Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-04-15; Planning Commission; ; AV 86-12 - MORRISONSTAFF REPORT DATE : APRIL 15, 1987 TO : PLANNING COMMISSION FROM : PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: AV 86-12 - MORRISON - Request for side yard variance to permit a six-foot wall in the front yard setback. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No.2632 DENYING AV 86-12 based on the findings contained therein. 11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant is appealing the Planning Director's denial of a request for an administrative variance to allow a six-foot concrete wall in the front yard, on both sides of the residence, on property located at 3421 Ann Drive. This item was referred to the Planning Department by the Code Enforcement Officer who received a complaint about an illegal wall in the front yard setback at this location. The wall was constructed approximately four months ago. Staff could not locate any record of a building permit for the wall. The applicant applied for an administrative variance, but the required findings could not be made and the variance request was denied. The applicant is now appealing the Planning Director's denial of the administrative variance. 111. ANALY S I S Planning Issues 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 or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to 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? Discussion L c Staff cannot make the four mandatory findings required to grant a variance. The first finding states that exceptional or extraordinary circumstances must exist that do not generally apply to other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant feels the circumstances are extraordinary because the County Health Department requires that the swimming pool be enclosed. This requirement states that there be a 60 inch minimum height of wall and self-closing, self-latching gates. Review of the plans points to convenience rather than necessity as the rationale for the wall placement. The wall could be located onsite so as to meet both regulations without undue hardship and without the need for a variance. A second finding is whether the applicant is being denied a substantial property right enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity, It does not appear the applicant is being denied a substantial property right enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity. The applicant refers to three examples: 1) a hedge, and no complaints have been received regarding it, 2) a fence which was built before the ordinance went into effect, and 3) a fence which an administrative variance was applied for and denied by the Planning Director (AV 86-14 Bender). Granting of this variance could be detrimental to the public welfare, indirectly, in that approval of this variance could establish an undesirable precedent since it would encourage the construction of fences that did not comply with the setback requirements without meeting the four required findings. The General Plan for this area will not be adversely affected because the density will not be increased. In conclusion, staff cannot make the four findings necessary to grant a variance and recommends that the Commission deny the applicant's appeal of the Planning Director's denial of this administrative variance. 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. 2632 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Statement 5. Exhibit "A", dated September 23, 1986 DC :dm CR CHARLEEN CARLSBAD HlQH SCHOOL QENERAL PLAN RL LOW DENSITYYO-1.S) RM MEDIUM DENSITY(4.8) RH HIGH DENSITY (13-23) RESIMNtlAL RLM LOW.MEDIL" DENSITY (0-4) RMH MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY (8-15) COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE REGIONAL RETAIL (cg. EXTENSIVE REGIONAL RETNL (e# RM RRI RS REGIONAL SERVICE C COMMLNITY COMMERCIAL N SEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TS TRAVEL SERVICES COMMERCIAL 0 PROFESSIONAL REUTED scnoou E ELEMENTARY H HIGH SCI!OOL J JUNIOR HIGH P PRIVATE NM NON RESIDENTIAL RESERVE OS OPENSPACE ZONINQ COMMIRCIAL C. 1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCW LONE C.2 GENEDM COMMERCW ZOhT C.T CO"ERCW.TOLWST ZONE 0 OFFICEZONE ZONE CIR 4 city of carlsbad AV 86-12 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: AV 86-12 APPLICANT: MORRISON REQUEST AND CATION: Request to allow a six-foot high concrete fence in front and side yard setbacks on a lot located at 3421 AM Drive. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 26 of Carlsbad Gardens Unit No. 1 as recorded on Map No, 3998 with the County of San Diego. APN: 205-153-03 Acres -17 Proposed No. of Lotsnnits N/A GENWAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation RLM Density Allowed 0 - 3.2 Density Proposed N/A Existing Zone R1-7500 Proposed Zone N/A Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Site R-1 North R-1 South R-1 East R-1 West R-1 Land Use SF (Single Family) SF SF SF SF PWLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated N/A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued - E. I .R. Certified, dated Other , Exempt per Section 14.04.07 AtfisT: Nam. , .- - Burinur Addr.esq .. .. .. .. . Tolephono m&mr . ' $5' .I. 'I . , .' . ., .. . . . . . .. I. . "BERSt Ham .(individual, putnor, joint . . Home Address venturo, corporation, syndication) '. Tclephono Nuzkr Telephom Yumbsr Home Address .. (Attach more slaaots if necessary) . I/Wc daclaze uzdcr Penalty of perjury that the infomation contained in this dis- closure is tzu9 and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may ba' relied upon as bairq true and correct until amended. I *" - .. .. .. ... .. "7 4' 4 . I---------- I I tiCrsnt.lb ' 'Fan0 I T"---- I I 1 L 1 3' 3' fl