1991-05
RESOLUTION NO. C-91-05
A RESOLUTION OF THE CARDIFF-BY-THE-SEA
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD
APPROVING A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ENCROACH
EIGHT (8) FEET INTO THE 20 FOOT FRONT YARD
SETBACK IN ADDITION TO THE 4 FOOT ALLOWED PROJECTION
FOR A RECENTLY CONSTRUCTED DECK
LOCATED AT 305 NORFOLK DRIVE
(CASE NO.: 91-011V)
WHEREAS, John Kline and Stuart Resor applied to the Cardiff
Community Advisory Board for consideration of a variance to section
30.16.010 E6 of the Municipal Code to permit a recently constructed
deck to encroach eight (8) feet beyond the permitted four (4) foot
projection into the 20 foot front yard setback per Chapter 30.78
(Variances) of the Municipal Code of the City of Encinitas;
WHEREAS, the property is located at 305 Norfolk Drive and
legally described as:
Lots 47 and 48, Block 14, Cardiff, in the City of Encinitas,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to map
thereof No. 1298, filed in the office of the County Recorder
of San Diego County, November 14, 1910.
WHEREAS,
a public hearing was conducted on the variance
application on February 25, 1991; and
WHEREAS,
the Community Advisory Board considered without
limitation;
1.
The staff report dated February 20, 1991;
The adopted General Plan, Zoning Code and associated Land Use
Maps;
2.
3.
Oral evidence submitted at the hearing;
4.
Written evidence submitted at the hearing;
5.
Development plans submitted by the applicant
received by the City on January 24, 1991; and
and 'dated
CO/04/CRO9-720WP5 (3/1/91-4)
Page 1 of 6
WHEREAS, the cardiff-by-the-Sea Community Advisory Board made
the findings of application approval of the variance request
pursuant to Section 30. 78 . 030 of the City of Encini tas Zoning
Ordinance as follows:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "A")
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the
application
Variance
for
91-011V is hereby APPROVED, and the subject deck may encroach into
the 20 foot front yard setback is described above subject to the
following conditions:
(1)
(2)
(3)
Buildina DeDartment: Plans shall be submitted to the
Building Department for lias built II plan check approval.
A permit is required for decks in excess of 30 inches
above grade. A complete plan check will be done when
plans are submitted to the Building Department. Deck
appears to surcharge on existing retaining wall.
Architect must certify "as-built" construction in writing
to Building Department.
Fire De~artment: Prior to building permit issuance,
applicant shall submit a statement from the Fire District
to the Community Development Department indicating that
all development impact, plan check and/or cost recovery
fees have been paid. Address numbers shall be clearly
visible from the street fronting the structure.
city Enaineer: Applicant shall contact the Public Works
Department regarding compliance with the following
conditions:
Street Conditions:
(A)
An Irrevocable Offer of Dedication (I.O.D.) shall
be made for 10 feet along Montgomery and Norfolk
adjacent to the property for public right-of-way
purposes unless found to be exempt per City Council
policy of March 14, 1990.
(B)
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.
CO/04/CR09-720WP5 (3/1/91-4)
Page 2 of 6
7.
8.
(C)
4.
Improvements constructed within the present or
future public right-of-way shall be considered
temporary. Applicant shall enter into an
encroachment removal covenant agreeing to remove
those improvements at the direction of the City.
Landscaping shall be provided with planting material of
sufficient height and size to adequately screen the under
portion of the deck visible to Norfolk Drive to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Community
Development.
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
Development Director, the Director may declare the
variance to have expired with the privileges granted
thereby cancelled.
Prior to Building Permit issuance, applicant shall
prepare and have recorded a certificate of Compliance to
merge the two lots into a single lot of record to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Community
Development.
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.
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.
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) (4) of CEQA.
CO/04/CRO9-720WP5 (3/1/91-4)
Page 3 of 6
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of February, 1991 by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Grossman, Tom, Cruz
NAYES: MacManus
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: McCabe
c~c
--c--,
-t-~ --
':Fo ~
Carol MacManus, Chairperson
of the Cardiff-by-the-Sea
Community Advisory Board
A~R.~
Craig R. Olson, Assistant Planner
CO/04/CRO9-720WP5 (3/1/91-4)
Page 4 of 6
B.
C.
ATTACHMENT" A"
RESOLUTION NO. C-91-05
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 vicini ty and under identical
classification.
Evidence: The Cardiff Community Advisory Board finds that the
application of the 4 foot projection into the 20 foot front
yard setback for decks is inadequate to provide sufficient
outdoor recreational area due to the steep slope of the lot,
the structure's location on the lot, and the lot's location
at the corner of a street intersection. without variance, the
property owner would be deprived of sufficient outdoor
recreational area as enjoyed by other property owners in the
vicinity.
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 adjustment does not authorize or
constitute any grant of special privilege due to the fact that
the existing structure on the lot was legally permitted at the
time of construction and the owner only seeks to provide
usable outdoor recreational area which would otherwise be
precluded due to the lot's steep slope. In addition, the
residential use conforms to permitted uses within the R-11
Zone.
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 residential use of the
property conforms to the allowed uses within the R-11 Zone.
CO/04/CR09-720WP5 (3/1/91-4)
Page 5 of 6
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 signif icant impact to the si te and
adjacent properties then the project requiring a
variance;
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
Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any
private or public nuisance.
Evidence: The Board finds that an alternate development plan
is not viable due to the fact that no other area of expansion
exists for the deck that would not otherwise preclude future
remodel of the existing residence due to the steep slope of
the lot and its location at a street intersection. The
variance is not self induced since the natural slope and
existing structure preclude an alternate development plan.
The degree of variance does not constitute a rezoning or
amendment of the zoning code since decks are commonly
accessory structures to residential use. No evidence has been
received to indicate that the project constitutes a public or
private nuisance.
4.
CO/04/CRO9-720WP5 (3/1/91-4)
Page 6 of 6