1992-11
RESOLUTION NO. C 92-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE CARDIFF-BY-THE -SEA
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A
VARIANCE PERMIT TO ENCROACH 9 FEET INTO THE
REQUIRED 2S-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK OF THE R-8 ZONE
AND A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT TO EXCEED THE 16 FT.
HEIGHT LIHIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION
TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOME
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
915 EMMA DRIVE
(CASE NUMBER 92-090 DR/V; PATRICIA LEY)
WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance and Design
Review was filed by Patricia Ley to allow a maximum 9 ft.
encroachment into the required 25 ft. front yard setback for the
construction of an addition to an existing single family residence
per Chapter 30.78 of the City of Encinitas Municipal Code
(Variance), and authority to exceed the standard height envelope
per Section 30.16.010b-7b (Design Review) for the property located
at 915 Emma Drive, and legally described as:
Lot 25 of PLAYA RIVIERA UNIT No.1, according to the map
thereof No 4946, filed in the office of the County Recorder of
San Diego County, April 11, 1962.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on
June 22, 1992;
WHEREAS,
considered:
the
Cardiff-By-The-Sea
Community Advisory
Board
1.
2.
The staff report dated June 11, 1992;
The application and Statement of Justification and
project plans submitted by the applicant received March
20, 1992;
Oral evidence submitted at the hearing:
written evidence submitted at the hearing:
3.
4.
WHEREAS, the Cardiff Community Advisory Board made the
following findings and determinations pursuant to Chapter 30.78 and
Section 30.16.010B7-b, respectively, of the Encinitas Municipal
Code:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "A")
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Cardiff Community
Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that application 92-090DR/V
is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "B")
1
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Cardiff Community Advisory Board
of the city of Encinitas that:
This project was found exempt from environmental review under
Section 15301 (e) of the State CEQA guidelines.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Cardiff Communi ty
Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that application 92-090DR/V
is hereby approved.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
following vote, to wit:
22nd day of June,
1992,
by the
AYES:
Crimmins, Grossman, Hall, Mac Fall, Fullwood
NAYS:
None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
-(3~ /t d,Ø
Bruce Hall
Chairman of the Cardiff
Community Advisory Board
ATTEST:
---/--... - ~
Tom Curriden
Associate Planner
JK/92090DR/V.RES
(6-9-92)
2
ATTACHMENT "A"
FINDINGS
Resolution No. CARD 92-11
Case No. 92-090DR/V
Applicant: Patricia Ley
Case No: 92-090 DR/V
Subject: Design Review for addition to existing single family
home to exceed 16 ft. height envelope and Variance to allow
encroachment into front yard setback.
Location: 915 Emma Drive
Findinqs for variance:
A.
In reference to Municipal Code section 30.78.030
(A), a variance from the terms of the zoning
regulations 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 regulations deprives such property of
privileges enjoyed by other property in the
vicinity and under the same zoning classification.
Facts: The subject lot is made up of irregularly shaped
lot lines and topography, which slopes steeply down in
the rear yard area.
Discussion: The property in question is constrained by
a lot shape which restricts the usable rear yard area.
The lot is further constrained by topography which slopes
steeply down in the rear yard area, further restricting
the rear yard. If the "usable" rear yard area were to be
developed with an addition (an area now occupied with a
wood deck), little usable yard area would remain.
Conclusion: The Board finds that the subject lot is
subj ect to special the circumstances of restrictive shape
and topography which result in a usable lot area less
than that typical of similar sized lots in the vicinity.
B.
In reference to Municipal Code section 30.78.024
(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 wi th the
limitations upon other properties in the same
vicinity and zone in which property is situated.
3
Facts: The subject property is particularly impacted by
topographical and lot-shape constraints when compared
with most properties in the area.
Discussion: Although the subj ect residence is located in
an area of sloping terrain, the majority of lots in the
area are not subject to such restrictive topography (or
lot shape) and most would be permitted similar additions
without need for a variance.
Conclusion: The Board finds that the approval of the
variance would not constitute a grant of special
privileges since, due to site constrains of lot shape and
topography not applicable to most surrounding properties,
the variance would allow a use of property similar to
that which would be allowed on most lots in the
surrounding area.
C.
In reference to Municipal Code section 30.78.024
(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 regulations governing the parcel of
property.
Facts: The applicable zoning is R-8.
a residential use.
The project is for
Discussion: Residential uses are permitted in the R-8
zone and no additional uses are proposed in conjunction
with this project.
Conclusion: The Board finds that the project would not
authorize any activity not permissible in the R-8 Zone
since the proposed project is a residential use.
D.
In reference to Municipal Code Section 30.78.024
(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 than 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
consti tute a rezoning or other amendment to the
JK/92090DR/V.RES (6-9-92)
4
zoning code:
4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of
any public or private nuisance.
1.
Facts: The existing site is impacted with topographical
and geometric constraints.
Discussion: The existing site is impacted with
topographical and geometric constraints which preclude
development elsewhere on the site. The only alternate
development plan would be to build into the small usable
rear yard area, which would result in no usable rear yard
remaining.
Conclusion: Board finds that the variance could not
practically be avoided by the use of an alternate
development plan since the site conditions leave no other
area of the site for development, without occupying the
small usable rear yard.
2.
Facts: The existing site conditions of topography and
lot geometry are inherent site conditions.
Discussion: The inherent site conditions restrain the
property from making a normal addition of living space,
while still leaving usable rear yard area.
Conclusion: The Board finds that this variance is not
self-induced since the variance request is induced by
inherent site conditions of topography and lot shape
which create restrictive conditions to the rear of the
subject property.
3.
Conclusion: The Board finds that this variance would
not consti tute a rezoning or other amendment to the
zoning code since the continuation of a residential use
would be consistent with the zoning code.
4.
Conclusion: The Board finds that this variance would not
legalize the maintenance of any public or private
nuisance.
criteria for Desiqn Review to Exceed Heiqht Envelope:
A.
The portion of the building outside of the standard
envelope maintains some of the significant views enjoyed
by residents of nearby properties.
B.
The building is compatible in bulk
buildings on neighboring properties.
mass
with
and
JK/92090DR/V.RES (6-9-92)
5
A.
Facts: No views of significance have been documented
with which the proposed addition would interfere. The
applicant has submitted photographic evidence of other
residences in the area of a similar size.
Discussion: Based on the photos submitted by the
applicant and review of the development in adjoining
areas, the 2,079 sq. ft. home resulting from the addition
will be compatible in bulk and scale with nearby homes.
No views of significance have been identified with which
this addition would interfere.
Conclusion: The Board finds that the proposed addition
will result in a home compatible in bulk and scale with
the adj oining neighborhood and that there will be no
significant loss of views resulting to neighboring
properties.
JK/92090DR/V.RES (6-9-92)
6
ATTACHMENT "B"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Resolution No. CARD 92-11
Case No. 92-090DR/V
Applicant: Patricia Ley
Case No: 92-090 DR/V
Subject: Design Review for addition to existing single family
home to exceed 16 ft. height envelope and Variance to allow
encroachment into front yard setback.
Location: 915 Emma Drive
1.
E.
G.
H.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
A.
This approval will expire on June 22, 1994, at 5:00 p.m.
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 15 days from the date of this approval.
c.
The project is approved as submitted and shall not be
altered without review and approval by the authorized
agency.
D.
Nothing in this permit shall relieve the applicant from
complying with the conditions and regulations generally
imposed upon activities similar in nature to the activity
authorized by this permit:
Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with
any sections of the Zoning Code and all other applicable
City Ordinances in effect at the time of Building Permit
issuance.
F.
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 submittal.
Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
- California Coastal Commission
The applicant shall be caused 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.
JK/92090DR/V.RES (6-9-92)
7
I.
Prior to final inspection on framing, the applicant shall
provide a certification from a licensed engineer that the
height of the structure is in conformance with this
permit.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
2.
SITE DEVELOPMENT
A.
Prior to issuance of building permits, all appropriate
conditions of approval contained herein shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the Director of
Community Development. Other conditions shall be
satisfied prior to final inspection.
B.
All cost recovery fees associated with the processing of
the subject application shall be paid to the Department
of Planning and Community Development prior to the
issuance of building permits.
THESE ITEMS MUST BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO FINAL FIRE DISTRICT
APPROVAL. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PROTECTION
DISTRICT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
3.
FIRE
A.
B.
Address numbers shall be clearly visible from the street
fronting the structure. Where structures are located off
a roadway on long driveways, a monument shall be placed
at the entrance where the driveway intersects the main
roadway. Permanent address numbers shall be displayed on
this monument.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant
shall submit a letter from the Fire District stating that
all development impact, plan check and/or cost recovery
fees have been paid or secured to the satisfaction of the
District.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
4.
Public Works
Gradinq Conditions
A.
The grading for this project is defined in Chapter 23.34
of the Encini tas Municipal Code. Grading shall be
performed under the observation of a civil engineer whose
responsibility it shall be to coordinate site inspection
and testing to ensure compliance of the work with the
JK/92090DR/V.RES (6-9-92)
8
E.
F.
approve grading plan, submit required reports to the City
Engineer and verify compliance with Chapter 23.24 of the
Encinitas Municipal Code.
B.
No grading shall occur outside the limits of the PROJECT
unless a letter of permission is obtained from the owners
of the affected properties.
C.
A soils/geological/hydraulic report (as applicable) shall
be prepared be a qualified engineer licensed in the state
of California to perform such work prior to building
permit issuance: or at first submittal of a grading
plan.
D.
The developer shall obtain a grading permit, if
applicable, prior to any commencement of any clearing or
grading of the site.
All newly created slopes within this project shall be no
greater than 2:1.
Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to any
proposed construction site within this project, the
developer shall submit to and receive approval from the
Ci ty Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer
shall comply with all conditions and requirements the
City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling
operation.
street Conditions
F.
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.
utilities
G. The owner shall comply with all the rules, regulations and
design requirements of the respective utility agencies
regarding services to the project.
H. The owner shall be responsible for coordination with S. D. G
& E., Pacific Telephone, and applicable authorities.
I. All proposed utilities within the project shall be
installed underground including existing utilities unless
exempt by the Municipal Code.
J. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation and
undergrounding of existing public utilities, as required.
JK/92090DR/V.RES (6-9-92)
9