1990-21
RESOLUTION NO C-90-021
A RESOLUTION OF THE CARDIFF-BY-THE-SEA
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM
SECTION 30.16.010 A 10 OF THE
ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
1952 FREDA LANE
(CASE NO. 90-081V)
WHEREAS, Mark Francois applied for Variance per Chapter 30.78
(Variance) of the Municipal Code of the City of Encinitas to permit
an encroachment of a second story addition into the required 25
foot rear yard setback as follows:
(1) A four foot encroachment for the supporting wall and the
bay window (which extends 1 foot beyond the existing
lower level wall); and
(2) A seven foot encroachment for the supporting wall and the
wood deck (which extends 4 feet beyond the existing lower
level wall).
WHEREAS, the property is located at 1952 Freda Lane and
legally described as:
Lot 327 of POINSETTIA HEIGHTS UNIT NO.7, in the County of San
Diego, state of California, according to Map thereof No. 5089,
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County, December 5, 1962.
WHEREAS, public hearings were conducted on the application
on May 14, and June 25, 1990; and
WHEREAS, the Cardiff-by-the-Sea Community Advisory Board
considered without limitation;
CO/dc/CR06-582wp5 1(7-2-90/2)
1. The staff reports dated May 9, and June 20, 1990;
2. The adopted General Plan, Zoning Code and associated Land Use
Maps;
3. Oral evidence submitted at the hearings;
4. written evidence submitted at the hearings;
5. Revised site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted to
the City and dated received June 15, 1990.
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 90-081 is
hereby APPROVED, and the subject structure may encroach 7 feet into
the 25 foot rear yard setback; 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.
(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 the building's height.
(4) Prior to foundation and/or 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 of the foundations for the portion of the
structure requiring the variance.
(5) 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
CO/dc/CR06-582wp52(7-2-90/2)
Development Director, the Director may declare the
var iance 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) 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.
(8) 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.
(9) 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) The property owner shall pay flood control and any other
development impact fees as required by Municipal Code
prior to final inspectionloccupancy of the subject
structure.
(11) storage may be permitted under the lower level deck area
provided it is screened from view to other properties by
trellis material andlor landscaping, or other adequate
screening material to the satisfaction of the Director
of Planning and Community Development.
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.
CO/dc/CR06-582wp5 3(7-2-90/2)
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of June, 1990, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: McCabe, MacManus, Grossman, Orr
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Barker
ABSTAIN: None
G;T: e J;z-
(.(a.. .....-~
Craig R. Olson
Assistant Planner
CO/dc/CR06-582wp5 4(7-2-90/2)
ATTACHMENT "A"
RESOLUTION NO. C-90-021
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 depr i ves 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 requirement would require
the upper level to be set back 3 feet from the existing lower
level wall which would disrupt internal circulation and
external design for the structure. The lot is smaller than
other lots in the neighborhood and the building envelope is
confined by slope areas. The lower level exterior wall was
approved by the County for a 22 foot rear yard setback.
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 single family residences are
permitted in the R-8 Zoning District.
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 acti vi ty . Single family residential
use is permitted in the R-8Zoning 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
var~ance;
CO/dc/CR06-582wp5 5(7-2-90/2)
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 an alternate development plan
would require extensive support construction for the upper
level if not permitted to utilize the existing, lower level
wall along the westerly side of the building. The variance
request is not self-induced nor does it constitute a re-
zoning. The property has long been developed for residential
use and the remodel will not legalize nor maintain a private
or public nuisance.
CO/dc/CR06-582wp5 6(7-2-90/2)