1993-09
RESOLUTION NO. OE 93-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE OLD ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD
APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO
BE ATTACHED TO AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE/POOL HOUSE WHICH
CURRENTLY ENCROACHES INTO THE SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS OF THE
R-5 ZONE FOR AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 726 ARDEN DRIVE
(CASE NUMBER 93-215 V)
WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance was filed
by Mr. William Sommer to encroach fully into the required 10 ft
side yard setback and 20 ft into the required 25 ft rear yard
setback of the R-5 zone for an addition to an existing single
family home to be attached to a detached garage/pool house (which
exists in the setbacks) in accordance with Chapter 30.78 of the
City of Encinitas Municipal Code, for the property located at 726
Arden Drive, legally described as:
The North one-half of Lot 9 in Block "H" 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.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on
November 18, 1993, by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board;
and
WHEREAS, the Board considered:
1. The November 18, 1993 staff report to the Community
Advisory Board with attachments;
2. Application and project plans dated received October 21,
1993;
3. Correspondence from the public consisting of 16 letters
in support;
4. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing;
5. 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")
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Community Advisory
Board of the City of Encinitas hereby approves application 93-215
V subject to the following conditions:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "C")
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Community Advisory board, in
their independent judgement, found the project exempt from
cd/MN/SR93215V.OEI (12-14-93) 5
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
existing facilities and not environmentally sensitive.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November, 1993, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Birnbaum, Comeau, McGrath, Wells
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Q~-~è1~,~. ---.
Adam Birnb. m,
Chairman of the Old
Encinitas Community
Advisory Board
~~~
Tom Cu rlden,
Associate Planner
cd/MN/SR93215V.OE1 (12-14-93) 6
ATTACHMENT "A"
Resolution No. OE 93-09
Case No. 93-215 V
Applicant: William Sommer
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 20 ft into the required 25
ft rear yard setback and fully into the required 10 ft side
yard setback of the R-5 zone as the result of an attachment of
the main residence to a detached garage/pool house within the
setbacks for an addition with interior access from the garage
to an existing single family home. No expansion of the
garage/pool house within the setbacks is proposed with this
application. The proposed addition will not encroach into the
setbacks, however, the attachment creates one large building
that encroaches into the setbacks.
Discussion: Special circumstances are applicable to this
property since the existing legal non-conforming garage/pool
house structure encroaches into the rear and side yard
setbacks and will not be expanded further within those
setbacks as a result of the proposed addition. In addition,
there is no feasible location on the lot where an attached
garage could be constructed without the benefit of a variance.
Finally, the attached garage will provide the residents a
level of security which other property owners currently enjoy.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that special
circumstances are applicable to the project since the existing
garage/pool house will not be expanded within the setbacks and
that there is no ability for the applicant to construct an
attached garage without benefit of a variance.
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
cd/MN/SR93215V.OE1 (12-14-93) 7
limitations upon other properties in the same vicinity and
zone in which property is situated.
Fac'ts: The proposal is to encroach 20 ft into the required 25
ft rear yard setback and fully into the required 10 ft side
yard setback of the R-5 zone as the result of an attachment of
the main residence to a detached garage/pool house within the
setbacks for an addition with interior access from the garage
to an existing single family home. No expansion of the
garage/pool house within the setbacks is proposed with this
application. The proposed addition will not encroach into the
setbacks, however, the attachment creates one large building
that encroaches into the setbacks. There are other property
owners in the neighborhood with attached garages.
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 enjoy the
convenience and security of an attached garage without the
need for a variance.
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 to encroach 20 ft into the required 25
ft rear yard setback and fully into the required 10 ft side
yard setback of the R-5 zone as the result of an attachment of
the main residence to a detached garage/pool house within the
setbacks for an addition with interior access from the garage
to an existing single family home. No expansion of the
garage/pool house within the setbacks is proposed with this
application. No change in the primary single family use is
propose in conjunction with this variance.
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.
cd/MN/SR93215V.OE1 (12-14-93) 8
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 20 ft into the required 25
ft rear yard setback and fully into the required 10 ft side
yard setback of the R-5 zone as the result of an attachment of
the main residence to a detached garage/pool house within the
setbacks for an addition with interior access from the garage
to an existing single family home. No expansion of the
garage/pool house within the setbacks is proposed with this
application. The proposed addition will not encroach into the
setbacks, however, the attachment creates one large building
that encroaches into the setbacks.
Discussion: Based on a site analysis which includes main
building and parking location on the site and the location of
existing garage/pool house within the setbacks, there is no
feasible alternate development plan available which would
allow the construction of an attached garage 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
location of the garage/pool house (built in the 1940's) and
main residence (built in 1956). 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 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/SR93215V.OE1 (12-14-93) 9
CONDITIONS
Project description . : SOMMER, WILLIAM & JILL
Project number. . . : 93-215
Project type. . . . : MAJOR VARIANCE
Application date . . : 10/21/93
CASE NO: 93-215 v
RESOLUTION NO: OE93-09
APPLICANT: SOMMER
LOCATION: 726 ARDEN DR
VARIANCE TO ENCROACH FULLY INTO THE NORTH SIDE YARD SETBACK AND
20 FT INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY HOME. ENCROACHMENT IS THE RESULT OF ATTACHING THE
EXISTING RESIDENCE TO AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE. ADDITION WILL
NOT ENCROACH INTO THE SETBACK.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Prior to occupancy of the residential building addition (ora
later date to be determined by the Director), electrical permits
for the pool house shall be obtained from the City to bring the
electrical system into compliance with current codes.
2. The project is approved by the Old Encinitas Community
Advisory Board on November 18, 1993 in accordance with the plans
dated received October 21, 1993, and shall not be altered without
Community Development Department review and approval.
3. Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to
intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is
specifically described in this permit.
4. 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.
5. The applicant shall obtain permits from the California
Coastal Commission and all other applicable regulatory agencies.
6. 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.
7. This approval may be appealed to the Authorized Agency
within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval.
8. Upon a showing of compelling public necessity demonstrated
at a noticed hearing, the City of Encinitas, acting through the
authorized agency, may add, amend, or delete conditions and
regulations contained in this permit.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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 APPLICANT 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.
14. SMOKE DETECTORS: Smoke detectors shall be inspected by the
Fire Department.