1990-25
.
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. OE90-25
A RESOLUTION OF THE OLD ENCINITAS
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A MINOR USE
PERMIT TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A HORTICULTURAL
SERVICE AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 225 REQUEZA
(CASE NUMBER 90-241 MIN)
WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Minor Use permit was
filed by Mr. Antony DiPaola to allow the operation of a
horticultural service at a single family residential lot, per
Chapter 30.74 of the City of Encinitas Municipal Code, for the
property located at 225 Requeza, legally described as:
Lot 10 in Block F of Encinitas Highlands, in the County of San
Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 2141,
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County
on December 4, 1928.
Excepting therefrom the easterly half of said lot 10.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on
November 29, 1990, and;
WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board considered:
1. The staff report dated November 19, 1990;
2. The application, site plan and Statement of Justification
submitted by the applicant;
3. Letters from the public;
4. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing;
5. Written evidence submitted at the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board made the
following findings pursuant to Chapters 30.09 and 30.74 of the
Encinitas Municipal Code:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "AII)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Old Encinitas Community
Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that application 90-241 MIN
is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "B")
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory
Board of the City of Encinitas that:
This project was found to be exempt from environmental review under
Section 15305 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
.
.
.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 29th day of November,
following vote, to wit:
1990, by the
AYES: Birnbaum, Rotsheck, Steyaert
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Tobias
ABSTAIN: None
ru: ~-
Peter Tobias, Chairman of
the Old Encinitas Community
Advisory Board
ATTEST:
~~
Tom Curriden
Associate Planner
.
.
.
ATTACHMENT "A"
Resolution No. OE90_25
(E)
Findings:
The following findings must be made by the authorized
agency to warrant approval of the Minor Use Permit in
accordance with Section 30.74.070 of the Municipal Code:
1.
The location, size, design or operating characteristics
of the proposed project will not be incompatible with and
will not adversely affect and will not be materially
detrimental to adj acent uses, residences, buildings,
structures or natural resources, with consideration given
to, but not limited to:
a. The adequacy of public facilities,
utilities to serve the proposed project;
services and
b. The suitability of the site for the type and
intensity of use or development which is proposed; and
c. The harmful effect, if any, upon environmental
quality and natural resources of the city;
Evidence to Consider: The Board finds that the proposed
horticultural service business is a use that is
compatible with the character of the surrounding single
family residential neighborhood. The existing single
family structure is currently served by all utilities and
the business requires no additional public facilities or
services. In his Statement of Justification, the
applicant contends that the site is suitable for
horticul tural services equipment storage and that the
equipment is adequately screened from view. In addition,
the applicant states that there are no harmful effects
or environmental impacts with regard to the storage of
the equipment and vehicles on the site.
A recent site inspection indicated that the vehicle
parking area is well maintained and adequately screened
from view by fences and a large chain-link gate at the
driveway. The site appeared to be landscaped with large
trees and hedges which also help to screen the equipment
and vehicles. Additionally, there have been no
complaints or other evidence that suggests that noise
generated from this operation is excessive.
There are, however, several possible negative impacts
related to this application which were identified by a
number of neighbors who contacted staff by phone and
wri tten correspondence. Several neighbors expressed
concerns regarding the additional truck traffic from
"Coast Tree Service" on residential streets and expressed
.
.
3.
.
safety concerns to autos and pedestrians when traffic on
Requeza is stopped allowing the trucks to back into the
parking area. In addition, the applicant and his
employees have parked the trucks on the street for short
periods of time restricting traffic.
The applicant has stated that he has changed his parking
procedures and no longer parks his trucks on the street
for even short periods of time. He has also stated that
he will re-route his trucks so that they avoid the
neighborhood streets whenever possible. The Board has
included two conditions in the resolution which address
these issues. These conditions require the applicant to
submit a proposed truck route that avoids the
neighborhood streets, and prohibits parking the trucks
on the street. The Board finds that the majority of the
neighbors' concerns can be mitigated and the use is
compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood.
2.
The impacts of the proposed project will not adversely
affect the policies of the Encinitas General Plan or the
provisions of this Code.
Evidence to consider: The Board finds that this proposal
is consistent with the Municipal Code and the policies
of the General Plan. The project will still maintain the
general character of a single family residential use.
No significant increase in traffic to and from the site
is generated as a result of this use since customers do
not generally visit the home.
The project complies with all other regulations,
conditions or policies imposed by this Code.
Evidence to Consider: The Board finds that the proposed
horticultural service conforms with all Zoning Code
requirements within a residential zone including parking
requirements, development standards, and permitted uses.
In addition, the resolution contains standard conditions
that must be satisfied to approve a horticultural
service.
.
.
.
Applicant:
Case No.:
Subject:
Location:
1.
STANDARD CONDITIONS
ATTACHMENT "B"
Anthony DiPaola
90-241 MIN
Minor Use Permi t to Continue Operation of
Horticultural Service "Coast Tree Service" out of
Existing Residence
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS:
225 Requeza
II.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
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 Community Development.
The applicant shall remove all combustible materials
within the equipment storage area.
The applicant shall provide a gated access not less than
20 ft. in width to the satisfaction of the Encinitas Fire
District Fire Marshall.
The applicant shall submit to the Community Development
Department a proposed truck route which avoids
neighborhood streets to the satisfaction of the Director
of Community Development.
The applicant is prohibited from parking the "Coast Tree
Service" vehicles and equipment on Requeza in a manner
which impedes traffic.
STANDARD CONDITIONS:
1.
2.
3.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
This approval will expire in two years, on November 29,
1992, at 5:00 p.m. unless the conditions have been mete
or an extension has been approved by the Authorized
Agency.
This approval may be appealed to the authorized agency
within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval.
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with
any sections of the Zoning Development Code and all other
MN/03/MS17-1844wp5 (11-21-90)
.
.
.
8.
applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of
Building Permit issuance unless specifically waived here.
4.
Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
a.
Coastal Commission
5.
Project is approved as evidenced by the plot plan dated
October 17, 1990 received by the City of Encinitas on
October 17, 1990 and signed by a City Official as
approved by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board
on November 29, 1990 and shall not be altered without
Planning and Community Development Department review and
approval.
6.
In the event that any of the conditions of this permit
are not satisfied, the Planning and Community Development
Department shall cause a noticed hearing to be set before
the authorized agency to determine why the City of
Encinitas should not revoke this approval.
7.
Upon a showing of compelling public necessity
demonstrated at a noticed hearing, the City of Encinitas,
acting through the authorized agency, any add, amend, or
delete conditions and regulations contained in this
permit.
Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to
intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is
specifically described in this permit.
MN/03/MS17-1844wp5 (11-21-90)