1992-01
RESOLUTION NO. OB92-01
A RESOLUTION OF THB OLD BNCINITAS
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCB TO BNCROACH 9 FT
INTO THB REQUIRED 25 FT FRONT YARD SBTBACK OF THB R-5 ZONE FOR
AN ATTACHBD GARAGB FOR PROPERTY LOCATBD AT 921 SAN DIBGUITO DR
(CASB NUMBBR 91-184 V)
WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance was filed
by Mr. William Rix to permit a 9 ft encroachment into the required
25 ft front yard setback of the R-5 zone for a garage per Chapters
30.16 and 30.78 of the City of Encinitas Municipal Code, for the
property located at 921 San Dieguito Drive, legally described as:
The south half of Lot 18, Block H Encinitas Highlands Map No. 2141
filed in the Office of the San Diego County Recorder December 4,
1928.
WHEREAS, public hearings were conducted on the application on
November 21, 1991, January 28, 1992 and February 25, 1992;
WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board considered:
1. The staff reports dated November 6, 1991 and January 23,
1992;
2. The application, site plan, floor plan, elevations and
Statement of Justification submitted by the applicant dated
received October 21, 1991;
3. List of addresses with front yard encroachments in the
Encinitas Highlands with corresponding map and letter dated
received January 15, 1992;
4. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing;
5. Written evidence submitted at the hearing; and
6. Letter in support of the application submitted by Hugh
Mehan dated January 19, 1992.
7. Letter in support of the application submitted by William
H. Tripp dated received January 24, 1992.
8. Letter in opposition of the application submitted by
Pamela and Michael Elliott dated received November 20, 1991.
9. Letter in opposition to the application submitted by
Pamela and Michael Elliott, and Raymond and Carol Savage dated
received February 21, 1992.
MN\91184V.RES (2-28-92) 1
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 91-184 V
is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "B")
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Old Encini tas 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 25th day of February 1992, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Cartwright, Steyaert, Lewis
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Birnbaum, Cowen
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:
~~é'
Tom rriden
Associate Planner
MN\91184V.RES (2-28-92) 2
ATTACHMENT "A"
Resolution No. OB92-01
Case No. 91-184 V
Applicant: william Rix
Findinqs: (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. In reference to the Municipal Code Section 30.87.030A, 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 9 ft into the required 25
ft front yard setback with a I-story garage with deck above.
The length of the encroachment is 22 ft. The lot size is
9,570 sq ft with dimensions of 145' x 66' which is typical for
lots on San Dieguito Drive. The garage was constructed in the
front yard setback due to measurement errors which were not
caught by the designer, contractor, Building Inspector or
owner.
Discussion: The applicant contends that special circumstances
are applicable to this project since unintentional errors were
made during the design, construction and inspection of the
residential addition.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that special
circumstances are applicable to the project since the garage
was constructed with the understanding that it was in
compliance with all City codes and a requirement for removal
would result in an undue hardship on the property owner.
B. In reference to the Municipal Code Section 30.78.030B, 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 applicant has documented 39 other properties in
the Encinitas Highlands with front yard encroachments, 13 of
MN\91184V.SR2 (1-23-92) 3
which are on San Dieguito Drive. This constitutes
approximately 13% of the properties on San Dieguito Drive (13
out of 104 properties).
Discussion: The proposal for retaining the garage in the
front yard setback will result be consistent with some other
properties in the Encinitas Highlands as indicated on the plat
of the Encinitas Highlands dated received January 15, 1992.
Conclusions: Therefore, the grant of this variance does not
constitute special privileges since other property owners also
enjoy front yard encroachments. In addition, since the
requirement for this variance is the result of an unusual set
of circumstances, the grant of this variance should not be
considered setting a precedence for other front yard
encroachment requests.
C. In reference to the Municipal Code section 30.78.030CA 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 9 ft into the 25 ft front
yard setback with an attached garage and deck above.
Discussion: The attached garage is a accessory to the primary
residential use on the lot which is permitted in the R-5 zone.
Conclusions: Approval of the garage encroachment will not
result in any change in residential use on the property.
D. In reference to the Municipal Code section 30.78.03 OD, 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.
MN\91184V.SR2 (1-23-92) 4
Facts: The proposal is to encroach 9 ft into the required 25
ft front yard setback with an attached garage and deck above.
The project is the result of an error in measurement made by
the designer which was not discovered by either the contractor
or inspector until after the addition was complete. The
applicant has identified 39 other properties in the Encinitas
Highlands which have structures that encroach into the front
yard setback.
Discussion: An alternate development plan which would involve
removing the front 9 feet of garage is possible, but this
would result in a design which could be inferior to that which
exists. The removal of the front portion of the garage would
require major interior design alterations to create a 19 ft
deep garage, otherwise no enclosed parking would be provided.
The variance request is not self-induced since the need for
the variance is the result of an action which was based on
inaccurate measurements. Finally, since so few properties in
the Encinitas Highlands encroach into the front yard setback,
the approval of the variance would not result in a new front
yard setback standard or legalize the maintenance of a private
or public nuisance.
Conclusions: Therefore, the Board finds that no alternate
development plan is possible which would be less impacting to
the site and adjacent properties, that the garage encroachment
is not self induced, and that the approval of this variance
will not resul t in a new front yard setback standard or
legalize the maintenance of any public or private nuisance.
MN\91184V.SR2 (1-23-92) 5
RESOLUTION NO. OE92-01
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
ATTACHMENT liB"
Applicant: Rix/Shaputnic
Case No: 91-184V V
Subject: Variance for a single family residence to encroach
into the required 25 ft. front yard setback for an
already constructed garage with deck above in the
R-5 Zone.
Location: 921 San Dieguito Drive
I. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
A. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall record a
covenant which sets forth the conditions of this
approval.
B. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall plant a
total of two 24 inch box trees, one on each side of the
garage, to help soften the appearance of the front yard
encroachment.
II. STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. GENERAL CONDITIONS
A. This approval will expire in one year, on February
25, 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/CRO10-887wp51 (3-4-92-1)
E. This approval shall become null and void if
bui lding 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 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 February 25, 1992 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.
I. Prior to final inspection, the applicant shall
prepare a covenant which sets forth the conditions
of this approval.
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 February 25, 1992 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:
MN/03/CRO10-887wp51 (3-4-92-1)
I
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.
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.
MN/03/CRO10-887wp51 (3-4-92-1)
I