Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-11-04; Planning Commission; Resolution 7131 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 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE CITY PLANNER’S DENIAL OF A MINOR VARIANCE FOR A DECORATIVE WALL TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED HEIGHT OF FORTY TWO INCHES (42”) IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK OF A SINGLE FAMILY LOT LOCATED AT 4826 KELLY DRIVE IN THE R-1-8,000 ZONE AND IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1. CASE NAME: MAHON RESIDENCE CASE NO: AV 15-01 WHEREAS, Ian Mahon, “Developer/Owner,” has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as Lot 23 of Laguna Riviera Unit No. 1, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 5871, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, April 21, 1967 (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Minor Variance as shown on Attachment No. 6, dated May 19, 2015, on file in the Planning Division, AV 15-01 – MAHON RESIDENCE provided by Chapter 21.50 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on November 4, 2015, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Minor Variance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission UPHOLDS THE CITY PLANNER’S DENIAL of the AV 15-01 – MAHON RESIDENCE, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7131 PC RESO NO. 7131 -2- 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 Findings: 1. There ARE NOT special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings applicable to the property, and the strict application of the zoning ordinance DOES NOT deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification in that the front yard is sufficient in size (depth) to enable the wall to be built outside of the front yard setback. Furthermore, the wall which is for decorative, noise attenuation or security purposes does not constitute relief from unusual difficulties or unnecessary hardships associated with the property in question. 2. The requested variance WOULD constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located in that no other property in the vicinity has an approved wall or fence over 42 inches in height within the front yard setback. Although, there are other walls exceeding the maximum allowed height in a front yard setback within the same neighborhood, none of these property owners possess variances for such walls. Therefore, none of these property owners have been granted a special privilege for their non-conforming walls. 3. The granting of this variance WOULD authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zone regulation governing the subject property in that the subject property is designated R-1-8,000 – One Family Residential Zone and walls as permitted by the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) are a typical component of residentially zoned areas. The proposed wall is located within the front yard setback and is not permitted per CMC 21.46.130 which restricts wall height to a maximum of 42 inches within the front yard setback. 4. The granting of this variance WILL adversely affect the general purpose and intent of the general plan, in that the subject property is designated Residential Low-Medium (RLM) General Plan Land Use designation and although walls are a typical component of residentially designated areas, the subject wall is not consistent with development of single family neighborhoods and does not preserve the neighborhood atmosphere and identity of the existing residential area. 5. The granting of this variance WOULD BE consistent with the general purpose and intent of the certified local coastal program and WOULD NOT reduce or in any manner adversely affect the requirements for protection of coastal resources in that it would not have any impact on sensitive environmental resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .