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 )