1992-21
RESOLUTION NO. C 92-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE CARDIFF
COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE
TO ENCROACH 15 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 20-FOOT
REAR YARD SETBACK OF THE R-11 ZONE
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION
TO AN EXISTING DUPLEX STRUCTURE
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
2520-2522 NEWCASTLE AVENUE
(CASE NUMBER 92-017 V; TRIEBEL/HOLDEN)
WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a variance was filed
by Robert & Yvonne Triebel and Wayne Holden to allow a 15 ft.
encroachment into the required 20 ft. rear yard setback for the
construction of a family room addition and deck to an existing
duplex structure per Chapter 30. 78 of the City of Encini tas
Municipal Code, for the property located at 2520-2522 Newcastle
Avenue legally described as:
The Northeasterly one-half of Lots 4 through 9 inclusive, in
Block 4 of CARDIFF, 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:
EXCEPTING from said Lots 7, 8 and 9 that portion lying
southwesterly of the Northwesterly line of the 40 foot road as
shown on the Plat of Road Survey No. 1132 as filed in the
office of the County Surveyor of San Diego County, the center
line of said 40 foot road being described as follows:
Beginning at point of the Northwesterly line of lot 8, in said
Block 4, distant thereon North 31 degrees, 12 minutes West
(record North 31 degrees 10 minutes) 55.66 feet from the most
Easterly corner of beginning of a tangent curve concave to the
Northwest having a radius of 200 feet, thence Southwesterly
along the arc of said curve to the Southwesterly line of Lot
10 in said Block 4;
EXCEPTING therefrom the Northwest 1.75 feet of Lot 4;
ALSO GRANTING an easement of 3 feet on the Westerly line of
the Northwesterly one-half of Lots 1,2, and 3, and the North-
westerly 1.75 feet of the Northwesterly one half on Lot 4,
Cardiff, in the County of San Diego, State of California,
according to the Map thereof No. 1298, filed in the office of
the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 14, 1910,
said easement being for the purpose of a water line.
WHEREAS, public hearings were conducted on the application on
October 26, 1992 and December 21, 1992 by the Cardiff Community
Advisory Board:
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board considered:
1.
The staff reports dated October 21, 1992 and
December 14, 1992:
2.
The application and Statement of Justification submitted
by the applicant received February 10, 1992;
3.
Plans dated received September 5,1992 and revised dated
December 10, 1992.
4.
Revised project description and photographs submitted by
the applicant dated December 10, 1992.
5.
Letter of concern and photographs submitted by Dr. Margot
Kopley dated December 7, 1992.
Letter and supporting "Bikelane Study" from Wayne Holden
dated June 29, 1992.
Letter from Mrs. Virginia Higginson dated received
April 15, 1992 regarding drainage issues.
Letter from Mr.
issues.
Mark
McNaughton
regarding
drainage
Oral evidence submitted at the hearing:
Written evidence submitted at the hearing: and
WHEREAS, the Cardiff Community Advisory Board made the
following findings pursuant to Chapter 30.78 of the Encinitas
Municipal Code:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "A")
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Cardi ff Community
Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that application 92-017 V
is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
(SEE ATTACHMENT "B")
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.
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of December 1992, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Grossman, MacFall
NAYS: Hall
ABSENT: Crimmins, Fullwood
ABSTAIN: None
a '7Å /7
....' h/ C / --/f.../{ /{ /"
I '/f, 'l/ '~L. .
, / .ctairman' of the Cardiff
, / . .
{,/ Commun1 ty Advlsory Board
ATTEST:
-----/-~
.<--~- ~ ~ ~
Tom Cur' n
Associate Planner
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)
..
ATTACHMENT "A"
Resolution No. C 92-21
Case No. 92-017 V
FINDINGS
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 proposal is to encroach 15 ft. into a 20 ft. rear
yard setback for a living room addition and a deck to encroach
approximately 8 ft. into the rear yard onto an existing duplex
structure. The southerly edge of the proposed living room
addition would be approximately 28'6" from the northerly edge
of the existing San Elij 0 Avenue right-of-way. A visual
inspection and evidence submitted by the applicant suggest
that the majority of existing structures in this area of San
Elijo are located significantly closer to the existing right-
of-way than the proposed addition.
Discussion: The proposed additions will maintain a spatial
separation from the existing and proposed right-of-way
consistent with other similar properties in the area, and the
fact that the proposed addition would be located approximately
16 ft. higher than the street, resulting in a greater apparent
setback.
Conclusion: The Board finds that special circumstances apply
since the application of the full setback standards to the
proposed project would deprive the applicant of privileges
enjoyed by other property in the vicinity since the 20 ft.
rear yard setback would:
1.
Preclude the subject property from developing in a manner
consistent with other properties in the area, i.e. the
project site would be restricted with a greater setback
from the right-of-way than is common for other
surrounding properties:
2.
Restrict the expansion of living area for the subject
structure which is approximately 1000 sq. ft. in area,
considerably smaller than the average dwelling size in
the area.
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)
C.
D.
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 with the
limitations upon other properties in the same vicinity and
zone in which property is situated.
Facts: The majority of existing structures in this area of
San Elijo are located significantly closer to the existing
right-of-way than the proposed addition as evidenced by visual
inspection and information submitted by the applicant.
Discussion: The proposed project seeks an addition of
interior living area and an external deck into the rear yard
setback, projecting into the subject yard to a degree which is
not inconsistent with the location of other nearby structures
with respect to the San Elijo right-of-way. In addition, the
applicant has re-designed the addition, to the extent
practical, to preserve views from the properties to the
northeast.
Conclusion: The Board finds that the variance would not
constitute a grant of special privileges since the applicant
seeks to encroach into the rear yard to an extent which is
consistent with other structures nearby along the San Elijo
right-of-way and protects some views for the property owners
to the northeast of the subject site.
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-11.
residential use.
The project is for a
Discussion: Residential uses are permitted in the R-11 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-11 Zone since
the proposed project is a residential use.
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:
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)
3.
4.
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 constitute a
rezoning or other amendment to the zoning code:
4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any public
or private nuisance.
1.
Facts: The existing structure is such that an addition to the
common living area is located on the south side of the
building, and the 20 ft. setback crosses this portion of the
property.
Discussion: The project proposes an addition of living space
on the only practical area of the property.
Conclusion: Board finds that the variance could not
practically be avoided by the use of an alternate development
plan since orientation of the subject parcel is such that the
20 ft. setback line eliminates most of the rear yard area and
would preclude the addition of any living area on the south
and view side of the existing building.
2.
Facts: The location of the adjacent San Elijo right-of-way
results in a setback line which significantly impacts the rear
yard area of the subject site.
Discussion: The 20 ft. setback, as currently applied to the
project site eliminates the possibility of pursuing a
reasonable addition to the rear and view side of a relatively
small (approximately 1,000 sq. ft.) unit.
Conclusion: The Board finds that this variance is not self-
induced since the 20 ft. rear yard setback measured from the
existing right-of-way would preclude reasonable additions to
the rear yard area, a condition not brought about by the
applicant or the applicants predecessor.
Conclusion: The Board finds that this variance would not
constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the zoning code
since the continuation of a residential use would be
consistent with the zoning code, and the variance involves
only one property under unusual circumstances.
Conclusion: The Board finds that this variance would not
legalize the maintenance of any public or private nuisance.
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)
Applicant:
Case No.
Subject:
Location:
APN:
1.
RESOLUTION NO. C 92-21
ATTACHMENT liB"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Triebel/Holden
92-017 V
Conditions of approval for a Variance Permit
addition to an existing duplex structure.
2520-2522 Newcastle Ave.
261-142-16
for an
A.
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
B.
1.
The applicant shall cause to be recorded with the County
Recorder a covenant which sets forth the conditions of
this variance.
Upon implementation of an area-wide drainage system to
resolve existing drainage problems, the property owner
shall, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer,
participate in the installation of said improvements at
least in the amount necessary to install a drainage inlet
in the low point in the south driveway area of the site
and install an 18" diameter drainage pipe running down
the hill to San Elijo Ave.
A.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
B.
C.
D.
E.
This approval will expire on December 21, 1994 at 5:00
p.m. unless the conditions have been met or an extension
has been approved by the Authorized Agency.
This approval may be appealed to the authorized agent
within 15 days from the date of this approval.
The project is approved as submitted and shall not be
altered without review and approval by the authorized
agency.
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.
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)
2.
C.
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.
G.
Permits from other agencies will be required as follows:
- California Coastal Commission
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE DEPARTHENT OF PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPHENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
SITE DEVELOPHENT
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.
A plan shall be submitted for approval by the Director of
Planning and Community Development and the Encinitas Fire
Protection District regarding the treatment of the site
during the construction phase, and the circulation and
parking of construction workers' vehicles and any heavy
equipment needed for the construction of the project.
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 HUST 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
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)
4.
F.
District.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REGARDING
COHPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Enqineerinq
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
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
permi t issuance; or at first submittal of a grading
plan.
Drainaqe Conditions
E.
The developer shall exercise special care during the
construction phase of this project to prevent any off-
site siltation. The developer shall provide erosion
control measures and shall construct temporary
desiltation/ detention basins of type, size and location
as approved by the City Engineer. The basins and erosion
control measures shall be constructed to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer prior to the start of any other
grading operations. Prior to the removal of any basins
or facilities so constructed, the area served shall be
protected by additional drainage facilities, slope
erosion control measures and other methods required or
approved by the City Engineer. The developer shall
maintain the temporary basins and erosion control
measures for a period of time satisfactory to the City
Engineer and shall guarantee their maintenance and
satisfactory performance through cash deposit and bonding
in amounts and types suitable to the City Engineer.
A drainage system capable of handling and disposing of
all surface water originating within the site, and all
surface waters that may flow onto the site from adjacent
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)
lands, shall be required. Said drainage system shall
include any easements and structures as required by the
City Engineer to properly handle the drainage.
G.
Concentrated flows across driveways and/or sidewalks
shall not be permitted.
H.
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.
I.
The applicant shall dedicate an additional 2 feet of San
Elijo frontage creating a 30 ft 1/2 street (as measured
from centerline) for future right-of-way improvements.
TC/7/92017V.RES
(12-22-92)