Loading...
1995-01 RESOLUTION NO. NE-9S-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE . NEW ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD DENYING A V ARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW A PORTION OF A PROPOSED 609 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY UNIT TO ENCROACH TO WITHIN 20 FEET OF THE REAR YARD PROPERTY LINE AND TO EXCEED BY APPROXIMATELY 180 SQUARE FEET THE 30% OF THE LIVABLE AREA OF THE PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE STANDARD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 146 FIVE CROWNS WAY (CASE NUMBER 95-035 V; APN: 259-520-38) WHEREAS, an application for consideration of a Variance request was filed by Alphonso Hernandez to allow for the construction of a 609 square foot attached Accessory Unit; a portion of which will encroach five feet into the 25-foot Rear Yard Setback (Municipal Code Section 30.16.01OA 10) and will exceed the 30% of the principal residence square footage standard (Municipal Code Section 30.48.040W 3) by approximately 180 square feet for property located at 146 Five Crowns Way, and legally described as; LOT 609 OF VILLAGE PARK UNIT NO. 13, IN THE CITY OF ENCINITAS, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 7833, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, ON DECEMBER 27, 1973. . WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted by the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board on March 21, 1995 and all those desiring to speak, did speak; and WHEREAS, the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board considered, without limitation: 1. The Agenda Report for the March 21, 1995 meeting; 2. The General Plan, Zoning Code and associated Land Use Maps; 3. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing by staff, by the applicant and by the public; 4. Written evidence submitted with the application and at the public hearing; and 5. The application, plans and supporting material dated received by the City on February 15, 1995. Said plans consisting of 1 sheet of the Site Plan, the Floor Plan and the Elevation Plan; and a second sheet showing the site plan in relation to surrounding property. . cdlcrola: 101rs9S03S.nel(3-21-95) WHEREAS, the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board made the following findings for denial of the Variance application request without prejudice to redesign pursuant to Section . 30.78.030 of the Encinitas Municipal (Zoning) Code: Findings Pursuant to Section 30.78.030 of the Municipal (Zoning) Code Related to Variances A. A Variance from the terms of the zoning ordinance 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 ordinance deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. Facts: The application requests a Variance to encroach 5 feet into the 25-foot Rear Yard Setback and to exceed the 30 % of the size of the principal residence standard by 180 square feet for a 609 square foot Accessory Unit to an existing single family residence. Discussion: Although the applicant contends that special circumstances exist on the property to warrant Variance approval (Le.: the additions to the neighboring homes which encroach to within approximately 10 and 15 feet of the common rear yard lot line, that the principal structure dictates the location of the Accessory Unit, and that a breezeway separation between the principal residence and the Accessory Unit is necessary due to the Floor Plan of the principal residence), the Board found that the property's size exceeds the 5,400 square foot standard for the R-8 Zoning District, no . constraints are present related to shape or topography on the property that would exclude an alternate design which would not require Variance approval, and that the applicant could redesign the project to conform to development standards of the R-8 Zone and could enjoy the benefits of an addition to the existing residence as do other property owners in the neighborhood and under the identical zoning classification. The Board found that exceeding the 30 % square footage standard of the principal residence by 180 square feet equates to 42 % of the principal residence and would provide the applicant with a significant benefit over other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification who would design similar project to conform with Municipal (Zoning) Code Development Standards. Conclusion: Therefore, the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board finds that no special circumstances are applicable to the property which would warrant Variance approval or exclude the property owner from redesigning the project in conformance with applicable development standards of the R-8 Zoning district. 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 vicinity and zone in which such property is situated. Facts: Variance approval would allow for a portion of a proposed Accessory Unit to encroach 5 feet into the 25-foot Rear Yard Setback (to within twenty feet of the rear yard . property line) and for the size of the Accessory Unit to exceed the 30% of the living area cdIcrola: 1 OIrs95O35 .Del (3-21-95) I of the principal residence by approximately 180 square feet. Accessory Units are permitted by right on parcels zoned for residential single family dwellings. . Discussion: The property is located within the R-8 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Since the R-8 Zoning District permits Accessory Units as accessory structures to single family residences, no conditions would be necessary to assure that the Variance would not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. Conclusion: Therefore, the New Encinitas Board fmds that no special conditions would be necessary to assure that the adjustment would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated since Accessory Units are a permitted use in the R-8 District. However, the Board did find that no special circumstances exist on or surrounding the property to grant the Rear Yard Setback encroachment or an Accessory Unit that exceeds the square foot limitation established by the Municipal Code. 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 regulation governing the parcel of property. Facts: The requested Variance would have allowed for a portion of a proposed Accessory Unit to encroach 5 feet into the 25-foot Rear Yard Setback (to within twenty feet of the rear yard property line) and for the size of the Accessory Unit to exceed the 30% of the living area of the principal residence by approximately 180 square feet. . Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 30.48.040W, Accessory Units are permitted by right on parcels zoned for residential single family dwellings. Discussion: The project proposes the development of an Accessory Unit which is permitted by right on parcels zoned for single family residential use. Conclusion: Therefore, the New Encinitas Board finds that the requested Variance would not have authorized a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulation 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; or . 4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any private or public nuisance. cdIcrola: 1 0/rs95O35 .nel(3-21-95) Facts: The project conforms in all aspects with the development standards of the R-8 Zoning District and all other applicable standards required by the Municipal Code except for the five foot encroachment into the 25-foot Rear Yard Setback and the 180 square . foot increase over the 1130% of the livable area of the principal residence II standard of the Municipal Code. Discussion: An alternative design that would not require Variance approval is practical for this property since no special circumstances are evident on the property that would prohibit the owner from redesigning the project to conform to (or lessen) the extent of the Variance requested. If the 25-footRear Yard Setback were to be maintained, the size of the Accessory Unit could be reduced by approximately 155 square feet which would still exceed the 1'30% of the livable area of the principal residence standardll. This excessive amount of Variance to the Municipal Code standard was found by the Board to be unwarranted based upon the information received in the application request and during the public hearing. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that an alternative development plan would be practical and is warranted since no specicial circumstances exsist to warrant Variance approval and the Variance could be avoided by an alternate development plan that would not pose any impacts on adjacent neighbors. The Variance is found to be self-induced due to the fact that no special circumstances exist on the lot or on surrounding property to warrant the Variance request. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Variance request (Case No. 95-035) is hereby denied based upon the preceding findings and that the Board does not prejudice the re- . design of the project and consideration of potential Variances which may be associated with such are-design. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of March, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Beck, Weinstein, Van Reusen, Edde, Felker NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None t£.~ New Encinitas Community Advisory Board, City of Encinitas ATTEST: /\ . ~~e.~ Craig R. Olson, Assistant Planner cdIcrola: 101rs95O35 .nel(3-21-95)