1993-02
RESOLUTION NO. OE 93-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE OLD ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD
APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH 23 FT INTO THE REQUIRED 25 FT
FRONT YARD SETBACK (AFTER 10 FT DEDICATION) AND 5 FT INTO THE
REQUIRED 10 FT SIDE YARD SETBACK OF THE R-5 ZONE FOR AN ADDITION
TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 225 REQUEZA STREET
(CASE NUMBER 93-052 V)
WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance was filed
by Mr. Anthony Di Paola to encroach 23 ft into the required 25 ft
front yard setback (after 10 ft dedication) and 5 ft into the
required 10 ft side yard setback of the R-5 zone for an addition to
an existing single family home in accordance with Chapter 30.78 of
the City of Encinitas Municipal Code, for the property located at
225 Requeza Street, legally described as:
Lot 10 in Block E of Encinitas Highlands, in the County of San
Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 2141,
filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County
December 4, 1928.
Excepting therefrom the easterly half of said lot 10.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on
May 20, 1993, by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board; and
WHEREAS, the Board considered:
1. The May 20, 1993 staff report to the Community Advisory
Board with attachments;
2. Application and pro j ect plans dated received April 2,
1993;
3. Requeza Street setback survey dated received May 13,
1993;
4. Statement regarding proposed addition from Resor
Architect dated May 13, 1993;
5. Correspondence from the public consisting of 18 letters,
(17 in support of the project, 1 opposed);
6. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing;
7. Written evidence submitted at the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board made the following
findings pursuant to Chapters 30.78 of the Encinitas Municipal
Code:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "B")
cd/MN/SR93052.0El (6-10-93) 5
ATTACHMENT "A"
Resolution No. OE 93-02
Case No. 93-052 V
Applicant: Anthony Di Paola
Findings: (Code Section, Factual Circumstances, Reasoning,
Conclusion
What follows are the findings of fact the Board must make to
approve the variance request pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section
30.78.030:
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 encroach 23 ft into the required 25
ft front yard setback (after 10 ft dedication) and 5 ft into
the required 10 ft side yard setback of the R-5 zone for a
living room and bathroom addition with roof deck to an
existing single family home. The existing structure
encroaches 12 ft into the front yard setback (after 10 ft
dedication for Requeza Street right-of-way). The bathroom
addition is proposed to encroach 10 ft further into the front
yard setback and 5 ft into the side yard setback. The living
room addition is proposed to match the existing front yard
encroachment, but will also encroach 5 ft into the front yard
setback. No on-street parking is available on Requeza.
Discussion: Special circumstances may be applicable to this
property since the existing structure encroaches 10 ft into
the front yard setback and no reasonable addition to the
living room could be accomplished without a front yard
varlance. In addition, there is no on-street parking
available to the applicant and other property owners, which
eliminates the possibility of an addition on the east side of
the building where parking is currently provided. Finally,
the small lot size and north-south orientation limits design
alternatives.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that special
circumstances are applicable to the project due to the lot
orientation, minimal depth of the lot, and the location of the
structure and parking on the lot which denies the applicant
the ability to construct a room addition without benefit of a
varlance.
cd/MN/SR93052.0E1 (6-10-93) 7
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 encroach 23 ft into the required 25
ft front yard setback (after 10 ft dedication) and 5 ft into
the required 10 ft side yard setback of the R-5 zone for a
living room and bathroom addition with roof deck to an
existing single family home. The existing structure
encroaches 12 ft into the front yard setback (after 10 ft
dedication for Requeza Street right-of-way). The bathroom
addition is proposed to encroach 10 ft further into the front
yard setback and 5 ft into the side yard setback. The living
room addition is proposed to match the existing front yard
encroachment, but will also encroach 5 ft into the front yard
setback. The applicant has identified other properties along
Requeza Street which encroach into the setback to the degree
which is requested, and other properties in the Encinitas
Highlands which encroach into the side yard setback.
Discussion: The grant of this variance does not constitute a
grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations
upon other properties since other property owners are not
subject to the same degree of building envelope constraints
than that of the applicant due to lot dimensions, orientation
and location of the residence on the lot. In addition, other
property owners along Requeza Street and in the Encinitas
Highlands have been identified which encroach into the
setback.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the grant of this
variance does not constitute a grant of special privileges
inconsistent with the limitations upon other property owners
in the neighborhood.
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. The provisions of this section shall not apply to
use permits.
Facts: The proposal is for a variance to encroach 23 ft into
the 25 ft front yard setback (after 10 ft dedication) and 5 ft
into the 10 ft side yard setback of the R-5 zone to construct
an addition to an existing single family home. The room
addition will not change the residential use or character of
the residential unit.
cd/MN/SR93052.0E1 (6-10-93) 8
Discussion: The grant of this variance does not authorize a
use or activity which is not expressly permitted in the R-5
zone.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the grant of this
variance will not change the residential use or character of
the residential unit.
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 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 proposal is to encroach 23 ft into the required 25
ft front yard setback (after 10 ft dedication) and 5 ft into
the required 10 ft side yard setback of the R-5 zone for a
living room and bathroom addition with roof deck to an
existing single family home. The existing structure
encroaches 12 ft into the front yard setback (after 10 ft
dedication for Requeza Street right-of-way). The bathroom
addition is proposed to encroach 10 ft further into the front
yard setback and 5 ft into the side yard setback. The living
room addition is proposed to match the existing front yard
encroachment, but will also encroach 5 ft into the front yard
setback. No on-street parking is available on Requeza. The
applicant parking area is located on the east side of the
structure.
Discussion: Based on a site analysis which includes building
and parking location on the site, lot dimensions and
orientation, location of required setbacks, lack of on-street
parking and age of the structure which limits the ability to
construct a 2nd floor, there is no feasible alternate
development plan available which would allow a living room
addition without the benefit of a variance. In addition, the
project is not self-induced since the need for the variance is
due to the original lot dimensions and building orientation.
Additionally, the grant of this variance will not constitute
a rezoning or other amendment to the Municipal Code since the
need of the variance is due to the special characteristics of
cd/MN/SR93052.0E1 (6-10-93) 9
the subject lot. Finally, there is no evidence that the grant
of this variance with authorize the maintenance of a public or
private nuisance since the request has been supported by a
majority of immediate neighbors.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that there are no
alternate development plans available which would be of less
impact to the site, the variance is not self-induced, it will
not constitute a rezoning or amendment to the Municipal Code,
and it will not authorize the maintenance of a public or
private nuisance.
cd/MN/SR93052.0E1 (6-10-93) 10
ATTACHMENT "c"
Project description . : DIPAOLA, ANTONY
Project number.. . 93-52
. .
Project type. . . . : MAJOR VARIANCE
Application date . . : 04/02/93
CASE NO: 93-052 V
APPLICANT: Antony Di paola
LOCATION: 225 Requeza street
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Variance to encroach 23 ft into the
required 25 ft front yard setback and 5 ft into the required 10
ft side yard setback of the R-5 zone for an addition to an
existing single family home.
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS: Exempt per section 15301 (e) of CEQA
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. The project is approved by the Old Encinitas Community
Advisory Board in accordance with the plans dated received April
2, 1993, and shall not be altered without Community Development
Department review and approval.
2. The applicant shall obtain permits from the California
Coastal Commission and all other applicable regulatory agencies.
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any
sections of the Municipal Code and all other applicable City
Ordinances in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance
unless specifically waived here.
This approval shall become null and void if building permits
are not issued for this project within 2 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 2
year period, this approval may be extended by the Community
Development Director to allow for the issuance of building
permits.
3. This approval may be appealed to the Authorized Agency
within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval.
4. 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 Mitigation
Fees,
Drainage Fees, and Park Fees. Arrangements to pay these fees
shall be made prior to Final Map approval (where applicable) or
building permit agency to the satisfaction of the respective
agencles.
5. Prior to permit issuance, the applicant shall execute and
record a covenant setting forth the terms and conditions of this
approval to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Department.
6. 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.
7. A Building permit is required for this project. Submit plans
and specifications to the Building Division for a complete
plancheck and review. Please contact the Building Division if you
have specific questions about your plan submittal.
THE APPLIC .ANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PREVENTION
DISTRICT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
8. ADDRESS NUMBERS: Address numbers shall be placed in a
location that will allow them to be clearly visible from the
street fronting the structure. The height of the numbers shall
conform to Fire District Standards. NOTE: 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.
9. RECORDATION: Prior to granting final recordation or
development approval, the applicant shall submit to the Planning
Deparment 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.
10. SMOKE DETECTORS: Smoke detectors shall be inspected by the
Fire Department.
THE APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REGARDING
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS
1. 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.
2. Developer shall execute and record a covenant with the County
Recorder agreeing to maintain and remove structures in the
right-of-way.
3. Developer shall dedicate 10 ft of frontage on Requeza street
for future right-of-way improvements.
d. 'Leucadia Community Advisory Board agenda report (94-074
V) for the meeting of July 7, 1994; which is on file in
the Department of Community Development;
e. Additional written documentation.
WHEREAS, the Leucadia Community Advisory Board made the
following findings pursuant to section 30.78.030 of the Municipal
Code.
(SEE ATTACHMENT "A")
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Leucadia Community
Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that Variance application
No. 94-074 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 15301, class l(e) (2) of the State
CEQA Guidelines.
cd/DSL/RL94074.405 (7/12/94) -2-