Loading...
1991-22 RESOLUTION NO. OE91-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE OLD ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE BY APPROXIMATELY 88 SQ FT AND FLOOR AREA RATIO BY APPROXIMATELY 288 SQ FT TO ENABLE THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING 1-CAR GARAGE AND A48 SQ FT ADDITION TO THE SOUTH UNIT OF AN EXISTING 2 UNIT CONDOMINIUM IN THE RS-ll ZONE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 342 LA VETA AVENUE (CASE NUMBER 91-183 V) WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance was filed by Mrs. Hazel Faul to exceed allowable FAR and lot. coverage to enable the conversion of an existing garage and construct a 48 sq ft addition on the south side of the structure in the RS-11 zone per Chapters 30.16 and 30.78 of the city of Encinitas Municipal Code, for the property located at 342 La Veta Avenue, legally described as: An undivided one-half interest in and to Lot 13 of Block "J" of SEASIDE GARDENS, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1800, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California Augus t 6, 1924. WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on November 21, 1991; WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board considered: 1. The staff report dated November 13, 1991; 2. The application, site plan and Statement of Justification submitted by the applicant dated received October 21, 1991; 3. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing; 4. written evidence submitted at the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board made the following findings pursuant to Chapter 30.78 of the Encinitas Municipal Code: (SEE ATTACHMENT "A") NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that application 91-183 V is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: (SEE ATTACHMENT "B") MN\91183V.RES (11-13-91) 1 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 (e) of the State CEQA Guidelines. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of November 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Birnbaum, Cartwight, Lewis NAYS: None ABSENT: Steyaert, Cowen ABSTAIN: None 1--- vi ginia artwright, C irperson of e Old Encinitas ommunity Advisory Board ATTEST: ~~~ Tom Curriden Associate Planner MN\91183V.RES (11-13-91) 2 ATTACHMENT "A" Resolution No. OE91-22 Case No. 91-183 V Applicant: Hazel Faul 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. Evidence: The Board finds that special circumstances apply to this site since the lot is small, substandard for a duplex. Many of the surrounding properties were built as duplex uses with a much higher Floor Area Ratio and lot coverage than would be permitted under current Zoning regulations. The applicant has identified 12 other properties in the neighborhood that have converted garages and/or appear to exceed lot coverage and FAR standards. In addition, the applicant states that an identical condominium unit south of the subject site located at 338/340 La Veta legally constructed a similar project several years ago. The board finds that this finding can be made since the lots are small for a duplex, other properties in the neighborhood have constructed similar additions and garage conversions, and the required off-street parking is provided. 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. MN\91183V.SR (11-13-91) 6 Evidence: The Board finds that the grant of this variance would not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the neighborhood because the addi tion is minor in nature and others have legally constructed similar additions over the years. 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. Evidence: Multi-family residential uses are not permitted in the RS-11 zone, however, this duplex is a legal nonconforming use and no additional uses are proposed in conjunction with this project. 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. Evidence: (1) The Board finds that an alternate development plan which provides additional floor area for a den in one unit of the duplex is not possible without exceeding FAR and/or lot coverage. This request will be less impacting to the site than an addition to the second story or in a required setback. In addition, the required parking will be provided off of the alley to the rear of the structure and out of view from La Veta Avenue. (2) The Board finds that'this variance request to exceed FAR and lot coverage is only self-induced because of inadequate floor area in the unit. No alternative available can be found that would comply with the above standards even if no project was constructed since the existing building already exceeds MN\91183V.SR (11-13-91) 7 I lot coverage and FAR. Further, the Board finds that no addition or garage conversion would deny the applicant the same privileges that others in the neighborhood have enjoyed. (3) The Board finds that this variance does not constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the zoning code since there are other properties in the neighborhood with similar converted garages and that exceed FAR or lot coverage standards. (4) There is no evidence that the converted garage and the addition would be a nuisance. , MN\91183V.SR (11-13-91) 8 RESOLUTION NO. OE91-22 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ATTACHMENT "B" Applicant: Faul Case No: 91-183V Subject: Variance for a I-car garage of an existing 2-unit condominium to be converted and expanded into additional living space resulting in a request to exceed maximum allowable lot coverage and Floor Area Ration in the RS-ll Zone. Location: 342 La Veta Avenue I. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS A. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the applicant shall prepare a covenant to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development which prohibits the expansion of the adjoining dwelling unit located at 344 La Veta Avenue without compliance with the affordable housing regulations contained within section 30.76.120. II. STANDARD CONDITIONS 1. GENERAL CONDITIONS A. This approval will expire in two years, on November 21, 1993, 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 here. 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 here. MN/03/CRO9-873wp511(11-15-91/4) I .. \ E. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within two years from the date of project approval. F. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows: state Coastal Commission G. Project is approved as submitted/modified as evidenced by the revised site plan dated received by the City of Encinitas on October 21, 1991, and signed by a City Official as approved by the Old Encinitas community Advisory Board on November 21, 1991, and shall not be altered without Planning and Community Development Department review and approval. H. Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is specifically described in this permit. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT A. site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plan which is dated and signed as approved on November 21,1991, by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board and which is on file in the Planning and Community Development Department and the conditions contained herein. 3. PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS A. Driveways shall meet the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, Public Works Standards, and the Offstreet Parking Design Manual. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 4. FIRE A. Prior to final recordation, the applicant shall submit a letter from the Fire District stating that all development impact, plan check and/or cost recovery fees have been paid or secured to the satisfaction of the District. Address numbers shall be clearly visible from the street fronting the structure. I MN/03/CRO9-873wp512(11-15-91/4) 5. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: All City Codes, regulations, and policies in effect at the time of final map submittal shall apply. 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. utilities 2. The developer shall comply with all the rules, regulations and design requirements of the respective utility agencies regarding services to the project. 3. The developer shall be responsible for coordination with S.D.G.& E., Pacific Telephone, and Cable TV authorities. 4. All proposed utilities within the project shall be installed underground including existing utilities unless exempt by the Municipal Code. 5. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation and undergrounding of existing public utilities, as required. MN/03/CR09-873wp513(11-15-91/4)