Loading...
1993-02 RESOLUTION NO. C-93-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE CARDIFF COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH 10 FT INTO THE REQUIRED 25 FT FRONT YARD SETBACK AND 3 FT INTO THE REQUIRED 25 FT REAR YARD SETBACK OF THE R-8 ZONE FOR AN ADDITION TO ONE UNIT OF AN EXISTING DUPLEX FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1867-1869 MONTGOMERY AVENUE (CASE NUMBER 93-100 V) WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance was filed by Mr. Theodore Tillinghast to encroach 10 ft into the required 25 ft front yard setback and 3 ft into the required 25 ft rear yard setback of the R-8 zone for an addition to one unit of an existing duplex in accordance with Chapter 30.78 of the City of Encinitas Municipal Code, for the property located at 1867-1869 Montgomery Avenue, legally described as: All of lot "A" together with all that portion of lot "B" in Block 80 of CARDIFF VILLA TRACT, in the County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1469, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County August 10, 1912. WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on June 21, 1993, by the Cardiff Community Advisory Board; and WHEREAS, the Board considered: 1. The June 21, 1993 staff report to the Community Advisory Board with attachments; Application and project plans dated received June 18, 1993; Oral evidence submitted at the hearing; Written evidence submitted at the hearing; and 2. 3. 4. WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board made the following findings pursuant to Chapters 30.78 of the Encinitas Municipal Code: (SEE ATTACHMENT "A") NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas hereby approves application 93-100 V subject to the following conditions: (SEE ATTACHMENT "B") BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Community Advisory board, in their independent judgement, found the project exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Section 15301 (e) since the project is an addition of less than 2,500 sq ft in an area with cd/MN/SR93100.CA1 (6-18-93) 5 existing facilities and not environmentally sensitive. PASSED AND ADOPTED this following vote, to wit: 21st day of June, 1993, by the AYES: Crimmins, Grossman, Fullwood, Sarkozy NAYS: None ABSENT: MacFal1 ABSTAIN: None ohn MacFall, hairman of the Cardiff Community Advisory Board ATTEST: ....----'" ~""",'-'~ / ~. ¿::-~~ ~ - - '- /A:':_-~.-'-'oo::--" Tom Curriden, Associate Planner cd/MN/SR93100.CA1 (6-18-93) 6 ATTACHMENT "A" Resolution No. C-93-02 Case No. 93-100 V Applicant: Theodore Tillinghast Findings: (Code Section, Factual Circumstances, Reasoning, Conclusion What follows are the findings of fact the Board must make to approve the variance request pursuant to Zoning Ordinance 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 10 ft into the required 25 ft front yard setback and 11 ft into the required 25 ft rear yard setback of the R-8 zone for an addition one unit of an existing duplex on the 6,019 sq ft triangular lot fronting on the corner of Westminster Drive and Montgomery Avenue. The existing structure encroaches 10 ft into the front yard setback and 11 ft into the rear yard setback. The addition will not encroach any further into the setback than the existing structure. No addition to the existing 2nd story unit is proposed. The existing 2-car garage is proposed to be converted into living area and a new basement level garage is proposed as a replacement. The 5 existing parking spaces on site will remain. Discussion: Special circumstances are applicable to this property since the existing structure encroaches 10 ft into the front yard setback and 11 ft into the rear yard setback, the lot is triangular in shape with a relatively small building envelope, and no addition is proposed beyond the existing encroachments. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that special circumstances are applicable to the project due to the triangular shape of the lot, the existing front and rear yard encroachments, small building area outside of the setbacks, and no addition is proposed beyond the existing encroachments. cd/MN/SR93100.CAI (6-18-93) 7 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 proposal is to encroach 10 ft into the required 25 ft front yard setback and 11 ft into the required 25 ft rear yard setback of the R-8 zone for an addition one unit of an existing duplex on the 6,019 sq ft triangular lot fronting on the corner of Westminster Drive and Montgomery Avenue. The existing structure encroaches 10 ft into the front yard setback and 11 ft into the rear yard setback. The addition will not encroach any further into the setback than the existing structure. No addition to the existing 2nd story uni t is proposed. Neighboring properties have been identified by the applicant with larger building envelopes which would enable the construction of an addition similar in size to what is proposed without the need for a variance. Discussion: The grant of this variance does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties since other property owners are not subject to the same degree of building envelope constraints than that of the applicant due to the shape of the lot. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the grant of this variance does not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other property owners in the neighborhood. 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. The provisions of this section shall not apply to use permits. Facts: The proposal is for a variance to encroach 10 ft into the 25 ft front yard setback and 3 ft into the 25 ft rear yard setback of the R-8 zone to construct an addition to one unit of an duplex. The room addition will not change the character of the duplex use and will not expand the 2nd story residential unit. Discussion: The grant of this variance does not authorize a use or activity which is not expressly permitted in the R-8 zone. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the grant of this variance will not change the character of the duplex use and will not expand the 2nd story residential unit. cd/MN/SR93100.CAI (6-18-93) 8 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 constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the zoning code; 4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any public or private nuisance. Facts: The proposal is to encroach 10 ft into the required 25 ft front yard setback and 11 ft into the required 25 ft rear yard setback of the R-8 zone for an addition one unit of an existing duplex on the 6,019 sq ft triangular lot fronting on the corner of Westminster Drive and Montgomery Avenue. The existing structure encroaches 10 ft into the front yard setback and 11 ft into the rear yard setback. The addition will not encroach any further into the setback than the existing structure. No addition to the existing 2nd story unit is proposed. The building area outside of the setback is approximately 1,036 sq ft in area and triangular in shape. Discussion: Based on a site analysis which includes building and parking location on the site, lot shape, dimensions and location of required setbacks, there is no feasible alternate development plan available which would allow an addition of the size proposed without the benefit of a variance. In addition, the project is not self-induced since the need for the variance is due to the original lot shape, dimensions and building location on the site. Additionally, the grant of this variance will not constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the Municipal Code since the need of the variance is due to the special characteristics of the subject lot. Finally, there is no evidence that the grant of this variance with authorize the maintenance of a public or private nuisance. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that there are no alternate development plans available which would be of less impact to the site, the variance is not self-induced, it will not constitute a rezoning or amendment to the Municipal Code, and it will not authorize the maintenance of a public or private nuisance. cd/MN/SR93100.CAI (6-18-93) 9 ATTACHMENT IIB" Project description. : TILLINGHAST, TED Project number. . . : 93-100 V Project type. . . . : MAJOR VARIANCE Application date. . : OS/28/93 APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Specific Conditions: 1. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the applicant shall the shrubs and trees which front on Westminster Drive and Montgomery Avenue to the satisfaction of the City Engineer provide sufficient sight distance and a pedestrian pathway from the street pavement. trim to away 2. This approval will expire in 2 years, on June 21, 1995 unless construction on the project has begun or an extension has been granted by the Director of Community Development. Standard Conditions: 1. The project is approved by the Cardiff Community Advisory Board on June 21, 1993 in accordance with the plans dated received June 18, 1993, and shall not be altered without community Development Department review and approval. 2. This approval may be appealed to the Authorized Agency within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval. 3. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Municipal Code and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance unless specifically waived here. 4. The applicant shall obtain permits from the California Coastal Commission and all other applicable regulatory agencies. 5. Prior to permit issuance, the applicant shall execute and record a covenant setting forth the terms and conditions of this approval to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. 6. 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. THE APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PREVENTION DISTRICT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 7. ADDRESS NUMBERS: Address numbers shall be placed in a location that will allow them to be clearly visible from the street fronting the structure. The height of the numbers shall conform to Fire District Standards. NOTE: Where structures are located off a roadway on long driveways, a monument marker shall be placed at the entrance where the driveway intersects the main roadway. Permanent numbers shall be affixed to this marker. 8. RECORDATION: Prior to granting final recordation or development approval, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Deparment a letter from the Fire District stating that all fees including plan check reviews and/or cost recovery fees have been paid or secured to the satisfaction of the Fire District. 9. SMOKE DETECTORS: Smoke detectors shall be inspected by the Fire Department.