Loading...
1993-05 RESOLUTION NO. OE 93-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE OLD ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE LOT COVERAGE LIMITATION OF THE GC ZONE FOR AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING RESTAURANT, AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR AN ADDITIONAL PLANTER AND OTHER EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 490 FIRST STREET IN OLD ENCINITAS (CASE NUMBER 93-140 DR/V) WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance and Design Review permit was filed by Mr. Robert Schubert to allow an addition of a rest room for an existing restaurant to exceed the allowed 30% lot coverage of the GC zone to 36.8%, along with design review for a planter area adjacent to an existing outdoor seating area of the restaurant and fencing for a proposed new parking space and trash enclosure, in accordance with Chapters 30.78 and 23.08 of the City of Encinitas Municipal Code, for the property located in the GC zone at 490 First Street, legally described as: Lots 7 and 8 in Block 4 of Encinitas, in the 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 12, 1883. WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on August 19, 1993 and September 23, 1993 by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board; and WHEREAS, the Board considered: 1. The August 19 and September 23,1993 staff reports to the Community Advisory Board with attachments; 2. Application and project plans dated received July 19, 1993; 3. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing; 4. written evidence submitted at the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board made the following findings pursuant to Chapters 30.78 and 23.08 of the Encinitas Municipal Code: (SEE ATTACHMENT "A") NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas hereby approves application 93-140 DR/V subject to the following conditions: (SEE ATTACHMENT "B") BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Community Advisory board, in their independent judgement, found the project exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA section 15301 (e) since the project is an addition of less than 2,500 sq ft in an area with TC/8/93140DRV.RE2 (9-14-93) existing facilities and not environmentally sensitive. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of September, 1993, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Birnbaum, Comeau, McGrath, Wells NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ~nb\~ ----- Chairman of the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board ATTEST~ --. ~- c::;;:::? Tom Curriden, Associate Planner TC/8/93140DRV.RE2 (9-14-93) ATTACHMENT "A" Resolution No. OE-93-05 Case No. 93-140 DR/V Applicant: Schubert 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 exceed the allowable 30% lot coverage ration of the General Commercial zone to 36.8% for a 46 sq. ft., 5' 8" x 8' rest room addition to an existing restaurant to meet current Health Dept. standards. Discussion: The special circumstance applicable to this property, stated by the applicant in the Statement of Justification attached to the application, is that this restaurant does not presently have a rest room appurtenant to it and thus does not meet present Health Dept. standards, unlike the predominant majority of restaurants in the same vicinity and zone. It is not possible to incorporate a rest room without increasing the present nonconformity relative to lot coverage or reducing the already relatively small area of the restaurant kitchen or flower shop. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that special circumstances are applicable to the project which deprive the property of a privilege enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. 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. TC/8/93140DRV.RE2 (9-14-93) Facts: The proposal is to exceed the allowable 30% lot coverage ration of the General Commercial zone to 36.8% for a 46 sq. ft., 5'8" x 8' rest room addition to an existing restaurant to meet current Health Dept. standards. Discussion: The grant of this variance does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties since most other restaurant facilities in the same vicinity and zone have rest room facilities, and many also exceed the lot coverage limitation of the zone. 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: Both the restaurant and retail use on the property are expressly allowed in the GC zone. Conclusion: The grant of this variance does not authorize a use or activity which is not expressly permitted in the GC zone. 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 exceed the allowable 30% lot coverage ration of the General Commercial zone to 36.8% for a 46 sq. ft., 5'8" x 8' rest room addition to an existing restaurant to meet current Health Dept. standards. Discussion: Any alternative to enable the applicant to TC/8/93140DRV.RE2 (9-14-93) incorporate the rest room facility that would not increase the nonconformity relative to lot coverage would require reduction to the already relatively small area of the restaurant kitchen or flower shop. The restaurant was presumably constructed at a time when a rest room was not required to meet Health Dept. standards, such that the need for the variance was not self- induced by the owner or owner's predecessor. There is no evidence to suggest that the variance would allow such a degree of variation as to constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the zoning code or that their is any public or private nuisance on the property which would be maintained through the variance. 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. FINDINGS FOR DESIGN REVIEW (CHAPTER 23.08 MUNICIPAL CODE) (Case * 93-140 DR/V) A. The project design is not inconsistent with the General Plan, a Specific Plan or the provisions of this Code. Facts: The design review permit is required for minor exterior changes involving conversion of 50 sq. ft. of the existing outdoor dining area to a planter, and installation of a new 6 ft. high wood fence around the trash enclosure and new parking space off the alley. Discussion: The project meets all applicable development standards contained in the Municipal Code, contained in Chapt. 30.20 (Commercial Zones) as well as other applicable Municipal Code Requirements, subj ect to approval of the associated variance for lot coverage with the rest room addition. other aspects of the site are legal nonconforming, such as existing setback encroachments and parking, which will not be expanded or intensified through this application. Conclusion: ThE~ project is consistent with the Municipal Code and the General Plan. There is no Specific Plan approved in the area of the project site. B. The project design is not substantially inconsistent with the City's Design Review Guidelines. Facts: The design review permit is required for minor exterior changes involving conversion of 50 sq. ft. of the existing outdoor dining area to a planter, and installation of TC/8/93140DRV.RE2 (9-14-93) a new 6 ft. high wood fence around the trash enclosure and new parking space off the alley. Discussion: Since the aspects of the project subject to design review are related to the trellis and awning (with sign) and the small landscaped area adjoining the outdoor eating area, the applicable design findings of Chapter 23.08 (design review) are related to the "Landscape Design" regulatory conclusions of Section 23.08.077. with regard to those conclusions, no aspect of building design changes, the Board finds that the proposed landscaping consists of drought tolerant species which are appropriate for the size of the planter in which they are proposed. The fencing is to be of a color to tie in with the existing restaurant and is compatible with the site and adjoining properties. Conclusion: The Board finds the project finds the project to be in substantial compliance with the design review guidelines and regulatory conclusions contained in Chapter 23.08 of the Encinitas Municipal Code. C. The project would not adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Facts: The proj ect is categorically exempt from environmental review under Section 15301 (e) of CEQA which exempts minor additions and alterations to existing structures. No evidence has been identified to suggest any possible adverse environmental impacts from this project. Conclusion: The Board finds that the project would 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. Facts: The design review permit is required for minor exterior changes involving conversion of 50 sq. ft. of the existing outdoor dining area to a planter, and installation of a new 6 ft. high wood fence around the trash enclosure and new parking space off the alley. Conclusion: The design changes to the project represent an upgrade to the appearance of the property and thus would not detrimentally affect the appearance or values of the surrounding neighborhood. TC/8/93140DRV.RE2 (9-14-93) ATTACHMENT "B" Project description . : SCHUBERT, ROBERT Project number.. . 93-140 . . Project type. .. . VARIANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW . . Application date . 07/19/93 . . . Variance for commercial center to exceed allowable 30% lot coverage for the addition of a 50 sq ft restroom, and Design Review for a planter area and fencing. STANDARD CONDITIONS: APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1.This approval will expire in two years (on the date below) unless the conditions have been met or an extension has been approved by the Authorized Agency. DATE OF EXPIRATION: September 23, 1995 2. This approval may be appealed to the Authorized Agency within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval. 3.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. 4.Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is specifically described in this permit. 5.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. 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. The applicant shall obtain permits from the California Coastal Commission, County Health Dept. and all other applicable regulatory agencies. 8.The project is approved in accordance with the plans dated received as of the date described below and by the agency also described below on the specified date, and shall not be altered without Community Development Department review and approval: 9.For new commercial or industrial development, or addition to existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but not be limited to: Permit and Plan Checking fees, Water and Sewer Service Fees, School Fees, Traffic Fees, and Drainage Fees. Arrangements to pay these fees shall be made prior to building permit issuance to the satisfaction of the respective agencies. 10.AII required landscape materials and irrigation systems shall be in place prior to use or occupancy of the new buildings or structures. All required landscape materials and irrigation systems shall be maintained in good condition, and whenever necessary, shall be replaced with new plant materials or irrigation systems to insure continued compliance with applicable landscaping, buffering, and screening requirements. All landscaping and irrigation systems shall be maintained in a manner that will not depreciate adjacent property values and otherwise adversely affect adjacent properties. 11.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. THE APPLCIANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PREVENTION DISTRICT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 12.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. 13.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.