1989-25
. . ,.'
.
8 RESOLUTION NO. L-89-25
A RESOLUTION OF THE LEUCADIA
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD TO APPROVE
A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT MODIFICATION
WHICH ALLOWS CERTAIN SPECIFIC
ALTERATIONS TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
(88-105 DR) BUILDING PLANS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES
LOCATED AT 1067 AND 1069 NEPTUNE
(CASE NO. 89-199-DRM)
WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Design Review Permit
Modification was filed by Dean Foster to allow the alteration of
two single family residences, as per Chapter 23.08 of the City of
Encinitas Municipal Code, for the properties located at 1067 and
1069 Neptune Avenue, legally described as:
Lot 18 in Block 6, South Coast Park Unit 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,
8 December 7, 1989 and all persons desiring to be heard were heard;
and
WHEREAS, evidence was submitted and considered to include
without limitation:
1. The previous staff report for 88-105 DR and resolution
of approval;
2. The staff report dated November 29, 1989;
3. The General Plan, Local Coastal Program, Zoning Code and
maps;
4. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing;
5. Written evidence submitted at the hearing;
6. 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"
e JJ/02/CR05-438wp5 (12/13/89/1) Case No. 89-199-DRM
Page 1 of 9
. . "
8 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Leucadia Community
Advisory Board of the city of Encinitas that the Design Review
Permit application is hereby approved subject to the following
conditions:
SEE ATTACHMENT "B"
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of December, 1989, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Locko, Harwood, Kaden, Shur, Eldon
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None ~/
,/
8
8 JJ/02/CR05-438wp5 (12/13/89/1) Case No. 89-199-DRM
Page 2 of 9
.'
8 ATTACHMENT "A"
LEUCADIA COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD
RESOLUTION NO. L-89-25
Findings for a Design Review Permit
(Section 23.08 Municipal Code)
A. The project design is consistent with the General Plan, a
specific Plan or the provisions of this Code.
Evidence to consider: The project is consistent with the
General Plan and the Municipal Code. There is no specif ic
plan applicable to this area.
B. The project design is substantially consistent with the Design
Review Guidelines.
Evidence to consider: What follows is a brief discussion of
the revised project's design as it relates to the City's
adopted design criteria, broken down by section:
1) site Design: The site design is essentially similar to
that previously approved by community Advisory Board.
The revised plans feature only a single site related
8 change; that being the replacement of a deteriorating
fence. This change will have a positive effect on the
project and surrounding properties.
2) Building Design: Interior changes consisting of door and
window redesign will have no significant effect on
surrounding properties and will not significantly alter
the buildings appearance. The same can be said of the
exterior tile and color changes. These changes are seen
to be minor in nature and do not compromise design as
envisioned in the Board's initial approval.
A major concern however is the addition of the dormers.
These dormers tend to create a feeling of greater bulk
and mass rather than to simply break the roof line. The
dormer addition further emphasizes the scale difference
between the project and the surrounding existing
development. Finally, the dormers add an impression of
greater height which further distinguishes this project
from neighboring structures.
The dormer addition is found as not being consistent with
the following Design Review criteria:
8 JJ/02/CR05-438wp5 (12/13/89/1) Case No. 89-199-DRM
Page 3 of 9
8 Section 23.08.076 Requlatorv Conclusions - Buildinq
Desiqn.
A. The project design does not coordinate the
elements of exterior building design, such as color,
materials, form, texture and detailing to create harmony
and continuity among all elements.
B. The project is not harmonious with or is
functionally incompatible with the adjacent property in
one or more of the following aspects:
1. Color scheme;
2. Location of structures on the site;
3. Architectural features or ornaments;
4. Type and quality of exterior materials;
5. Location and use of open spaces.
C. The project design is substantially out of scale
with the predominant scale of structures in the adjacent
neighborhood.
Neighbors have raised the issue of the dormers creating
an increase in the loss of privacy experienced by
adjoining properties. If the board finds this a valid
concern, it may wish to address the following regulatory
8 conclusion:
section 23.08.079 Regulatorv Conclusions - privacv and
Securitv.
A. The project will cause an unreasonable intrusion
on privacy of neighboring properties.
Given the above, the dormer element of the proposed
design modifications is not consistent with the design
review requirements.
3) Landscape Design: The applicant has significantly
altered the previously approved landscaping plans.
Whereas the initial plans called for 26-15 gallon
trees and 4-24" box trees, the new plans call for
6 small palms. The quantity and diversity of shrubs
and ground cover has been reduced to grass and red
apple ice plant. This reduction in plantings is a
contributing factor in the massive, bulky appearance
of the structures. The Leucadia Community Advisory
Board can find no justification for the reduction
in the previously approved plantings.
8 JJ/02/CR05-438wp5 (12/13/89/1) Case No. 89-199-DRM
Page 4 of 9
.'
8 ATTACHMENT "B"
LEUCADIA COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD
RESOLUTION NO. L-89-25
1. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
A. Building and site alterations specifically allowed by the
resolution include the following:
1. Slight color change in exterior stucco.
2. Substitution of blue for black composition shingle
for the roof.
3. Substitution of blue-grey for grey driveway
concrete.
4. Substitution of slate grey for brown terra cotta
entrance tile.
5. The addition of a fireplace in the back unit master
bedroom.
6. The movement of the east wall of the back unit two
8 feet to the east.
7. Modification of eave step detail of the roofs.
8. Changes to the second story of the front unit as
follows:
a. Step detail at top of glass block in stairwell
reversed.
b. Window in master bath water closet smaller and
higher.
c. Window in master bath shower added.
d. Window on east wall of master bedroom deleted.
e. Window boxes on master bedroom north wall
converted to simple windows.
9. Changes to the rear unit first story as follows:
a. Living room french doors and window reversed
traffic flow.
8 JJ/02/CR05-438wp5 (12/13/89/1) Case No. 89-199-DRM
Page 5 of 9
.'
8 10. Changes to the rear unit second story as follows:
a. Den/guestroom window box changed to simple
window.
b. Glass block in stairwell raised up four feet.
c. Bedroom one, east window deleted and two windows
of smaller size placed near ends of well.
d. Master bedroom east wall window box converted to
simple window.
e. Master bathroom windows made smaller and higher
and 1.c. window box deleted.
f. Replacement of the existing fence along the north
and east property lines.
B. This resolution specifically disallows the addition of
two dormers.
C. This resolution specifically prohibits any modification
or alteration of the previously approved landscape plans,
dated May 31, 1988.
8 2. GENERAL CONDITIONS
A. This approval will expire in two years, on December 7,
1991, 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 authorized agency
within 15 calendar 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 applicant 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 and Community Development
8 JJ/02/CR05-438wp5 (12/13/89/1) Case No. 89-199-DRM
Page 6 of 9
.,
. Department shall cause a noticed hearing to be set before
the authorized agency to determine why the city of
Encinitas should not revoke this permit.
F. Upon a showing of compelling public necessity
demonstrated at a noticed hearing,t he 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 similar 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 waiver compliance with
any sections of the zoning Development Code and all other
applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of
Building Permit issuance unless specifically waived here.
. 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 ordinances in effect
at the time of building permit issuance unless
specifically waived here.
K. This approval shall become null and void if building
permits are not issued for this project within two years
from the date of project approval. If the applicant is
not able to obtain building permits due to a growth
management program within the two year period, this
approval may be extended by the Director of Planning and
Community Development to allow for the issuance of
building permits.
L. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
a. Coastal commission
M. Although the zoning Ordinance may define certain building
heights as two story structures, the Uniform Building
Code may define the structure as a three story building
requiring an additional exit or other improvements.
8 JJ/02/CR05-438wp5 (12/13/89/1) Case No. 89-199-DRM
Page 7 of 9
8 project is ~r~ed as ~difi~ as ~i~nced ~ ~e pl~
N.
plan (no date) received bY the c~tY of Enc~n~tas on
~~st 30, ~989 ~d s~n~ ~ a c~ official as ~pr~ed
~ ~e ~c~ia c==i~ ~is~Y Bo~d on Dec~~ 1.
1989 and shall not be altered "ithout Planning and
co-=i~ D~e1~m~t D~~~~t r~i~ a~ ~~~al.
~PLXC~ BOLL oo~~ ~ ~~H~ ~ p~XNG ~ OO~X~~
~~œ~ R~~~G C~L~~~ wUH nB F~~UG ~~n~~S'
3. S1:TE DEVELOP}(EN'r
A. prior to ~ use of ~e project site, all conditions of
approva~ contained herein shall be completed to the
s~isfa~ion of ~e Dire~~ of Pla=i~ ~ c~=iW
Development.
B. For new residential dwelling unit(S) , the applicant shall
p~ d~elo~~ fees ~ ~e est~liwed r~e. such fees
may include, but not be limited to: permit and plan
~e~ing Fees, S~ool Fees, wrter ~d S~er S~vice Fees,
Traffic Fees, Drainage Fees, and park Fees. Arrangements
to p~ ~ese fees ~n ~ paid ~ior to ~ildi~ pe=it
is~a~e as ~~d necess~Y W ~e ~r~riate age~.
. 4. k1\1IDSC1\P1:N~
A. All r~uir~ pl~ti~S ~all be in place ~i~ to use ~
occ~anq of n~ wildi~S or str~~es. All required
p1.antings shaH be maintained in good growing conditions.
aoo ~en~er necess~Y, ~all be replaced wi~ n~ pla~
m~erialS to ~s~e co~i~ed c~1iance wi~ ~lic~le
landscaping, buffering, and screening requirements. All
landscaping shall be maintained in a manner that will not
d~reciate adjace~ pr~er~ values ~ o~e~ise
a~erse~ affe~ adjaC~ pr~erties.
B. The height required for hedges or other dense landscaping
is the height to be attained within 3 years after
planting.
1\PPL1:C]\NT SHALL CONT1\CT THE ENC1:N1:T1\S F1:RE PROTECT1:0N D1:STR1:CT
UG~~NG c~L~~CB W~~R ~B F~L~~~ ~~~~~~s:
5. I.1:R~
A. prior to final recordation, the applicant shall submit
a letter from the Fire District stating that all
d~el~m~t ~a~, pl~ ~e~ ~d/or cost rec~ery fees
8 JJ/02/CR05-438WP5 (12/13/89/1) case No. 89-199-DRM
page 8 of 9
.
8
have been paid or secured to the satisfaction of the
District.
6. STREETS AND SIDEWALKS
A. 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.
7. DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL
A. Concentrated flows across driveways and/or sidewalks
shall not be permitted.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE APPROPRIATE AGENCY REGARDING COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
8. UTILITIES
A. The developer shall comply with all the rules,
regulations and design requirements of the respective
sewer and water agencies regarding services to the
. project.
B. The developer shall be responsible for coordination with
S.D.G. & E., Pacific Telephone, and Cable TV authorities.
C. All proposed utilities within the project shall be
installed underground including existing utilities unless
exempt pursuant to the Municipal Code.
. JJ/02/CR05-438wp5 (12/13/89/1) Case No. 89-199-DRM
Page 9 of 9
-