Loading...
1989-09 RESOLUTION NO. 89-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE LEUCADIA 8 COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A SECOND FLOOR ADDITION AND REMODEL A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 1031 NEPTUNE AVENUE (CASE NO. 89-065-V) WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance was filed by Jack B. Quick to allow the construction of a second floor addition and remodeling, as per Chapter 30.78 of the City of Encinitas Municipal/Zoning Codes, for the property located at 1031 Neptune Avenue, legally described as: Lot 14 in Block 7 of South coast Park No. 2, in the County of San Diego, state of California, according to map thereof No. 1859 filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, september 21, 1925. WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application, May 11, 1989 and all persons desiring to be heard were heard; and WHEREAS, evidence was submitted and considered to include without limitation: 1. The staff report dated May 4, 1989; 8 2. The proposed General Plan, Local Coastal Program, Zoning Code and maps; 3. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing; 4. written evidence submitted at the hearing; 5. Documentation and site plans submitted by the applicant; and WHEREAS, the Leucadia Community Advisory Board made the required findings pursuant to Section 30.78 of the zoning Code (See Attachment "A"). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Leucadia community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that the Variance Application is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: (1) The project as submitted is approved and shall not be altered without City approval. (2) The owner(s) shall submit proof of Coastal Commission approval prior to issuance of a Building Permit. (3) A licensed surveyor or civil engineer shall verify the height of the structure at the time of framing inspection to certify that the height shall conform tit to approved plans. COjO2/CRO4-218wp5 1(2-8-89-1) CASE NO. 89-065-V 8 (4) The developer shall execute and record a covenant for the benefit of the City with the County Recorder agreeing not to oppose the formation of an assessment district to fund the installation of right-of-way improvements. (5) No obstructions shall be permitted within the public right-of-way to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. (6) Construction plans must clearly show if lower level is a basement or a story based on definitions in section 403 and 420 of the Building Code. A second exit is required from the 3rd level if it is determined to be a 3rd story. (7) If required by the city Fire Department, a fire sprinkler system shall be installed per NFPA 13 D and Encinitas Fire Ordinance specifications. (8) Owner(s) shall enter into a covenant waiving any claims of liability against the City and agree(s) to indemnify and hold harmless the City and City Employees relative to the approved project. This covenant is applicable to any bluff failure and erosion resulting from the development project. 8 1. GENERAL CONDITIONS A. This approval will expire on May 11, 1991 after the approval of this project unless the conditions have been met or an extension has been approved by the Authorized Agency. B. This approval may be appealed to the authorized agent within 10 days from the date of this approval. C. At all times during the effective period of this permit, the applicant shall obtain and maintain in valid force and effect, each and every license and permit required by a governmental agency for the operation of the authorized activity. D. At no time during the effective period of this permit shall the appl icant be delinquent in the payment of taxes or other lawful assessments relating to the property which is the subject of this permit. E. In the event that any of the conditions of this permit are not satisfied, the Planning Department shall cause a noticed hearing to be sent before the authorized agency to determine why the City of C~2/CRO4-218WP5 2(2-8-89-1) CASE NO. 89-065-V 8 Encinitas should not revoke this permit. F. Upon a showing of compelling public necessity demonstrated at a noticed hearing, the City of Encinitas, acting through the authorized agency, may add, amend, or delete conditions and regulations contained in this permit. G. Nothing in this permit shall relieve the applicant from complying with the conditions and regulations generally imposed upon activities similarly in nature to the activity authorized by this permit. H. Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is specifically described in this permit. I. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Zoning Development Code and all other applicable city Ordinances in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. J. 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 8 ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance. K. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within one year from the date of project approval. L. Project is approved as submitted/modified and shall not be altered without Planning and Community Development Department review and approval. APPLICANT S HAIJ.. CONTACT THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT A. Building identification and/or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identification and/or addresses shall contrast with their background color. 3. EXISTING STRUCTURE 8 A. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building code for CO/02/CRO4-218wp53(2-8-89-1) CASE NO. 89-065-V property line clearances considering use, area and fire resistance of existing buildings. 8 B. Existing building(s) shall be made to comply with current building and zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be demolished with appropriate permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 4. STREETS AND SIDEWALKS A. All damaged off-site public works facilities, including parkway trees, shall be repaired or replaced prior to exoneration of bonds and improvements, to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. B. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-way, a right-of-way construction permit shall be obtained from the Public Works office and appropriate fees paid, in addition to any other permits required. C. Developer shall execute and record covenant with the County Recorder agreeing not to oppose the formation of an assessment district to fund the installation of 8 right-of-way improvements. D. In Irrevocable Offer of Dedication (I.O.D.) shall be amde for 10 feet along Neptune adjacent to the property for public right of way purposes. Neptune is classified as a local street requiring a 60 foot right of way or 30 feet from the official centerline of such street. E. An Irrevocable Offer of Dedication shall be made for 10 feet along Diana Street adjacent to the property for road purposes. Diana Street is classified as a local street requiring a 60 foot right of way or 30 feet from centerline. CO~2/CRO4-218WP5 4(2-8-89-1) PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of May, 1989, by the 8 following vote, to wit: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: ~ e..cJ2 craig Olson Assistant Planner 8 8 COjO2jCRO4-218wp5 5(2-8-89-1) CASE NO. 89-065-V ATI'ACHMENT II A II 8 LEUCADIA COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 89-09 Findings for a Variance (Section 30.78.030 Municipal Code) 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 to Consider: The lot has an irregular shape due to the curve in Diana Street which results in only a 34.4 foot street frontage on Neptune Avenue whereas most of the other properties have 50 to 53 foot frontages. The rear property line is only 21 feet while the neighboring lots have 41 to 50 foot rear boundaries. The Diana Street side of the property 8 curves to follow the street to a maximum of about 55 feet. Since the property is longer and narrower than most of the lots in the neighborhood, the side yard setbacks from Diana Street drastically reduce the buildable area. The site, being located on the corner, subjects the site to not only the front yard setback but the exterior side yard setback which is at least five feet larger than the normal interior yard setback. 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 to Consider: Other properties in the vicinity and in the same zone have the right to build second floor additions which in most cases could be and, where already built, generally are as large or larger than the applicant, if he receives the var1.ance, would be permitted to build. C. A variance will not be granted for a parcel of property P~2/CRO2-51WP (5/16/88) CASE NO. 89-065-V C. A variance will not be granted for a parcel of property 8 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. Evidence to Consider: The variance, if granted to the applicant, would not authorize a use or activity not already expressly permitted by the zoning Code. 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; 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 8 private or public nuisance. Evidence to Consider: 1. The property is already fully developed and, given the other setback requirements, there is no where else on the site to expand. 2. The original residence was built over 35 years ago. Self-induced action by the property owner or the owner's predecessor is highly unlikely. 3. The variance would not constitute a rezone. 4. The variance would permit an interior and exterior remodeling of the property which is currently well- maintained and would not, therefore, legalize or authorize the maintenance of any private or public nuisance. pJ2/CRO2-51WP (5/16/88)