1990-02
. .
8
RESOLUTION NO. NE 90-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE NEW ENCINITAS
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE
FROM CHAPTER 30.78 VARIANCES, SECTION 30.16.010
RESIDENTIAL ZONES, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
PROPERTY BEING LOT 616 OF VILLAGE PARK UNIT NO. 13,
MAP NO. 7833, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF ENCINITAS,
(COMMONLY KNOWN AS 143 OXBOW LANE, ENCINITAS)
WHEREAS, Carl Winder, applied for a Variance from Chapter
30.78 Variances, and Section 30.16.010 Residential Zones of the
City of Encinitas Zoning Ordinance to allow a room addition to
encroach a maximum of 8 feet into the required 25' rear yard
setback at one corner of the proposed room addition in the R-8
zone, for property located at 143 Oxbow Lane, Encinitas; and
8
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application
89-301-V on February 5, 1990 by the New Encinitas Community
Advisory Board, at which time all persons desiring to be heard
were heard; and,
WHEREAS, evidence was submitted and considered to include
without limitation:
a. Site plan submitted by the applicant dated December 27,
1989;
b. Written information submitted with the application;
c. Oral testimony from staff, applicant, and public made a
part of the record at said public hearing;
d. CAB staff report (89-301-V) dated January 30, 1990 which
is on file in the Department of Planning and Community
Development; and
e. Additional written documentation.
8 LN/CAB13-177wp5
.
8 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the New Encinitas Community
Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that:
A. A variance from the terms of the zoning ordinances 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.
Evidence:
The 9070 square foot lot is considerably larger than the
minimum 5,400 square foot lot required by the R-8 zone.
The lot is irregularly shaped, however, and a typical
square room of even this small size cannot be
accommodated with the diagnonal rear lot line.
Surrounding lots tend to be smaller and a little more
regularly shaped. The familyroom is designed to be added
adjacent to the existing country kitchen. The room
addition could be designed to stay out of the setback,
however, in order for the addition not to block the
8 windows in the existing den and master bedroom, the
square footage would have to be reduced to approximately
200 or 225 square feet. Another option would be to
construct the addition across the back of the structure
adjacent to the kitchen and the den (approximately 10'
x 39') which may produce approximately 390 square feet
of long narrow family room.
It appears that the proposed design is the most logical
and the most usable for the site, however, other options
exist that would not require the variance. Neighboring
property owners spoke in support of the project at the
public hearing. Planting shall be required along the
side lot line south/west of the proposed addition in
order to screen the addition from the neighboring
property on the west.
In conclusion, because of the irregular shape of the lot
and the siting of the existing home on the lot the site
does have special circumstances which would deprive it
of the privilege of adding a standard size family room
in the most logical place according to the existing floor
plan of the house.
8 LN/CAB13-177wp5
I
8
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.
Evidence:
The granting of this variance would not constitute the
granting of special privileges inconsistent with
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and
zone in which the property is located because a
substantial body of evidence has not been submitted to
indicate that the percentage of lot coverage is different
for the subject site as opposed to other lots in the same
vicinity and zone.
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. The provisions of this section
shall not apply to conditional use permits.
8 Evidence:
The granting of this variance would not authorize a use
or activity not expressly authorized by the zoning
regulations governing this property since the use will
be a single family dwelling which is consistent with the
zone.
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
8 LN/CAB13-177wp5
8 4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any
private or public nuisance.
Evidence:
1. The proposed addition will be visible from the
westerly property, however, it would be well
screened from the north and east properties. The
proposed design would be a lesser impact on the
existing house and more usable, however, and with
the additional landscaping required on the west
property line it will be of less impact to the
surrounding properties.
2. The need for the variance is not self-induced
because the irregular shaped lot exists.
3. The granting of the variance would only permit a
single family home as currently allowed and would
not, therefore, constitute a rezoning.
4. There are currently no private or public nuisances
on the site which the zoning would legalize or
authorize.
8
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED THAT the application for Variance for 89-
301-V is hereby APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Fire Department: Prior to approval of the variance the
applicant shall submit a letter from the fire district
stating that all project review fees have been paid.
2. Additional planting shall be placed on the westerly
property line to help screen the addition from the
adjoining property to the west.
48 LN/CAB13-177wp5
L I
..
8 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of March, 1990, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Grajek, Beck, Quinn, and Patton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: White
ABSTAIN: None
~ ~
ANNE PATTON, Vice-Chairman of
the New Encinitas Community
Advisory Board
ATTEST:
. LIND S. NILES
Associate Planner
" LN/CAB13-177wp5
L