1994-06
RESOLUTION NO. OE-94-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE
OLD ENCINITAS COKKUNITY ADVISORY BOARD
OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS
APPROVING A DESIGN REVIEW AND VARIANCE APPLICATION
TO ALLOW A PROPOSED 865 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION
TO ONE UNIT OF AN EXISTING TRIPLEX
AND TO ALLOW
THE ADDITION TO ENCROACH FIVE FEET
INTO THE REQUIRED 15 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK
FOR A TOTAL SETBACK OF TEN FEET;
FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 306 W. "I" STREET
(CASE NO. 94-131 DR/V; APN 258-172-09)
WHEREAS, an application for a Design Review Permit and
Variance was filed by Clay and Tawn Babcock pursuant to Chapter
23.08 (Design Review). and Chapter 30.78 (Variances) of the City of
Encinitas Municipal Code to allow a proposed 865 square foot
addition to one unit of an existing triplex and to allow the
addition to encroach five feet into the required 15 foot front yard
setback for a total setback of ten feet on property located at 306
w. "I" street and legally described as;
Lot 8, Block 33 of Encinitas, in the City of Encinitas, County
of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof
No. 148, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, June l2, 1883.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted by the Old Encinitas
Community Advisory Board on October 20 and November 17, 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. Project Plans including site Plan, Floor Plans, Building
Elevations, and Roof Plan, consisting of four sheets,
dated August 12,1994 and dated received August 18,1994
cd/DSL/ROE94l3l.406 -1-
by the City of Encinitas; and Landscape Plan consisting
of one sheet and dated received by the City of Encinitas
on November 4, 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;
d. Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board agenda reports
(94-131 DR/V) for the meetings of October 20, and
November l7, 1994; which are on file in the Department of
Community Development;
e. Additional written documentation.
WHEREAS, the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board made the
following findings pursuant to Chapter 30.78 (Variances) and
Chapter 23.08 (Design Review) of the Municipal Code:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "A")
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Old Encinitas Community
Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that Design Review and
Variance application No. 94-131 DR/V is hereby approved subject to
the following conditions:
(SEE ATTACHMENT" B")
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory
Board of the City of Encinitas that:
This project was found to be exempt from environmental
review under Section 15301, class l(e) (1) of the State
CEQA Guidelines.
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -2-
PASSED AND ADOPTED this l7th day of November 1994 by the
following vote, to wit:
Ayes: Boardmembers Birnbaum, Harden and Pearce
Nays: None
Absent: Boardmembers Wells and Comeau
Abstain: None
~~ l
. ~\~ --
Adam Birnbaum, Chairperson of the
Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board
ATTEST:
~/~ 6 '~W
Diane S. Langager
Assistant Planner
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -3-
ATTACHMENT "A"
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT
(CHAPTER 23.08 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE)
TO ALLOW A PROPOSED 865 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION
TO ONE UNIT OF AN EXISTING TRIPLEX AND
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE
(SECTION 30.78.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE)
TO ALLOW THE ADDITION TO ENCROACH FIVE FEET
INTO THE REQUIRED 15' FRONT YARD SETBACK
FOR A TOTAL SETBACK OF TEN FEET
Resolution No. OE-94-06
Case No. 94-131 DR/V
Applicant: Clay and Tawn Babcock
Findinqs for a Variance Pursuant to section 30.78.030 of the
Municioal 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 865 square foot, two story addition
to one unit of an existing triplex. The variance is requested
to allow the project to encroach five feet into the required
fifteen foot front yard setback of the DR-25 zone for a total
front yard setback of ten feet. The addition is proposed for
Unit 2 which is located on the first floor and is the most
easterly unit. On the first floor the project includes
converting an existing bedroom into a study and adding a
living room; a second story is also proposed which includes a
master bedroom and master bath.
In July, 1986 a building permit was issued on the subject site
to convert an existing duplex into a triplex; final occupancy
for the triplex was authorized in October, 1987. At the time
of building permit issuance, the site was zoned RU-29 by the
County of San Diego which allowed multiple units at a maximum
density of 29 units per net acre. Based on the maximum
density of 29 units per acre, the 5000 square foot site was
allowed three units. Additionally, at the time of permit
issuance, County zoning required a 50 foot front yard setback
as measured from the centerline of right-of-way, which for the
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -4-
subject site is 10 feet from the edge of right-of-way and
which is the setback maintained by the existing structure.
The site was rezoned to R-25 upon adoption of the City's
General Plan and Land Use Designation Map in March, 1989. The
new zone classification allowed a maximum of 25 units per net
acre, which based on the 5000 square foot lot allowed only two
units. Consequently, the subject triplex became legal
nonconforming. The required front yard setback for the R-25
zone is 20 feet, therefore the 10 foot existing setback of the
site also became legal nonconforming.
The subject site is located within the boundaries of the
Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan (DESP) which was adopted on
February 9,1994. The DESP designates the subject site as DR-
25, which allows a maximum of 25 units per net acre, and which
requires a front yard setback of l5 feet. Based on the DESP
the site is still considered legal nonconforming in terms of
density and setback. Nonconforming uses within the DESP area
are allowed to expand. Pursuant to Section 11.4 of the DESP,
structures which maintain nonconforming uses are allowed to
expand so long as the nonconforming use does not "increase in
its inconsistency with the allowances" of the Specific Plan.
Any expansion is required to comply with required development
standards.
The applicant contends that the special circumstance
applicable to the site, to warrant a variance, is related to
the character and development in the immediate neighborhood.
The applicant provided evidence showing that sixteen
properties in the immediately adjoining blocks maintain 10
foot setbacks over a substantial portion of their frontages.
Additionally, the applicant contends that to accommodate the
applicant's needs the 10 foot setback is necessary.
Discussion: Special circumstances are applicable to the site
since the site was subject to modified zoning, including a
specific plan, which created more stringent setback
regulations. Additionally, a new methodology for measuring
front yard setbacks was adopted; the County of San Diego
measured front yard setbacks from the centerline of right-of-
way and the City of Encinitas measures front yard setbacks
from the edge of public right-of-way. The change in
methodology resulted in the change of actual setback from
property line.
The existence of improvements on the site at the one story
area, which is proposed to be used as foundation for the
project, was constructed at a 10' setback. The construction
was done with reliance that, in the future, the structure
could be utilized to support a second story. Additionally,
there are other properties in the area which were developed
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -5-
with a lO' front yard setback; approval of the variance grants
privilege to the subject property which is enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning
classification.
Conclusion: The Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board finds
that .due to the change in developm~nt standards, which
resulted with adoption of the Encinitas Zoning Ordinance and
subsequently with adoption of the Downtown Encinitas Specific
Plan, special circumstances are applicable to the property
which by the strict application of the zoning regulations
would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by
other property in the vicinity and under the same zoning
classification.
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 865 square foot addition to one unit
of an existing triplex and the variance is requested to allow
the addition to encroach five feet into the required 15 foot
front yard setback for a total setback of ten feet.
Based on the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan (DESP) the site
is considered legal nonconforming in terms of density and
setback. Nonconforming uses within the DESP area are allowed
to expand. Pursuant to Section 11.4 of the DESP, structures
which maintain nonconforming uses are allowed to expand so
long as the nonconforming use does not" increase in its
inconsistency with the allowances" of the Specific Plan. Any
expansion is required to comply with required development
standards.
The applicant provided evidence showing that sixteen
properties in the immediately adjoining blocks maintain lO
foot setbacks over a substantial portion of their frontages.
Discussion: Approval of the variance is not a grant of
special privilege since there are other properties in the area
which maintain 10 foot front yard setbacks. Additionally,
expansion of the nonconforming structure is not a grant of
special privilege since it is authorized by the DESP.
Conclusion: The Old Encinitas 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.
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -6-
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.
Facts: The project is an 865 square foot addition to one unit
of an existing triplex and the variance is requested to allow
the addition to encroach five feet into the required l5 foot
front yard setback for a total setback of ten feet.
Based on the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan (DESP) the site
is considered legal nonconforming in terms of density and
setback. Pursuant to section 11.4 of the DESP, structures
which maintain nonconforming uses are allowed to expand so
long as the nonconforming use does not .. increase in its
inconsistency with the allowances" of the Specific Plan. Any
expansion is required to comply with required development
standards.
Discussion: Approval of the variance would allow the
applicant to expand the existing triplex in conformance with
the Development Standards of the DR-25 Zone of the DESP.
Conclusion: Since expansion of nonconforming uses is
authorized pursuant to section 11.4 of the DESP, the Old
Encinitas Community Advisory Board finds that approval of the
variance 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
variance;
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 865 square foot, two story addition
to one unit of an existing triplex. The variance is requested
to allow the project to encroach five feet into the required
cd/DSL/ROE94l31.406 -7-
fifteen foot front yard setback of the DR-25 zone for a total
front yard setback of ten feet.
The site was previously zoned RU-29 by the County of San Diego
which allowed three units on the site and which required a 50
foot front yard setback as measured from the centerline of
right-of-way. Fifty feet from the centerline of Third Street,
for the subject site, equates to lO feet from the edge of
right-of-way. Ten feet is the setback maintained by the
existing structure.
The site was rezoned to R-25 upon adoption of the City's
General Plan and Land Use Designation Map in March, 1989. The
required front yard setback for the R-25 zone is 20 feet,
therefore the new zoning regulations made the 10 foot front
yard setback of the site legal nonconforming.
The subject site is located within the boundaries of the
Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan (DESP) which was adopted on
February 9,1994. The DESP designates the subject site as DR-
25, which allows a maximum of 25 units per net acre, and which
requires a front yard setback of 15 feet. Based on the DESP
the site is still considered legal nonconforming in terms of
density and setback.
Discussion: An alternate development plan, to allow the
project to meet the 15 foot front yard setback, would be
complete removal of the one story unit and new construction at
the required 15 foot setback. This is not a viable
alternative since demolition of the unit is infeasible and an
economic hardship to the applicant. other alternatives would
include maintaining the existing portion of the unit at the lO
foot setback with new construction at the l5 foot setback.
This alternative may require penetrating existing structural
walls. Additionally, to enable the continuity of design, at
the second story level, the 10' setback needs to be maintained
in line with the existing structure.
The addition is not self-induced because the change in zoning
and development standards was made by the City of Encinitas
and not the applicant. The variance approval would not change
the use or increase the density therefore it would not
constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the zoning code.
Granting of the variance will not authorize or legalize the
maintenance of any public or private nuisance.
Conclusion: The Old Encinitas 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; and the
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -8-
project will not legalize the maintenance of any public or
private nuisance.
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -9-
Findinas for a Desian Review Permit Pursuant to Section 23.08.072
of the MuniciÐal Code:
1. The project design is consistent with the General Plan, a
specific Plan, and the provisions of this Code.
Facts: The Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan (DESP)
designates the subject site as DR-25, which allows a maximum
of 25 units per net acre, and which requires a front yard
setback of 15 feet. Based on the DESP the site is considered
legal nonconforming in terms of density and setback.
Nonconforming uses within the DESP area are allowed to expand.
Pursuant to section 11.4 of the DESP, structures which
maintain nonconforming uses are allowed to expand so long as
the nonconforming use does not "increase in its inconsistency
with the allowances" of the Specific Plan. Any expansion is
required to comply with required development standards.
Conclusion: with approval of the variance the project is in
conformance with the provisions of the General Plan and the
Municipal Code, and the development standards of the DR-25
Zone of the Downtown Encinitas Specific Plan.
2. The project design is substantially consistent with the Design
Review Guidelines.
Discussion: In terms of site design (Municipal Code section
23.08.074), the project involves negligible changes to the
existing topography of the site. The addition is proposed in
an area which is presently occupied primarily by grass lawn,
therefore minimal disturbance to existing vegetation will
occur. The project takes access from an alley to the rear
(west), thus largely separating vehicular and pedestrian
movements. The site sits above Third Street, consequently
there are no view corridors maintained by the properties to
the east.
In terms of building design (Municipal Code Section
23.08.076), the resulting structure is in scale with the site
and the surrounding area which contains many two-story
structures. variations in the structure's roofline are
created since the project will meet the standard height limit
of 26 feet and is below the height of the two-story portion of
the existing structure. The addition will coordinate with the
design elements of the existing second story unit, thereby
creating a more harmonious design for the triplex. The
addition is proposed with off-white stucco and dark gray
composition shingle roof to match the colors and materials of
the existing structure.
with regard to landscape design (23.08.077) the only landscape
changes proposed for the proj ect are the addition of four
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -10-
queen palm trees. The site is already landscaped with
domestic landscape treatments such as grass lawn, hedge/shrub
and queen palms. The additional queen palms will carry the
theme of the existing palms (south side) around to the east
side of the structure and will work to screen and soften the
northeast corner of the structure.
Conclusion: The Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board finds
that the project is in substantial compliance with the City's
adopted design criteria.
c. The project would not adversely affect the health, safety, or
general welfare of the community.
Discussion: No aspect of the project has been identified
which would have any significant adverse affect on the health,
safety, or general welfare of the community.
Conclusion: The Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board finds
that this project will not adversely affect the health,
safety, or general welfare of the community.
d. The project would not cause the surrounding neighborhood to
depreciate materially in appearance or value.
Conclusion: The Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board finds
that the proposed development will upgrade the appearance of
the si te and the existing structure thus will cause no
material depreciation to the appearance or value of the
surrounding neighborhood.
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -11-
ATTACHMENT "B"
RESOLUTION NO. OB-94-06
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Applicant: Tawn & Clay Babcock
Case No. 94-074 V
Subject: Conditions of approval for a variance request to
allow an 865 addition to one unit of an existing
triplex and to allow the addition to encroach five
feet into the require~ 15' front yard setback.
Location: 306 W. "I" street
1. GENERAL CONDITIONS
A. This approval will expire in two years, on November l7,
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 issuance 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 Plans, Building Elevations, and Roof
Plan, consisting of four sheets, dated August 12, 1994
and dated received August 18, 1994 by the City of
Encinitas; and Landscape Plan consisting of one sheet and
dated received by the City of Encinitas on November 4,
1994; signed by a City Official as approved by the Old
Encinitas Community Advisory Board on November 17, 1994
and shall not be altered without Community Development
Department review and approval.
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -12-
I
G. Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to
intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is
specifically described in this permit.
H. Prior to Building Permit Issuance the applicant shall
sign and record a covenant with the County Recorder which
sets forth 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.
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.
K. Prior to issuing a final inspection on framing, the
applicant shall provide a survey from a licensed surveyor
or a registered civil engineer verifying that the
building height complies with this design review permit.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
2. FIRE
A. 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.
B. SMOKE DETECTORS: Smoke detectors shall be inspected by
the Fire Department.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
3. ENGINEERING
All City Codes, regulations, and policies in effect at the time of
approval shall apply.
A. Prior to any work being performed in the public right-of-
way, a right-of-way construction permit shall be obtained
from the City Engineer's office and appropriate fees
paid, in addition to any other permits required.
cd/DSL/ROE94131.406 -13-
I
B. 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.
C. The existing retaining wall along the property frontage
at Third street is failing and must be repaired,
reconstructed or removed.
D. An encroachment permit is required for the two palm trees
proposed within the public right-of-way on "I" street.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT REGARD:ING
COMPLIANCE W:ITH THE FOLLOW:ING CONDITIONS:
4. Building:
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/ROE94131.406 -14-