1992-11
RESOLUTION NO. L-92-11
. A RESOLUTION OF THE LEUCADIA
COHHUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE REQUEST
TO ALLOW AN AS-BUILT DECK AND STAIRWAY
TO ENCROACH A MAXIMUM OF 4'-6" INTO THE REQUIRED
FIVE FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
1349 - 1351 NEPTUNE AVENUE
(CASE NO. 92-092 V)
WHEREAS, Isabel Griffin applied for a variance in accordance
with Chapter 30.78 (Variances) to allow an as-built deck and
stairway to encroach a maximum of 4'-6" into the required 5 foot
side yard setback as required pursuant to section 30.60.010.A.8 of
the City of Encinitas Municipal Code; for property located at 1349
and 1351 Neptune Avenue, and legally described as follows:
Lot 24, Block 2, South Coast Park #4, according to Map No.
. 2049 filed in the Office of the County Recorder July 26,1927,
San Diego County.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on application No. 92-
092 V on July 9, 1992 by the Leucadia 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, Floor Plan and Elevations dated 5/17/92 and
received by the City of Encinitas on 5/21/92.
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. Leucadia CAB staff report, 92-092 V, dated July 2, 1992
which is on file in the Department of Community
Development; and
e. Additional written documentation.
. DL/**/CM19-2821wp51 (7/21/92-1)-1-
WHEREAS, the Leucadia Community Advisory Board made the
.
following findings pursuant to Chapter 30.78, of the Encinitas
Municipal Code:
SEE ATTACHMENT "A"
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Leucadia Community
Advisory Board that Variance application No. 92-092 V is hereby
approved subject to the following conditions:
SEE ATTACHMENT "B"
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Leucadia Community Advisory
Board of the City of Encinitas that:
This project was found to be exempt from environmental review
under Section 15305, Class 5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of July 1992, by the following
vote to wit:
. AYES: Boardmembers Allen, Cameron, Eldon, Buck and Fahlberg
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
.
~n, ~
Melissa Allen,
Chairperson of the Leucadia
Community Advisory Board
of the City of Encinitas
ATTEST:
- I '
/
/" ~ "
"" A" !." ¡"Tt::',;- J '¿., \', ¿;, ( L ,
Diane S. Langag~ , \
Assistant Planner/
. DL/**/CM19-2821wp51 (7/21/92-1)-2-
. ATTACHMENT "A"
RESOLUTION NO. L-92-11
Findings for Approval of a
Variance to the Side Yard Setback
Pursuant to Section 30.78.030 of the Municipal Code
TO ALLOW AN AS-BUILT DECK AND STAIRWAY
TO ENCROACH A MAXIMUM OF 4'-6" INTO THE REQUIRED
FIVE FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK
Findinqs for a Variance Pursuant to Section 30.78.030 of the
Kunicipal 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 proposal is to allow an as-built deck and stairway
to encroach a maximum of 4'-6" feet into the required 5 foot
side yard setback. The length of the encroachment is
approximately 58 feet. The lot size is approximately 6000
. square feet with dimensions of approximately 50' x 120' which
is typical for lots on Neptune Avenue. As evidenced on the
County Assessor Residential Building Record, the existing
duplex and entry deck was legally constructed in 1972 through
the County of San Diego. In 1991, upon construction of the
single family residence to the north, it was discovered that
the fence of the subject property was encroaching on the
adjacent property to the north. It then became apparent that
the existing duplex had actually been sited 2 feet farther to
the north than had been depicted on the building permit plans;
whereby the existing entry deck encroaches into the side yard
setback currently required by a maximum of 4'-6" and 2 extra
feet were gained on the south side of the property.
Discussion: The applicant contends that special circumstances
are applicable to this project since the duplex, including the
deck and stairway, was unintentionally sited incorrectly on
the site when originally constructed in 1972. The applicant
has submitted photographs of the structure during the latter
phase of construction, which shows the deck as-built today.
Additionally, the photos depict the temporary construction
fence on the south side of the property located incorrectly.
The photographs are evidence to show that the deck was
constructed as it exists today as part of the original
construction which was done with required building permits,
. DL/**/CM19-2821wp51 (7/21/92-1)-3-
and to show that the encroachment results from the fact that
. the entire project was sited incorrectly.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that special
circumstances are applicable to the project since the deck and
stairway was constructed with the understanding that it was in
compliance with all County codes in effect at the time of
construction in 1972, and a requirement for removal would
result in an undue hardship on the property owner.
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 proposal is to allow an as-built deck and entry
stairway for an existing duplex, which was constructed with
building permits in 1972, to encroach a maximum of 4'-6" into
the required 5' side yard setback. The main structure
maintains a setback of approximately 5'-3".
Discussion: Upon construction of the residence to the north
of the subject site, it became apparent that the duplex,
including the deck and entry stairway, on 1349-1351 Neptune
Avenue had been sited incorrectly two feet to the north. The
. structure has been in place approximately 20 years. The
variance would allow for the continued use of the deck and
stairway which is an integral part of the proj ect design.
Open air decks are found on many of the structures on Neptune
Avenue.
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. In addition, since the requirement
for this variance is the result of an unusual set of
circumstances in that construction of the deck occurred 20
years ago and was considered to be constructed with legally
issued County of San Diego Building Permits, the grant of this
variance should not be considered setting a precedence for
other side yard encroachment requests.
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
the property.
Facts: The proposal is to allow an as-built deck and entry
stairway for an existing duplex, which was constructed with
. DL/**/CM19-2821WP51 (7/21/92-1)-4-
building permits in 1972, to encroach a maximum of 4'-6" into
4IÞ the required 5' side yard setback.
Discussion: The deck and entry stairway are accessory to the
existing duplex which is the primary residential use on the
lot. Duplexes are allowed in the R-11 zone, however based on
the 11.0 du/ac maximum density allowed in the R-11 zone the
6,000 square foot lot can only accommodate one unit under
present standards. Accordingly the duplex is considered legal
non-conforming. Approval of the variance is not considered an
intensification of the density non-conformity since no new
units are being created and no physical changes will result.
Conclusion: Therefore the Leucadia Community Advisory Board
finds that approval of the deck and stairway encroachment will
not result in any change in residential use on the property
and approval of the variance will not intensify the legal non-
conforming density on 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
4IÞ adj~cent properties than the project requiring a
var1anCe¡
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 proposal is to allow an as-built deck and stairway
to encroach a maximum of 4'-6" feet into the required 5 foot
side yard setback. The length of the encroachment is
approximately 58 feet. The lot size is approximately 6000
square feet with dimensions of approximately 50' x 120' which
is typical for lots on Neptune Avenue. As evidenced on the
County Assessor Residential Building Record, the existing
duplex and entry deck was legally constructed in 1972 through
the County of San Diego. In 1991, upon construction of the
single family residence to the north, it was discovered that
the fence of the subject property was encroaching on the
adjacent property to the north. It then became apparent that
the existing duplex had actually been sited 2 feet farther to
the north than had been depicted on the building permit plans;
4IÞ DL/**/CM19-2821wp51 (7/21/92-1)-5-
. whereby the existing entry deck encroached into the required
side yard setback by a maximum of 4'-6" and whereby 2 extra
feet were gained on the south side of the property.
Discussion: An alternate development plan of removing the
portions of the deck and stairway which encroach into the
required side yard setback would negate the need for the
Variance. This would result in the removal of approximately
77 square feet of the deck along the south side in order that
a three foot setback be maintained with a maximum horizontal
projection of six feet and would also result in the relocation
of the stairway so that a five foot setback is maintained.
Reducing the deck size and relocating the stairway would
impact the existing design and would reduce the usable outdoor
space for the tenants of the existing duplex. The variance
request is not self-induced since the need for the variance is
the result of unintentional error in the siting of the project
which occurred in 1972. The need for the variance is unique
to the subject property due to the property line error and
would not result in a new side yard setback standard or
legalize the maintenance of a private or public 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, and that
. the approval of this variance will not result in a side yard
setback standard or legalize the maintenance of any public or
private nuisance.
. DL/**/CM19-2821wp51 (7/21/92-1)-6-
. ATTACHMENT "B"
RESOLUTION NO. L-92-11
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Applicant: Isabel Griffin
Case No. 92-092 V
Subject: Conditions of approval for a variance to allow an
as-built deck and stairway to encroach a maximum of
4'-6" into the required five foot side yard setback
in the R-11 zone.
Location: 1349 - 1351 Neptune Avenue
I. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
If, for any reason, new materials are required for 50% of the
entire deck and stairway for repair and/or reconstruction, the
deck and stairway shall be brought into compliance with the
required side yard setback pursuant to the City of Encinitas
Municipal Code.
II. STANDARD CONDITIONS
. 1. GENERAL CONDITIONS
A. This approval will expire in one year, on July 9,
1993, 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
here.
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 issuance unless specifically waived here.
. DL/**/CM19-2821wp51 (7/21/92-1)-7-
. 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, and building elevations
dated May 19, 1992 and dated received by the City
of Encinitas on May 21, 1992 (consisting of two
sheets), and signed by a City Official as approved
by the Leucadia Community Advisory Board on July 9,
1992, 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.
H. Within thirty days from the date of approval, the
applicant shall record a covenant with the County
Recorder which sets forth the conditions of this
approval.
I. 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.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
REGARDING COKPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
2. FIRE
A. ADDRESS NUMBERS: Address numbers shall be clearly
visible from the street fronting the structure.
The height of numbers shall conform to Fire
District Standards. Where structures are located
off a roadway on long driveways, a monument marker
shall be placed at the entrance where the driveway
intersects the main roadway. Permanent numbers
shall be affixed to this marker.
B. RECORDATION: Prior to development approval, the
applicant shall submit to the Planning Department a
letter from the Fire District stating that all
development impact, plan check and/or cost recovery
fees have been paid or secured to the satisfaction
of the Fire District.
. DL/**/CM19-2821WP51 (7 /21/92-1) -8-
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REGARDING
. COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
3. STREET CONDITIONS
Developer shall execute and record a covenant with the
County Recorder agreeing not to oppose the formation of
an assessment district to fund the installation of right-
of-way improvements.
.
. DL/**/CM19-2821wp51 (7/21/92-1)-9-