Loading...
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-