2007-30
RESOLUTION NO. PC 2007-30
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT, A MAJOR USE
PERMIT, AND A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
A MIXED-USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 9 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS
AND 6 COMMERCIAL-USE CONDOMINIUM SUITES FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1528 NORTH COAST HIGHWAY 101
(CASE NO. 06-159 DRMOD/MUP/CDP; APN 254-054-01-53)
WHEREAS, a request for a Modification to a Design Review Permit, a Major Use Permit,
and a 'Coastal Development Permit was filed by Western Pacific Homes, Inc. for the development of
a mixed-use project generally consisting of nine (9) residential condominium units, comprising
1O,976square feet of gross building floor area; and six (6) commercial-use condominium suites,
comprising 8,808 square feet of gross building floor area, on a 0.54-acre development site in
accordance with Chapters 23.08,30.74, and 30.80 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, for the property
located within the Commercial Residential Mixed 1 (N-CRM-1) zone of the North 101 Corridor
Specific Plan area and located within the City's Local Coastal Zone, legally described as:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "A")
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing of the
application on June 7, 2007 and October 18; 2007 at which time all those desiring to be heard were
heard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered, without limitation:
1. The June 7, 2007; July 19, 2007; and October 18, 2007 agenda reports to the
Planning Commission with their respective attachments;
2. The General Plan, Local Coastal Program, North lOJ Corridor Specific Plan,
Municipal Code, and associated Land Use Maps;
3. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing;
4. Written evidence submitted at the hearing;
5. Project drawings consisting of (22) sheets of architectural drawings labeled as Cover
Sheet (C 1.0), Arch. Site Plan (SP 1.0), Arch. Site Plan (SP 2.0), Landscape Plan (1.,
1.0), Landscape Plan (1., 2.0), Office/Retail Floor Plans (A 1.0), Office/Retail Floor
Plans (A 1.1), Unit A & B Floor Plans (A 2.0), Unit A & B Roof Plans (A 2.1), Unit
C & G Floor Plans (A 3.0), Unit C & G Roof Plans (A 3.1), Unit D, E & F Floor
Plal)s (A 4.0), Unit D, E & F Roof Plans (A 4.1), Unit H & J Floor Plans (A 5.0),
Unit H & J Roof Plans (A 5.1), Building Sections (A 6.0), Com. Build. Elevations
(EL 1.0), Com. Build. Elevations (EL 2.0), Unit A & B Elevations (EL 3.0),
Residential North and South Elevations (EL 4.0), Residential East & West
Elevations (EL 5.0) - stamped received by the City of Encinitas September 6, 2007;
(3) sheets of preliminary grading plans - stamped received by the City of Encinitas
March 6, 2007, and the project colored elevations and color/materials exhibits
presented at the public hearing; and
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159 .2007 -30
- 1 -
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following findings pursuant to Chapters
23.08,30.74, and 30.80 ofthe Encinitas Municipal Code:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "B")
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Encinitas hereby approves application Case No. 06-159 DRMOD/MUP/CDP subject to the
following conditions:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "C")
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission, in its independent judgment, has
determined the project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the provisions of Section
15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, which provides an
exemption for qualifying "In-Fill Development Projects" and subject to a determination of the
following findings:
· The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and zoning regulations.
· The project occurs within the City limits on a site of no more than 5 acres and substantially
surrounded by urban uses.
· The project site has no value as habit for any endangered, rare, or threatened species.
· Approval of the project will not result in any significant effects to traffic, noise, air quality or
water quality.
· The project site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of October, 2007 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chapo, Felker, Steyaert, McCabe, Van Slyke
NAYS: none
ABSENT: none
ABSTAIN: none
L
. A~~ . /7'
...---/.....-- ~~
/<r7"""'-
P~trick Murphy
Secretary
NOTE: This action is subject to Chapter 1.04 of the Municipal Code, which specifies time limits
for legal challenges.
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159 .2007 -30
- 2 -
ATTACHMENT "A"
Resolution No. PC 2006-55
Case No. 06-159 DRMODIMUP/CDP
The following described property is located within the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, and
State of California:
LOTS 1 AND 16 IN BLOCK 28 OF NORTH LEUCADIA, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF
NO. 524, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO
COUNTY, APRIL 6, 1888. ALSO, ALL THAT PORTION OF THE ALLEY IN SAID
BLOCK 28 LYING ALONG SAID LOTS 1 AND 16 ALL TOGETHER WITH THAT
. PORTION OF THE EASTERLY HALF OF FLORA AVENUE, LYING WESTERLY OF
AND ADJOINING SAID LOT 16, AND ALSO ALL THAT PORTION OF THE
SOUTHERLY HALF OF MYRTLE STREET LYING NORTHERLY OF AND ADJOINING
SAID PORTION OF SAID FLORA AVENUE AND SAID ALLEY IN SAID BLOCK 28,
SAID PORTIONS OF SAID ALLEY. FLORA AVENUE AND MYRTLE STREET
HAVING BEEN CLOSED TO PUBLIC USE ON NOVEMBER 19, 1915, BY AN ORDER
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, A CERTIFIED COPY OF
SAID ORDER HAVING BEEN RECORDED ON DECEMBER 26, 1916, IN BOOK 500,
PAGE 343 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF SAN DIGO COUNTY.
EXCEPTING FROM SAID LOT 1 AND SOUTHERLY HALF OF MYRTLE STREET, THE
NORTHEASTERLY 40 FEET THEREOF AS CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA FOR A RIGHT OF WAY FOR STATE HIGHWAY BY DEED DATED MAY
13, 1933, AND RECORDED IN BOOK 224, PAGE 5 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO.
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159 .2007 -30
- 3 -
ATTACHMENT "B"
Resolution No. PC 2007-30
Case No. 06-159 DRMODIMUP/CDP
FINDINGS FOR DESIGN REVIEW
STANDARD: Section 23.08.080 of the Encinitas Municipal Code provides that an application
for a design review permit must be granted unless, based upon the information presented in
the application and during the Public Hearing, the authorized agency makes any of the
following regulatory conclusions:
1. The project design is inconsistent with the General Plan, a Specific Plan, or the provisions of
the Municipal Code.
Facts: The proposed project consists of certain modifications to an existing approved
Design Review permit for the modification of building design and building architecture for
the subject mixed-use development consisting of nine (9) residential condominium units and
six (6) commercial suite condominium units on a 0.54-acre development site. There are no
changes to the approved number of residential units and commercial suites. The proposed
project also includes incidental increases in building floor area and a modification in side
yard setback along the southerly property line for the residential units. The approved project
consists of 8,000 square feet of residential floor area and 8,000 square feet of commercial
floor area, and the proposed project consists of 10,976 square feet of residential-use gross
building floor area, 8,808 square feet of commercial-use gross building floor area. The
proposed amount of residential use gross building floor area represents 55.5% of the
project's total gross building floor area and exceeds a 50% threshold whereby a request for a
Major Use (MUP) Permit is proposed under the provisions of Section 3.1.2.DA.bA of the
North 101 Corridor Specific Plan ("Specific Plan"). In comparison to the existing approved
design, the proposed building setback for the residential buildings along the southerly
property line is proposed to be reduced from 10 feet to zero feet. However, the proposed
modifications to the commercial building would retain a zero setback along the southerly
property line the same as the current approval. A zero side yard setback is permissible
within the subject N-CRM-1 zone. Additional on-site improvements include an increase in
parking facilities such that the previously approved Minor Use Permit (MIN) for a
residential-use sharing of two (2) commercial-use parking spaces in no longer proposed as
part of the project. In addition, the proposed project includes an upgrade to 2-car sized
garages for each residential unit, utility areas, and various decorative and enhanced open
space areas. A waiver of a commercial loading space was granted as part of the approval of
the original project design and is proposed to be maintained under the same assumptions for
insignificant loading space requirements generated by the project. A mixed-use
development consisting of multiple family dwelling units and commercial uses is a
permitted use within the N-CRM-1 zone. The project is subject to the Design
Recommendations of the Specific Plan.
Discussion: The project as proposed will comply with all applicable development standards
of the Municipal Code and the effective Specific Plan related to density and intensity of
development, parking area and parking facilities, building height, setbacks, lot coverage,
floor area ratio, landscaping, drainage control and storm-water cleansing. In addition, the
project would be required to comply with all applicable Building and Fire codes through the
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159.2007-30
-4-
standard plan checking process. With approval of the requested MUP, the project will be
consistent with the General Plan and the provisions of the Municipal Code.
Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds that the project design is consistent with the
General Plan and the provisions of the Municipal Code.
2. The project design is substantially inconsistent with the Design Review Guidelines.
Facts: The project is located within the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan. The Specific
Plan regulations include Design Recommendations specifically for mixed-use projects
and consisting of criteria for architectural treatment and site planning. Accordingly, the
Specific Plan design criteria are the effective design regulations for the proposed project.
Discussion: The proposed modifications to building architecture are consistent with the
highly encouraged architectural design elements specified within the Specific Plan. The
project design includes significant wall articulation, the use of a variety of natural materials
for wall finishes, a variety of roof forms and the use of multi-planed roofs representing full
roof treatments, and outdoor plazas and courtyards incorporating a use of enhanced
hardscape materials and accentuating landscape materials. The project achieves the desired
building scale with a traditional type of commercial storefront fronting NCH 101 and the
commercial building reflects a transitioning building height, which steps back from the
NCH 101 street frontage from first floor to third floor. In this manner, the project's
commercial building character is consistent with the encouraged design for a pedestrian and
village scale. With regard to site design, the project is consistent with the key elements
encouraging a commercial-use street frontage and a shared-use driveway for street access.
Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds that the project is substantially consistent with
the applicable Design Review criteria.
3. The project would adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community.
Facts: The proposed mixed-use project is conditioned to comply with all applicable codes
and standards related to its on-site construction and occupancy and its off-site interface with
the surrounding areas. All public utilities and services are in place to serve the proposed
use. In addition, the project qualifies for a categorical exemption from environmental
review under the provisions of Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) guidelines and thereby would have no potential for any significant effects upon the
environment.
Discussion: The design of the proposed project conforms to the applicable development
standards and zoning limitations related to lot area, lot width, lot dimension, building and
structural setbacks, floor area ratio, lot coverage, building and structural he~ght, landscaping,
and parking area and parking facilities. Adequate facilities exist or are available as new
services to the project site to serve the project. Accordingly, the project would have no
adverse affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community.
Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds that the project will not adversely affect the
health, safety or general welfare of the community.
4. The project would cause the surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in
appearance or value.
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159.2007 -30
- 5 -
Facts: The proposed mixed-use project is conditioned to comply with all applicable codes
and standards related to its on-site construCtion and occupancy and its off-site interface with
\
the surrounding areas. The proposed project conforms to the applicable design criteria and
meets or exceeds all applicable development standards, including setbacks, building height,
lot coverage, and provision of parking spaces. The scale and physical form of the proposed
project conforms to the applicable design and development standards of the Specific Plan.
Discussion: Conformance with the applicable development standards, construction codes
and regulations, and design criteria are the standards by which the quality of new
development may be measured. The project's conformance with the applicable
development standards and design criteria would attest to its design quality and its positive
integration into the neighborhood area. In addition, no evidence has been submitted or
discovered that would suggest that the proposed project will cause any material depreciation
in appearance or value of the surrounding neighborhood.
Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds that the project will not cause the surrounding
neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance or value.
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159 .2007- 30
- 6 -
FINDINGS FOR A USE PERMIT
STANDARD: In accordance with Section 30.74.070 of the Municipal Code, a use permit
application shall be approved unless fmdings of fact are made, based upon the information
presented in the application or during the hearing, which support one or more of the
following conclusions:
1. The location, size, design or operating characteristics of the proposed project will be
incompatible with or will adversely affect or will be materially detrimental to adjacent uses,
residences, buildings, structures or natural resources, with consideration given to, but not
limited to:
a. The inadequacy of public facilities, services and utilities to serve the proposed
project;
b. The unsuitability ofthe site for the type and intensity of use or development which is
proposed; and
c. The harmful effect, if any, upon environmental quality and natural resources of the
city;
Facts: Under the provisions of Section 3.1.2.DA.bA of the North 101 Corridor Specific
Plan ("Specific Plan"), a mixed-use development within the N-CRM-1 zone having a
residential use that exceeds 50% of the gross building floor area requires the approval of a
Major Use Permit (MUP). The existing approved project consists of 8,000 square feet of
residential floor area and 8,000 square feet of commercial floor area, and the proposed
project consists of 10,976 square feet .of residential-use gross building floor area, 8,808
square feet of commercial-use gross building floor area. The proposed residential use area
represents 55.5% of the project's total gross building floor area and exceeds the 50%
threshold whereby a request for a Major Use (MUP) Permit is required under the provisions
of the Specific Plan. There are no proposed changes to the number of residential
condominium units or commercial suite units, which will remain at nine (9) units and six (6)
suite units respectively. The proposed project conforms to the applicable development
regulations for the Specific Plan pertaining to mixed-use design criteria and the project
meets or exceeds all applicable development standards, including setbacks, building height,
lot coverage, and provision of parking spaces.
Discussion: The project's composition of residential-use floor area in excess of the 50%
gross building floor area threshold is contained within building areas that conform to the
applicable development standards and zoning limitations for lot area, lot width, lot
dimension, building and structural setbacks, floor area ratio, lot coverage, building and
structural height, landscaping, and parking area and parking facilities. The relative increases
in residential and commercial floor areas and the amount of residential floor area that
exceeds 50% ofthe gross building floor area does not diminish the project's character as a
mixed-use development consistent with the land use provisions of the Specific Plan. In
addition, the proposal does not reduce the project's provision of any necessary facilities or
Jhe provision of qualitative amenities in the form of enclosed parking garages for each
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159.2007-30
- 7 -
residential unit and the outdoor areas consisting of approximately of 4,639 square feet of
qualifying landscape and hardscape improvements and exceeding the minimum 10% area of
1,775 square feet applicable to the project site. The project qualifies for a categorical
exemption from environmental review under the provisions of Section 15332 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines
Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds that the proposed project will be compatible
with, and would not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to, adjacent uses,
buildings, structures, or natural resources.
2. The impacts of the proposed project will adversely affect the policies of the Encinitas
General Plan or the provisions of the Municipal Code; and
3. The project fails to comply with any other regulations, conditions, or policies imposed by
the Municipal Code.
Facts: The conclusions of the project review and the environmental review conducted for
the project have determined conformance with the applicable development standards and no
potential for significant effects to the environment.
Discussion: The proposed mixed-use development complies with all applicable policies of
the General Plan and provisions of the Municipal Code. The proposed project would
comply with all applicable development standards related to density and intensity of
development, parking area and parking facilities, building height, setbacks, lot coverage,
floor area ratio, landscaping, drainage control and storm-water cleansing. The project is
conditioned to comply with all applicable Building and Fire codes through the standard plan
checking process. In addition, exceeding 50% gross building floor area with residential
floor area is acceptable in this case due to the project's ability to provide for the total floor
area at no expense or diminishment in meeting and exceeding the applicable development
standards and conformation with the applicable design criteria for the Specific Plan area.
Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds that the proposed mixed-use development will
not adversely affect the policies of the General Plan or Municipal Code and that the
proposed project will comply with all applicable regulations, conditions, and policies
imposed by the Municipal Code.
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159 .2007 -30
- 8 -
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
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 finding that such development is in conformity
with the public access and public recreation policies of Section 30200 et. seq. of the Coastal
Act.
Facts: The proposed mixed-use development complies with all applicable policies of the
General Plan and provisions of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan and the Municipal
Code. As designed, the project would comply with all applicable development standards
related to density and intensity of development, parking area and parking facilities, building
height, setbacks, lot coverage, floor area ratio, landscaping, drainage control and storm-
water cleansing. In addition, the project would be required to comply with all applicable
Building and Fire codes through the standard plan checking process. All public utilities and
services are in place to serve the existing use. The project qualifies for a categorical
exemption from environmental review under the provisions of Section 15332 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines and thereby would have no
potential for any significant effects upon the environment.
Discussion: Related to finding No.1, with the approval of the Tentative Map, Major Use
Permit, and Design Review Permit applications associated with the proposed project; the
project would comply with all applicable provisions, regulations, and policies of the City's
Municipal Code, General Plan and certified Local Coastal Program. Related to finding No.
2, the project will not result in any significant environmental impacts and is categorically
exempt from environmental review. Finding No.3 is not applicable since the project is not
located between the sea or other body of water and the nearest public road.
Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds that 1) the project is consistent with the
certified Local Coastal program of the City of Encinitas; 2) the project would not have a
significant effect on the environment, and 3) finding No.3 is not applicable to the project
since it is not located between the sea or other body of water and the nearest public road,
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159.2007-30
- 9 -
ATTACHMENT "C"
Resolution No. PC 2007-30
Case No. 06-159 DRMODIMUP/CDP
Applicant:
Western Pacific Homes, Inc.
Location:
1528 NCH 101 (APN 254-054-53)
SC1 SPECIFIC CONDITIONS:
SCA All of the conditions specified within Resolution No. PC 2005-16 shall remain in effective
to this project, unless specifically modified herein, and with the exception that Conditions
SCJ, SCK, SCN, and SCP are deleted and the following conditions are added to the
approved project.
SCB This project approval shall expire in accordance with the expiration date specified within
Condition SC3 of Resolution No. PC 2005-16.
SCC Prior to approval of the Tentative Map or the issuance of any building or grading permits,
the developer shall provide the easement deed for the private road easement along the
northerly property boundary to substantiate the right to construct the proposed
improvements within the easement.
SCD It appears that the proposed retaining wall along the northerly property boundary could fall
within a utility easement to SDGE and could possibly interfere with the use of that
easement. Prior to approval of the Tentative Map or the issuance of any building or grading
permits, the developer shall obtain from a letter SDGE referencing the proposed site plan
and indicating that the construction ofthe proposed improvements is not prohibited.
SCE It appears that construction of the proposed improvements will occur beneath the existing
overhead utilities that cross the property from south to north, an area where a utility
easement to SDGE is likely to exist. Prior to approval of the Tentative Map or the issuance
of any building or grading permits, the developer shall obtain a letter from SDGE
referencing the proposed site plan and indicating that the construction of the proposed
improvements is not prohibited.
SCF Since a portion of the access driveway is elevated above the adjacent grade, the proposed
masonry retaining wall shall be constructed a minimum one foot above the driveway grade.
A hand rail shall be constructed on top of the wall for pedestrian safety.
SCG Overhead utilities exist through the property and along the property boundary on Edgeburt
Drive. The developer shall be responsible for the undergrounding the overhead utilities
running through the property only. The developer shall be responsible for any necessary
offsite transition to the adjacent overhead utilities, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159 .2007 -30
- 10 -
SCH Natural treatment ofthe storm water runoff has not been provided. The applicant shall treat
all of the runoff from proposed hardsurface areas in StorrnFilter (by Contech Storm Water
Solutions) or equal systems in lieu of providing natural treatment for the runoff. The storm
water treatment system shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and
approved prior to issuance of a grading or a building permit for the project and prior to
recordation of the Final Map.
SCI The developer proposes offsite construction of retaining walls to jog around the existing
utility poles. The developer will be required to obtain permission from the neighboring
property for offsite work and an easement for the maintenance of the walls prior to issuance
of any grading or building permit and prior to recordation of the Final Map.
SCJ The proposed trash enclosure shall be installed on a raised pad and covered in order to
prevent any storm water runoff from draining into the enclosure. A drain shall be installed
within the trash enclosure to capture the wastewater from within the enclosure and discharge
it to the sanitary sewer system.
SCK As shown on the Tentative Map, the proposed storm water detention vault shall be located
entirely within the private property.
SCL . Vehicular access to the satisfaction of the City Engineer shall be provided for direct
servicing of the cleanouts for the proposed detention vault. An approved service access
shall be shown on the grading plan prior to issuance of a grading or building permit for the
project .and prior to recordation of the Final Map.
SCM The runoff from the site does not seem to be properly routed through the detention vault.
The developer shall provide additional drainage systems to ensure that all.ofthe runoff from
the site will be routed through the detention vault. The detention and drainage systems shall
be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and approved prior to issuance of any
grading or building permit for the project and prior to recordation of the Final Map.
SCN ACCESS ROADWAY DIMENSIONS: Fire apparatus access roadways shall have an
unobstructed paved width of not less than 24 feet until the beginning of the east end the
parking garage, at which point the access drive may be reduced to 20 feet. The
unobstructed paved width shall be measured curb line to curb line, or edge-of-pavement
to edge-of-pavement where no curbs are proposed. An unobstructed vertical clearance of
not less than 13 feet 6 inches shall also be provided. Access roads shall be designed and
maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus. Minimum design load is
65,000 lbs.
SCO Prior to the approval of the Final Map, the CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the
Engineer Services Department and the Planning and Building Department to ensure the
contents address the occupancy requirements and limitations expressed within the contents
of project approval.
G:\Resolutions\RPC06-159.2007-30
- 11 -
SCP Street trees shall be planted across the project frontage and within the adjoining street right-
of-way for North Coast Highway 101. The street trees shall be planted in unit sizes and at a
spacing interval as prescribed by Municipal Section 30.20.010.G.6. The final selection of
the street trees species and the final location of the street tree plantings shall be approved by
the City Engineer and the Planning and Building Director. The planting and irrigation
. details for the street tree improvements shall be shown on the project grading plans or the
public improvement plan as determined by the City Engineer. A standard Encroachment
Maintenance and Removal Covenant shall be executed by property owner of the project site
and recorded against the project site property.
G1 STANDARD CONDITIONS:
CONTACT THE PLANNING AND BUILDING 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.
DESIGN REVIEW
DR1 Any future modifications to the approved project will be reviewed relative to the findings
for substantial conformance with a design review permit contained in Section 23.08.140 of
the Municipal Code. Modifications beyond the scope described therein may require
submittal of an amendment to the design review permit and approval by the authorized
agency.
F1 FIRE CONDITIONS:
CONTACT THE ENCINIT AS FIRE DEPARTMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH
THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):
F5 GRADE: The gradient for a fire apparatus roadway shall not exceed 20.0%. Grades
exceeding 15.0% (incline or decline) shall not be permitted without mitigation. Minimal
mitigation shall be the installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems appropriate' to the
structures and uses served. The angle of departure and angle of approach of a fire access
roadway shall not exceed 7%.
F6 GATES: All gates or other structures or devices, which could obstruct fire access
roadways or otherwise hinder emergency operations, are prohibited unless they meet
standards approved by the Fire Department. All automatic gates across fire access
roadways shall be equipped with approved emergency key operated switches overriding
all command functions and opening the gate(s). Gates accessing four (4) or more
residences or residential lots, or gates accessing hazardous, institutional, educational, or
assembly occupancy group structures shall also be equipped with approved emergency
traffic control activating strobe light sensor(s) which will activate the gate on the
approach of emergency apparatus. All automatic gates must. meet Fire Department
requirements for rapid, reliable access.
G:\Reso1utions\RPC06-159.2007-30
- 12 -
F7 RESPONSE MAPS: Any development that by virtue of new structures necessitates fire
hydrants, roadways, or similar features, shall be required to provide a map in a format
compatible with current Department mapping services, and shall be charged a reasonable
fee for updating all Fire Department response maps.
F9 POSTING OR STRIPING ROADWAYS "NO PARKING FIRE LANE": Fire
Department access roadways, when required, shall be properly identified as per Fire
Department standards.
F10 OBSTRUCTION OF ROADWAYS DURING CONSTRUCTION: All roadways shall
be a minimum of 24 feet in width during construction and shall be maintained clear,
including the parking of vehicles, in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code and the
Encinitas Fire Department.
F19 WET STANDPIPE SYSTEM: A Class I combined wet standpipe system with 2W' brass
outlets with 1 W' brass adapters is required. The standpipe system shall be designed and
installed per NFP A 14 and Encinitas Fire Department requirements.
E1 ENGINEERING CONDITIONS:
CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S):
EB1: Underground Basement/ Garage Conditions
EB2 This project proposes construction of an underground garage. The drainage for the garage
access ramp shall be designed to intercept all runoff and ensure that no stormwater may
enter the garage. The system to drain wastewater from the garage shall be connected to the
sewer system.
EB3 The developer shall design and have approved the shoring and construction dewatering
systems necessary for the construction of the underground garage prior to issuance of any
grading permit for the project.
EB4 No permanent dewatering system shall be allowed for the underground garage. The
underground garage shall be designed to withstand the hydrostatic pressure without any
dewatering.
EB5 If temporary shoring with tie-backs will be utilized for construction of the basement
garage, the tie-backs could potentially encroach into the public right-of-way. If tie-backs
within the public right-of-way are proposed, the applicant shall meet the following
requirements:
a. A permanent encroachment permit shall be obtained with a minimum of $1
million liability insurance.
G:\Reso1utions\RPC06-159.2007-30
- 13 -
b. The tie-backs shall be placed a minimum of 5 feet below the lowest public
utilities and a minimum of 10 feet below the finished surface elevation at the
property line;
c. All the existing utilities within the public right-of-way shall be potholed by the
developer and the actual location shall be shown on the proposed grading and
improvement plans.
d. Shoring sheet piles, soldier beams, and lagging shall be within the private
property and shall not encroach into the public right-of-way.
e. A structural calculation shall be submitted for temporary shoring for Engineering
review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit.
f. If phased construction is proposed for the grading and shoring operation, the
phasing sequence shall be shown on the grading plan.
g. An adequate performance bond shall be provided for the grading and shoring.
The engineer's cost estimate for the purpose of bonding shall also include an item
for the complete backfill of the excavated basement area.
h. Grading and building permits shall be processed concurrently. No grading permit
will be issued unless the building plan check is complete and the project is ready
for building permit issuance.
EU1 Utilities
EU5 The owner shall be responsible for the relocation and undergrounding of existing public.
utilities, as required.
G:\Reso1utions\RPC06-159 .2007 -30
.. 14 -