The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutV 330; Plumb Construction; Variance (V)STAFF REPORT DATE : TO : FROM : SUBJECT: December 23, 1981 Planning Commission Planning Department V-330, PLUMB CONSTRUCTION - Request for approval of a variance to allow construction of a retaining wall up to 8 feet in height upon which a 10-foot high chain link fence would be erected along the rear lot line of a through-lot on property located at 2629 Obelisco Place in the R-1 zone. I PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting a fence height variance to allow construction of a retaining wall and chain-link fence to be erected along the rear property line of a 24,000 square foot through-lot located on the south side of Obelisco Place between Obelisco Circle and Obelisco Place. The proposed retaining wall would vary from 4-feet to 8-feet in height with a chain-link fence, 10-feet in height, to accommodate a tennis court, which would be erected on fill soil behind and above the wall. The total combined height would be 18 feet at the highest point. Section 21.46.180 of the Zoning Ordinance states that the rear yard requirements of a through-lot are identical to those of a front yard for setback purposes. A maximum 42-inch high wall is allowed under these circumstances. 11. ANALYSIS Planninq Issues 1) Can the four mandatory findings for a variance be made which are as follows: Are there exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property that do not apply to other property in the same vicinity and zone? Do other properties in the same vicinity and zone share a similar right which is denied to this property? will this variance adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan? will this variance be detrimental to the public welfare or property in the vicinity? 111. DISCUSSION The subject property is rectangular, approximately 225-feet in depth, and varies from approximately 90-feet in width at the front of the property to approximately 125-feet in width at the rear. This rear lot line fronts directly upon Obelisco Circle. As shown on Exhibit "A", a large home sits toward the front of the lot providing a large back yard which slopes downward to the street at the rear lot line. The applicant wishes to fill this rear lot area to accommodate a tennis court and a smaller play court. A retaining wall of up to 8-feet fronting on Obelisco Circle would result from this fill area. The 10-foot high chain link fence is to be erected above this. Staff is unable to make all the required findings for approval of a variance. First, staff feels that no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances exist on this property which do not apply to others in the vicinity as the surrounding neighborhood contains numerous through-lots with sloping topography. Also, the lot is large enough in size to accommodate open recreational areas without the need for a wall in the setback. Secondly, the variance is not necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed by others because no other property has a wall or fence over 42" in height in the front yard setback. While the requested variance would not adversely affect the General Plan, staff feels that it would be detrimental to the public welfare in two respects. First, the visual impact of a potentially 18-foot high wall and fence located on the property line (10-feet off the face of the curb) would be great. Since the lot is located near the top of a hill, the wall would be vis- ible for a great distance. Secondly, the City Traffic Engineer feels that a vehicle sight-distance problem presently exists at this corner, and the proposed wall would increase this problem. Staff recommends that the applicant pull the proposed tennis court toward the house to remove it from the setback, which would result in a lesser retained fill area, and shorter wall. In summary, staff is unable to find sufficient facts to make the four mandatory findings for approval of a variance. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This project is exempt from Environmental Review per Section 19.04.070(f) of the Environmental Ordinance. V. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 1899, DENYING V-330, based on the findings contained therein. -2- ATTACHMENTS 1. PC Resolution No. 1899 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Form 5. Exhibit "A", dated November 6, 1981 6. Exhibit "B" , dated November 26, 1981 PJK : ar 12/15/8 1 -3- CASE NO* 330 A P P b U C A N TPtUMBCONSTRUCTiON VICINITY MAP APPLI&NT: PLUMB CONSTRUCTION rznQUEs~jwD LXATION: Fence height construction up to 18-feet in rear setback of through-lot at 2629 Obelisco Place, ~fiDEsM71pTION: Lot 681 of La Costa Meadows Unit No. 4, in the County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map Thereof 7367 filed in the Office of the County Recorder, July 19, 1972. Assessors ParcelNmbs: 715 - 460 - 31 Acres -55 No. of Iots 1 GENERALPLANANDZONING R-L DensityAllmed 0-1.5 ac. Density -sed N/A General Plan Land Use Designation &sting zone R-1-15 Proposed zone N/A Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: zoninq North R-1-15 South R-1-15 East R-1-15 Land use Vacant Vacant SFD West R- 1- 15 SFD PUBLIC FACILITIES ,Scbl District San Marcos Unified Water District Costa Real Sewer District Leucadia County mu’s 1 October 19, 1981 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated (Other : 1 ENVIRO”, IMPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued Log No. - E.I.R. Certified, dated other, EXEMPT, PER SECTION 19.04.070(f) Lc q.:.e infomation you have suLxnitted has been reviewed, it is deternine A~ further info 763 is required, you will be sclvised. A??LI:: Name (individual, partnership, join; -,-tnmre, corporation, syndication) .. ._ ' -. ... Kame *(individual, pzrtner, joint. . Xcme Address -. vmttue, corporation, syndication) - 4 ._ .. 3iiinessAddrcsr . : .. . . . .. . .. .- . - .. .. -. .. I .. .. .. . ._ .. - .. -relid upon .as being true and correct until amended, -. . . ~. .. .. City 0; Carlsbad Planning Cor:fim'b'm Can No. G-3330