Loading...
1993-05 . . . RESOLUTION NO. OL-93-05 INTO A RESOLUTION OF THE OLIVENHAIN COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF NINE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND TO EXCEED THE STANDARD HEIGHT ENVELOPE ON LOTS 2,4,5, 6 AND 7 AND FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW THE STRUCTURE ON LOT 2 TO ENCROACH 3 FEET THE 30-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE 2200 BLOCK OF 11TH STREET (CASE NUMBER 93-145 DR/V) WHEREAS, an application for consideration of a Design Review Permit and a Variance request was filed by Venture Pacific (Robert Booker) to allow-for the construction of nine (9) single family residences and "to exceed the Standard Height Envelope on Lots 2,4, 5, 6 and 7 and to encroach 3 feet into the 30-Foot Front Yard Setback for the residence on Lot 2 for property located between EI Camino Del Norte (formerly 10th Street) and 11th Street, approximately 700 feet west of Rancho Santa Fe Road, and legally described as; Block 59 of Colony of Olivenhain, in the city of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 12991, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, December 4, 1992, recorded as file #92- 781176. WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted by the Olivenhain Community Advisory Board on September 7, 1993; and WHEREAS, the Olivenhain Community Advisory Board considered, without limitation: 1. 2. The Agenda Report for the September 7, 1993 meeting; The General Plan, Zoning Code and associated Land Use Maps; Oral evidence submitted at the hearing by staff, by the applicant and by the public; Written evidence submitted with the application and at the public hearing; and The application, plans and supporting material dated received by the City on July 23, 1993. Said plans consisting of 20 sheets of the site development plans, 3. 4. 5. . floor plans, exterior elevations, landscape & irrigation plans and sectional plans. The design plans consisting of the floor plans and elevations for Plan Types 1,2 and 3. WHEREAS, the Olivenhain Community Advisory Board made the following findings pursuant to Chapters 23.08 and Sections 30.16.010B 7b and 30.78.030 of the Encinitas Municipal (Zoning) Code: (SEE ATTACHMENT "A") NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Olivenhain Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that application 93-145 DR/V is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: . (4) (5) . (6) (1) The project is approved as submitted and evidenced by plans dated received by the City on July 23, 1993 and shall not be altered without City approval or as conditioned herein. (2) This approval may be appealed to the Planning Commission within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval in accordance with Chapter 1.12 of the Municipal Code. (3) This Design Review approval shall be valid for two years from the effective date of the permit (to September 7, 1995), during which time construction of the approved structure (s) shall be pursued in conformance with the Uniform Building Code to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development; or as may be extended pursuant to the Municipal Code. A licensed surveyor shall verify the height of the structures on Lots 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 at the time of framing inspection to certify that the height does not exceed the height measurements specified on the approved plans. For new residential dwelling unit (s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but shall not be limited to: Permit and Plan Checking Fees, School Fees, Water and Sewer Service Fees, Traffic Fees, Drainage Fees and" Park Fees. Arrangements shall be made to the satisfaction of the appropriate department or agency to pay the impact fees prior to Building Permit issuance or Final Occupancy approval. Prior to Building Permit issuance, a plan shall be submi tted for approval by the Director of Communi ty Development and the Encinitas Fire Protection District regarding the treatment of the site during the . (9) . construction phase, the circulation and parking of construction workers' vehicles and any heavy equipment needed for the construction of the proj ect, and the mi tigation of potential impacts the construction may pose to surrounding residents. (7) All required landscape plantings shall be in place prior to use or occupancy of new buildings or structures. All required plantings and automated irrigation systems shall be maintained in good growing and working condition and, whenever necessary, shall be replaced with new plant materials or irrigation parts to ensure continued compliance with applicable landscaping, buffering, and screening requirements. All landscaping and irrigation systems shall be maintained in a manner that will not depreciate adjacent property values and otherwise adversely affect adjacent properties. (8) Grading within the Private Open Space easement over Lots 1 and 2 shall be prohibited, except as may be allowed by City Council for the removal of the diseased eucalyptus tree and for access to Lot 1 and for contour grading on Lot 2 if no existing trees are impacted. The developer shall request review from the City Council related to the deletion of the portion (approximately 100 s.f.) of the Private Open Space easement for the access to Lot 1, prior to Grading Plan or Building Permit issuance. All exterior lights within the subdivision shall be provided with shields to prevent light glare from being visible above the horizontal plane of the bottom of the light source. (10) FIRE PREVENTION DISTRICT: . A. Access Roadways: Fire apparatus access roadways shall have an unobstructed paved width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. A roadway providing access to a single family residence shall not be less than sixteen (16) feet in paved width. EXCEPTION: with automatic sprinkler systems installed, a fire access road providing access to not more than three single family dwellings shall not be less than 16 feet in paved width with an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. B. 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 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 dr i veway intersects the main roadway. Permanent address numbers shall be affixed to this marker. . . H. . I. C. COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS: Prior to delivery of combustible building materials on the project site, water and sewer systems shall satisfactorily pass all required tests and be connected to the public water and sewer systems. In addition, the first lift of asphalt paving shall be in place to provide a permanent all weather access for emergency vehicles. Said access shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Fire District. D. OBSTRUCTIONS: All traffic lanes shall be a minimum of twenty-four (24) feet wide and shall be maintained free and clear of obstructions at all times during construction in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code. Emergency access roadways, when required, shall be properly identified as per Fire Department standards. E. FIRE HYDRANTS AND FLOWS: The applicant shall submit a letter from the Encinitas Fire Protection District to the Community Development Department stating the District's satisfaction with the type, number and location of fire hydrants. A letter from the water agency serving the area shall be provided to the District which states that the required fire flow is available. Fire hydrants shall be of a bronze type. A two-sided blue reflective road marker shall be installed on the road surface to indicate the location of the fire hydrant for approaching fire apparatus. F. AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS: Structures shall be protected by automatic fire sprinkler systems installed to the satisfaction of the Encinitas Fire District. G. FEES: Prior to Final Occupancy, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department a letter from the Fire Prevention 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. TURNAROUNDS: All dead-end fire access roadways in excess of 150 feet in length or serving four or more dwelling units shall be provided with a cul- de-sac. The cul-de-sac radius for public streets shall comply with the City's Road Standards. Street constructed to Private Road standards where a turnaround is required shall have a cul-de-sac wi th a paved radius of not less than 36 feet. Alternate types of turnarounds may be considered by the Fire Chief as needed to accomplish the purpose of the Fire Code. SMOKE DETECTORS: Smoke detectors inspected by the Fire Department. shall be . (11) Should any work be required in the roadway near Rancho Santa Fe and 10th Street, the developer shall contact the San Dieguito Water District prior to the work beginning to review plans to assess if the water main will be affected. (12) All construction plans for the residential units shall be submitted to the Building Division for plancheck review. (13) Public improvements and other requirements of the Final Subdivision Map and requirements of Improvement Plan 2975 shall be implemented by the developer. (14) The developer shall implement the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program established by the Environmental Initial Assessment for the project. Costs for implementation of the Program shall be secured to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a Grading Plan or Building Permits. . (15) (a) A footpath easement, approximately 7 feet in width, shall be provided at the end of 11th Street, north of the 30 foot drainage easement to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Staff is to explore opportunities for future extension of the footpath to the west. (b) Community Development Department staff shall facilitate a consensus from the applicant and adjacent property owners to the west to agree upon design changes to the west exterior of the structure proposed on Lot 2 and the design and location of fencing along the west property line. (c) The trees proposed for removal due to the development shall be clearly marked within five (5) days of this approval. (d) The Malaluca plantings on the slope adjacent to the west elevation of the structure on Lot 2 shall be 24 inch box in size. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Olivenhain Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that: A Negative Declaration was adopted for this project on April 25, 1989 in conformance with CEQA Guidelines and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was made a part of the Final Map and Grading requirements for the project. This project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code . and, therefore, a Certificate of Fee Exemption shall be made with De Minimis Impact Findings. . . . following vote, to wit: PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7nd day of September, 1993, by the AYES: Greer, Jordan, Kitnick NAYS: None ABSENT: Bode ABSTAIN: Van Slyke C::Q . jL Craig R. Olson Assistant Planner ~K~ Dean Kitnick, Vice-Chairman of the Olivenhain Community Advisory Board, City of Encinitas ATTACHMENT "A" Resolution OL-93-05 . Findings for Design Review Approval Pursuant to Section 23.08.072 and Section 30.16.010B7b of the Municipal Code 1) The project design is consistent with the General Plan, or Specific Plan and the provisions of the Municipal Code. Facts: The subject property was approved for subdivision and the Design Review request is consistent with the Tentative Map approval. Discussion: Staff can not identify any aspect of the submi tted proj ect which does not comply with Zoning Code standards, General Plan Policies or the requirements of the Tentative Subdivision Map approval. Conclusion: The Olivenhain Community Advisory Board finds, therefore, that the design of the project conforms to the policies and standards of the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, and the provisions of the Tentati ve Map approval. 2) The project design is substantially consistent with the Design Review Guidelines. . Facts: The project design provides structures which conform to the site design layout of the approved subdivision map, the building designs provide architectural accents and relief and the homes are situated to provide privacy and security. Discussion: The project design is consistent with the intent of the Design Guidelines in that buildings and landscaping are well planned to take advantage of the site without intruding on the privacy of neighboring property. Conclusion: The Board finds that the project design is consistent with the intent of the Design Review Guidelines. 3) The project design will not adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Facts: The project design is consistent with new homes being built within the Olivenhain community. Discussion: All utility services are available or can be extended to the site. Staff can find no evidence to indicate that the project design would adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. . Conclusion: Therefore, the Olivenhain Board finds that the project design will not adversely affect the health, safety or general welfare of the Olivenhain Community. 4) The project will not tend to cause the surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance or value. . Facts: The project design tends to be compatible with the style of single family residences constructed wi thin the neighborhood. Discussion: staff can find no evidence to indicate that the project would materially depreciate the appearance or value of the neighborhood. Conclusion: Therefore, the Olivenhain Board finds that the project will not adversely depreciate the appearance or value of the immediate neighborhood or the Olivenhain Community. 5) The portions of the buildings on Lots 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 outside of the Standard Height envelope maintain some of the significant views enjoyed by residents of nearby properties, and the buildings are compatible in bulk and mass with buildings on neighboring properties. . Facts: The structure on Lot 2 is proposed to measure 26' 6" from finish grade (28' 6" from natural grade), the structure on Lot 4 is to measure 28' 2" from natural grade (25' 2" from finish grade), the structure on Lot 5 is to measure 28' 10" from natural grade (24' 4" from finish grade), the structure on Lot 6 is to measure 29' 8" from natural grade (25' 2" from finish grade), and the structure on Lot 7 is proposed to measure 29' 10" from natural grade (24' 4" from finish grade). Discussion: The pad height for Lot 4 is called out to be at an elevation of 186.5, which is the highest pad elevation of the five lots proposed to have structures which exceed the standard height envelope. A cross-section of Lots 3 and 4 is provided on page 5 of the plans. This cross-section illustrates the height difference between White Wood Place to the west at an elevation of approximately 206 feet and the structures with finish floor elevations of 196.67 (Lot 3) and 187.17 (Lot 4). Significant views enjoyed by nearby properties to the west will be preserved since a similar sized home would have second story views over the structure proposed on Lot 4. The structure on Lot 3 will conform to the standard height envelope and will have a roof ridge elevation of approximately 220 feet while the structure on Lot 4 will have a roof ridge elevation of approximately 212 feet. The buildings, with garages, range from 4,476 s.f. (Plan 2) to 5,186 s.f. (Plan 1) in floor area, which is consistent with other single family residences in the area. . Conclusion: Therefore, the Olivenhain Board finds that the portions of the structures on Lots 2, 4, 5~ 6 and 7 outside of the Standard Height envelope maintain some of the significant views enj oyed by residents of nearby properties, and the buildings are compatible in bulk and mass with buildings on neighboring properties. . . . Findings Pursuant to Section 30.78.030 of the Municipal (Zoning) Code Related to Variances A. A Variance from the terms of the zoning ordinance 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 ordinance deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. Facts: The application requests a Variance to encroach 3 feet into the 30-Foot Front Yard Setback for a portion of the structure on Lot 2. A portion of the garage is proposed to extend 3 feet into the Front Yard Setback which means a 27 foot setback from the cul-de-sac of Corinia Court which has a 180 foot radius. Discussion: The applicant requests the Variance due to the site constraints imposed on the lot by the open space easement on the rear portion of the lot for the eucalyptus grove. No grading will occur in the open space area. Conclusion: Therefore, the Olivenhain Community Advisory Board finds that the site constraints imposed on the lot by the open space easement on the rear portion of the lot for the eucalyptus grove precludes the privilege to develop the property as enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under the same Rural Residential-2 Zoning Designation and that the Variance to the Front Yard Setback standard is warranted. 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 vicinity and zone in which such property is situated. Facts: The Variance allows for a 3 foot encroachment into the Code defined 30- Foot Front Yard Setback for a single family residential structure. Discussion: If the site was not impacted by the constraints associated with the open space easement on the rear portion of the lot for the eucalyptus grove, adequate area would be available to provide access to the structure's garage. Since the RR-2 Zoning District permits single family residential use, no conditions are necessary to assure that the Variance adjustment would constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated. Conclusion: Therefore, the Olivenhain Board finds that the Variance is warranted since the Variance approval does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. . . . 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 regulation governing the parcel of property. Facts: The RR-2 Zoning District residential development as a right. permits single family Discussion: The project proposes the development of a single family residence and associated accessory structures. D. Conclusion: Therefore, the Olivenhain Board finds that the Variance does not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulation governing the parcel of property. 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 project conforms in all aspects with the development standards of the RR-2 Zoning District and all other applicable standards required by the Municipal Code except for the encroachment into the Front Yard Setback as approved by this Resolution. Discussion: The project conforms to standard height limitations that are applicable to all residential structures and to other development standards imposed by the Municipal Code or has received Design Review approval for projections outside the Standard Height Envelope as provided in this approval. The project design is compatible with similar residential development in the neighborhood. This Variance approval has been conditioned to ensure compliance to adopted development standards. The Variance is necessitated by the topographical constraints on the property and the Private Open Space easement for the eucalyptus grove and, therefore, the Variance request is not self-induced. The Variance does not constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the Zoning Code since single family residences and their accessory structures are permitted in the RR-2 Zone. No evidence has been . submitted to indicate that any private or public nuisance exists on the property. Conclusion: Therefore, the Olivenhain Board finds that the project does not impose any significant adverse impacts to the si te and adj acent properties and that the Variance is not self-induced as a result of an action taken by the property owner or the owner's predecessor. The project does not allow such a degree of variation as to constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the Zoning Code nor has any evidence been submitted to indicate that the project would authorize or legalize the maintenance of a private or public nuisance. . .