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.