HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-11-02; City Council; 7195; Horton denial appealCITI JF CARLSBAD - AGENDA.31LL
\B# ' 9sz TITLEmAPPE~ OF PLANNING COMMISSION
~TG. 1112 18 2
IEPT. PLN V-341
DENIAL OF A VA~IANCE - HORTON DEPTg "Dpa CITY ATTY
CITY MGRP-
Both the Planning Staff and Planning Commission recommend that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission's decision to
deny V-341, and direct the City Attorney to prepare necessary documents.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
This item is an appeal, by the applicant, of a Planning
Commission denial of a variance to reduce the street side yard
setback from ten feet to three feet on property located at the
northwest corner of Isle Drive and Hillside Drive (4225 Isle Drive) in the R-1 zone.
The applicant requested this variance to construct a three-
story, 20' x 20' garage recreation room along the street side
property line on Hillside Drive. The applicant would like a
driveway cut and two-car garage at the lower level, storage room
at the second level, and a recreation room on the upper level
which would be adjacent to a swimming pool on this elevated lot.
In denying this variance, the Planning Commission could not make
the four mandatory findings for a variance and instead found the
fo 1 lowing :
1) That no exceptional circumstances were applicable to
this property since it is a standard size 7,500 square
foot lot with adequate room to provide for his facility
without the need for a variance;
2) That the applicant is not being denied a property right
shared by other properties in the same vicinity and zone
since no other properties have reduced side yard set-
backs similar to what the applicant is requesting, and
his lot allows for similar development of his property
as is allowed throughout the vicinity;
3) That the granting of this variance would be materially
detrimental to the public health and welfare due to the
traffic problems which would be created from cars
backing onto Hillside Avenue, and the adverse visual
impact of a three-story structure placed only three feet from the property line along Hillside Avenue in a single family zone.
Because of these findings, staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that the Council uphold the Commission's denial of this request. At the Planning Commission public hearing, one
adjacent property owner spoke in opposition to approval of this
variance .
I
PAGE 2 of AGENDA BILL # 71 95
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
This project is exempt from environmental review per Section
19.04.070(F)(4)(A) of Title 19.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
No fiscal impacts would be created by this project.
EXHIBITS:
1. P.C. Resolution No. 2021
2. Staff Report dated September 22, 1982 with Attachments
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IC
11
12
13
2.4
15
16
17
ia
19
20
21
22
22
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING CCMMISSION RESOLUTION -- NO. 2023
A RESOLUTION UF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYIMG A VARIANCE TO REDUCE
THE STREET SIDEYARD SETBACK PROM 10’ ?O 1 1/2’ GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ISLE DRIVE AND
HILLSIDE
APPLICANT: SKIP HORTON
CASE NO, : V-341
I “____1_
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, to
qi.-k:
Lot 100 of Carlsbad Tract 72-18, Unit No, 2, APN 207-211-
05 *
ias been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to the
?laming Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request
3s provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Coda; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 22nd day of
5’epteaber, 1982, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed
2y law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said pi1b3-i~ hearing, upoil her=rir:g aiid
zonsidering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons
jzsiriag to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
rePat ing to V-341.
NOW, THEREFOREp BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
E) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing,. the
Commission DEKIES V-349, based on the following findings;
Findings:
1) That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
applicable to this property that do not apply generally to otlre, properties in the same vicinity and zone since the property has
more buildable area than other similar corner lots as indicated
in the staff report. ////
3
L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
3.7
18
13
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
That the subject property is not being denied a substantial
property right possessed by other properties in the same
vicinity as there are no structures located within the street.
side yard setback on other properties and t.here are other
locations on the lot where the buildings could be constructed which would not require a variance.
The reduction of the side yard setback would set an undesirable precedent since no other lots in the vicinity and zone have such a reduction of setbacks.
That the granting of such variance could be materially detrimental to the public welfare as 2@' of driveway is
required to store an automobile in front of the garage and the granting of this variance could potentially encourage encroachment of parked vehicles into the public right of way and because the proposed structure could create adverse visual impacts to the neighborhood,
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Caxlsbad, Cali.fornia, held on
the 22nd day of September, 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES : Chairman Farrow, Commissioners Marcus, Rombaiis,
Schlehuber, Jose, Friestedt and Rawlins,
NOES: None
ABSENT : None
ABSTAIN: None,
-. .- -- VERNON J. $ARROWp 3~) Chairmarr
CARLSBA~ANNI NG COMMI ss I ON
LAND USE PLANNING MANAGER
PC RES0 NO. 2021 .2
4
STAFF REP9RT
DATE : September 22, 1982
TO : Planning Commission
FROM : Land Use Planning Office
SUBJECT: V-341 - HORTON - Request for a variance of the Zoning
Ordinance to reduce the sideyard setback from 10' to 1
7/2' on property located at the northwest corner of Isle
Drive and Hillside Drive in the R-1 zone (4225 Isle Drive).
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting a variance of Section 21.10.040 of the Zoning Ordinance to reduce the required street sideyard setback from 10' to 3'. The intent of the applicant is to
construct a 20' x 2O', three story garage/recreation room. The
structure would be located approximately 3' from the street, sideyard property line at its closest point and approximately 5' from the property line at its widest point.
both a proposed double-wide, rolling garage door and a possible parking area at the lowest level of the structure.
Plans indicate
11. ANALYSIS -
Planning Issues
1, Can the four mandatory findings for a variance be made as they relate to this case? Specifically:
a. Are there exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do
not apply generally to other property in the same
vicinity and zone?
Is the granting of this variance necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the
Will the granting of this variance be detrimental
to the public welfare?
Will the granting of this variance adversely affect the General Plan?
b.
, same vicinity and zone?
c,
d,
Discussion - -
The main issue with this request is whether there are extraordinary or exceptional circumstances that apply to this
property that do not generally apply to other properties in this
vicinity. The applicant has indicated that both the configuration of the lot and the location of the existing house
and swimming pool have made construction of a building difficult without intruding into the sideyard setback.
A field check of the site revealed that although the southwest corner of the lot is elevated approximately 20' above street level, the lot is relatively flat, has a normal buildable area,
and has other locations upon it to locate a recreation room without a variance. Also, there is an existing 2-car garage which provides adequate storage area for a single family house
in a residential zone. Actually, the property has more
buildable area than other sirnilar corner lots because of a
narrower right-of-way; at this location, the property line is set back only 5 1/2 feet from the curb edge instead of the normal 10 feet. Based on these facts, staff cannot make the required finding that exceptional or extraordinary conditions exist on this property that do not apply to other properties in the vicinity.
A second issue is whether the applicant is being denied a property right possessed by other properties in the vicinity.
No other properties in the vicinity have existing structures
which are located within the street side yard setback. Staff feels therefore, that this property is not being denied a
substantial property right shared by other properties in the
same vicinity and zone.
While the granting of this variance would not affect the General Plan, there is concern that it would be detrimental to the public welfare. Staff is concerned with the visual impact a 27' high structure will have in a residential neighborhood when built 3' from the sidewalk. Another possible problem is that due to the
decreased sideyard setback, any automobiles stored in the
driveway would encroach into the public right-of-way.
Staff feels that the granting of this variance, with its visual impact and the potential of having an automobile overhanq into the public right-of-way could be detrimental to the public safety
and the public welfare and could set a very undesirable
precedent. Attached to this report are two letters of opposition from nearby residents reflecting these concerns.
The applicant has already excavated a portion of his property in
anticipation of approval of this variance; however, it was done
without a grading permit or any set of approved plans.
In summary, staff feels that the request does not meet the four required findings for a variance and, therefore, cannot recommend approval of this project.
-2- 6
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is exempt from environmental review per Section 19.04.070 (F)(4)(A) of the Environmental Ordinance.
V. RECOMMENDATION -
It is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution
No. 2021, DENYING V-341, based on the findings contained
therein.
ATTACHMENTS
1. PC Resolution No. 2021
2. Location Map
3. Background Data Sheet
4. Disclosure Form
5. Exhibit "A", dated August 16, 1982
6. Letter of opposition from Ronald Clarke, dated September
7. Letter of opposition from John Fitzgerald, dated September 14, 1982
14, 1982
AML : bw 3/2 2/8 2
-3- 7
!
APP LI CANT HOWTON
CASE NO. v-34 1
b
r
BACKG€UXJIW DATA SHEET
CASE NO: V-341
APPLICANT: Skip Horton
REQUE,sL' AND LOCATION: Variance request to reduce Le street side yard setback
from 10' to 1 1/2' by construction of a three-story recreation/storage roam.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: I;ot 100 of Carlsbad Tract No. 72-18, - Unit No. 2.
APN: 207 - 211 - 05
Acres 8,352 square feet Proposed No. of Lots/Units 1
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation €&PI
Density Allowed 0-4 Density Proposed N/A
Existing Zone R-1 Proposed Zone N/A
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
Zoning Land Use
Site R-1 SFR
North R-1 SFR
South R-1 SFR
East R-1 SFR
West R-1 SFR
PUBLIC FACILITIES
school District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated Excepted frcm requirement per City
Council Policy No. 17.
ENVI- 2% IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Negative Declaration, issued
E.I.R. Certified, dated --
Other, Exempt per section 19.04.070 (F) (4) (A)
..... .. .. . .'_.
. ., . .. .. ... .....
.. .. .. 8..
---...- ....... .......... -1- ... ... l%Y
. , ................. .. ....... ..... .- - __.. ..... - ...... .......... ._ .... - ....... ~-
..
I . __ ..... -. .............. .- ..... ................... -. ....................... -. __ ............ ......... ... . .......
. - ........... ..~.. _. .......... .... ._ - ...
- ...... -~ . - .. ........ __ .................
... ._ ..... ............ .- ......... ._ .......... .~-. ... ...... -. ... __ .... . -. ............. .- .. ....... - -- -.
...... ....... - ... ... ... ... .... ... _. . *. -
.. .. .... ..... ........... .... .." . I
.. ... ..
'dU 31G.I
90 'I:
I 0
b1 I- -
/3
R
- - NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOI?CE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad
will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chanhrs, 1200 Elm Avenue,
Carlsbad, California, at 7:OO p.m. on Mednesday, September 22, 1982, to consider approval of a variance to reduce the street sideyard setback frm 10’ to 1
property generally located at the northwest corner of Isle Drive and
Hillside Drive and more particularly described as: \ --.. 1/2’ by construction of a three-story recreation/storage roan on _---
TAra.J, ;y c- Lot No. 100 of Carlsbad Tract 72-18, Unit No. 2 of Map
7973, APN 207-211-05.
TSlose persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to
attend the public hearing.
Use Planning Office at 438-5591. If you have any questions please call the Land
CASE FILE: V-34 1
APPLICANT: Horton
PUBLISH : September 11 , 1982
CITY OF CARLSBAD P!LIW!lIBG COMMISSION .. ., . . .. . , . .,.. -- ..
Hme & Nancy Ludwig
4242 Park Dr,
carlsbad, ci4 92008
d’
Y
Stephanie, Marella, ~nthony
4244 Park Dr, Carlsbad, CA 92008 j Bantle, Claire Sullivan
John & Linda Fitzgerald d
Carlsbad, CA 92008
4246 Park Dr, d
Rrmald & Betti Clarke
4248 Park Dr,
Carlsbad, CA 92008
V
V
v James Lawson
4223 Isle Dr, v Carlsbad, CA 92008
Joseph & Joyce Maestro
Guzlsbad, CA 92008 4221 Isle Dr. v/
Edward Doyle Jr, &
4219 Isle Dr, carlsbad, CA 92008
Dennis Davidson d’
Michael & Annunziata Haggerty 4217 Isle Dr,
Carlsbad, CA 92008 b
G-ladys Glassford J
612 17th N.W. J Albuquerque, NM 87104
. ..-
David, Velarde, Don Savicki Ai Richard & Jean Horton
4220 Isle Dr, Carlsbad, CA 92008 v
Jan & Danna Wmgon 1730 Flcgue Isle ckurt 2 Carlsbad, CA 92008
Nancy Parkinson /
1733 Isle Court q: CarLSbad, 92008
Norbert & say s-ok
7743 Laurel Ridge Rd, ,J
San Diego, CA 92120 J‘
Frea&KarenSinn f
1729 Ibg~ Isle cotnrt= Carlsbad, CA 92008
ThcaMs & Betty Hds ~
4303 Sea Bright m, , Carlsbad, CA 92008
Albert, AUdEy &4 Sharon
Christianson J 1731 Hillside Dr. i/
Carlsbad, CA 92008
J’ i 4225 Isle Dr,
! Carlsbad, CA 92008 i i
I
1
I
f
~ John & Judith Stixberk J 4218 Isle Dr. I/
1 Carlsbad, CA 92008
BufardF, Hmll u
1729 Hillside Dr,
Carlsbad, CA 92008
a3 0 0 cd (x
l~.X ELM AVENUE C.hRI,SbAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Office of the City Clerk
APPEAL FORM
XC/> H@&7mtJ
Name (Please print)
729- 77x Telephone Number
i
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
(714) 438-5551
DESCRIPTION
Carlsbad Journal
Decreed a Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of Son Diego County
3 138 ROOSEVELT ST. 0 P.O. BOX 248 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 729-2345
Proof of Publication
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid;
I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter.
I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general circulation,
published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of Sun Diego, State of California, and which
newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and
which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying
subscribers, and which newspaper has been established and published at regular intervals in the said
City of Carlsbad, County of’San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year
next preceding the date of publication of the
notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice
of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been
published in each regular and entire issue of said
newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on
the following dates, to-wit:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL v-341
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council oftheCityoFCarls- bad will hold a public hearing at the City Council.Chambers. 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:oO P.M. on Tuesday. November 2. lW2, to consider an appeal of a Planning Commission denial of an application for a variance to re- duce the street sideyard setback from 10 to 1W by construction of a three-story recreationistorage mom on property generally located at the northwest corner of Isle Drive and HillsideDrive and more
Lot No. 100 of Carlsbad Tract 72-
18. Unit No. 2 of Map 7973. A.P.N.: 207-21145. Appellant: HORTON
CI WUI: October 20. 1982
.................. .<., c*clber. .XJ. . 19 E‘,?. .
................................. 19 ....
particalarly described as: ................................. 19 ....
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL ................................. 19 ....
................................. 19.
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego,
State of California on _-the2Cth-- - d.l!%r :“E2--.pp-- -~~ day of pi ‘. \ c /dLL-’ ,~-
I &.t CY e <
” Clerk of the Prin‘ter 2M-4182