2002-048 - EG
City of Encinitas
CO~TYDEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT
505 So. Vulcan Ave.
Encinitas, CA 92024
(760) 633-2710
NOTICE OF DECISION
DCD-2002-48
May 31, 2002
This letter is to inform you that the Director of Community Development has approved your
application for:
01-254 MINV/CDP (Spaulding) - A request for a Minor Variance and Coastal
Development Permit to allow an existing accessory unit to encroach 4' into the required 20-
ft. front yard setback, or 20%. The subject property is located at 2015 MacKinnon Avenue
(APN 260-394-08) within the R11 (Residential-II) Zone and within the Coastal Zone.
Background: This minor variance request is to permit an existing accessory unit to encroach
into the front yard setback a total of 4 ft. A building permit for the subject accessory unit (unit)
was issued on June 4, 2001. The unit was approved and constructed in accordance with the
approved permit plans and in compliance with Municipal Code provisions for accessory units.
A certificate of occupancy (no. 01-656) was issued on August 8, 2001. Subsequent to the
issuance of the certificate of occupancy, further additions were made to the unit without the
benefit of a building permit. Complaints regarding these unauthorized alterations were received
by the Community Development Department, and the property owner was notified that the
unauthorized conditions must be remedied. Pursuant to the multi-family provisions of the R-11
zone, the property owner filed a design review application on November 11,2001 to allow the
conversion of the property to a duplex since the modified unit exceeded the size limitations for
an accessory unit. Community Development Department staff reviewed the design review
application and informed the property owner that the Department could not support the proposal
based upon issues related to design compatibility with the surrounding community. In
conducting its analysis of the design review application, the Community Development
Department determined that the originally permitted unit did not comply with the required 20-ft
front yard setback. (The building permit plans had not accurately represented the setbacks) The
unit was found to encroach 4 feet into the 20- ft. front yard setback. As a result of these
developments, the property owner opted to remove the non-permitted additions to the unit and
to request a minor variance to allow the nonconforming unit to remain. This request was
submitted on March 7, 2002.
Project Description and Discussion: Municipal Code Section 30.48.040V permits accessory
units in association with existing single-family residences, provided that the unit does not
exceed 750 SF or 30% of the size of the principal residence, whichever is less. The size of the
primary residence is 1446 SF, allowing an accessory unit of up to 433 SF. The subject
accessory unit has been returned to its original configuration of 432 SF.
CD/JK/g:\Nod\O 1-254MV AR/CDP
- 1 -
The applicant proposes to legalize the nonconforming accessory unit with the approval of an
existing encroachment of 4 ft. into the required 20- ft. front yard setback, or 20% of the setback
standard. Municipal Code Section 30.78.020 authorizes the Director of Community
Development authority to grant variances of up to 20% of the setback standard (Minor Variance).
The subject unit is located below the primary single-family residence, and does not expand the
existing building footprint toward the street / further into the front yard setback. In order for the
property owner to retain use of the accessory unit in its present configuration, a variance is
required to allow the (existing) accessory unit to encroach 4 feet into the front yard setback.
Findings for the subject variance request can be made based upon unique site constraints inherent
with the property. The findings of approval for this variance are related to the non-standard lot
shape and restrictive topography.
The unit is provided with a dedicated parking space and the site maintains the appearance of a
single-family residence, as required by the Municipal Code. The project complies with all
(other) development standards.
Citizen Participation Program: A Citizen Participation Program was submitted and approved
by the Community Development Department for this project.
This approval is based on the following fmdings:
FINDINGS FOR A VARIANCE
STANDARD: Section 30.78.030 of the Encinitas Municipal Code provides that a variance
may be granted only when, based upon the information presented in the application and
during the Public Hearing, all of the following fmdings of fact can be made:
A. A variance from the terms of the zoning regulations shall be granted only when, because of
the special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography,
location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning regulations deprives such
property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning
classification.
Discussion: The property is impacted with a non-standard lot shape and with topographical
constraints which significantly reduce the area of useful building envelope. Although the
subject lot is not substandard in size, its unconventional shape makes the rear area of the
parcel unusable for development. The property is triangular in shape, with the rear of the
site tapering closed. Additionally, in the central area of the lot a topographical drop-off of
approximately 3 feet further restricts the building envelope. The result of these conditions is
that of the total building envelope (i.e. all lot area outside of building setbacks),
approximately 58% is constrained, while just 42% is located on the (upper) buildable
portion of the lot, abutting MacKinnon Avenue. These inherent conditions have defined a
restrictive building envelope, having caused development to be located close to the street
and encroaching into the front yard setback. The existing structure was built under County
development standards and encroaches into the (current) front yard setback by 4 ft. The
CD/JK/g:\Nod\O 1-254MV AR/CDP
-2-
subject accessory unit fills in space under the existing residence, and does not project any
closer to the front property line than the existing building. Therefore the proposed variance
will not appreciably increase the degree of the existing nonconformity.
Because of the existing site conditions, the property owner is not able to enjoy a building
envelope similar to that typical of surrounding properties, which predominantly have
rectangular lots with more standard building envelopes.
The subject land use (accessory unit) is permitted by-right as per Municipal Code Section
30.48.040V.
Conclusion: The Community Development Department fmds that, because of the special
circumstances applicable to the property, including shape & topography, the strict
application of the zoning regulations deprives the subject property of privileges enjoyed by
other properties in the vicinity.
B. Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment
thereby authorized will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which property is situated.
Discussion: An accessory unit is permitted by right in association with a single-family
residence in the subject R11 Zone. The adjustment approved herewith, authorizing a
reduction of front yard setback by 4-ft., or 20% of the required 20 ft. setback, will enable the
subject property to enjoy a building envelope roughly equal to that enjoyed by surrounding
properties which are not constrained by restrictive topography and shape. The triangular
property has a restrictive shape, particularly in the rear yard area, and has topographical
constraints in the form of a drop-off of approximately 3 ft. in the central portion of the lot.
These conditions make the central to rear area of the parcel unusable for development. The
primary building envelope (upper portion of parcel) is approximately 1880 SF in size. This
constitutes an atypically small, restrictive buildable area. This buildable envelope is
occupied almost entirely by the existing single-family residence, which also encroaches into
the existing front yard setback by 4', thus leaving no useful space for even a modest
addition. Only 42% of the technical building envelope (total property minus setback areas,
or approximately 4455 SF) is available for development due to the lot shape and
topography.
Conclusion: The Community Development Department fmds that the granting of the
variance request does not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations
placed upon other properties in the same vicinity and zone, since the approved adjustment
permits the property owner a building envelope more consistent with that of surrounding
properties.
C. A variance will not be granted for a parcel of property which authorizes a use or activity
which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulations governing the parcel
of property. The provisions of this section shall not apply to use permits.
CD/JK/g:\Nod\O 1-254MV AR/CDP
- 3 -
Discussion: The subject use of an accessory unit is permitted by-right as per Municipal
Code Section 30.48.040V.
Conclusion: The Community Development Department finds that the granting of the
variance request will not authorize a use or activity that is not otherwise expressly
authorized by the zoning regulations governing the parcel of property.
D. No variance shall be granted if the inability to enjoy the privilege enjoyed by other property
in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification:
1. Could be avoided by an alternate development plan which would be of less significant
impact to the site and adjacent properties than the project requiring a variance;
2. Is self-induced as a result of an action taken by the property owner or the owner's
predecessor;
3 . Would allow such a degree of variation as to constitute a rezoning or other amendment to
the zoning code;
4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any public or private nuisance.
Discussion: The subject site is constrained with a restrictive building envelope due its non-
standard shape and existing topographical conditions. These conditions have caused the site
to be developed with the existing building close to MacKinnon Avenue and encroaching
into the existing front yard setback by 4 feet. These are inherent site conditions not created
by the property owner or the owner's predecessor. The proposed (existing) accessory unit
land use is permitted by right and is built within the envelope and footprint of the existing
single-family residence, with no further encroachment into the front yard setback. By
utilizing the existing building footprint, the applicant is pursuing the least impactive
development plan for the permitted use. This variance does not constitute a rezoning or
other amendment to the zoning code since this grant of variance is specific to the subject
property and is induced by special circumstances related to lot shape and topography.
Conclusion: The Community Development Department finds that the variance would not
authorize or legalize the maintenance of any public or private nuisance.
FINDINGS FOR A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
STANDARD: Section 30.80.090 of the Municipal Code provides that the authorized agency
must make the following fmdings of fact, based upon the information presented in the
application and during the Public Hearing, in order to approve a coastal development permit:
1. The project is consistent with the certified Local Coastal Program of the City of Encinitas;
and
CD/JK/g:\Nod\O 1-254MV AR/CDP
- 4 -
2. The proposed development conforms with Public Resources Code Section 21000 and
following (CEQA) in that there are no feasible mitigation measures or feasible alternatives
available which would substantially lessen any significant adverse impact that the activity
may have on the environment; and
3. For projects involving development between the sea or other body of water and the nearest
public road, approval shall include a specific fmding that such development is in conformity
with the public access and public recreation policies of Section 30200 et. seq. of the Coastal
Act.
Discussion: Municipal Code Section 30.48.040V permits accessory units in association with
existing single-family residences, provided that the unit does not exceed 750 SF or 30% of
the size of the principal residence, whichever is less. The size of the primary residence is
1446 SF, allowing an accessory unit of up to 433 SF. The subject accessory unit is 432 SF
m SIze.
Related to fmding No.1, the project complies with or is conditioned to comply with the
City's Local Coastal Program and the Municipal Code. Related to finding No.2, no
potentially significant adverse impacts to the environment are associated with the proposed
project, and the project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to
Section 15301(e) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Finding
No.3 is inapplicable since the project is not located between the sea or other body of water
and the nearest public road.
Conclusion: The Community Development Department fmds that 1) the project is
consistent with the certified Local Coastal Program of the City of Encinitas; 2) no
potentially significant adverse impacts to the environment will result and the project is
categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15301(e) of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and 3) finding No.3 is not
applicable to the project since the project site is not located between the sea or other body of
water and the nearest public road.
Environmental Review: The project is determined to be exempt from environmental review
pursuant to Section 15301(e) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines,
which exempts the construction of one single-family residence.
This approval is subject to the following conditions:
SC1 SPECIFIC CONDITIONS:
SC2 This approval will expire on May 31, 2004 at 5 :00 p.m., two years after the approval of this
project, unless the conditions have been met or an extension of time has been approved
pursuant to the Municipal Code.
SC6 This project is conditionally approved as set forth on the application and project drawings
dated received by the City on March 11, 2002 consisting of 5 sheets including Vicinity Map,
CD/JK/g:\Nod\Ol-254MV AR/CDP
- 5 -
Site Plan, Interior Elevations, Floor Plans, Exterior Elevations and MechanicallElectrical
Plans, all designated as approved by the Community Development Director on May 31,
2002 and shall not be altered without express authorization by the Community Development
Department.
G 1 STANDARD CONDITIONS:
CONTACT THE CO~TY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):
G2 This approval may be appealed to the City Council within 15 calendar days from the date of
this approval in accordance with Chapter 1.12 of the Municipal Code.
G5 Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Municipal
Code and all other applicable City regulations in effect at the time of Building Permit
issuance unless specifically waived herein.
G 13 The applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but
not be limited to: Permit and Plan Checking Fees, Water and Sewer Service Fees, School
Fees, Traffic Mitigation Fees, Flood Control Mitigation Fees, Park Mitigation Fees, and Fire
Mitigation/Cost Recovery Fees. Arrangements to pay these fees shall be made prior to
building permit issuance to the satisfaction of the Community Development and
Engineering Services Departments. The applicant is advised to contact the Community
Development Department regarding Park Mitigation Fees, the Engineering Services
Department regarding Flood Control and Traffic Fees, applicable School District(s)
regarding School Fees, the Fire Department regarding Fire Mitigation/Cost Recovery Fees,
and the applicable Utility Departments or Districts regarding Water and/or Sewer Fees.
B 1 BUILDING CONDITION(S):
CONTACT THE ENCINITAS BUILDING DIVISION REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):
A I-hour construction and sound separation between units is required.
B An "as-built" certification from an architect is required for concealed construction.
C Separate heating systems are required for each unit.
B2R The applicant shall submit a complete set of construction plans to the Building Division for
plancheck processing. The submittal shall include a Soils/Geotechnical Report, structural
calculations, and State Energy compliance documentation (Title 24). Construction plans
shall include a site plan, a foundation plan, floor and roof framing plans, floor planes),
section details, exterior elevations, and materials specifications. Submitted plans must show
compliance with the latest adopted editions of the California Building Code (The Uniform
Building Code with California Amendments, the California Mechanical, Electrical and
CDnK/g:\Nod\O 1-254MV ARlCDP
- 6-
Plumbing Codes). These comments are preliminary only. A comprehensive plancheck will
be completed prior to permit issuance and additional technical code requirements may be
identified and changes to the originally submitted plans may be required.
F1 FIRE CONDITIONS:
CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE DEPARTMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):
F13 ADDRESS NUMBERS: Address numbers shall be placed in a location that will allow them to
be clearly visible from the street fronting the structure. The height of the address numbers shall
conform to Fire Department Standards.
E1 ENGINEERING CONDITIONS:
CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):
E2 All City Codes, regulations, and policies in effect at the time of building/grading permit issuance
shall apply.
ES6 In accordance with Chapter 23.36 ofthe Municipal Code, the developer shall execute and record
a covenant with the County Recorder agreeing not to oppose the formation of an assessment
district to fund the installation of right-of-way improvements.
ES7 In accordance with Chapter 23.36 of the Municipal Code, the developer shall execute and record
a covenant with the County Recorder agreeing not to oppose the formation of an assessment
district to fund the undergrounding of utility facility improvements.
ESW1 Best Management Practices shall be utilized for storm water pollution control to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer. The surface run off shall be directed over grass and landscaped areas prior
to collection and discharge onto the street and/or public storm drain system. If pipes are used for
area drainage, inlets shall be located to allow maximum flow distance over grass and non-
erodable landscape area. Grass lined ditches, reinforced with erosion control blankets or rip rap
lined drainage ditches shall be used instead of concrete ditches were feasible. Hardscape areas
and driveways shall be sloped toward grass and landscaped areas. Driveways with a grass or
gravel lined swale in the middle could be used if site topography does not allow discharge of
driveway runoff over landscape areas. Grading plan shall identify all landscape areas designed
for storm water pollution control.
This notice constitutes a decision of the Community Development Department only. Additional
permits, including Building Permits, may be required by the Building Department or other City
Departments. It is the property owner's responsibility to obtain all necessary permits required for
the type of project proposed.
CD/JK/g:\Nod\Ol-254MV AR/CDP
- 7 -
In accordance with the provisions of Municipal Code Section 1.12, this decision may be appealed to
the City Council within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of this determination. The appeal
must be filed, accompanied by a $100.00 filing fee, prior to 4:00 p.m. on the 15th calendar day
following the date of this notice of decision. This decision may not be appealed to the Coastal
Commission.
If you have any questions regarding this determination, please contact Jim Kennedy at the
Community Development Department by telephoning (760) 633-2717.
---r:~ u.)~~~
Patrick Murphy
Community Development Director
CD/JKJg:\Nod\O 1-254MV AR/CDP
- 8 -