Loading...
1989-10 RESOLUTION NO. OE89-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE OLD ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD CITY OF ENCINITAS, APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 5 FT. ENCROACHMENT INTO A REQUIRED 10 FT. NORTH SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A PROPOSED ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 754 BONITA DRIVE (CASE NUMBER 89-066V) WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a variance was filed by Mannix Architecture to allow a 5 ft. encroachment into a required 10 ft. north side yard setback for a proposed addition to an existing single family residence as per Chapter 30.78 of the City of Encinitas Municipal/Zoning Codes, for the property located at 754 Bonita Drive legally described as; The South half of the East half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of section 15, Township 13, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, in the County of San Diego, State of California, according to the Official Plat thereof. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the East one rod thereof. WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on May 18, 1989, and WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board considered: 1. The staff report dated May 3, 1989; 2. The application and plans dated April 6, 1989 submitted by the applicant; 3. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing; WHEREAS, the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board made the following findings pursuant to Chapter 30.78 of the Encinitas Zoning Ordinance: TC/07/CRO5-298wp51(5-23-89) SEE ATTACHMENT "A" NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that Variance application 89-066V is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: SEE ATTACHMENT liB" BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that: (1) This project was found to be exempt from environmental review, Section lS30S(a); PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1989, 18th day of May, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Rotsheck, Tobias, Birnbaum, Steyaert, Kauflin NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSENt: None ATTEST: ~~ ~ <--- Tom Curriden Associate Planner TC/07/CROS-298wpS2(S-23-89) t ATTACHMENT "A" OLD ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD RESOLUTION NO. OE89-10 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 "privilege enjoyed by other property" in the same vicinity and zone is the ability to encroach within the side yard setback. To support that contention, the applicant has prepared a setback plat showing setbacks presently observed by the other properties in the same vicinity and zone, specifically on the same block and same (west) side of Bonita Drive. That plat indicates that 9 of the developed properties along Bonita Drive and near the corner of Requeza and Bonita observe less than the required 10 ft. side yard setback. Those 9 properties represent a majority of the development along the west side of Bonita between Melba and Requeza, and 7 of those 9 are built to S ft. from at least one side property line. The circumstances appl icable to this particular property which make it impractical to "increase floor area in a one story design" without the setback encroachment, is the location of other structures on site (the packing house and greenhouses) and the access drives to serve them. While some room for addition is available to the north, east and west of the house (as proposed), expansion to the south would restrict access or make necessary the removal of a portion of the abutting greenhouses. 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. TC/03/CROS-298WpS3(S-22-89) Evidence to Consider: Since the majority of the nearby properties have already been developed with at least one setback of less than the 10 ft. presently required under code, to allow the applicant a similar encroachment in the north side yard setback does not constitute a grant of special privilege. 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 regulations governing the parcel of property. The provisions of this section shall not apply to conditional use permits. c. Evidence to Consider: Use of the property for a single family residence is authorized by the Zoning Ordinance. The greenhouse nursery business on site is a pre-existing nonconforming use which is not being expanded or intensified by the addition to the home, and is not the subject of this variance application. No variance shall be granted if the inability to enjoy the privilege enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification: D. 1. 2. 3. 4. Could be avoided by an alternate development plan which would be of less significant impact to the site and adjacent properties than the project requiring a variance; Is self-induced as a result of an action taken by the property owner of the owner's predecessor; Would allow such a degree of variation as to constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the zoning code; or Would authorize or legalize private or public nuisance. the maintenance of any Evidence to Consider: (1) An addition of this size appears to constitute a reasonable use of the property, given the smallness of the existing home relative to the site. An addition of nearly equal area could be built as a second story addition to the home. However, it does not appear that such a solution would be as desirable or that it would be of any less significant impact to the site or adjoining areas. In addition, removal of greenhouses to expand southward would be of more impact to the site and less desirable. TC/03/CROS-298wpS4(S-22-89) (2) (3) The "inability to enjoy the privilege enjoyed by other property" as defined under finding "A" is largely the result of the vicinity being developed prior to or under different setback regulations, not the direct result of an action taken by the present or preceding property owners. and (4) No evidence has been submitted to suggest that such a variance would either legalize any nuisance or be of a degree so as to constitute rezoning or zone code amendment. TC/O3/CROS-298wpSS(S-22-89) Attachment "B" RESOLUTION NO. OE89-10 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Subject: Applicant: variance Conditions Mannix Architecture Location: 7S4 Bonita Road Case No.: 89-066 V 1. CITY OF ENCINITAS GENERAL CONDITIONS A. This approval will expire on May 18, 1991, two years after the approval of this project unless the conditions have been met or an extension has been approved by the Authorized Agency. B. This approval may be appealed to the authorized agent within 10 days from the date of this approval. C. In the event that any of the conditions of this permit are not satisfied, the Planning Department shall cause a noticed hearing to be sent before the authorized agency to determine why the City of Encinitas should not revoke this permit; D. Nothing in this permit shall relieve the applicant from complying with the conditions and regulations generally imposed upon activities similarly in nature to the activity authorized by this permit; E. Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is specifically described in this permit; and F. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Zoning Development Code and all other appl icable City Ordinances in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. G. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Uniform Fire Code, and all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance. TC/03/CROS-298wpS6(S-22-89) H. I. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows: California Coastal Commission Project is approved as submitted/modified and shall not be altered without Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board review and approval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: J. SITE DEVELOPMENT 2. K. site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file in the community Development Department and the conditions contained herein. Any change to the natural drainage or concentration of drainage shall be adequately handled and shall not impact adjacent properties. Applicant shall contact the Department of Public regarding compliance with the following conditions: 3. Works STREETS AND SIDEWALKS L. An Irrevocable Offer of Dedication (1.0.0.) shall be made for 7.S feet along Bonita Road adjacent to the property for public right-of-way purposes. 4. Bonita Road is classified as a local street requiring a 60 foot right-of-way or 30 feet from the official centerline of such street. M. Developer shall execute and record covenant with the County Recorder agreeing not to oppose the formation of an assessment district to fund the installation of right- of-way improvements. DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL N. Concentrated flows across driveways and/or sidewalk shall not be permitted. TC/07/CROS-298wpS7(S-23-89)