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)