Loading...
1988-51 - RESOLUTION NO. OE - 51 A RESOLUTION OF THE OLD ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD CITY OF ENCINITAS, APPROVING A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT, VARIANCE, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR TWO BLUFFTOP ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES LOCATED AT 430 NEPTUNE (CASE NUMBER 88-270 DR/EIA AND 88-318V) WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Design Review Permit, Variance, from required interior side yard setbacks and Environmental Assessment was filed by Dominy Cecil Associates to allow the construction of 2 bluff top attached single-family homes for the property located at 430 Neptune Avenue, legally described as; A portion of Lot 6 in Block "c" of Seaside Gardens, according to the map thereof, No. 1800, and a portion of Lot "B" of Seaside Bluff, according to the map thereof, No. 1276 filed in the office of the Recorder. WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on October 20, 1988; and WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board considered: 1. The Environmental Initial Assessment form completed by staff and the Negative Declaration prepared; and 2. The geologic investigation report dated January 6, 1988 submitted with the application; and 3. The project model presented at the public hearing; and 4. The staff report dated September 28, 1988; and 5. The applications, site plans, and statement of justification submitted by the applicant; and CC/02/CRO5-176wp 1(11-16-88-2) 6. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing; and 7. Written evidence submitted at the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board found that the project will have no significant adverse impacts on the environment with the incorporation of the mitigation measures contained in the Negative Declaration for the project and subject to the conditions of approval listed below, and that the findings contained in attachment "A" can be made in this instance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Design Review application 88-270 DR and Variance Application 88-318V and the associated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact 88-270 EIA are hereby approved subject to the following conditions contained in Attachment "B". PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of October, 1988, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Couglar, Hano, Kauflin, Stayaert, Tobias NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Harry Cougl ,Chairman of Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board ATTEST: ~ ¿ --, /., - ,/ r->------ I ' . /-£-.~.-/\.A. ~-f:: / .-- -.6. Tom Curriden . Assistant Planner CCj02jCRO5-176wp 2(11-16-88-2) -- ATTACHMENT II A II OLD ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION NO. OE-51 CASE NO. 88-270DR Findings For Design Review (Section 23.08.076 Municipal Code) 23.08.072 Requlatorv Conclusions - Generally. A. The project design is inconsistent with the General Plan, a Specific Plan or the provisions of this Code. Evidence to Consider: The proposed duplex is consistent with both the present RV-ll zoning of the property and the Residential 8-11 dujacre designation on the Land Use Policy Map of the City's Draft General Plan. B. The project design is substantially inconsistent with the Design Review Guidelines. Evidence to Consider: The proposal preserves some significant views enjoyed by nearby properties to the full extent practical, reflects a high quality of design appearance, takes into consideration the privacy of occupants, preserves significant existing landscape, and otherwise substantially conforms with the City's adopted design criteria. C. The project would adversely affect the health, safety or general welfare of the community. Evidence to Consider: The applicant has submitted investigation reports within which a licensed engineering geologist states that the structure will not be subject to or contribute to bluff failure within its anticipated 75 year lifetime. Water and sewer services will be provided to the property, and there has been no other provided evidence to suggest that the project would adversely effect public health, safety, or welfare. D. The project would tend to cause the surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance or value. CC/02/CRO5-176wp 3(11-16-88-2) - Evidence to Consider: The proposal reflects a high quality of design appearance and thus will not be materially detrimental to surrounding properties. E. That the project is compatible in structural size (bulk and mass) to adjacent properties and neighborhood; F. There is reasonable probability that the land use and design proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered or studied since the proposed General Plan is consistent with the currently adopted General Plan. G. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted General Plan if the proposed design is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, since the project is allowed by the proposed General Plan. 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 evidence submitted indicates that nearly all of the bluff top lots in three block vicinity of the subject property are of the 40 ft. width typical to the Seaside Gardens subdivision. The single family homes and duplexes which are built on these lots thus enj oy a 30ft. wide building envelope once the interior side yard setbacks are observed. The variance would allow the subject homes to be a maximum 25 ft. and 24.5 ft. wide respectively, as opposed to the 19.6 and 20 ft. widths allowable without the variance. B. Any variance granted shall be subj ect 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: The fact that the subject property is comprised of two 30 ft. wide legal lots makes them atypical of other bluff top lots and thus granting a CC/02/CRO5-176wp 4(11-16-88-2) variance would not be a "grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties" in the same vicinity and zone. C. A variance will not be granted for a parcel of property which authorizes a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly 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: Use of the lots for single family residential development is authorized under City zoning regulations. 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 private or public nuisance. Evidence to Consider: (1) The "privilege enjoyed by other property in the vicinity", namely a building envelope wider than 20 ft., cannot be attained by an alternate development plan;. (2) The inability to enjoy the wider envelope typical of the area is primarily the result of the original subdivision design and the fact that the property straddles the boundary of two older subdivisions, not the result of an action of the applicant or applicant's predecessor;. (3) The proposed variance would not authorize such a degree of variation as to constitute a rezoning or amendment to the zoning code; (4) The proposed variance would not authorize or legalize the maintenance of any private or public nuisance. CC/02/CRO5-176wp 5(11-16-88-2) ATTACHMENT II B II RESOLUTION NO. OE-51 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Subject: Design Review for 2 attached bluff top single family homes Applicant: Dominy Cecil Associates Location: 430 Neptune Avenue Case No.: 88-270 DR CITY OF ENCINITAS 1. GENERAL CONDITIONS A. A Coastal Permit or finding of exemption must be obtained from the California Coastal Commission prior to building permit issuance. B. Prior to final occupancy, the City shall be provided a waiver agreement by the property owner and appl icant of all claims against the City for future liability or damage resulting from permission to build. All such waivers shall be acknowledged and recorded in the Office of the County Recorder. C. Prior to final occupancy, the owner shall provide the City with a satisfactory recordable easement granting access to any beach areas which are presently accessible to the public and which may be blocked as a result of this development. This condition is to be fulfilled to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. D. Prior to final occupancy, the owner shall provide the City with a recorded covenant precluding any construction of any structure on the bluff face or at the toe of the bluff or within any area between the top of the bluff and that distance as specified in development regulations. E. No new structures, walls, or other facilities shall be allowed on the face of a bluff. (Exceptions may be granted for emergency situations as determined by the Community Development Director). F. Nothing in this permit shall relieve the applicant from complying with the conditions and regulations CC/02/CRO5-176wp 6(11-16-88-2) CASE NO. 88-270 DR generally imposed upon activities similar in nature to the activity authorized by this permit; G. Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is specifically described in this permit; and H. 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. I. The appl icant 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. J. 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. K. Prior to issuing a final inspection on framing, the applicant shall provide a survey from a civil engineer verifying the building height is in compliance with the design review permit. L. Project is approved as modified and shall not be altered without Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board review and approval. M. Any damage caused to existing public facilities shall be repaired "in kind" to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department prior to final occupancy. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT A. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all conditions of approval shall be submitted to and found satisfactorily by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. B. Prior to any use of the project site or bus iness activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval contained herein shall be completed to the CC/02/CRO5-176wp 7(11-16-88-2) CASE NO. 88-270 DR satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. C. For new residential dwelling unites), the applicant shall pay development fees 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, Traffic Fees, Drainage Fees, and Park Fees. Arrangements to pay these fees shall be made prior to building permit issuance. D. Building elevations materials and color are approved as submitted, subject to the following modifications: i. That the east elevation of the northerly building over the garage have some relief in the stucco and that the corner windows be enlarged and carried around further along the east (front) wall. E. 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's employees relative to the approved project. This covenant is applicable to any bluff failure and erosion resulting from the development project. F. That a plan be submitted for approval by the Director of Planning and Community Development and the Encinitas Fire Protection District regarding the treatment of the site during the construction phase, and the circulation and parking of construction workers' vehicles and any heavy equipment needed for the construction of the project. 3. LANDSCAPING A. The landscape plan shall meet the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, Grading Ordinance and off street Parking Design Manual and is approved as submitted subject to the following modifications: i. An alternative species be substituted for the proposed Melaleuca in the parkway area. B. All required plantings shall be in place prior to use or occupancy of new buildings or structures. All required plantings shall be maintained in good growing conditions, and whenever necessary, shall be replaced with new plant materials to ensure continued compliance with applicable landscaping, buffering, and screening requirements. All landscaping shall be maintained in a manner that will not depreciate CCj02jCRO5-176wp 8(11-16-88-2) CASE NO. 88-270 DR adjacent property values and otherwise adversely affect adjacent properties. C. The landscaping shall be well maintained at all times. D. The conventional irrigation system shall be replaced with the drip system at the westerly half of the property. E. No irrigation or vegetation shall be installed on or adjacent to the bluff face. F. The ivy shall be replaced with suitable drought- tolerant plant material. G. Landscaping shall be maintained in such a way so view corridors are not blocked. 4. GRADING A. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Grading Ordinance. B. No grading, scraping, or removal of vegetation shall be allowed on a bluff face or within 40 feet of the top edge of a bluff. C. No grading, or removal or deposit of material shall take place except pursuant to a grading permit issued by the City Engineer in connection with a building permit; or where no structure is involved; or pursuant to an application to the Community Development Department, that has been approved by the Director, to do minor grading, where no grading permit is required. D. The grading plan shall incorporate drainage provisions into site development to prevent run-off from gaining access to the bluffs and shall be constructed so as to allow drainage to the street. E. A soils/geological/hydraulic report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work to be found satisfactory by the City Engineer prior to building permit issuance. F. The final grading plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department and shall be completed prior to recordation of the final subdivision map or issuance of building permit, whichever comes first. CC/02/CRO5-176wp 9(11-16-88-2) CASE NO. 88-270 DR 5. DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL A. A drainage system capable of handling and disposing of all surface water originating within the subdivision, and all surface waters that may flow onto the subdivision from adjacent lands, shall be required. Said drainage system shall include any easements and structures as required by the Director of Public Works to properly handle the drainage. B. The applicant shall submit a drainage study showing surface flows on the property and the impact, if any, on adjacent properties. CC/02/CRO5-176wp 10(11-16-88-2)