Loading...
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-