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)