1990-14
.
8
8
RESOLUTION NO.
OL-90-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE OLIVENHAIN
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM
SECTION 30.16.010, A. 7 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR
PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 215 1/2 MEADOW VISTA WAY
CITY OF ENCINITAS
(CASE NO. 90-078-V)
WHEREAS, Charles Lombardo, applied for a Variance from Section
30.16.010, A. 7 (front yard setback), and Section 30.34.030, B, 5
(inland bluff top setback) of the Zoning Ordinance, as required by
Chapter 30.78 Variances, to allow a single family dwelling unit to
encroach into the required 30 foot front yard setback by 20' for
a minimum 101 front yard setback from the private road easement
line to the main building, and for a stairway to encroach to 31
from the private road easement line; additionally for the single
family dwelling unit to encroach into the required 401 bluff top
setback by 151 for a bluff top setback of 251, in the RR-2 zone, for
property located at 215 1/2 Meadow vista Way, Encinitas; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application
90-078-V on May 22,
1990 by the Olivenhain Community Advisory
Board, at which time all persons desiring to be heard
were heard;
and
WHEREAS,
the Initial Consideration of the appeal of the CAB
approval of the item was heard at the Planning Commission meeting
of June 14, 1990 and the item was referred back to the CAB to
review new information;
WHEREAS,
a new public hearing was conducted on the
application
90-078-V on July 17, 1990 to review the new issue of
LN/CAB18-209wp (7/5/90)
8
8
8
verification of the bluff edge by the Olivenhain Community Advisory
Board, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were heard;
and
WHEREAS,
evidence
was
submitted and considered to include
without limitation:
a.
Blueline site plan, floor plans for Alternate Plan B,
elevations and section of Plan A and Alternate Plan B to
include pages 1 through 5, dated April 4, 1990 and
received by the City of Encinitas on April 10, 1990, and
the Bluff Evaluation Report by Owen Consultants dated
June 29, 1990;
written information submitted with the application;
Oral testimony from staff, applicant, and public made a
part of the record at said public hearing;
CAB staff reports (90-078-V) dated April 30, and July 6,
1990, and Planning commission staff report dated June 6,
1990, which are on file in the Department 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 90-
078-V is hereby approved subject to the following findings:
A.
A variance from the terms of the zoning ordinances 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.
Evidence:
The lot is of unusual location and topography since it
is located on an inland bluff system with a considerable
portion of the lot in over 25% slope. The setback
requirement from the inland bluff is 401. If supported
by a geotechnical report, structures may go to within 251
if a variance is granted, and cantilevered structures are
allowed to encroach into the required 251 inland bluff
setback because they are considered not to be
LN/CAB18-209wp (7/5/90)
8
loadbearing, however, they should be reviewed for visual
impact of the overhang. The requested Alternate Plan B
is the proposed al ternti ve recommended for approval.
The front yard setback is 30 1 from the edge of the
private road easement, and the interior side yard setback
is 101. Due to the required setbacks there is no
buildable area on the site.
A Bluff Evaluation Report has been submitted by Owen
Consultants dated June 29, 1990 that verifys the bluff
edge. It has been determined that due to the site
location on the inland bluff system and the topography
of the lot the strict application of the zoning ordinance
does deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other
property in the vicini ty and under identical zoning
classification since other lots do not have as severe
physical constraints which eliminate any buildable area.
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.
Evidence:
8
Two other lots exist on this portion of Meadow vista Way
that are already developed under previous County
development standards and that are setback approximately
101 from the right-of-way. Other properties in the same
vicinity and zone that are not located on the bluff
system are allowed more reasonable development envelopes
since they are not located on the inland bluff system
with the 401 bluff top setback, are not characterized by
a considerable amount of the lot in over 25% slope, and
are not therefore, as restricted by the standard required
setbacks. The project can be conditioned to satisfy all
other requirements of City Code.
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. The provisions of this section
shall not apply to conditional use permits.
Evidence:
Single family residential development is allowed in the
RR-2 zone.
8
LN/CAB18-209Wp (7/5/90)
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:
8
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 owner1s 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.
Evidence:
8
The Variance Request is reasonable to allow development
of the site to be in parity with the development of
properties in the neighboring vicinity and same zone.
Alternate designs need only be considered that have a
direct relationship to the requested variance which in
this case is a front yard setback variance and a bluff top
setback variance. An alternate design was not available
that would not require a variance from the required
setbacks since any design on the subject property would
require a variance. Alternate designs could have been
submi tted that required less of a front yard setback
variance and less of a bluff top setback variance,
however, the square footage of the project would need to
be reduced and would therefore result in the structure
dropping below the average square footage of other single
family structures in the area. In accordance with
recent court decisions the standard practice in review
of a variance request is to make the findings to approve
or deny. The decision to approve a reduction to the
request has not been upheld where there is no material
difference between the variance requested and that
granted and without evidence of fact supporting the
reduction to the requested variance, the decision is
arbitrary. The request does not constitute a rezoning,
nuisance, nor is it self-induced since the lot was
created prior to purchase by the applicant and the City
of Encini tas adopted the new Zoning Code standards
requiring the 401 bluff top setback and the 301 front
yard setback after the applicant had purchased the lot.
8
LN/CAB18-209wp (7/5/90)
8
8
8
the following conditions:
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED THAT the variance is approved subject to
1.
This approval will expire on July 17, 1991, at 5:00 p.m.
unless the conditions have been met or an extension has
been approved by the Authorized Agency.
This approval may be appealed to the authorized agent
within 15 days from the date of this approval.
2.
3.
Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant
shall submit a letter from the Fire District stating that
all plan review fees have been paid.
4.
The Variance is approved as submitted on the blueline
site plan, floor plans for Alternate Plan B, elevations
and section of Plan A and Alternate Plan B to include
pages 1 through 5, dated April 4, 1990 and received by
the City of Encinitas on April 10, 1990, and as supported
by the Bluff Evaluation Report submitted by Owen
Consultants dated June 29, 1990, and any changes to the
plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community
Advisory Board.
5.
That the landscaping shall be limited in height to 8' -
9 1 at maturity at the front and south sides of the
structure, to the roof on the east side of the structure,
and to the height of the large red residence at the north
side of the structure, and shall be reviewed and approved
by staff prior to issuance of a building permit.
6.
That the level of the proposed pad be lowered by 1.131
to 21 in order to allow for more view over the structure
for neighbors to the west of the subject site, with a
good faith effort to accomplish the most lowering
possible and still achieve a driveway slope that is not
excessive. The evidence to support this condition is
that the setbacks could be modified, and the house could
be resituated so as to accomplish additional view over
the structure of approximately 1 to 2% more.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
LN/CAB18-209wp (7/5/90)
11
8
7.
Grading Conditions
8.
9.
10.
11.
.
The developer shall obtain a grading permit, if
applicable, prior to the commencement of any clearing or
grading of the site.
The grading for this project is defined in Chapter 23.24
of the Encini tas Municipal Code. Grading shall be
performed under the observation of a civil engineer whose
responsibility it shall be to coordinate site inspection
and testing to ensure compliance of the work with the
approved grading plan, submit required reports to the
City Engineer and verify compliance with Chapter 23.24
of the Encinitas Municipal Code.
No grading shall occur outside the limits of the
(PROJECT) unless a letter of permission is obtained from
the owners of the affected properties.
All slopes within this project shall be no steeper than
2: 1.
A soils/geological/hydraulic report (as applicable) shall
be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the state
of California to perform such work prior to building
permit issuance or at first submittal of a grading plan.
Drainaqe Conditions
12.
The developer shall exercise special care during the
construction phase of this proj ect to prevent any offsi te
siltation. The developer shall provide erosion control
measures and shall construct temporary
desiltation/detention basins of type, size and location
as approved by the City Engineer. The basins and erosion
control measures shall be shown and specified on the
grading plan and shall be constructed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer prior to the start of any other
grading operations. Prior to the removal of any basins
or facilities so constructed the area served shall be
protected by additional drainage facilities, slope
erosion control measures and other methods required or
approved by the ci ty Engineer. The developer shall
maintain the temporary basins and erosion control
measures for a period of time satisfactory to the City
Engineer and shall guarantee their maintenance and
satisfactory performance through cash deposit and bonding
in amounts and types suitable to the city Engineer.
8
LN/CAB18-209wp (7/5/90)
12
8
.
8
13.
14.
15.
A drainage system capable of handling and disposing of
all surface water originating within the subdivision, and
all surface waters that may flow onto the subdivision
from adjacent lands, shall be required. Said drainage
system shall include any easements and structures as
required by the City Engineer to properly handle the
drainage.
Concentrated flows across driveways and/or sidewalks
shall not be permitted.
The drainage system shall be designed to ensure that
runoff resulting from a 10-year frequency storm of 6
hours or 24 hours duration under developed conditions,
is equal to or less than the runoff from a storm of the
same frequency and duration under existing developed
conditions. Both 6 hour and 24 hour storm durations
shall be analyzed to determine the detention basin
capacities necessary to accomplish the desired results.
street Conditions
16.
Reciprocal access and maintenance and/or agreements shall
be provided ensuring access to all parcels over private
roads, drives or parking areas and maintenance thereof
to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
utilities
17.
18.
19.
The developer shall comply with all the rules,
regulations and design requirements of the respective
utility agencies regarding services to the project.
The developer shall be responsible for coordination with
S.D.G. & E., Pacific Telephone, and Cable TV authorities.
All proposed utilities within the project shall be
installed underground including existing utilities unless
exempt by the Municipal Code.
LN/CAB18-209wp (7/5/90)
13
8
.
.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
following vote, to wit:
17th day of July,
1990 by the
AYES:
Boardmembers DuVivier, Johnson, Perkins, and Wiegand
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Boardmember Trujillo
ABSTAIN:
None
ATTEST:
Ò ~ð
,~/c5; U/d
'-L DA S. NILES
Associate Planner,
LN/CAB18-209wp (7/5/90)
CHUCK DU VI ER, Chairman of the
Olivenhain Community
Advisory Board
14