Loading...
1990-15 RESOLUTION NO. C-90-015 A RESOLUTION OF THE CARDIFF-BY-THE-SEA COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 30.16.010 A 7 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1321 SEA VILLAGE DRIVE (CASE NO. 90-060V) WHEREAS, Denise witkin and Carol Cohen applied for a Variance in accordance with Chapter 30.78 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the following encroachment into the front yard setback specified by the Residential 3 Zoning District: A. An eight foot, four inch structural encroachment into the 25-foot front yard setback for an upper level addition; and B. An additional 12 inch encroachment for the upper level bay window. WHEREAS, the property is located at 1321 Sea Village Drive and legally described as follows: Lot 72 in Cardiff Sea Village, in the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, State of California, according to map thereof No. 8067, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on February 13, 1975. WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on April 23, 1990 by the cardiff-by-the-Sea Community Advisory Board, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were heard; and, COI03/CR06-514wp51(4-27-90-2) WHEREAS, evidence was submitted and considered to include without limitation: a. site plan, floor plans and elevations submitted by the applicant; b. written information submitted with the application; c. Oral testimony from staff, applicant, and public made a part of the record at said public hearing; d. Community Advisory Board staff report dated April 18, 1990, which is incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein; and e. Additional written documentation. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the following findings are made by the Cardiff-by-the-Sea Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas: (SEE ATTACHMENT "A") BE IT RESOLVED THAT the application for Variance 90-060V is hereby APPROVED, and the subject structure may encroach 8 feet 4 inches into the 2S-foot front yard setback and the bay window may extend 12 inches beyond the permitted 8 foot 4 inch projection into the front yard; subject to the following conditions: (1) Plans submitted for building plan check shall conform to the Variance request. The building height shall be limited to Zoning Code requirements and separate Design Review Application must be submitted if required by the Design Review Ordinance provision (Le.: if the height exceeds 26 feet). (2) Developer shall provide certified height surveys by a licensed civil Engineer or surveyor verifying that building heights conform to approved plan heights prior to the issuance of framing inspection approval. (3) Prior to final Building Permit approval, the property owner shall have recorded a Covenant agreeing to maintain landscape height at, or below 26 feet. COI03/CR06-S14wpS 2(4-27-90-2) (4) Prior to foundation andlor pad preparation for the proposed remodel, 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. (S) 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 cancelled. (6) 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. (7) Proof of approval or exemption of this project by the Coastal Commission shall be provided prior to issuance of building permits. (8) 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. (9) The remodel is for a single family residential use only. Any conversion of the existing structure or proposed remodel to a second dwelling unit is strictly prohibited. (10) Fire Department: Prior to permit issuance, the applicant shall submit proof that the Fire District recovery fees have been paid. Address numbers shall be clearly visible from the street fronting the structure. (10) APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 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 owner shall comply with all the rules, regulations and design requirements of the respective utility agencies regarding services to the project. CO/03/CR06-S14wpS 3(4-27-90-2) (C) The owner shall be responsible for coordination with S.D.G.& E., Pacific Telephone, and Cable TV authorities. (D) The developer shall be responsible for the relocation and undergrounding of existing andlor proposed public utilities, as required by Municipal Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Cardiff-by-the-Sea Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that: This project was found to be exempt from environmental review per Section 15301(e) (1) of CEQA. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23th day of April, 1990, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: McCabe, MacManus, Barker, Crosthwaite NAYS: None ABSENT: Orr ABSTAIN: None L~ Terrance Barker, Cha~rperson of the Cardiff-by-the-Sea Community Advisory Board MTEST: ~ ~ ~("ø . eo .. ~ Craig R. Olson Assistant Planner COI03/CR06-514wp5 4(4-27-90-2) ATTACHMENT "A" RESOLUTION NO. C-90-015 FINDINGS PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.78.030 (VARIANCE) OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS ZONING ORDINANCE 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 classification. Evidence: The Cardiff Community Advisory Board finds that the strict application of the setback requirements would require the addition to be set back further than other buildings on the same block due to its location on a "knuckle" street configuration of Sea View Drive. 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: The Board finds that the variance will not grant a special privilege since the subject structure, and other structures within the neighborhood, are currently constructed to less than the 25 foot front yard setback standard. 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. Evidence: The Board finds that the current use on the property is single family residential and the remodel will not change the use or current activity. Single family residential use is permitted in the R-3 Zoning District. 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: 1. Could be avoided by an alternate development plan; which would be of less significant impact to the site and adjacent properties then the project requiring a variance; CO/03/CR06-514wp55(4-27-90-2) . 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 constitute a rezoning or other amendment of the Zoning Code; or 4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any private or public nuisance. Evidence: The Board finds that a redesign is not feasible due to the existing interior pattern of the current structure and roof trusses. An alternate location would require additional exterior foundations and would conflict with the current architectural design. The current structure was built in conformance with past zoning code provisions. The remodel does not constitute a rezoning and would not authorize or legalize any private or public nuisance. COI03/CR06-S14wpS 6(4-27-90-2)