1994-05
RESOLUTION NO. L-94-05
. A RESOLUTION OF THE LEUCADIA COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD
OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS
APPROVING A VARIANCE
TO ALLOW A 1337 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION
TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM 35% LOT COVERAGE,
ALLOWED IN THE RR-2 ZONE,
BY 4% FOR A TOTAL LOT COVERAGE OF 39%
FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1689 LEORA LANE
(CASE NO. 94-074 V; APN 254-150-09)
WHEREAS, an application for a Variance was filed by Deborah
Holliday pursuant to Chapter 30.78 (Variances) of the City of
Encinitas Municipal Code to allow a 1337 square foot addition to an
existing single family residence to increase the maximum 35% lot
coverage allowed in the RR-2 zone by 4% for a total lot coverage of
39% on property located at 1689 Leora Lane and legally described
. as;
Lot 7, La Cresta Barrio Unit No. 1, in the City of Encinitas,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map
thereof No. 2515, filed in the office of the County Recorder
of San Diego County on October 5, 1948.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted by the Leucadia
Community Advisory Board on July 7, 1994 as required by law, and
all persons desiring to be heard were heard;
WHEREAS, evidence was submitted and considered to include
without limitation:
a. site plan, floor plan, roof plan, building elevations,
consisting of four pages dated May 17, 1994 and dated
received by the City of Encinitas on May 18, 1994
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;
.
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -1-
. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of July 1994 by the following
vote, to wit:
Ayes: Boardmembers Buck, Burkhart, Eldon, Hughes and Suttie
Nays: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
,/)~/~ /.,./ " ,,/ ,,> ß
- ( _L '~.. <::: Y::7 1,/,' " ",/ /./ ..;<"',
I ,//',:c':':,
~. Marilyn Buc~, Chairperson of the
Leucadia Community Advisory Board
ATTEST:
. '. D:::~c ;-<Lan~:ge~J3"
Assistant Planner
.
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -3-
. ATTACHMENT "A"
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE
(SECTION 30.78.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE)
Resolution No. L-94-05
Case No. 94-074 V
Applicant: Deborah Holliday
Findings for a Variance Pursuant to Section 30.78.030 of the
Municipal Code:
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 the same zoning
classification.
Facts: The project is a 1337 square foot, single story
addition to an existing 1241 square foot single family
residence. The variance is requested to allow the project to
. increase the maximum 35% lot coverage allowed in the RR-2 zone
by 4% for a total lot coverage of 39%. The proposed addition
will maintain all required setbacks for the RR-2 zone and is
proposed at the rear of the existing residence. The minimum
lot size for the RR-2 Zone is 21,500 square feet; the subject
site is 8483 square feet.
Discussion: The special circumstance applicable to the
project which warrants the variance is lot size; the subject
site is 8483 square feet which is 40% less than the 21,500
square foot minimum lot size for the RR-2 Zone. A diagram was
submitted as part of the application, which is on file in the
Community Development Department, which depicts the
surrounding properties and lot sizes within a 300 foot radius,
the diagram shows that the site is the smallest non-conforming
lot within the 300 foot radius from the project site. The
average size of the 26 properties in the 300 foot radius is
20,341 which is significantly greater than subject site and
the average size of the 7 adjacent properties is 18,681 square
feet which is also significantly greater than the subject
site. The requested variance to the 39% lot coverage would
equate to a lot size of 9452 square feet with a 35% lot
coverage; the 9452 lot size would still be non-conforming and
very small for the area.
Another special circumstance applicable to the project which
. adds to the need for the variance is that the CC&R's for the
site limits residences to single story. Although the City is
not party to CC&R's, this requirement compounds the lot size
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -4-
constraint since a second story can not be constructed. A
. second story would allow the applicant to construct a home of
the desired size while still maintaining the lot coverage
requirements.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that due to lot size
and the single story restriction of the site, special
circumstances are applicable to the property.
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.
Facts: The project is a 1337 square foot, single story
addition to an existing 1241 square foot single family
residence. The variance is requested to allow the project to
increase the maximum 35% lot coverage allowed in the RR-2 zone
by 4% for a total lot coverage of 39%. The proposed addition
will maintain all required setbacks for the RR-2 zone. The
existing structure does encroach into the required 30' front
yard setback and the required 15' street side yard setback,
however said encroachment is legal nonconforming and will not
be intensified with the project.
. Discussion: A diagram was submitted as part of the
application, which is on file in the Community Development
Department, which depicts the surrounding properties and lot
sizes within a 300 foot radius, the diagram shows that the
site is the smallest non-conforming lot within the 300 foot
radius from the project site. The average size of the 26
properties in the 300 foot radius is 20,341 which is
significantly greater than subject site and the average size
of the 7 adjacent properties is 18,681 square feet which is
also significantly greater than the subject site. A larger
lot size allows the surrounding properties to maintain homes
significantly larger than the subject site while still
maintaining the 35% lot coverage requirement. The other
properties would be able to construct a home similar and
greater in size to the project, approving the variance 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.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Leucadia Community Advisory Board
finds that the approval of the variance does not constitute a
grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations
upon other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which
the property is situated.
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.
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -5-
Facts: The project is a 1337 square foot, single story
. addition to an existing 1241 square foot single family
residence. The variance is requested to allow the project to
increase the maximum 35% lot coverage by 4% for a total lot
coverage of 39%. The site is located within the RR-2 zone in
which single family residences are permitted by right.
Discussion: Approval of the variance would allow the
applicant to construct a single family residence which is
expressly allowed in the RR-2 zone.
Conclusion: Since single family residences are permitted by
right, the Leucadia Community Advisory Board finds that
approval of the variance to allow the project to increase the
lot coverage will not authorize a use or activity which is not
otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulations
governing the parcel of the 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 classifications:
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
. varlance;
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.
Facts: The project is a 1337 square foot, single story
addition to an existing 1241 square foot single family
residence. The variance is requested to allow the project to
increase the maximum 35% lot coverage allowed in the RR-2 zone
by 4% for a total lot coverage of 39%. CC&R's for the subject
property limit construction to single story.
Discussion: An alternate development plan which would allow
the project to meet lot coverage requirements would be a two
story structure. Although this option is not available since
the CC&'s limit the site to single story, a single story
structure is more compatible to the small lot and the
surrounding neighborhood. Another option would be to reduce
the size of the structure. In order to meet the maximum
allowed 35% lot coverage the proj ect would be limited to
. 2969.05 square feet, which is approximately 329 square feet
less than the proposal. The uses requested for the single
family residence; ie. family room, study, living and dining
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -6-
room, three bedrooms and kitchen; and the size of the rooms
. are typical for a standard residence. Reducing the home by
329 would require the elimination of some of the proposed
rooms and would severely affect the floor plan and the
applicant's needs.
The need for the variance is not self-induced since the size
of the subject site and the CC&R's are creating the need for
the variance. The need for the variance is unique to the site
in that the site is the smallest lot in the surrounding area;
the request is for only a 4% increase in lot coverage which
does not constitute a great variation from the standard lot
coverage requirement. Additionally, the variance would not
constitute a rezoning since the variance request is to allow
for the construction of a single family residence which is
expressly allowed for in the RR-2 zone.
Granting of the variance will not authorize or legalize the
maintenance of any public or private nuisance.
Conclusion: Therefore the Leucadia Community Advisory Board
finds that no alternate development plan is possible which
would be less impacting to the site and adjacent properties,
that the need for the variance is not self induced, that the
approval of this variance will not result in a rezoning or a
new lot coverage standard; and the project will not legalize
. the maintenance of any public or private nuisance.
.
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -7-
ATTACHMENT "B"
. RESOLUTION NO. L-94-05
7CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Applicant: Deborah Holliday
Case No. 94-074 V
Subject: Conditions of approval for a variance request to
allow a 1337 square foot addition to an existing
single family residence to increase lot coverage
from 35% to 39% in the RR-2 zone.
Location: 1689 Leora Lane
1. GENERAL CONDITIONS
A. This approval will expire in two years, on July 7, 1996,
at 5:00 p.m. unless the conditions have been met or an
extension has been approved by the Authorized Agency.
B. This approval may be appealed to the Planning Commission
within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval.
C. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with
. any sections of the Zoning Code and all other applicable
City Ordinances in effect at the time of Building Permit
issuance unless specifically waived herein.
D. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted
Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform
Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Uniform Fire Code,
and all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect
at the time of building permit lssuance unless
specifically waived herein.
E. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
California Coastal Commission
F. Project is approved as submitted as evidenced by the site
plan, floor plan, roof plan and building elevations,
consisting of four pages, dated May 17, 1994 and dated
received by the City of Encinitas on May 18,1994; signed
by a City Official as approved by the Leucadia Community
Advisory Board on July 7, 1994 and shall not be altered
without Community Development Department review and
approval.
G. Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to
intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is
. specifically described in this permit.
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -8-
H. Prior to Building Permit Issuance the applicant shall
. sign and record a covenant with the County Recorder which
sets forth this approval.
1. All cost recovery fees associated with the processing of
the subject application shall be paid to the Department
of Community Development prior to building permit
issuance.
J. For residential dwelling unit(s) , the applicant shall pay
development fees for new construction at the established
rate. Such fees may include, but not be limited to:
Permit and Plan Checking Fees, School Fees, Water and
Sewer Service Fees, and Flood Control Fees.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
2. FIRE
A. 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 numbers
shall conform to Fire District Standards.
. B. AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM: The structure shall be
protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system installed
to the satisfaction of the Fire District.
C. REVIEW FEES: Prior to building permit issuance, the
applicant shall submit to the Community Development
Department a letter from the Fire District stating that
all fees including plan check reviews and/or cost
recovery fees have been paid or secured to the
satisfaction of the Fire District.
D. SMOKE DETECTORS: Smoke detectors shall be inspected by
the Fire Department.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
All City Codes, regulations, and policies in effect at the time of
building permit issuance shall apply.
.
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -9-
. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
3. Buildinq:
The applicant shall submit a complete set of construction
plans to the Building Division for review. The submittal
shall include structural calculations and details, complete
framing plans and details, a site plan and floor plan showing
state mandated disabled access requirements, state Energy
compliance documentation and a Soils Report which includes
recommendations for the design of the foundation. Submitted
plans will be reviewed for compliance with state Title 24, the
1991 Editions of the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform
Mechanical Code, the Uniform Plumbing Code and the 1990
Edition of the National Electrical Code. Please note that
project review comments are not intended to be a comprehensive
plan review of applicable Building Codes and additional
comments will be made after plans have been submitted to the
Building Division for plan check.
.
.
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -10-