1988-22
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO.
C-88-022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CARDIFF-BY-THE-SEA
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A
DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT FOR PROPERTY OF LOTS 1, 2,
BLOCK 14, MAP 1298, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF ENCINITAS 2310 OXFORD
88-116/DESIGN REVIEW
3, 4
WHEREAS, William Yen applied for a Design Review permit
for two zero lot line single family dwellings on two lots and
one single family unit as per Chapter 23.08 Design Review, of
the City of Encinitas Municipal Code and Ordinance 87-68;
WHEREAS,
public
on
the
hearing
conducted
a
was
application by the Cardiff-by-the-Sea Community Advisory Board
on June 27,
and all persons desiring to be heard were
1988,
heard; and
WHEREAS, evidence was submitted and considered to include
without limitation:
a.
site plan submitted by the applicant;
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 report (88-116-DR) dated June 24, 1988, 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 Cardiff-by-the-Sea
Communi ty Advisory Board of the City of Encini tas that the
Design
Review
permit
for two
line
single
lot
family
zero
dW~~l¡Al)g,!units on two lots and one single family home is hereby
approved subject to the following findings:
PM/03/CRO3-80Wp 1(6/23/88-1)
.
.
.
7.
8.
9.
1.
That the proposed project is in conformance with the
intent of section 23.08.72 of the Design Review
Ordinance, since the project is consistent with the
proposed General Plan in that one single family home is
allowed on one lot in the RV-11 zone;
2.
That the proposed project is in conformance with the
intent of Section 23.08.74 of the Design Review
Ordinance, since the project is designed to take
advantage of the site constraints, preserves significant
views, and is proposing adequate on-site parking in the
proposed two car garages;
3.
That the proposed project is in conformance with the
intent of Section 23.08.76 of the Design Review Ordinance,
since the project is consistent with the bulk and scale of
the neighborhood;
4.
That the proposed project is in conformance with the
intent of section 23.08.77 of the Design Review
Ordinance, since the landscape design will reach a mature
stage in three years so as to provide softening of the
elevations of the structure, and will blend in with the
design aspects of the structure providing an aesthetically
pleasing streetscape;
5.
That the proposed project is in conformance with the
intent of section 23.08.79 of the Design Review Ordinance,
since the project design takes into consideration the
privacy of the occupants of the proposed units and
adjacent property units to the extent possible;
6.
The project design does preserve significant public views
to the extent possible, and offers mitigation for lost
views. Public views are defined as those views provided
from public property;
The project takes advantage of views and/or protects, to
the extent possible, some of the significant view enjoyed
by the residents of nearby properties;
That the projection out of the interim envelope does not
significantly impact the views of adjacent properties, int
hat the project takes advantage of views while maintaining
some of the significant views enjoyed by residents of
nearby properties;
That the proj ect is compatible in structural size (bulk
and mass) to adjacent properties and neighborhood;
PM/03/CRO3-80wp 2(6/23/88-1)
.
.
.
10.
11.
There is reasonable probability that the land use and
design proposed will be consistent with the General Plan
proposal being considered or studies since the proposed
General Plan is consistent with the currently adopted
General Plan.
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment
to or interference with the future adopted General Plan if
the proposed design is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan, since the project is allowed by the proposed General
Plan.
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED,
that the Design Review Permit is
approved with the following conditions:
A.
B.
C.
E.
G.
H.
The project is approved as submitted and shall not be
altered without Community Advisory Board review and
approval.
Prior to the City Building Department issuing a final
inspections on framing, the applicant shall provide a
survey from a civil engineer as to the building height.
D.
A covenant shall be recorded in the County Recorder's
office agreeing to plant and maintain the landscaping
approved on the landscape plan, requiring that all trees
be maintained at a height not to exceed the building
height directly adjacent to the subject tree.
Applicant shall pave the alley to City standards to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
Install asphaltic concrete patching on Norfolk (adjacent
to existing drive) as required.
F.
Saw cut existing asphalt in the alley and pave
proposed driveways with a smooth transition to
existing pavement.
the
the
Applicant to sign and record covenant agreeing not to
protest any proceedings for the installation of public
improvements under any applicable special assessment
proceedings.
Applicant shall provide
system per NFPA 13 D.
residential
fire
sprinkler
a
I.
stairs shall be no closer than 3' to property line.
PM/03/CRO3-80wp 3(6/23/88-1)
.
.
.
J.
Grade and improve with AC pavement the right-of-way on
Oxford for the length of the project to provide additional
space for on street parking.
K.
Submit grading and drainage plan for review and approval
by the Department of Planning and Community Development
and Engineering. Drainage needs to be accomplished so as
not to negatively impact the neighboring properties.
L.
Lower the roof height on the single family detached unit
as discussed in the public hearing and resubmit elevations
showing the reconstruction of the roofline for inclusion
as record of approval in the file 88-116-DR.
M.
Submit a different color scheme for the zero lot line
structure for approval by the Department of Planning and
Community Development.
N.
That the roof peak for the zero lot line structure be
allowed be a maximum of 26' 4" in height, which would
require changing the pitch of the roof to a 3 in 12 pitch.
O.
That the applicant submit an alternative species of tree
for review and approval by the Department of Planning and
Community Development that would be a lower variety than
that proposed on the landscape plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of June,
1988 by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
Boardmembers Slater, Barker and Shannon
None
Boardmember Hirsch
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
None
ANN SHANNON, Chairman of the
rdiff-by-the-Sea
ommunity Advisory Board
ATTEST:
'- DA S. NILES,
Assistant Planner
PM/03/CRO3-80wp 4(6/23/88-1)