1995-07
USOLU'l'IO. 110 .PC-I5-07
USOLU'lIOB 01' 'l'II8 IDICDI'1'U PLUD1D18 coaI88IOM
UnoVIR A DJO. V88 nltllI'I IIODI'%o.&'1'IOM
IfO ALLOW PDVIOVSLY UPROftD 8D DLL8
U llICUU. D DIGB'I '1'0 A DZIXUII 01' 13 He
1M ntOlI'1' 01' nvB. HOnR'II_S A'1' 'II1II BAS-
01' 'l'II8 COU'IAL SLOn' :rea PROP.It'II"
LOC&'1'BD A'I 312,370,378,39',
UD 402 DnmDI &VDO. &lID IfO
APHOft '1'IIJI .aDDI'IIOM 01' A SD WALL
to A DI'IIIUJI DIGB'I OJ' 13 1""1
LOCAUD AI' 38' Dft'mDI AV8JRJII ,
(cae- JIUIIB_. 15-.041 JIUP/IIOD)
WHEREAS , ,a request for consideration of a Major Use Perait
Modification was filed by Auerbach et. ale to amend approved Major
Use Permit 93-070 to allow the subject sea walls to be increased in
height from approximately 10 feet in height to 13 feet in height, for
the properties located at 312, 370, 378, 396, and 402 Neptune Avenue,
and to allow the addition a new 13 ft. high sea wall to the use
permit for the property located at 386 Neptune Avenue, within the R-8
Zone and Coastal Bluff OVerlay Zone, as per Chapters 30.34 and 30.74
of the City of Encinitas Municipal Code, and, legally described as:
(SEE ATTACHMENT" A")
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning commission on
March 16, 1995, and all persons desiring to be heard were heard: and
WHEREAS, the Planning co_ission considered without limitation:
1. The Planning coamission staff report dated March 16, 1995:
2. The application and associated materials dated received
February 28, 1995:
3. Oral evidence submitted at the hearinq;
4. Written evidence submitted at the hearing: and
cd/J1VRPC95046 (3-9-95) 1
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following findings
pursuant to Chapters 30.34 and 30.74 of the Encinitas Municipal Code:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "B")
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning couission of the
City of Encinitas that Major Use Permit Modification application 95-
046 MUP/MOD is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "C")
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, after its inctependent review and
usinq its independent judgement, the Planninq Commission hereby finds
that project will substantially conform with the existing Negative
Declaration previously approved for the project area, and. is
therefore in conforJlance with CEQA.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of March, 1995, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Lanham, Jacobson, Bagq,Patton, We Is
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Lester Chairman
of the Commission
ATTEST:
~U LJ.J .n ~ Þ---
Sa a Holder
Secretary
cd/JK/RPC95046 (3-9-95) 2
AftAoa.œn itA".
USOLU'1'I08 110. PC 95-07
LSGL DB8C1tIftIOM
Lot 3 in Block B, and Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of Block C of
SEASIDE GARDENS, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to the Map thereof No. 1800, filed in the Office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County.
cd/JK/RPC95046 (3-9-95) 3
AftaœJlD'l "B"
U80LD'1'IOII 80. PC 15-07
I'IIIDII1GS :roB A US8 .81U1I'1' CBa.ft8. 30.74
UD I'IIIDIBG8 :roB DBVBLO~ 1M 'IIDI
COU~AL BL1Ø1' OVBRL&Y Ion CBaP'1'BR 30.34
01' '1'JIJI 1DfCI8I'1'U JIUlIICIPAL COD8
(CAS8 110. 95-04' JlUP/IIOD)
I. 8ection 30.74.040 - Us. ..~it
A. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the
proposed proj ect will be compatible wi th and will not adversely
affect and will not be materially detriJlental to adjacent uses,
residences, buildings, structures or natural resources, with
consideration given to, but not limited to:
1. The adequacy of public facilities, services and utilities to
serve the proposed project;
2. The suitability of the site for the type and intensity of
use or develop88nt which is proposed; and
3. The haraful effect, if any, upon environaental quality and
natural resources of the city.
l'act8' Tbe application is to allow construction of a sea wall
fronting an individual property, and to allow sea walls fronting
multiple properties to be permitted a height increase from 10
ft. to 13 ft.
Discu88~' The project does not create the need for any public
facilities, services and utilities other than what is already
servicing the existing residences. The exposed height of the
walls will be limited to a maximum of 13 ft. for all subject
properties. The proposed cast-in-place method of construction
will be aesthetically acceptable and will produce structurally
superior sea walls.
Conclusion. The Planning Commission finds that the location,
size, design and characteristics of the proposed sea walls and
the upper bluff retention measures are compatible with and will
not adversely affect and are not materially detrimental to
adjacent uses, residences, buildings, structures or natural
resources.
B. The impacts of the proposed project will not adversely affect the
policies of the Encini tas General Plan or the provisions of the
Municipal Code; and
C. The project complies with any other regulations, conditions or
policies imposed by the Municipal Code.
cd/JKjRPC95046 (3-9-95) 4
I'.ctal The application is to allow construction of multiple sea
walls to a maximum height of 13 ft.
DiacuaaioDI Pursuant to Section 30.34.020B2.b of the Municipal
Code, preemptive measures are allowed on the face of the coastal
bluff in accordance with the development processinq and approval
regulations specified in Section 30.34.020C of the Municipal
Code. The project has been reviewed for conformance with the
policies of the General Plan related to coastal bluffs and the
provisions of the Municipal Code for the Coastal Bluff OVerlay
Zone and Use Parmi ts. The project has been determined to comply
with said regulations and policies.
CoDcluaioDI The Planning commission finds that approval of the
Use Permit JIOdification allowing the new seawall and the
expanded sea walls will not adversely affect the policies of the
Encinitas General Plan or the provisions of the Municipal Code.
II. 8eatioD 30.34.020C2 - Pre88ptiv. ...aur. fiDdiD9a CO.at.l Bluff
overl.y SOD..
c. (1) The proposed aeasure must be demonstrated in the soils and
geotechnical report to be substantially effective for the intended
purpose of bluff erosion/failure protection, within the specific
settinq of the dev.lopment site's coastal bluffs.
I'.ctal The application is to allow the modification of
previously approved Major Use Permit 93-070 to permit the
addition of a new sea wall to the use permit, and to allow the
previously approved sea walls a height increase from 10 ft. to
a maxiJlUlt height of 13 ft.
DiacuaaioBI The sea walls have been analyzed by engineering
geologists who have found, based on site-specific conditions,
that the devices are designed to protect the bluff at the
subject site from erosion and/or failure, per previous reviews
and approvals. In a letter from engineer Charles Randle (dated
March 2, 1995), it is indicated that the approved walls at 10
ft. in height may not provide adequate storm protection with a
significant storm event, and that the inclusion of the property
of 386 Neptune Avenue will enhance the overall integrity of the
continuous sea wall. The City Engineer has reviewed this report
and has concurred with its conclusions.
Inforaation has also been reviewed by the City Enc ineering
Department indicating that additional sea wall protection is
necessary for protection of the property located at 386 Neptune
Avenue and that the addition .of this property to the use permit
will enhance general bluff protection in the area by providing
continuous protection in the vicinity of the subject property.
COnaluaioDI The Planning Commission finds that the proposed
cd/JIVRPC95046 (3-9-95) 5
wall heights of 13 ft. are necessary to provide adequate wave
protection, and that the addition of the property located. at 386
Neptune Avenue will enhance overall bluff protection in the
vicinity of the subject property.
c. (2) The proposed 88asure must be neo..sary for the protection of
a principal structure on the bluff-top to which there is a
demonstrated threat as substantiated by the geotechnical report.
I'.Ct:.1 The subject Major Use Parmi t was approved by the
Planning Commission on August 26, 1993.
The City third party geotechnical consultant reviewed the
proposal and submitted a written report.
Di.cus.WI The subject Major Use Permi t, approved by the
Planning Commission on August 26, 1993, demonstrated that the
subject sea walls were necessary for the protection of principal
structures on the bluff-top.
Further, the city has determined that the property locat:ed at
386 .Neptune Avenue is subject to similar threats as are the
other properties party to the use parmi t.
The City third party geotechnical consultant reviewed 'the wa~l
~ification and has deterJIined that the propo.ed change. comply
with applicable Municipal Code Standards
Conclusion I The Planning Commission finds that the proposed
measure (increase of wall height to 13 ft. and the addition of
new property to use permit) is necessary for the protection of
the principal structures on the bluff-top to which there is a
demonstrated threat as substantiated by the geotechnical report.
C.(3) The proposed aeasure will not. directly or indirectly cause,
promote or encourage bluff erosion or failure, either on site or for
an adjacent property, within the site-specific setting as
demonstrated in the soils and geotechnical report. Protection
devices at the bluff base shall be designed so that additional
erosion will not occur at the ends because of the device.
I'.Ct:.1 The walls are intended to be increased in height, and
one property is intended to be added to the use permit.
Di.CU8..f.sya1 The walls are intended to be increased in height by
three feet., and one property is intended to be added to the use
perai t. The addition of wall height will have no detri8ental
impact to any bluff property, either on site or for an adjacent
property.
The addition of the property located at 386 Neptune Avenue will
have a beneficial impact to surrounding properties by
contributing to a continuous sea wall coverage in the project
cd/JK/RPC95046 (3-9-95) 6
vicinity.
coDo1uaiQJil The Planning Co_ission finds that there is no
evidence to indicate that the proposed .-asures will directly or
indirectly cause, prcmote or encourage bluff erosion or failure,
either on site or for an adjacent property, within the site-
specific setting as deaonstrated in the soils and geotechnical
report a8 part of the original use permi t review, and as
demonstrated by current City engineering review and
reco_ndation.
c. (4) The proposed .easure in design and appearance .ust be found to
be visually compatible with the character of the surrounding area:
where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually
degraded area; and not cause a significant alteration of the natural
character of the bluff face.
l'aot81 The application is to allow construction of sea walls
for multiple properties. The walls are proposed to be "cast-in-
place", with concrete poured into forms intended to produce
textures .imicking the natural bluff.
Diaoua8ioDI The Planninq co_ission originally approved sea
walls of "shot-crete" type construction to a height of
approxiaately 10 ft. The applicant now proposes to utilize a
"cast-in-place" ..thod of construction. Pouring the concrete
into specially designed foras will produce wall textures which
will ~re closely resemble the actual bluff face than would a
shot-crete type wall. Additionally, the proposed method of
construction will produce structurally superior walls. After
the concrete is cured, ch..ical treatment will be employed to
render the desired color to ..tch the bluff.
Additionally, the proposed sea walls will ..tch the City
constructed wall, located at N. El Portal, in its 13 ft. height
and in appearance relative to color and texture.
The bluff property added to the use permit will employ the saae
construction methods.
Co~oluaioDI The Planning co_ission finds that the proposed
seawalls will be visually compatible with the character of the
surrounding area and will not cause a significant alteration of
the natural character of the bluff face.
c. (5) The proposed device/activity will not serve to unnecessarily
restrict or reduce the existing beach width for us. or access.
.ao1;8 1 The walls are approximately two feet in depth and are
placed at or near the toe of the bluff in front of the Mtbject
properties.
cd/JK/RPC95046 (3-9-95) 7
Di.aua.ioDI The design of the sea walls places them as close as
is practical to the toe of the bluff in order to maximize their
effectiveness. The wall generally follows the bluff
configuration. The actual depth of the seawalls is a maxiJBUlB of
two feet. ,Thus, the walls will result in an insignificant
amount of encroachment to the public areas of the beach.
CODcluaioDI The Planning Commission finds that the seawalls
would not serve to unnecessarily restrict or reduce the existing
beach width for use or access.
d. No preemptive .easure at the base of the bluff or along the beach
shall be approved until a comprehensive plan is adopted as Council
policy for such preeaptive treaa.ent, for at least the corresponding
contiguous portion of the COastal bluff. Preemptive .easurea
approved thereafter shall be consistent with adopted plan.
Di.au.aioDI The Planninq Commission approved the sea walla on
August 26, 1993, based upon the determination that the emergency
nature of the structures to be constructed on the site precluded
a coaprehensive plan froa being adopted as policy by City
Council for this specific site.
CoDcla.ioD: The Planning Commission finds that the proposed
modification to Major Uae Permit 93-070 does not significantlY
alter the nature of the oriqinal approval (per Resolution PC-93-
21), nor significantly modify any conditions of approval.
cd/JIC/RPC95046 (3-9-95) 8
AftAOlillBft "C"
USOL1J'1'IOB RO. 1tC-95-07
Applicant: Auerbach, et. ale
Ca.. No.: 95-046 MUP/MOD
Subject: Conditions of approval for a Major Us. Permit
aodification to allow construction of sea wall at the
base of the coastal bluff and upper bluff retention
devices.
Location: 312,370,378,386,396, and 402 Neptune Avenue
I. SP8C%I'IC OORDI~IO.
- Unless expressly aodified' or deleted herein, all conditions and
restrictions specified in Major Use ~rmit 93-070 (Resolution
PC-93-21), includinq de.ign, construction and appearance of the
walls, shall reaain in full force and effect for all properties
listed above.
cd/JK/RPC95046 (3-9-95) 9