HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-04-14; Planning Commission; Resolution 1237? '. I/ 0 e
1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1237
2 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
3
4
5
6
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROV-
REAR YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR A SINGLE- ING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE
FAMILY RESIDENCE ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF CALETA COURT BETWEEN ESTRELLA DE MAR ROAD AND THE LA COSTA GOLF COURSE. CASE NO. : V-260 APPLICANT: SUSAN GREEN (AGENT)
7 /I 8
to wit: 9
WHEREAS, a verified application for a Certain property,
10
11
12
13 I
Lot 56 and that portion of Lot 55 of La Costa Valley Unit No. 1, in the County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 5434, filed in the office of the County Assessor of said County, July 29, 1964, and more particularly described in the files of of the Planning Department
14/( has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the
15// Planning Commission; and
l6 il WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request
17/1 as provided by Title 21 of the "Carlsbad Municipal Code"; ani
l8 /I WHEREAS, the public hearing was held at the time and in ''1' the place specified in said notice on April 14, 1976; and I
2o I1 WHEREAS, the applicant has complied with the Public 211i Facility Policy of the City of Carlsbad and has provided the
22
23
24
25 requirements of the City of Carlsbad "Environmental Protecti
26 Ordinance of 1972" because the request is categorically exen
necessary information which ensures Public Facilities will b
available and current with need; and
WHEREAS, the subject application has complied with the
271( from the requirements of the Carlsbad Environmental Protecti
28 ll Ordinance Section 19.04.090 (4)(IV); and
, 0 0
1 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and con-
2
sons to exist: 5
relating to the Variance and found the following facts and re 4
who desired to be heard, said Commission considered all facta 3
sidering the testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons
6
7
8
1) There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstance or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the otk property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone because:
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
a) The subject property is one of the few remain' undeveloped lots that abut the golf course.
b) The subject property does not have a rear pro] line that forms a straight line with the adjo. lots' rear property 1i-nes.
c) There are existing houses on both sides of thc subject property with predetermined setbacks from the property lines and golf course.
d) There are no near neighbors to the rear of thc subject property because of the golf course.
2) The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessel by other property in the same vicinity and zone bu which is denied to the property in question becaus
~ 1
19 I
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a) Other homes in the area enjoy an unrestricted view of the golf course.
b) If a minimum setback for the rear yard was im posed, views to the golf course would be part blocked by existing structures.
c) The subject house, constructed at the 13-foot setback would not block the view of the neigh boring properties; whereas if such a house we at the 20-foot setback as required by the Or- dinance, the subject house's view would be blocked by the surrounding properties.
d) Because of the unique circumstances of the pr sent nonconforming setback of the house to th south, and the unique relationship of the sub lot to the view of the golf course, the best lot/house relationship to preserve this view be for a reduced rear yard setback.
I1 -2-
. II 0 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1'7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3) The granting of such variance will not be material1 detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to t property or improvements in the vicinity and zone i which the property is located because:
a) Other homes backing onto the golf course in tk area have less than a 20-foot rear yard setbac and no negative impacts have arisen.
b) Because the subject property abuts a golf coul at the rear, less than a 20-foot rear yard wi' not restrict light and air or emergency servic
4) The granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because:
a) Less than a 20-foot rear yard setback will no' affect dwelling unit density for the subject location.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commissil
of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
6) That a Variance to allow a reduction in the rear yard setback requirement .for a simgle-family resi- dence on property located on the East side of Cale Court between Estrella De Mar Road and the La Cost Golf Course be approved and is subject to the foll ing conditions:
1) Approval is granted for the land described in the application and any attachments thereto, shown on the plot plan submitted, labeled Exh A, dated 3/5/76. The location of all feature shall be located substantially as shown on th plot pl an.
2) Encroachment into the rear yard will occur on as shown on the approved plot plan with no exceptions.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of th
City of Carlsbad Planning Commission on April 14, 1976, by t
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners L'Heureux, Fikes, Larson, and J
NOES : None
ABSENT: commissioners Watson and Dominguez
ABSTAIN: None
-3-
.. 0 0
1
2
3
.,
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ATTEST:
-4-