Loading...
1995-04 RESOLUTION NO. C 95-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE CARDIFF COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ENCROACH INTO THE REQUIRED SETBACK OF THE R11 ZONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A A PROPOSED ADDITION TO A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 344 LIVERPOOL IN CARDIFF (CASE NUMBER 95-170 V) REAR WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance request was filed by Jerald and Janna Crickmore to allow encroachment 12.5 ft. into the required 20 ft. rear setback of the R11 zone, in conjunction with a proposed addition to an existing single-family residence, in accordance with Chapter 30.78 of the City of Encinitas Municipal Code, for the property located in the R11 zone at 344 Liverpool Dr. in Cardiff, legally described as: Lot 21 in Block 66 of Cardiff Villa, in the County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 1469, filed in the office of the San Diego County Recorder; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on July 25, 1995 by the Cardiff Community Advisory Board; and WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board considered: 1. The July 25, 1995 staff report to the Cardiff Community Advisory Board with attachments including the application dated received July 5, 1995; Project plans consisting of three sheets containing site plan, floor plans, and elevations dated received July 5, 1995; Oral evidence submitted at the hearing; written evidence submitted at the hearing; and 2. 3. 4. WHEREAS, the Communi ty Advisory Board made the following findings pursuant to Chapter 30.78 of the Encinitas Municipal Code: (SEE ATTACHMENT II A II ) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Cardiff Communi ty Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that application 94-170V is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: (SEE ATTACHMENT "B") BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Cardiff community Advisory Board, in its 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 existing facilities and not environmentally sensitive. CD/tc/94170V.RES (7-18-95 ) PASSED AND ADOPTED this following vote, to wit: 25th day of July, 1995, AYES: Fullwood, Grossman, Sarkozy NAYS: None ABSENT: Crimmins, MacFal1 ABSTAIN: None ~~ ' '. ...', / ~kZØ"""- /H 'rol~ssm n Vice Chairman of the Cardiff Community Advisory Board ATTEST: CD/tc/94170V.RES (7-18-95) by the ATTACHMENT IIAII Resolution No. PC-95-04 Case No. 95-170V Applicant: Crickmore Findings: Conclusion (Code Section, Factual Circumstances, Reasoning, 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: There is an existing older single-family dwelling on the project site for which the applicant seeks a variance approval in order to add living space and a two-car garage. The subject property, located at the corner of Liverpool and Oxford, with an alley located to the rear (east) of the property off of Liverpool. The property is developed with a single-family dwelling of approximately 1,446 sq. ft., to which the applicant is proposing to add approx. 1,038 net sq. ft. of living space at the first and second story (above a proposed two-car garage). The addition is proposed to be constructed 7.5 ft. from the rear property line abutting the alley, where an existing one-car garage is located, thus encroaching 12.5 ft. into the required 20 ft. rear setback of the R11 zone. Discussion: The applicant notes in the Statement of Justification submitted with the application that the steep topography of the site is such that it in effect limits the "buildable area II of the lot to 2,100 sq. ft., and cites 26 other properties in the same vicinity and zone which have existing rear yard setback encroachments. The total 2, 484 sq. ft. of living space which will result after the addition is within the floor area ratio limitation (49% proposed, 60% allowed) and lot coverage limitation (40% allowed and proposed), such that with the intensity of development that would be enjoyed by the applicant would be on a par with that available to others developing on the lots of this size, which are typical of the area. Thus, the applicant is seeking a comparable development privilege to others in the same vicinity and zone which could be denied through strict application of the setback standards. CD/tc/94170V.RES (7-18-95 ) B. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that because there are special circumstances present the variance is warranted to enable the applicant to enjoy a use of their property comparable to others in the same vicinity and zone. 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: There is an existing older single-family dwelling on the project site for which the applicant seeks a variance approval in order to add living space and a two-car garage. The subject property, located at the corner of Liverpool and Oxford, with an alley located to the rear (east) of the property off of Liverpool. The property is developed with a single-family dwelling of approximately 1,446 sq. ft., to which the applicant is proposing to add approx. 1,038 net sq. ft. of living space at the first and second story (above a proposed two-car garage). The addition is proposed to be constructed 7.5 ft. from the rear property line abutting the alley, where an existing one-car garage is located, thus encroaching 12.5 ft. into the required 20 ft. rear setback of the R11 zone. Discussion: As is noted in the discussion under Finding A. above, even with the rear setback variance the applicant would not be exceeding the development potential available to any other developer of the 5,000 sq. ft. lots typical of this area. Thus, no special conditions are necessary to ensure that approval of the variance request would not be a grant of special privilege. 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 use of the property will continue to be the existing legal single family residence on an individual legal lot, and no aspect of this application would allow a non- permitted use. Discussion: The grant of this variance does not authorize a use or activity which is not expressly permitted in the R11 CD/tc/94170V.RES (7-18-95 ) zone. D. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the grant of this variance will not change the existing legal use of the property. 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: There is an existing older single-family dwelling on the project site for which the applicant seeks a variance approval in order to add living space and a two-car garage. The subject property, located at the corner of Liverpool and Oxford, with an alley located to the rear (east) of the property off of Liverpool. The property is developed with a single-family dwelling of approximately 1,446 sq. ft., to which the applicant is proposing to add approx. 1,038 net sq. ft. of living space at the first and second story (above a proposed two-car garage). The addition is proposed to be constructed 7.5 ft. from the rear property line abutting the alley, where an existing one-car garage is located, thus encroaching 12.5 ft. into the required 20 ft. rear setback of the R11 zone. Discussion: Although there is little additional area at the first floor level where any addition could occur without significant grading due to the site's topography, the alternative is available of adding living area at the second level over the more westerly portion of the home outside the rear setback. However, such a relocation could have a more significant impact to properties lying east of the subject property. Thus no alternative is available which would be of less or equal impact to the site or surrounding properties. The specific circumstances upon which the variance request is based are related to the topography of the si te and the location of the existing buildings on it, not the direct result of any action taken by the applicant or the applicant's predecessor. The variance relates to an addition to a single- CD/tc/94170V.RES (7-18-95 ) family residence and is not of a degree to effectively constitute an amendment or rezoning, and there is no evidence that the grant of this variance would 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 or equal impact to the site or surrounding properties, 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/tc/94170V.RES (7-18-95) Applicant: Case No: ATTACHMENT "B" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Resolution No. PC-95-04 Case No. 95-170V Applicant: Crickmore crickmore 95-170 V Variance to encroach into the required rear yard setbacks of the R11 zone, in conjunction with a proposed addition to an existing single-family dwelling. Location: 344 Liverpool Subject: I. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS A. B. C. The applicant shall execute and record a covenant setting forth the terms and conditions of this approval prior to permit issuance to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. A building permit is required for this proj ect. The applicant shall submit plans to the Building Division for plancheck and review. Please contact the Building Division if you have specific questions about plan submittal. Building plans shall indicate ground floor area (lot coverage) not exceeding 40% (2, 000 sq. ft.), to be verified by the Community Development Department prior to permit issuance. II. STANDARD CONDITIONS GENERAL CONDITIONS A. B. 1. This approval will expire in two years on July 25, 1997, 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 agency within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval. C. 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 herein. CD/tc/94170V.RES (7-18-95 ) D. Project is approved as evidenced by the project plans including site plan, floor plans, and elevations consisting of three sheets dated received by the city of Encinitas on July 5, 1995, and signed by a city Official as approved by the Cardiff CAB on July 25,1995 and shall not be altered without Community Development Department review and approval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: DEPARTMENT 2. SITE DEVELOPMENT A. The applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but not be limited to: Permit and Plan Checking Fees, Water and Sewer Service Fees, School Fees, Traffic Fees, Drainage Fees and Park Fees. Arrangements to pay these fees shall be made prior to building permit issuance to the satisfaction of the community Development Department. B. Any change to the natural drainage or concentration of drainage shall be adequately handled and shall not impact adjacent properties. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 3. FIRE RECORDATION: Prior to final development approval, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department 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 Fire District. CD/tc/94170V.RES (7-18-95 )