1988-23
8
8
8
RESOLUTION NO. C-88-023
A RESOLUTION OF THE CARDIFF-BY-THE-SEA
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD
CITY OF ENCINITAS, APPROVING
A VARIANCE TO ALLOW
A REDUCTION OF 265 PARKING STALLS TO 227 STALLS
LOCATED AT 2015 SAN ELIJO DRIVE
(CASE NUMBER 88-121/V)
WHEREAS,
a request for consideration of a variance was
filed by Cardiff Town Center Partners to allow a reduction of
parking stalls from 265 to 227 as per Section 6762 of the City
of Encinitas Zoning Codes, for the property located at 2015 San
Elijo Drive, legally described as;
Portions of Block 64, 70 and 92 of Cardiff Villa
Tract, County of San Diego, California, according to
Map No. 1469.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application
on June 13, 1988; and
WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board/Planning Commission
considered:
1.
The staff report dated June .8, 1988;
The application and maps submitted by the applicant;
2.
3.
Oral evidence submitted at the hearing;
Written evidence submitted at the hearing;
4.
WHEREAS, the Cardiff-by-the-Sea Community Advisory Board
made the following findings pursuant to Section 30.78.030 of
the Municipal Code:
PM/05/CRO3-66WP 1(6-10-88)
8
8
B.
C.
8
ATTACHMENT II A II
CARDIFF-BY-THE-SEA COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD
RESOLUTION NO. 88--
Case No. 88-121/V
Findings for a Variance
(Section 30.78.030 Municipal Code)
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 to Consider:
The shopping center has maintained the same amount of
square footage as the old Vons/Value Fair Shopping Center.
The special circumstances include existing lot with
existing development bounded by public roads eliminating
the ability to expand the site.
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 to Consider:
The County previously approved a variance to reduce
parking from 260 and 317 to 227. This approval reduces
parking from 265 to 227 consistent with previous County
approvals ensuring the current mixed use is maintained.
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 to Consider:
The current zoning is C-36. Restaurants are permitted
within this district along with the other uses within the
center.
PM/05/CRO3-66WP 2(6-10-88)
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;
Is self-induced as a result of an action taken by the
property owner or the owner's predecessor;
2.
3.
Would allow such a degree of variation as to
constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the
zoning code; or
4.
Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any
private or public nuisance.
Evidence to Consider:
No alternate plan could achieve the required parking on-
site or within the nearby properties due to existing
development. The variance justifies the increase of
restaurant uses greater than that approved in previous
County approvals. Much of the uses compliment each other
and as such 100% of the traffic saturation will not occur
at the same time.
Findings required pursuant to Ordinance 87-80.
8
E.
There is a reasonable probability that the land use and
design proposed will be consistent with the General Plan
proposal being considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
Evidence to Consider:
F.
The proposed General Plan designates the subject property
as General Commercial consistent with the existing uses.
San Elijo Drive and Birmingham Drive are designated as
local augmented roads consistent with existing right-of-
ways. The project as considered will be consistent with
the proposed General Plan.
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment
to or interference with the future adopted General Plan if
the proposed use or design is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. .
Evidence to Consider:
8
PM/05/CRO3-66WP 3(6-10-88)
8
8
8
The County already approved a variance reducing the parking
requirements from 317 to 227. This has not resulted in impacts
to the existing streets. As such should the project ultimately
be inconsistent, the proj ect would not be detrimental to the
General Plan as a result of the variance and the consistent
surrounding uses.
G.
The proposed use or design complies with all other
applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances.
Evidence to Consider:
As conditioned
requirements.
the
project
complies
with
all
other
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Cardiff-by-the-Sea
Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that the
variance
is
hereby
approved
subject
to
the
following
conditions:
1.
Project approval is based on the submitted uses and square
footage. Modifications to uses that increase the parking
need will require further variance application and/or area
for parking.
2.
The applicant is reminded of previous conditions placed on
the project by the County and Coastal Commission.
a.
Variance V84-123 approved by the County August 10,
1984 based a limitation to the Health Club for five
years and that no retail display or sales acti vi ty
shall take place in the interior common lobby area.
b.
Coastal Commission limited restaurant uses to 3,400
sq. ft. Any modification requires Coastal
Commission.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Cardiff-by-the-Sea Community
Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that:
(1)
This proj ect was found to be exempt from environmental
review, Section 15305(a).
PM/05/CRO3-66WP 4(6-10-88)
8
8
8
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of June,
1988, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
Boardmembers Shannon, Slater, Barker, Winkler
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Boardmember Hirsch
ABSTAIN:
None
~~A~~
. . da Niles
Assistant Planner
Ann Shannon, Chairman
the Cardiff-by-the-Sea
ommunity Advisory Board
PM/05/CRO3-66WP 5(6-10-88)