIL (*I. Cy Counw CUlSbbad) RRI INTENSIVE REGIONAL RETAIL (eg PlUr CVnlnO Real) RS REGIONAL SERVICE C COMMLNlTYCOMMERClAL N SEIGHBORHOOD COM.HERCLAL TS TRAVEL SERVICES COM.WERCLAL 0 PROFESSIONAL RELATED CBD CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT PI PIANNED INDUSTRIAL G GOVTRN.HENT FACIUTIES RC RECREATION COMMERCW u PCBUC LmunEs I P PRIVATE NRR YON RESIDEhTWL RESERVE OS OPEN SPACE UUMNWAL PLANNED c0MMLm ZONE WIDEKIW AcIRICL7.ll'RAL ZONE RLaAL WIDEh-TW ESTATE ZONE 0W.FAMILY WIDEhW ZONE IWO.F&HILY WIDENl" ZONE YCLTWU FAMILY RESIDEKIW ZONE WUJEhllM DENSITY-ML'LTIPLE ZONE WIDE!! DLNSTTY-HIGH ZONE WlDWlUL PROFISSIONAL ZONE WIDEhllM TOLlusT ZONE WIDEhllM WATERWAY ZONE OFFICE ZONE COMMIlKUL GEMlW COMMEllCW ZOhT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCLU ZONE C0"EIICW;TOLUST ZONE HUW COMMEILW.UMITED IM)L'SlRIAL ZONE PLANNED mm ZONE MDL!sTRlAlmNE UMITED ~~F~ILY WIDENTW ZONE WIDW-TW .uoau HOME PARK ZONE 4 I City of Carlsbad AV 86-17 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: AV 86-17 c APPLICANT : BOX REQUEST AND IDCATION: Encroach 12' into required 19' rear yard setback for a patio cover at 2405 Sonora Court LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 29 Carlsbad Tract 76-2, as recorded on Map No. 8581 with the County of San Diego APN: 167-381-17 Acres .25 Proposed No. of Lots/Units GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation RLM Density Allowed 0 - 3.2 Density Proposed N/A Existing Zone RA 10,000 Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Site RA 10,000 North RA 10,000 south RA 10,000 East RA 10,000 West RA 10,000 Proposed Zone N/A Land Use SF SF SF SF SF PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT - N/A Negative Declaration, issued N/A E.I.R. Certified, dated Other ,