1992-12
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. OL-92-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE OLIVENHAIN
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE
FOR A SFR ADDITION TO ENCROACH INTO THE EXTERIOR
SIDE YARD SETBACK BY 10' FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 568 RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD
(CASE NO.: 92-041 V)
WHEREAS, John Zolezzi applied for a Variance for a single
family residence addition for a new second story to encroach 10'
into the 15' exterior side yard setback for property located at 568
Rancho Santa Fe Road and legally described as:
That portion of Block 94, in the COLONY OF OLIVENHAIN,
according to Map thereof No. 326, filed in the office of
the County Recorder of San Diego County, July 8, 1885.
WHEREAS, A public hearing was conducted on the application by
the Olivenhain Community Advisory Board on April 7, 1992, and all
persons desiring to be heard were heard; and
WHEREAS,
evidence was submitted and considered to include
without limitation:
a.
Plans submitted with the application and dated received
by the City on March 20, 1992;
written information submitted with the application;
O~al testimony from staff, applicant, and public made a
part of the record at said public hearing;
CAB staff report dated April 1, 1992, which is on file in
the office of Planning and Community Development; and
Additional written documentation.
b.
c.
d.
e.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Olivenhain Community
Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that the Variance for Case
#92-041 V is hereby approved in accordance with the following
findings:
JO/02/CROll-906wp511(4/1/92-2)
.
.
.
5.
(See Attachment" A")
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Variance Request is approved
subject to compliance with the following conditions:
1.
The project is approved as described on the revised plans
received by the City on March 20, 1992, which includes the
site plan, floor plans, and elevations and shall not be
altered without Community Advisory Board approval or as
provided by Municipal Code.
A plan shall be submitted for approval by the Director of
Planning and Community Development, the City Engineer, and the
Encinitas Fire Protection District regarding the treatment of
the site during the construction phase, and the circulation
and parking of construction workers' vehicles and any heavy
equipment needed for the construction of the project.
2.
3.
Prior to foundation and/or pad preparation for the proposed
addition,the property shall be staked and lined to indicate
all property lines to the satisfaction of the Director of
Community Development. An inspection shall be made of the
site prior to building department inspection of the
foundations for the portion of the structure requiring the
variance.
4.
Fire Prevention District:
Fire Prevention District
following condition:
The applicant shall contact the
to assure compliance with the
A.
Address Numbers: Address numbers shall be clearly
visible from the street fronting the structure. The
height of numbers shall conform to Fire District
Standards. 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.
B.
Recordation: Prior to final recordation or development
approval, the applicant shall submit to the Planning
Department 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
Fire District.
Public Works DeDartment.
Public Works Department
following conditions:
The applicant shall contact the
to assure compliance with the
JO/02/CROll-906wp512(4/1/92-2)
.
.
.
6
7.
8.
10.
11.
street Conditions
A.
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
B.
The developer shall comply with all the rules,
regulations, and design requirements of the respective
utility agencies regarding services to the project.
C.
The developer shall be responsible for coordination with
S.D.G. & E., Pacific Telephone, and other utility
authorities.
D.
All proposed utilities within the project shall be
installed underground including existing utilities unless
exempt by the Municipal Code.
This approval may be appealed to the Planning Commission
within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval.
In the event that any of the conditions of this permit are not
satisfied, the Planning and Community Development Department
shall cause a noticed hearing to be set before the authorized
agency to determine why the City of Encini tas should not
revoke this approval.
In the event that one or more of the conditions imposed on the
variance is violated, the Director, upon notice and an
opportunity to present information, may revoke the variance or
impose additional conditions.
9.
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any
sections of the Zoning Code and all other applicable City
Ordinances except as permitted by this approval.
The applicant shall cause to be recorded a covenant regarding
real property which sets forth this grant of approval. The
covenant shall be in form and content satisfactory to the
Director of Planning and Community Development.
If substantial construction has not been completed in reliance
upon a granted variance within one year of the grant, then
upon notice to the property owner, and an opportunity to
present information to the Community Development Director, the
Director may declare the variance to have expired with the
privileges granted thereby canceled.
JO/02/CROll-906wp513(4/1/92-2)
~
.
.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Olivenhain Community Advisory
Board of the City of Encinitas that:
This project was found to be exempt from Environmental Review
per Section 15303 (e) of CEQA¡
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of April,
1992,
by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
Van S~ke, Bode, Kitnick
NAYS:
Schafer, Mazanec
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
Q
None
Bryan R. Schafer, Chairman 0 the
Olivenhain Community Advisory
Board of the City of Encinitas
ATTEST:
~Q.oQ~
Craig R. Olson
Assistant Planner
JO/02/CROll-906wp514(4/1/92-2)
.
,_/
ATTACHMENT A
Olivenhain community Advisory Board
RESOLUTION NO. OL-92
CASE NO. 92-041 V
I.
FINDINGS FOR VARIANCE
(Section 30.78.030D Municipal Code)
A.
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 vicini ty and zone in which such property is
situated.
Facts: The project will not grant special privileges
inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties
in the vicinity and zoning district of the area.
.
Discussion: The proposed encroachment of the upper floor
addition will allow the structure to be in line with the
side yard setback of the existing one story residence on
the south side of the property. Many of the existing
homes along 9th Street do not meet the exterior side yard
setback for the RR-2 zone since they were built prior to
city incorporation and the adoption of current
development standards for the RR-2 zoning district. The
additions match the exterior side yard projection of the
existing first story of the residence with no further
encroachment. The proj ect would not be a special
privilege.
Conclusion: Therefore, special privileges are not being
granted that are inconsistent with the limitations of
other properties.
B.
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 regulation governing
the parcel of property.
Facts: Single family homes and additions are allowed in
residential zones. The project is in the RR-2 zoning
district.
Discussion: The proposed single family dwelling addition
on the RR-2 property is in a rural residential zone and
the structure is compatible with sizes and designs of
nearby existing homes. The sizes and design are typical
.
JO/02/CROll-906wp515(4/1/92-2)
.
.
.
for Olivenhain. There is ample room for an addition and
the proposed setback is safe for access to automobiles
and pedestrians.
Conclusion: Therefore, the variance for the SFR would
not authorize a use or activity that is inconsistent with
the zoning regulations since these types of additions are
allowed in the RR-2 Zone.
C.
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
consti tute a rezoning or other amendment to the
zoning code; or
4.
Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any
private or public nuisance.
Facts: The proposal is to encroach 10' into the 15'
exterior side yard setback for an addition in the RR-2
Zone. The property has a lot size of 0.53 acres and is
currently occupied with a single family home. There is
minor sloping on the lot with the house pad area being
flat.
Discussion: The variance request does not constitute a
rezoning, nuisance, nor is itself induced. An alternate
plan could have been submitted that does not require the
amount of encroachment proposed. However, this would
take away the possibility of a second story addition on
the south side of the property if the proper setback is
to be met. Many of the homes in the area do not meet
proper setbacks and have nonconforming additions. The
proposed addition will simply meet the existing side yard
setback.
Conclusion: Therefore, the addition location in the
exterior side yard setback area would be more compatible
to the land use characteristics of the area with current
home locations on the subject property and on lots along
9th street.
JO/02/CROll-906wp516(4/1/92-2)