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)