Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-07-16; Planning Commission; ; CDP 06-27|V 06-02 - PHIPPS RESIDENCEThe City of Carlsbad Planning Department A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Single Family Coastal Development Permit P.C. AGENDA OF: July 16, 2008 ItemNo. 0 Application complete date: October I 0, 2006 Project Planner: Pam Drew Project Engineer: Jeremy Riddle SUBJECT: CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE -Request for a Coastal Development Permit for the illegal construction of an existing 404-square-foot partial enclosure over an existing patio area, a fireplace/chimney, a built-in barbeque, and a block wall on the eastern portion of an existing single-family residence; and a Variance to allow a zero foot front yard setback for the block wall and fireplace/chimney and a 2.5 foot front yard setback for the patio cover and other structures on Ocean Street, as measured from the existing property line. The Variance would also allow the existing block wall and fireplace/chimney to remain in the future public right-of-way of Ocean Street subject to the recordation of an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication (IOD) and the execution of an Encroachment Agreement. The project is within the City's Coastal Zone located at 3015 Ocean Street within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6389 and 6388 APPROVING V 06-02 and CDP 06-27 based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein as being consistent with direction given to staff. II. BACKGROUND The applicant has constructed a 404 square-foot partial enclosure over an existing patio area, which includes a fireplace/chimney, built in barbeque, and block wall in the front yard setback at an existing single-family residence on a .20 acre site located on the west side of Ocean Street between Carlsbad Village Drive and Oak A venue without a permit, in violation of Carlsbad Municipal Code 18.04.015. A code enforcement case has been opened up on this violation. Accordingly, the applicant is requesting a Coastal Development Permit for these improvements in addition to a Variance to allow a zero foot front yard setback for the block wall and fireplace/chimney and a 2.5 foot front yard setback for the patio cover and other structures on Ocean Street, as measured from the existing property line. The Variance would also allow the existing block wall and fireplace/chimney to remain in the future public right-of-way of Ocean Street subject to the recordation of an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication (IOD) and the execution of an Encroachment Agreement. CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 2 16, 2008 Planning Commission meeting staff recommended denial of the CDP and Variance; however, the Planning Commission requested to continue the item in order for staff to review the issues raised by the Commission and consider options for this project. At the May 7, 2008 Planning Commission meeting staff presented four options for the Planning Commission's consideration. The four options were: 1) approve the Variance and CDP; 2) deny the Variance and CDP and abate all illegal structures (wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque & roof structure); 3) relocate all structures 2.5' to the west and out of the future public right-of-way; and 4) approve the Variance and CDP for the wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque, however have the applicant modify the roof structure to not be within the 2.5' future public right-of-way. After some discussion, a majority of Commissioners voted for Option #4. The Planning Commission continued the item and directed staff to return with a Resolution approving the CDP and Variance consistent with Option #4. The Planning Commission also requested that conditions of approval be added to require an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication (IOD), an Encroachment Agreement for structures in the future public right-of-way, and require the owner to get all required building permits for the structures. The Planning Commission's approval with conditions is supported by the analysis as follows. III. ANALYSIS The project is subject to the following regulations and requirements: A. General Plan Residential High Density (RH) Land Use designation; B. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3; Chapter 21.16 of the Zoning Ordinance) C. Coastal Development Permit Regulations for the Mello II Local Coastal Program (LCP) Segment, Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapters 21.201, 21.203, and 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance); and Beach Area Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.82 of the Zoning Ordinance); D. Variance regulations (Chapter 21.50 of the Zoning Ordinance); and E. Growth Management Regulations (Chapter 21.90 of the Zoning Ordinance). Approval of this project is based on an analysis of the project's consistency with the applicable city regulations and policies. The project's compliance with each of the above regulations is discussed in detail in the sections below, CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 3 A. General Plan TABLE A: GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE TABLE USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR PROPOSED USES & ELEMENT PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS Land Use Evaluate each application for The structures were built on the development of property with owner's property and currently do not encroach into the public right-of-way. regard to the following specific criteria: Site design The applicant has stated that the wall quality which may be and fireplace/chimney were constructed around 1965. On February indicated by the arrangement 5, 1980 the City Council adopted the of the site for efficiency of recommendations of the engineering circulation, or on-site and staff to have 50 feet as the minimum ultimate public right-of-way on Ocean off-site traffic safety, privacy, Street (Agenda Bill No. 6145). The etc. (Overall Land Use width at the south end of Ocean Street is 45 feet and the north end is 40 feet. Pattern-Policy C.7.3). In order for the City to reclaim the additional 5' for public right-of-way, the City would need to acquire a 2.5' 10D from property owners on the east and west sides at the southern end of Ocean Street (5' on the east and west sides at the northern end of Ocean Street). The policy allows the City to request the 10D from property owners when the property owners apply for a building permit or discretionary permit from the City. Since the wall and fireplace/chimney were constructed prior to the City Council adopting the recommendations in the report, only these structures are allowed to remain within the 2.5' future public right-of-way. The patio cover was constructed after the 1980 policy was adopted and therefore is not allowed to remain within the future public right-of-way. The project is conditioned to require an 10D, an Encroachment Agreement for structures in the future public right- of-way, and appropriate building permits for the structures. The Encroachment Agreement would allow the City to have the encroachments removed when the road is widened. Therefore the structures would not obstruct safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a residential neighborhood. COMPLIANCE Yes CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 4 TABLE A: GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE TABLE CONTINUED USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR PROPOSED USES & ELEMENT PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS COMPLIANCE Public Safety Design all structures in The project was constructed Yes accordance with the seismic without building permits and design standards of the may not currently be Uniform Building Code compliant with current UBC (UBC) and State building & State building requirements (Geology and requirements. However, a Seismic Safety -Policy condition of approval C.17). requires the applicant to obtain all building permits for the structures. The structures will be inspected by a building official to ensure that the project is in compliance with current UBC & State building requirements. The project may require modifications to meet all applicable codes. Open Space & To minimize environmental The project is on the eastern Yes Conservation impacts to sensitive resources portion of the lot, away from within the City (Special the coastal bluff, and does Resource Protection -not impact sensitive Objective B.6). resources. Noise A City where land uses are The project is located within Yes not significantly impacted by a residential neighborhood noise (Land Use-Goal A.I). and is not impacted by potential noise generating sources. CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 5 TABLE A: GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE TABLE CONTINUED USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR PROPOSED USES & ELEMENT PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS COMPLIANCE Circulation A City with streets designed The structures have been Yes to balance vehicular built on the owner's property requirements with the needs and currently do not of all pedestrians including encroach into the public children, the elderly and the right-of-way. However, the disabled (Streets and Traffic project is conditioned for the Control -Goal A.8). owner to sign an IOD for 2.5' of future public right-of- way and sign an Encroachment Agreement. The Encroachment Agreement would allow the City to have the encroachments removed when the road is widened. Therefore the structures would not obstruct safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a residential neighborhood. B. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3; Chapter 21.16 of the Zoning Ordinance) As shown on the R-3 zone Compliance Table below, the proposed development is in compliance with all R-3 zoning regulations. The side yard setbacks are considered existing non-conforming as the residence was constructed in 1951 prior to the City's incorporation. The City's zoning · code requires the side yards to be equal to 10% of the lot width. The lot width is 56 feet, therefore, the side yards should be a minimum of 5.6 feet. R-3 STANDARDS REQUIRED/ ALLOWED PROPOSED/EXISTING Front Yard Setback 20' 0' (proposed & existing) Side Yard Setback 5.6' 5'* (existing-north) 3' * ( existing-south) Rear Yard Setback 11' 85' ( existing) Max Building Height 30' 26.5' (existing) Lot Coverage 60% 34% (proposed & existing) * Existing non-conformity CDP 06-27 /V 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 6 C. Coastal Development Regulations for the Mello II LCP Segment, Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone, and Beach Area Overlay Zone. As shown on the Coastal Development Compliance Table below, the proposed development is in compliance with all the applicable Local Coastal Plan regulations. COASTAL DEVELOPMENT COMPLIANCE TABLE LCP Land Use Plan RH (Residential High Density) General Plan RH (Residential High Density) Zoning R-3 Grading Permit Required No Hillside Development Permit Required No Native Vegetation Impacts No 1. Mello II LCP Segment The project site is located within the appeal area of the Coastal Zone and within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program. The site is also located within and subject to the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.203), Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.204), and Beach Area Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.82) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The project proposes the modification of an existing partial enclosure over an existing patio area and the allowance of an existing fireplace/chimney, a built-in barbeque, and a block wall on the eastern portion of an existing single-family residence. The subject site has an LCP Land Use Plan designation of RH (Residential High Density; 15.0-23.0 du/ac), which allows for 19.0 dwelling units per acre at the Growth Management Control Point. The proposed accessory structures associated with a single-family residence is consistent with the land use type and density regulations for the property. The proposed accessory structures to a single-family residence would be consistent with the surrounding development of single-family structures. The additions will not obstruct views of the coastline as seen from public lands or the public right-of-way since an existing residence exists, nor otherwise damage the visual beauty of the coastal zone. No agricultural uses currently exist on the site, nor are there any sensitive resources located on the property. The proposed additions on the east side of the property are not located in an area of known geologic instability or flood hazard. No public opportunities for coastal shoreline access are available from the subject site. The residentially designated site is not suited for water-oriented recreation activities. 2. Conformance with public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. The property is located adjacent to the shore; however, there are no opportunities for vertical coastal access or recreational activities from the subject site as the site is CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 7 developed with a single family residence and there are no public access easements on the lot for public beach access. There is adequate vertical public access to public beaches located to the north and south of the property. Therefore, the project will not interfere with the public's right to physical access to the sea. 3. Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone The project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.203 of the Zoning Ordinance) in that the project will adhere to the City's Master Drainage Plan, Grading Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance, Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) and Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program (JURMP) to avoid increased urban run off, pollutants and soil erosion. No development is proposed in areas of steep slopes ( coastal bluff) and no native vegetation is located on the ·subject property. The site is not located in an area prone to landslides, or susceptible to accelerated erosion, floods or liquefaction. 4. Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone The project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance) to provide the public with the right of lateral access to a minimum of twenty-five feet of dry sandy beach, in that the project has been conditioned to provide the public with this access at all times of the year. The new additions are constructed on the east side of the existing residence and are not adjacent to any steep slopes. 5. Beach Area Overlay Zone The project is consistent with the provisions of the Beach Area Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.82 of the Zoning Ordinance) in that the project will adhere to the building height requirements of the Beach Area Overlay Zone. The maximum height may not exceed 30 feet and two stories if a minimum 3/12 roof pitch is provided or 24 feet and two stories if less than a 3/12 roof pitch. The maximum height of the accessory structures are 11" (fireplace chimney). D. Variance Regulations The site is 8,850 square feet in size with a lot width of 56 feet by approximately 150 feet. The site is constrained by a coastal stringline setback and slopes on the west side of the lot, as well as a requirement to dedicate an additional 2.5 feet of property on the east side for the future widening of Ocean Street. The Variance request supported by a majority of the Planning Commission is to allow a zero foot front yard setback for the block wall and fireplace/chimney and a 2.5 foot front yard setback for the patio cover and other structures on Ocean Street, as measured from the existing property line. The Variance would also allow the existing block wall and fireplace/chimney to remain in the future public right-of-way of Ocean Street subject to the recordation of an IOD and the execution of an Encroachment Agreement. CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 8 Zero foot front yard setback variance requests have been previously approved on lots located on the west side of Ocean Street. When the wall and fireplace/chimney were constructed in 1965 they were located on the zero foot front yard setback. It was not until 1980 that City Council adopted the recommendations of the engineering staff to have 50 feet as the minimum ultimate public right-of-way on Ocean Street. However, the patio cover was constructed after the 1980 recommendations were adopted by the City Council. As mentioned previously, the structures are currently on the owner's property and would only be within the future public right-of-way when the City accepts the owner's IOD. This Variance would only allow the wall and fireplace/chimney within the 2.5' future public right-of-way. Given the analysis below, staff can make all the required findings for the granting of a variance. TABLE D: VARIANCE FINDINGS TABLE FINDING RESPONSE That because of special circumstances That special circumstances do apply to the subject applicable to the subject property, including property in that constraints on the lot include an size, shape, topography, location or undevelopable coastal bluff, a coastal stringline surroundings, the strict application of the setback, sloping topography and availability of zoning ordinance deprives such property of only approximately 45' of developable flat pad, privileges enjoyed by other property in the west of the 20' front yard setback. The wall and fireplace/chimney were constructed on the zero vicinity and under identical zoning lot line similar to what other property owners classification. enjoy on adjacent lots. Due to the City's road widening policy, which requires a 2.5' IOD from property owners at the south end of Ocean Street, the structures would be in the future public right-of-way. However, the acceptance of the IOD and enforcement of the Encroachment Agreement, as conditioned, enables the City to require removal or relocation of encroaching structures at such time the City determines to widen Ocean Street. On February 5, 1980 the City Council adopted · the recommendations of the engineering staff to have 50 feet as the minimum ultimate public right-of-way on Ocean Street. Currently the width at the south end of Ocean Street is 45 feet and 40 feet at the north end. In order for the City to obtain the additional 5' for public right- of-way, the City would need to request a 2.5' IOD from property owners on the east and west side of Ocean Street. The strict application of the zoning ordinance would deprive said property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under the identical zoning classification in that similar improvements are present on adjacent properties. CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 9 TABLED: VARIANCE FINDINGS TABLE CONTINUED FINDING RESPONSE That the variance shall not constitute a grant of That the granting of this variance would not special privileges inconsistent with the constitute a grant of special privileges limitations upon other properties in the vicinity inconsistent with the limitations upon other and zone in which the subject property is properties in the vicinity and zone in which the located and is subject to any conditions subject property is located and no conditions necessary to ensure compliance with this can be imposed to assure compliance with this finding. finding, in that other property owners on the west side of Ocean Street have previously been granted Variances for a zero front yard setback to construct similar or larger-scale projects. Due to the City's road widening policy, which requires a 2.5' IOD from property owners at the south end of Ocean Street, the structures would be in the future public right-of-way. However, the acceptance of the IOD and enforcement of the Encroachment Agreement, as conditioned, enables the City to require removal or relocation of encroaching improvements at such time the City determines to widen Ocean Street. That the variance does not authorize a use or That the variance does not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zone regulation governing authorized by the zone regulation governing the the subject property. subject property in that a wall, fireplace/chimney, patio cover, and built-in barbeque as part of an existing single-family residence are permitted accessory structures. That the variance is consistent with the general That the variance is consistent with the general purpose and intent of the general plan and any purpose and intent of the general plan and any applicable specific or master plans. applicable specific or master plans in that the proposal for accessory structures (wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque, and patio cover) to a single-family residence is consistent with the RH (Residential High Density) Land Use designation and is an allowed use. The structures were built on the owner's property and currently do not encroach into the public right-of-way. However, the project is conditioned for the owner to sign an IOD for 2.5' of future public right-of-way and sign an Encroachment Agreement. The Encroachment Agreement would allow the City to have the encroachments removed when the road is widened, therefore no circulation impact will result. CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 10 TABLED: VARIANCE FINDINGS TABLE CONTINUED FINDING RESPONSE In addition, in the coastal zone, that the That the variance is consistent with and does variance is consistent with and implements the implement the requirements of the certified requirements of the certified local coastal local coastal program (LCP) in that the project program and that the variance does not reduce will not have an adverse affect on coastal or in any manner adversely affect the resources. The zero foot front yard setback protection of coastal resources as specified in for the wall and fireplace/chimney and a 2.5 the zones included in this title, and that the foot front yard setback for the patio cover, as variance implements the purposes of zones measured from the existing property line, is adopted to implement the local coastal program consistent with development of other land use plan. properties on the west side of Ocean Street. The structures are on the east side of the property, away from the coastal bluff, and do not impact steep slopes or sensitive vegetation. The structures have been built on the owner's property and currently do not encroach into the public right-of-way. However, the project is conditioned for the owner to sign an IOD for 2.5 feet of future public right-of-way and sign an Encroachment Agreement. The Encroachment Agreement would allow the City to have the encroachments removed when the road is widened. Therefore granting such a variance will not adversely affect the Local Coastal Program in that the structures would not obstruct safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within the coastal residential neighborhood. E. Growth Management Regulations The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 1 in the northwest quadrant of the City. The accessory structures to a single-family residence (wall, fireplace/chimney, patio cover, and built-in barbeque) will have no adverse impacts on public facilities. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This project is exempt from CEQA per the exemption listed below: (1) Section 15301(e) of CEQA exemptions (Class 1) exempts additions to existing single-family residences from environmental review. CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE July 16, 2008 Page 11 A Notice of Exemption will be filed by the Planning Director upon project approval. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6389 (V) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6388 (CDP) 3. Staff Report dated May 7, 2008 4. Staff Report dated April 16, 2008 5. Reduced Exhibits 6. Exhibits "A" -"C", dated July 16, 2008 --OCEAN ST, EDGE OF NEW PATIO COVER.----~ SCALE-1,20 PROJECT TITLE: EJ 11-211 I-IIG!-1 CMU BLOCK WALL TO REMAIN. TURE 2'-611 IRREVOCABLE OFFER OF DEDICATION (IODJ. (SI-IOWN I-IATCI-IEDJ NO NEW STRUCTURES IN TI-IIS AREA. PROJECT TEAM: OWNER: CONTRACTOR/ AGENT: SANT A FE DESIGN , CONSTRUCTION CONTACT, PROJECT SCOPE: -CONSTRUCT 404• OPEN LATTICE PATIO- COVER TO Tl-IE EXISTING COURTYARD. -VARIANCE REQUIRED- -MISC. aECTRICAL • NO PLUMBING. BUILDING DAT A: OWNER, VIRGINIA PI-IIPPS OWNER II PROJECT ADDRE55, 301S OCEAN ST. CARLSBAD,CA APN • , 203 • 2S1 • 03 • 00 ZONE/ GENERAL PLAN DE51GNATION , R-3 (RESIDENTIAL) BEACI-I AREA OVERLA .,.- VICINITY MAP: ,!...._J.~--L-. ,=n '\, '1c / ~ \ '-~ ;,._ -'1: .. \:". •,!>~ ·. ~' ,· ,· ''\, ,,_,.._ . , ·, 'v· . . \ ' . '· ,;t~ \~ ·.,.,.-·, ',/~ ··: J'.'\ ·,c; --✓ \ ,.A-,t'- ' I ~ ,f':· g .· ~--~- DRAWN BY, MTS P~IPPS RESIDENCE DATE: 06.06.2001 301S OCEAN ST,, CARLSBAD, CA SCALE, -NTS-324 E. Valley Pkwy. Escondido. Co 92025 060) 746-1000 43'-6" 17'-6" 14'-0" 12'-0" p--------------- v 21'-6" so'-3" PROJECT Tm.E, Pl-41PPS ~ESIDENCE 301S OCEAN ST., CARLSBAD, CA fr£:: TIE EOG£ OF .Al.I. PATIO coveR t1EHeER6 INCUIDtNc> l""O&Te, l!IEAP'16, l'tOOFING TO eE A H1Nlt1UM OF 2'-,~• CLEAR FROM nE EDGE OI= TME FROPERTY l.nE. -TI-E ~AL MATCI-I/H:i DENOTE& TI-E AREA TO KEe=' a.EAR. ~ -"' ---------'I.ct -------'I.ct (fl I (fl ·--4---------------, a;i ~ V 2013• TOT AL <EJ MABIT ABLE (INCLUDING, GARAGE) I NO WORK. IN SHADED AREAS! <U.N.O.J I MAIN FLOOR PLAN DRAWN BY, MTS DATE, 06.16.2008 SCALE, -NT5- {It Saaa ';e 1)~ ~&~ 324 E. Vall,y Pf<wy. &candido, Ca 92025 (760) 746-1000 Fr1-1 (RIGI-IT > ELEVATION I .ml.----------------------------------------------------- I EXl&TING LIPPER UNIT I ~TION -A-A-I Pfiii!o..ECT TIT~, FT!-1 (LEFT) ELEVATION I ~,.r, .... a-i.cco,.-Arc..•-"'"' .... llm.i.EC>TOl"l,t.rQ,T ... ------- ~T (FRONT) ELEVATION I F~IFFS RESIDENCE DRAWN er, MTS DATE, 06.06.2008 301S OCEAN er., CARLE:>BAD, CA SCALE, -NT5- .... ~ !:: 9 ~ co r- __ lai, ____________ _ 'l"'>IIITTOM .. .,.., """''-Al.I.. "'.OTllll..._._,,.~.,,,,o-o'. -"· i 8 SaHta ';e 1)~ ~&~ 324 E. Valley Pkwy. E1<ondido. Ca 92025 (760) 746-1000 rf City of CARLSBAD Planning Departmenft · · A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Single Family Coastal Development Permit P.C. AGENDA OF: May 7, 2008 ItemNo. G) Application complete date: October 10, 2006 Project Planner: Pam Drew 1 Project Engineer: Jeremy Riddle SUBJECT: CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE -Request for dental of a Coastal Development Permit for the illegal construction of an existing 503-square-foot enclosure over an existing patio area, a fireplace/chimney, a built-in barbeque, and a block wall on the eastern. portion of an existing single-family residence; and denial of a Variance to allow the block wall and a portion of the patio cover and fireplace/chimney to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way of Oce·an Street within the City's Coastal .Zone located at 3015 Ocean Street within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and· Local Facilities Management Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6388 and 6389 DENYING CDP 06-27 and V 06-02 based __ ~pon the findings contained therein. II. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission received a staff presentation and heard public testimony for the Phipps project at the April 16, 2008 Planning Commission meeting and continued the item so staff had more time to review the issues and options for this project. Below are some issues and possible options for the existing structures (wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque, and roof) located at 3015 Ocean Street. III. PROJECT QUESTIONS 1. Question: Which structures were built with valid building permits and are considered legal nonconforming to today's zoning code (i.e. wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque)? Discussion: A nonconforming structure is a structure that was built in conformance with applicable codes at the time it was constructed, but, due to the adoption or change of zoning ordinances, would no longer be allowed in the area which they are located or at the height it is built. To be afforded the protections of Municipal Code Chapter 21.48, "Nonconforming Buildings and Uses," a property owner would need to provide evidence that a nonconforming structure or use did conform to applicable ordinances prior to the change in codes that made the structure or use non-conforming. The structures in question in this application (wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque, and patio roof cover) are located within the required front yard setback. CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIP' RESIDENCE May 7, 2008 PAGE2 Conclusion: The City's zoning code ordinance, since its adoption in 1956, generally prohibits structures in the front yard setback of residentially zoned property from exceeding 42" in height. The applicant stated during public testimony at the April 16, 2008 Planning Commission meeting that he believes the walls and fireplace/chimney were built around 1965. The roof structure was built more recently. Since the structures never conformed to the City's zoning code when they were constructed, the structures could not be considered legal nonconforming today. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided evidence that any of the improvements in question were legally built. Instead, the applicant is requesting this Variance to make all the structures legal, conforming structures. 2. Question: Which structures were built without valid building permits and are considered illegal (i.e. wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque, roof structure)? Discussion: All of the existing structures require a building permit. Illegal structures are structures that are constructed without the required permit(s) (i.e. building, electrical, discretionary). Even if the structures complied with the City's zoning ordinance at the time of ____ _ the construction, they would still be considered illegal if they were constructed without the required City permits. Conclusion: As stated in question #1 above, the subject improvement do not comply with the zoning code today, nor would they have complied at the time of their construction. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any evidence that any of the structures in question were built with the required building permits. Therefore, the City considers the structures in question to be illegal. 3. Question: If the structures (walls, fireplace/chimney, and built-in barbeque) are considered legal nonconforming and the patio cover was allowed to stay in its present form and location would this be considered an expansion or intensification of a nonconforming structure? Discussion: If the walls, fireplace/chimney, and built-in barbeque are considered legal nonconforming, instead of illegal,· the roof structure would expand and/or intensify the existing non-conforming structures, and is not allowed per Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.48.080 -Alteration, repair, or expansion of nonconforming uses. Specifically Section 21.48.080 states that, " ... a nonconforming use or building shall not be altered, improved, reconstructed, restored, repaired, intensified, expanded or extended." Conclusion: Absent satisfactory evidence that any of the structures in question were built legally, Section 21.48.080 would not apply to this situation. However, if the Planning Commission determines that the structures are nonconforming (versus illegal) then Section 21.48.080 would be relevant. Therefore, even if the Planning Commission determined the previously existing improvements are legal nonconforming, enclosing the area with a roof would not be allowed. , CDP 06-27N 06-02-PHIP,RESIDENCE May 7, 2008 PAGE3 4. Question: Can the required variance findings be made? Discussion: There are five required findings that must be made in order for a variance to be approved. In general they are: 1-) that special circumstances exists on the lot; 2) the variance shall not constitute a grant of special privileges; 3) the variance does not authorize a use or activity not allowed in the zone; 4) the variance is consistent with the General Plan; and 5) in the Coastal Zone, the variance must be consistent with the requirements of the certified local coastal program. Conclusion: Staff is unable to make all the required findings to approve a variance for the structures to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way as stated in the staff report dated April 16, 2008. Because the City has not previously approved a variance to allow encroachments into the future public right-of-way, allowing this encroachment would constitute a grant of special privileges not enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity. However, if the structures were removed from the 2.5 foot future public right-of-way and all of the other structures are permitted, staff could m·ake all the required findings for a variance to allow a zero front yard setback similar to what other property owners in the vicinity hav~--__ _ been granted in the past. 5. Question: If the project is approved as is or modified what conditions of approval should be included with the variance to address any concerns the City or Planning Commissioner's may have about the structures? Discussion: If the Variance and Coastal Development Permit are approved, part of the wall, fireplace/chimney and roof structure would be located within a 2.5 foot public right-of-way. Staff would recommend conditions of approval to include the following: I) that the owner sign an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for the 2.5 feet to eventually widen Ocean Street to 50 feet; 2) enter into an Encroachment Agreement with the City for any structures in the future right-of-way. This would require the owner, at her expense, to remove all structures within the right-of-way at any time required by the City and would hold the City harmless from liability arising from the encroachments; 3) apply for and obtain all necessary building permits for all the unpermitted structures. Conclusion: If the project is approved as is, the following conditions should be added: 1) Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for 2.5 feet; 2), Encroachment Agreement, and 3) building permits. IV. PROJECT OPTIONS 1. Approve the Variance and CDP. If the required findings can be made, staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the Variance and CDP for all the structures (wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque, and roof structure) making these structures legal and conforming. Staff recommends that conditions of approval be added to require an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication, Encroachment Agreement, and require the owner to get all required building permits for all approved structures. · CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIPI RESIDENCE May 7, 2008 PAGE4 2. Deny the Variance and CDP and abate all illegal structures-(wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque & roof structure). Establish a timeframe by which all illegal structures would need to be removed. The wall and built-in barbeque could be considered conforming if they were reduced to a maximum height of 42" and received the proper permits. A building permit would not be required for the wall; however, a building permit would be required for the gas line to the barbeque. If the project is denied the City would not be able to get an IOD from the owner; therefore, the wall would be located on the owner's property and not in the public right-of-way. The other structures (roof and fireplace/chimney) would need to be removed since they would not be able to conform to the 42" maximum height allowed in the front yard setback. 3. Relocate all structures 2.5' to the west and out of the future public right-of-way. Approve the Variance for a zero front yard setback and approve the CDP for all structures (wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque, and roof structure). Condition the project to require the applicant to get all required building permits and for the owner to record an IOD for the 2.5' future public right-of-way. Since all structures would be located out of the public right-of- way, no Encroachment Agreement would be required. 4. Approve the Variance and CDP for the wall, fireplace/chimney, built-in barbeque, however have the applicant modify the roof structure to not be within the 2.5' future public right-of- way. Condition the project to require the applicant to get all required building permits. Have the owner of the property record an IOD for the 2.5' future public right-of-way and sign an Encroachmenf Agreement for all encroachments into the 2.5' future public right-of-way. The Encroachment Agreement would allow the City to have the encroachments removed when the road is widened. V. CONCLUSION: After reviewing the options, staff still cannot make all the required findings to support a variance for the structures in the future public right-of-way. Staff can make the findings and support a variance for Option #3. If the structures were removed from the future public right-of-way (relocated 2.5 feet to the west) staff could support a variance for a zero front yard setback. Staff would have to come back to the Planning Commission with a new resolution making the required findings for a variance and adding conditions to the project. However, if the Planning Commission chooses an option that allows the structures to remain in the future public right-of- way, staff would request that the Planning Commission provide general direction to staff regarding the justification proposed to make the required findings for the variance. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Letter to applicant dated April 28, 2008 2. Staff Report dated April 16, 2008. April 28, 2008 Dave Olds -City Santa Fe Design & Construction 324 E. Valley Parkway Escondido, CA 92025 of ftLE-COPY --Carlsbad. I:;; El;. ;1 • el· I •14 ·F131,,i4 ;11 SUBJECT: CDP 06-27/ V os·-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE It has not been determined if the existing 7'2" high block wall, fireplace/chimney, and built-in barbeque in the front yard setback were constructed with the benefit of permits. Staff has been unable to find any evidence that the City permitted these structures. This letter is to reiterate that the burden of proof lies with the property owner to show that the structures were permitted. Please submit any proof that you may have to me as soon as - possible. Thank you, ~p~ Pam Drew Associate Planner PD:lt c: Virginia Phipps, 3015 Ocean St., Carlsbad, CA 92008 File Copy \ 1635 Faraday Avenue• Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us @ f e City of Carlsbad Planning Departmen, A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Single Family Coastal Development Permit P.C. AGENDA OF: April 16, 2008 ItemNo. 0 · Application complete date: October 10,2006 Project Planner: Pam Drew Project Engineer: Jeremy Riddle SUBJECT: CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE -Request for deni'al of a Coastal Development Permit for the illegal construction of an existing 503-square-foot enclosure over an existing patio area, a fireplace/chimney, a built-in barbeque, and a block wall on the eastern portion of an existing single~family residence; and denial of a Variance to allow t~e block wall and a portion of the patio cover and fireplace/chimney to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way of Ocean Street within the City's Coastal .Zone located at 3015 Ocean Street within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6388 and 6389 DENYING CDP 06-27 and V 06-02 based _ _upon the findings contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The Planning Commission received a staff report and resolutions on the Phipps Residence on February 20, 2008. The applicant requested the project be continued until the April 16, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. The staff report for the February 20, 2008 meeting is attached. . --~ City of Carlsbad Planning Department A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION P.C. AGENDA OF: February 20, 2008 ItemNo. 0 Application complete date: October I 0, 2006 Project Planner: Pam Drew Project Engineer: Jeremy Riddle SUBJECT: CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE -Request for denial of a Coastal Development Permit for the illegal construction of an existing 503-square-foot enclosure over an existing patio area, a fireplace/chimney, a built-in barbeque, and a block wall on the eastern portion of an existing single-family residence; and denial of a Variance to allow the block wall and a portion of the patio cover and fireplace/chimney to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way of Ocean Street within the City's Coastal Zone located at 3015 Ocean Street within the Mello II Segment of the -Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6388 and 6389 DENYING CDP 06-27 and V 06-02 based upon the findings contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The applicant has constructed a 503 square-foot enclosure over an existing patio area, which includes a fireplace, built in barbeque, and block wall in the front yard setback at an existing single-family residence on a .20 acre site located on the west side of Ocean Street between Carlsbad Village Drive and Oak A venue without a permit in violation of Carlsbad Municipal Code 18.04.015. A code enforcement case has been. opened up on this violation. Accordingly, the applicant is requesting a Coastal Development Permit for these improvements in addition to a Variance to allow the illegal structures to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of- way of Ocean Street. Staff has previously recommended support of front yard setback variances up to the front property lines for other residential properties along Ocean Street. However, this existing encroachment extends beyond the property line and into the future right-of-way of Ocean Street, which no other property in the vicinity has been allowed to build into the existing or future public right-of-way. In addition, upon future road widening the structures in the right-of-way could preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians. For these reasons staff cannot recommend support in this case. The project is located in the coastal zone within the appeal area of the California Coastal Commission. The decision of the Planning Commission would first be appealed to the City Council and then to the California Coastal Commission. The project is subject to the R-3 Multiple-Family Residential (Chapter 21.16) and the Beach Area Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.82) standards of the zoning ordinance. CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIP' RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 2 III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Site/Setting: The subject lot is located on the west side of Ocean Street between Carlsbad Village Drive and Oak A venue as shown on the attached location map. The site is 8,850 square feet in size, and is considered a standard lot in the R-3 zone. Topographically, the lot slopes downward from east to west (towards the beach). The lot is currently developed with a single-family residence. The western slope contains mainly ice plant and other non-native plant species. There is no sensitive vegetation, such as coastal sage scrub or chaparral habitat on the site. The site has a Residential High Density (RH) General Plan Land Use designation, is zoned Multiple-Family Residential (R-3), and is located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ). Surrounding properties to the north and south are also zoned R-3 and have a General Plan designation of RH. The Pacific Ocean is located to the west and a timeshare, designated and zoned Village (V) and VR (Village Redevelopment) respectively, is located to the east. Proposed Residential Construction (already constructed without permits): The applicant is requesting approval of a Coastal Development Permit and Variance to retroactively approve an illegally constructed 503 square-foot enclosure over an existing patio; a 7' 2" high block privacy wall along Ocean Street; a fireplace and I I-foot high chimney; and a built-in barbeque at a·-·---- single-family residence. The existing wall, fireplace, and the eastern portion of the patio cover encroach into the future Ocean Street public right-of-way by 2.5 feet. Accordingly, the applicant has requested a variance for a -2.5 -foot frqnt yard setback. This is discussed in Section IV C of this report. For reference, Ocean Street is planned to have an ultimate street right-of-way of 50-feet. In order to increase the width of Ocean Street, at the southern end of the street where the subject property is located, the City would need a 2.5-foot Irrevocable Offer of Dedication (IOD) from owners on the west and east sides of Ocean Street. The City can request an IOD when the property owner applies for a discretionary permit. Staff researched approved plans for other properties on Ocean Street and could not find any record that the City has allowed other, above grade, structures to encroach into the existing or future right-of-way. Staff only found three at grade or below grade projects that encroach into this area (pavers for a driveway apron, a concrete drainage swell, and an underground storm drain system). The owners were required to apply for encroachment permits for the improvements in the right-of-way. Staff cannot recommend support of this variance request because the location of above grade structures in the right-of-way would constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the other properties in the vicinity and zone, and upon future road widening the structures in the right-of-way could preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians and, therefore, would not be consistent with the Development Standards of the Zoning Code and the General Plan. · IV. ANALYSIS The project is subject to the following regulations and requirements: A. General Plan Residential High Density (RH) Land Use designation; B. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3; Chapter 21.I6 of the Zoning Ordinance); C. Variance regulations (Chapter 21.50 of the Zoning Ordinance); CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIP.RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 3 - D. Coastal Development Permit Regulations for the Meno·n Local Coastal Program (LCP) Segment, Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapters 21.201, 21.203, and 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance); and Beach Area Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.82 of the Zoning Ordinance); and E. Growth Management Regulations (Chapter 21.90 of the Zoning Ordinance). The recommendation for denial of this project was developed by analyzing the project's consistency with the applicable City regulations and policies and determining inconsistencies would result from this project. The project's compliance, or non-compliance, wjth each of the above regulations is discussed in detail in the sections below. A. General Plan Table A: GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE TABLE USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR PROPOSED USES & ELEMENT PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS COMPLIANCE Land Use Evaluate each application for The encroachment of the No --- development of property structures into the future with regard to the following public right-of-way is not in specific criteria: Site design conformance with the quality which may be development standards in the indicated by the arrangement R-3 zone, which generally of the site for efficiency of'-apply to structures and circulation, or on-site and improvements contained off-site traffic safety, within property lines, not in privacy, etc. (Overall Land existing or future public Use Pattern-Policy C.7.3). rights-of-way. In addition, upon future road widening the structures in the right-of- way could preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a residential neighborhood. Public Safety Design all structures in The project was constructed Unknown. The accordance with the seismic without building permits and project should be design standards of the may not be compliant with inspected by a Uniform Building Code and current UBC & State building official State building requirements building requirements. to make the (Geology and Seismic Safety determination of -Policy C.17). compliance with current UBC & State building requirements. CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIP' RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 4 Table A: GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE TABLE CONTINUED USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR PROPOSED USES & ELEMENT PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS COMPLIANCE Open Space To minimize environmental Project is on the eastern Yes & impacts to sensitive portion of the lot and does Conservation resources within the City not impact sensitive (Special Resource Protection resources. -Objective B.6). Noise A City where land uses are Project is located within a Yes not significantly impacted by residential neighborhood and noise (Land Use -Goal A.I). is not impacted by potential noise generating sources. Circulation A City with streets designed The project would have No to balance vehicular structures encroaching into requirements wit~ the needs the future public right-of- of all pedestrians including way, which would narrow children, the elderly and the the road in front of the .-•-- disabled (Streets and Traffic property and create a smaller Control -Goal A.8). area for cars to park and thus force pedestrians and bike riders further into the public ---right-of-way and areas traveled by cars. B. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3; Chapter 21.16 of the Zoning Ordinance) R-3 COMPLIANCE TABLE LCP Land Use Plan RH (Residential High Density) General Plan RH (Residential High Density) Zoning R-3 Grading Permit Required No Hillside Development Permit Required No Native Vegetation Impacts No STANDARD REQUIRED/ALLOWED PROPOSED/EXISTING Front Yard Setback 20' -2.5' (proposed & existing) Side Yard Setback 5.6' 5'* (existing-north) 3' * (existing-south) Rear Yard Setback 11' 85' (existing) Max Building Height 30' 26.5' (existing) Lot Coverage 60% 34% (proposed & existing) * Existing non-conformity C. Variance Regulations The site is 8,850 square feet in size with a standard lot width of 56 feet by approximately 150 feet. The site is constrained by stringline and slopes on the west side of the lot, as well as a CDP 06-2;/V 06-02 -PHIP.RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 5 - requirement to dedicate an additional 2.5 feet of property on the east side for the future widening of Ocean Street. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the front yard setback from 20 feet to -2.5 feet, and to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way. Zero foot front yard setback variance requests have been previously approved on lots located on the west side of Ocean Street. However, no other above grade structures have been approved within the future public right-of-way. Given the below analysis, staff cannot make all the required findings for the granting of a variance. Table D: VARIANCE FINDINGS TABLE FINDING RESPONSE That because of special circumstances That special circumstances do not apply to the applicable to the subject property, including subject property in that all the adjacent size, shape, topography, location or properties along the westerly side of Ocean surroundings, the strict application of the Street have not been granted a variance to zoning ordinance deprives such property of . build above grade structures within the privileges enjoyed by other property in the existing or future public right-of-way. The vicinity and under identical zoning project could be modified and redesigned to classification. remove all structures from the future right--·- of-way with a zero foot front yard setback consistent with approvals for other residences on the westerly side of Ocean Street. The strict application of the zoning -ordinance would not deprive said property of •· privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under the identical zoning classification, because no other property owner has been allowed to build in the existing or future public right-of-way. That the variance shall not constitute a grant of That the granting of this variance would special privileges inconsistent with the constitute a grant of special privileges limitations upon other properties in the vicinity inconsistent with the limitations upon other and zone in which the subject property is properties in the vicinity and zone in which the located and is subject to any conditions · subject property is located and no conditions necessary to ensure compliance with this can be imposed to assure compliance with this finding. finding, in that no other properties in the vicinity have been allowed to encroach into the existing or future public right-of-way. The project could be redesigned without the structures in the right-of-way to be consistent with other properties in the vicinity and zone. That the variance does not authorize a use or That the variance does not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zone regulation governing authorized by the zone regulation governing the the subject property. subject property iil that an enclosed patio at an existing single-family residence is a permitted ancillary use. -CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 6 - Table D: VARIAN CE FINDINGS TABLK CONTINUED FINDING That the variance is consistent with the general purpose and intent of the general plan and any applicable specific or master plans. In addition, in the coastal zone, that the variance is consistent with and implements the requirements of the certified local coastal program and that the variance does not reduce or in any manner adversely affect the protection of coastal resources as specified in the zones included in this title, and that the variance implements the purposes of zones adopted to implement the local coastal program land use plan. D. Review of Required Coastal Findings RESPONSE That the variance is not consistent with the general purpose and intent of the general plan and any applicable specific or master plans in that the proposed structures would be in the future public right-of-way, which is not in conformance with the development standards in the R-3 zone. In addition, upon future road widening the structures in the right-of-way could preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a heavily traveled residential nei2hborhood. That the variance is not consistent with and does· not implement the requirements of the certified local coastal program (LCP) in that the granting of a variance to encroach into -·- the public right-of-way is not consistent with the City's Zoning Ordinance, which implements the LCP, and the development standards for the R-3 zone, which would not be consistent with Chapter 21.202.010 of the Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone, in that the intent and purpose of the overlay zone is to provide for control over development and land use along the coastline to "promote public safety and access." Upon road widening the project has the potential to reduce the available parking in the area due to the narrowing of the road in front of the property and may preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a heavily traveled residential neighborhood. Therefore, the project would not be consistent with Chapter 21.82.010 (2) and (3) of the Beach Area Overlay Zone, in that the intent and purpose of the overlay zone is to "provide for adequate parking as needed by residential projects" and to "ensure that adequate public facilities will exist to serve the beach area." The project is subject to the following Coastal Zone Regulations: Coastal Development Permit Regulations for the Mello II Local Coastal Program (LCP) Segment, Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapters 21.201, CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIP' RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 7 21.203, and 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance); and Beach Area-Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.82 of the Zoning Ordinance). The granting of a CDP and a Variance for structures to encroach into the public right-of-way would not be consistent with Chapter 21.202.0 IO of the Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone, in that the intent and purpose of the overlay zone is to provide for control over development and land use along the coastline to "promote public safety and access." In addition, the project would not be consistent with Chapter 21.82.010 (2) and (3) of the Beach Area Overlay Zone, in that the intent and purpose of the overlay zone is to "provid.e for adequate parking as needed by residential projects" and to "ensure that adequate public facilities will exist to serve the beach area." E. Growth Management Regulations The proposed project is located within the L~cal Facilities Management Zone 1 in the northwest quadrant of the City. The encroachment of structures-up to 2.5 feet into the future public right- of-way may have an adverse impact on public facilities because upon future road widening the structures in the right-of-way have the potential to reduce the available parking in the area due to-·-· --- the narrowing of the road in front of the property and may preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a heavily traveled residential neighborhood. V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW - Should the proposal be denied, the project would be statutorily exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15270(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which states, "CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6388 (CDP) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6389 (V) 3. Location Map 4. Disclosure Statement 5. Background Data Sheet 6. Local Facilities Impact Assessment 7. Photo of Inside Area of Patio Enclosure 8. Applicant's Justifications for Variance Letter 9. Reduced Exhibits 10. Exhibits "A" -"C", dated February 20, 2008 SITE MAP • N NOT TO SCALE Phipps Residence CDP 06-27 / V 06-02 C Lty of. Carlsbad I fl Et H}ii1i· ,,.,J.i-Jti U f 4n• DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership iriterests on all applications which will requir.e discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The fo11owing information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, . .... corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination a~ting as a unit." . Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% ._OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of _the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person \/\,~ ~\f;f:-e---Corp/Part. ____________ _ Title A:Pf>L-i ~,:-Title ---------------Address ~z.A €::~ ' v ~~:;·,,.>r r~✓.i-'( Address ____________ _ l:hWM-1) lt'>-C\ C-t>-. q 7,..02-~ 2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent) . Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership. include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person AffOSTA Jftf?-fi.J:!J/.f'.,_ fhi'ff5 Corp/Part. __________ _ Title O 1 ,l J fl} £ /2.,, Title ----------------::} ro ..C-._;..--....J._ Address ..:::. D I..:::, .Cfu'✓Y'-U-V~ddress /"\ ,..,1). 17. --:-1.7 . & . a ''00c \...Cv~~ j'-'t:--V,;; ·1;y_ ·o ------------- 3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST i· If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officeF: .. or director of the no~-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust. _____ ....;...__ Non Profit/Trust _________ _ . Title -----'---------Title -------------- Address Address ------------------------ - 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? D Yes ~ No If yes, please indicate person(s): ___________ _ NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. l4a vST ll v ( ~~q. , iv , A. Pl , p fo s Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 --BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: CDP 06-27 & V 06-02 CASE NAME: PHIPPS RESIDENCE APPLICANT: DA VE OLDS. SANTA FE DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for denial of a Coastal Development Permit for the illegal construction of an existing 503-sguare-foot enclosure over an existing patio area, a fireplace/chimney. a built-in barbegue, and a block wall on the eastern portion of an existing single-family residence; and denial of a Variance to allow the block wall and a portion of the patio cover and fireplace/chimney to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way of Ocean Street within the City's Coastal Zone located at 5013 Ocean Street within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The Southeasterly 58 feet of the following described property: that portion of Town of Carlsbad, in the City of Carlsbad, in the County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 36_5, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on February 2, 1887 and also referred to as Assessor Parcel No. 203-251-03 APN: 203-251-03 Acres: 0.20 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: =l"""lo=t'---/~1 ..... u=n=i~t ______ _ GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Existing Land Use Designation: ~RH_--=H=i=gh~D~e'---ns __ i...,.ty~--------------- Proposed Land Use Designation:N =-=/A:..=..-_-=-------------------- Density Allowed: 15-23 du/acre Density Proposed:N =-~/ A~---------- Existing Zone: R-3 Multi-Family Residential Proposed Zone: N=--"'-'/Ac...=.,_ _________ _ Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use: Zoning General Plan Current Land Use Site R-3 RH Single-Family North R-3 RH Single-Family South R-3 RH Single-Family East VR V Timeshare West Pacific Ocean Pacific Ocean Pacific Ocean LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM Coastal Zone: ~ Yes O No Local Coastal Program Segment: ::..;.M=e=llc...co....cI=-I ___ _ Within Appeal Jurisdiction: ~ Yes O No Coastal Development Permit: ~ Yes D No Local Coastal Program Amendment: 0 Yes ~ No Existing LCP Land Use Designation: RH Existing LCP Zone: R-3 Proposed LCP Land Use Designation: N=--'-'-=/ A-=----- Proposed LCP Zone: N~/A _____ _ Revised 01/06 PUBLIC FACILITIES School District: Carlsbad Unified Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): ~l~E=D~U~--------------- ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT ASSESSMENT ~ Categorical Exemption, =-S=ec'--'-t""'io=n'---'1'-=5....C.3~0~1.>.C(e...,_) ________________ _ D Negative Declaration, issued ____________________ _ D Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated ______________ _ D Other, ___________________________ _ Revised 01/06 CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application) PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMP ACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: PHIPPS RESIDENCE -CDP 06-27 & V 06-02 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: l GENERAL PLAN: =-=RH=-=-------- ZONING: =-=R-=-3 _______________________ _ DEVELOPER'S NAME: DAVE OLDS, SANTA FE DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION ADDRESS: 324E. VALLEY PARKWAY PHONE NO.: 760-746-1000 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: =20=3-=-2=5-=-1-.....c..0=-3 ______ _ QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): -'-'0.=-20-'--'A=C~----- ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: THE PROJECT HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED. A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage= NIA* B. Library: Demand in Square Footage= NIA* C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) NIA* D. Park: Demand in Acreage = NIA* E. Drainage: --Demand in CFS = NIA* Identify Drainage Basin = NIA* (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) F. Circulation: Demand in ADT = NIA* (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) G. Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = NIA* H. Open Space: Acreage Provided = NIA* I. Schools: NIA* (Demands to be determined by staff) J. Sewer: Demands in EDU NIA* Identify Sub Basin = NIA* (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) K. Water: Demand in GPD = NIA* *NI A -There is no impact on local facilities as the proposed project is an addition to an existing residence. Project: Owner: Address: Design & Construction 324 E. Valley Parkway• Escondido, Ca 92025 Lie. # B/C20/C47/C61/DO3 575117 760.746.1000 • 760.743.2753 Phipps Residence Virginia Phipps 3015 Ocean St. Carlsbad, Ca Justification For Variance -Variance Application 1.) Special Circumstances that would adequatelv iusti-fv this application: The topography and general site location cf the subject parcel is in itself a unique situation and location. The front of the parcel joins Ocean St., downtown Carlsbad. The rear of the parcel/ property line is located on the existing High Tide line of the Pacific Ocean. Directly adjacent to the subject parcel is a large multi-story time-share, across the street on the comer of Ocean St. and Carlsbad Village Dr. The guests that stay in the rooms located along Ocean St. have a direct line of Site into the current courtyard, offering very-little privacy or security to the owners of the subject parcel. Yehicles, bikes and pedestrians travel this road frequently as it is a frontage road to the Pacific Ocean and a source of congregation. We believe the proposed patio cover will provide the privacy and security enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and identical zoning. 2.) Variance is consistent with properties in the vicinity: The subject parcel is located along a block of Ocean St. where variance applications of similar descriptions have been applied for and approved. 3.) New use or activity not otherwise expresslv authorized bv the zone regulations: There are no changes to the existing use and there are no new proposed activities. No current uses or activities are inconsistent with current zoning regulations for the subject site. 4.) The granting of this variance is consistent with the general purpose and intent o(the current General Plan and any applicable Master Plans. The current zone is R-3 (Residential Use), Beach Area Overlay. The proposed patio cover does not inhibit the approved uses or activities of surrounding properties in the vicinity. Properties in the vicinity have submitted a variance application and have been approved for projects with very similar descriptions. The history and activity of properties in the vicinity is consistent with this application. GENERAL NOTEo: 6L DO NOT SCALE DRAWINCi!I. USE DIMENSIONS ONL 'r. iF A CISCREPANY I& FOUND TO Exl!T NOTIFY DESIGNER. 62. TI-IESE PLANS, ~EClflCATIONS AND ALL WORIC S+lALL COMPL 'I' WITl•I TI-IE 2001 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE FOUND IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TITLE-24 CCR AS AMENDED AND ADOPTEP er Tl-IE CITY OF CAlic.LSBAD, f.!~1 uac, 20os CEC, 2000 UMC, UPC -IAMPO, t 2002 NEC. 63. DEfAILS ARE INTENDED TO &l-!0111 METJ.IOD ANO MANNER OF ACCOMPLl&I-IIN6 WORK. MINOR MODIFICATIONS MAY BE REG:UiRED TO SUIT Tl-IE XlB DIMENSIONS OR CONDlTIONS AND 15 TO BE INCU.OEO M PART OF Tl-IE WORK. 64. DIMENSION!i Ali:E TAK.EN FROM Tl4E FACE OF Tl-IE ACTUAL $TUD. VERIFY ALL DIME$IONS AND CONDITIONS AT THE &ITE PRIOR TO STARTING ANY WORK, YERiFT FINDINGS, DIFFERENCES AND SU6GESTED MODlflCATIONS Wlnl DE61GNER PRIOR TO BE6INll<c6 PROJECT. STAKE OUT WORK FOR OIIJNER5 APPROVAL PRIOR TO STARTING ANY WORK. CiS. All WEATHER EXP06ED SURFACES SHAU HAVE A WEAnlER-RESISTIYE BARRIER TO PROTECT T14E INTERIOR UJALl COYERING AND TI-IAT EXTERIOR OPENrNG6 ARE 10 ac FJ.MUED IN SLJCJ.I A MANNER AS TO MAKE rnEM WEATI-IER PROOF. Gb, Tl-IE INSPECTOR MAY RE-CI-IECI< FOR EXPA~IVE SOILS AND OR 6RADIN6 REQUIREMENTS AT Tl-IE FtRST FOUNDATION INSPECTION, NO &Oil.& REPORT EXISTS AND Tl-IE EXISTING &OIL BEARING VALUE 15 APPX. 1000 PSI. 61. GFC\ OUTLETS ARE REGlUiRED OUTDOORS, BATI-IROOMS, WITI-IIN 6' OF l<ITCI-IEN SINKS, WET 8ARS, IN ATT~ED GARAGES. NEC 210.&, Ci&. Plii:OVIDE ALL NECE55ARY BACKING AND FRAMIN6 fOR ALL MOUNTED ITEMS, LlGI-ITS, FANS AND OTI-IER ITEMS Tl-lAT REQUIRE SAME. 69. -NOT IJ5a). 610. -NOT u&ED- GIO. ALL NAILING 51-!ALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITI-I TABLE 23--11-EH COMMON NAILS ONLY. 612. ALL RECEPTACLE OUTLET LOCATIONS SI-IALL COMPL'r WITI-I ~ NEC 2l0.52 a. 613. SET All IJJINDOWS I DOORS TO&'-&' TO TOP OF WtNDOW/ DOOlii:, U.O.N. 614. CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR 61-!All CA!il:EfULL 'r STUDY AND COMPARE All DRAWINGS, DATA, DIMENSIONS, SPEC.' EX~TING srn:: CONDITIONS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITI-I ANY WOfii!I<, AND REPORT TO Tl-IE DESl6NER AT ONCE ANT ER!ii:OR, INCONSISTA!Cl, C/OR OMMISION I-IE/SI-IE MAY Dl&coVER. 615. PERMANANT VACUUM BREAKERS TO BE INSTALLED ON ALL I-IOSE BIBS. ·j ~ OCEAN ST ~'ll<F!EVOCABLE,_, __ ~ OFFEROFDEDJCATIONOODJ. l'EJ1'-l'i-llGi-lCt1JBLOCi:: WALL TO!<EMAIN. -~~ / 9,1g ',,,/ I w ', 5 ' / i ',~ / (NJ I Q ffi I u EXISTING J ~ I 6UILDING !UUl I u (Qi I ~ J fill F 3 z ROPOSED~ !UUl u i ~ PATIO COVER. 7 0 I ~ I I I I I I I I l . t~f~ffe,J 'r(if:)fiJ;' PATIO COYER &MAl.l El<TEND TO t.lE EP6E OF Tl-IE EXl$TING BL.OCK WALL eur 1«:'T eETOND IJNOE);: ANT Cll2CIJM&UNCES. --U&' Tl-IE Rmil!.E ROAO UDBIING OCCUR$ TIE 61.0CK wm AMO AU NEW PATIO ROOF WITHIN Tl-IE 2'-4>' I.OD. &.!All BE QIT-6ACK 0'1: REMOvED TO CLEA!.: Tl,£ LO.D. AW.- 2-Ciil.'1: C.ARAGE TORE"liil.lN. ,'-O'w'DFENCE "lf Q I J I !UUl u (Qi I I ~ fill I F I z !UUl I u ~ ~ 7 0 ~ ~ I I I I I I I I PROJECT TEAM: OWNER, VIRGINIA PHIPPS 3015 OCEAN ST. CARLSBAD, CA CONTRACTOR/ AGENT, &ANT A FE DE&IGN , CON&TRUCTION CONTACT, BMP'a: /STORM.WATER QUALITY 'eEST -~~------1 MICHAEL SMEE OR DAVE OLDS MANAGEMENT PRACTICES') -TEl'F'OAARTl51"P'•- ABBR. f>YM. DE&CRIPTION WM•! m MATERIAL DELIVEFl:T • 6TORAGE WM-0 ,,.#~ CONCRETE WAS.TE WM•O ~ eDLID WASTE MGMT. • MATEJii!IAL S.TAGINGo. UIM•• 8 SANITARY WA5TE MGMT. WM-6 & 1--!AZARDOUS WA5TE MGMT. 65-6/& /"'t-,,,,,. MULCI--I (INTERIOR OF &IL T FENCE) &C-1 .,r' SILT FENCE TOTAL GROUND AREA DISTURBED , .001 ACRES. olTE PLAN SCALE· ldO FR ARED er, MICHAEL SMEE SANT A FE DESIGN • CONSTRUCTION , .. o . 141> • 1000 LIC' B-515117 324 E. VALLEY PKWY. ESCONDIDO, CA <12025 PH, 1io0.74io.lOOO FAX, 7io0.143.2153 EMAIL, MTSMEE•GMAIL.COM e~EET INDEX: T& I.I A 2.1 A 2.2 COVE:Fi! &1-lEET C &ITE PLAN. FLOOR PLAN. ELEVATION&, &ECTION&. PROJECT ecOPE: ~STRUCT &03! PATIO COVER TO T~E EXl&TING COURT'!'ARD. ·VARIANCE REQUIRED· -MISC. ELECTRICAL . • NO PLUMBING. BUILDING DATA: OWNER, VIRGINIA PHIPPS OWNER II PROJECT ADDRESS, 3015 OCEAN ST. CARLSBAD, CA APN • 1 203 . 2S1 . 03 , 00 ZONE/ GENERAL FLAN DEE>IGNATION, R-3 (RE61DENTIALJ BEACH AREA OVERLAY SET-FRONT (Fl"!-20'-o' BACK&, SIDE rm-s'-o' MIN TO 10'-o' MAX (kl• OF LOT UIDTMJ LOT , 56' (.kl) , , .• sr SETBACK REAR nm-REAR y ARD IS LINE LOT OF MIGM TIDE. COVERAGE, LOT , 8~;()1 FOOTPRINT , 3,000! 3,000 I 8~;o • (ll.9/ l-4• LOT COVERAGE (bO• MAX , COMPLIANCE! SQUARE FOOT AGE, 2-UNITS EXl6T!N6 TOT AL 2,121~ VICINITY MAP: :I ]>. -z jl! 0 0 ~ 1J " ]>. l_j;SC~lr 6Z II' Li): IJ1 ()_ ~ ~ i z i I F z () t.. 11-011 40'-o" 1'-011 <()! ··~--~•,0• t.o•.••·.o• t•·-•.6'-0" ! 12.0__:_.~·-o• t•".•6'-0" ///~// 7-/Y / ,/ /, //////_// / , , II' ~ IJ1 :; ~ :J ~ /al~// // J//~ rn;;;;::;:/,,:>/_;~~1,: / // / //, ,-/// , / / / / // X / ~ / / //, ,_ / / / / // !/// 1 /// / / / /: / ,:z / ,//// .,--7'7'T-,,P::;r.~ ;/// ~-/ '/ / // / , [/ // // / / ,/ ,/\/ ,/ /'///' // /f/' / / //,/ ;(iJ~1/ ,✓r-... ~ /~3/(~~·-,· ;:;;_ ( ':,,? \\': ~ 20 0 --f ~~ z ~@ )> ;o;c )> }>, ffios ! ,TE REMA!'aC& ~:i , ~ h ,.1.=~I ::::=: / -~/ -?lli:I 02:J~;i ~ I~ ~->-// ~ Fi%/'';,// (I ~ ' //.; ,. , m/ //-_;j i3 ci /,'), /( I , )/'-. A' / : ' / 10;·\ / ;/ 'v . / ___ ,,." ,. :.-,. /'I/ /\ \ ,/' / 1/ 1/ ( ,1 //' '', ,/,,/ n;i ! it ~;,1 i ,m f 1~ 1/ \ I // ' ' ·:/ / ' ' /, y--7"7-/{ ___ / ------~-G.A.l'tAG~OOOI'! 191-611 18'-i:," 9'-911 b'-Oll IS'-9" 2·+0"" ,,, 301-311 481 -~11 <Qi 301!> OCEAN ST,, CARLSBAD, 31-311 ,,, 18,ii ~ ~~· .~,-i ~ -~~~ h~-~ ~ -~ ~ --~--I __ •= H dtiW !~ ~~~ti! ijl lhi i~ tj-1; <l~ ihi~ ~~ ~r ►t ~~ i~·1· ~~ 11 I ~§ < ~ :: ~ ~, ti ~ i~ iio ~ h ~ I ;! ll1, • Seutta 'Je '!)e4UJ# ~&~ , ,o,1TE~~AL.I 3l4[Vpll,yPkwyEtcondtdo[q92Q25 (760}746:1000 I NORTH (RIGHT) ELEVATION I I SOUTH (LEFT) ELEV A TION I I EXJf>T~ LOWER UNJT l I SECTION -A-A-I I EAST (FRONT) ELEVATION I • • • • City of Carlsbad Planning Departmen~ A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Single Family Coastal Development Permit P .C. AGENDA OF: April 16, 2008 ItemNo. 0 Application complete date: October I 0,2006 Project Planner: Pam Drew Project Engineer: Jeremy Riddle SUBJECT: CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE -Request for denfal of a Coastal Development Permit for the illegal construction of an existing 503-square-foot enclosure over an existing patio area, a fireplace/chimney, a built-in barbeque, and a block wall on the eastern portion of an existing single-family residence; and denial of a Variance to allow the block wall and a portion of the patio cover and fireplace/chimney to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way of Ocean Street within the City's Coastal .Zone located at 3015 Ocean Street within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. ---,-..- I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6388 and 6389 DENYING CDP 06-27 and V 06-02 based upon the findings contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The Planning Commission received a staff report and resolutions on the Phipps Residence on February 20, 2008. The applicant requested the project be continued until the April 16, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. The staff report for the February 20, 2008 meeting is attached . le City of Carlsbad Planning Departme, A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION P.C. AGENDA OF: February 20, 2008 Item No. Application complete date: October I 0, 2006 Project Planner: Pam Drew Project Engineer: Jeremy Riddle SUBJECT: CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE -Request for denial of a Coastal Development Permit for the illegal construction of an existing 503-square-foot enclosure over an existing patio area, a fireplace/chimney, a built-in barbeque, and a block wall on the eastern portion of an existing single-family residence; and denial of a Variance to allow the block wall and a portion of the patio cover and fireplace/chimney to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way of Ocean Street within the City's Coastal Zone located at 30 I 5 Ocean Street within the Mello II Segment of the· Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Local Facilities Management Zone I. · I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6388 and 6389 DENYING CDP 06-27 and V 06-02 based upon the findings contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The applicant has constructed a 503 square-foot enclosure over an existing patio area, which includes a fireplace, built in barbeque, and block wall in the front yard setback at an existing single-family residence on a .20 acre site located on the west side of Ocean Street between Carlsbad Village Drive and Oak A venue without a permit in violation of Carlsbad Municipal Code 18.04.015. A code enforcement case has been opened up on this violation. Accordingly, the applicant is requesting a Coastal Development Permit for these improvements in addition to a Variance to allow the illegal structures to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of- way of Ocean Street. Staff has previously recommended support of front yard setback variances up to the front property lines for other residential properties along Ocean Street. However, this existing encroachment extends beyond the property line and into the future right-of-way of Ocean Street, which no other property in the vicinity has been allowed to build into the existing or future public right-of-way. In addition, upon future road widening the structures in the right-of-way could preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians. For these reasons staff cannot recommend support in this case. The project is located in the coastal zone within the appeal area of the California Coastal Commission. The decision of the Planning Commission would first be appealed to the City Council and then to the California Coastal Commission. The • • project is subject to the R-3 Multiple-Family Residential (Chapter 21.16) and the Beach Area • Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.82) standards of the zoning ordinance. • • • CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHI. RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 2 III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Site/Setting: The subject lot is located on the west side of Ocean Street between Carlsbad Village Drive and Oak A venue as shown on the attached location map. The site is 8,850 square feet in size, and is considered a standard lot in the R-3 zone. Topographically, the lot slopes downward from east to west (towards the beach). The lot is currently developed with a single-family residence. The western slope contains mainly ice plant and other non-native plant species. There is no sensitive vegetation, such as coastal sage scrub or chaparral habitat on the site. The site has a Residential High Density (RH) General Plan Land Use desig.p.ation, is zoned Multiple-Family Residential (R-3), and is located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ). Surrounding properties to the north and south are also zoned R-3 and have a General Plan designation of RH. The Pacific Ocean is located to the west and a timeshare, designated and zoned Village (V) and VR (Village Redevelopment) respectively, is located to the east. Proposed Residential Construction (already constructed without permits): The applicant is requesting approval of a Coastal Development Permit and Variance to retroactively approve an illegally constructed 503 square-foot enclosure over an existing patio; a 7' 2" high block privacy wall along Ocean Street; a fireplace and 11-foot high chimney; and a built-in barbeque at--a-~- single-family residence. The existing wall, fireplace, and the eastern portion of the patio cover encroach into the future Ocean Street public right-of-way by 2.5 feet. Accordingly, the applicant has requested a variance for a -2.5 -foot fr~mt yard setback. This is discussed in Section IV C of this report. For reference, Ocean Street is planned to have an ultimate street right-of-way of 50-feet. In order to increase the width of Ocean Street, at the southern end of the street where the subject property is located, the City would need a 2.5-foot Irrevocable Offer of Dedication (IOD) from owners on the west and east sides of Ocean Street. The City can request an IOD when the property owner applies for a discretionary permit. Staff researched approved plans for other properties on Ocean Street and could not find any record that the City has allowed other, above grade, structures to encroach into the existing or future right-of-way. Staff only found three at grade or below grade projects that encroach into this area (pavers for a driveway apron, a concrete drainage swell, and an underground storm drain system). The owners were required to apply for encroachment permits for the improvements in the right-of-way. Staff cannot recommend support of this variance request because the location of above grade structures in the right-of-way would constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the other properties in the vicinity and zone, and upon future road widening the structures in the right-of-way could preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians and, therefore, would not be consistent with the Development Standards of the Zoning Code and the General Plan. IV. ANALYSIS The project is subject to the following regulations and requirements: A. General Plan Residential High Density (RH) Land Use designation; B. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3; Chapter 21.16 of the Zoning Ordinance); C. Variance regulations (Chapter 21.50 of the Zoning Ordinance); -CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIPPS RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 3 D. Coastal Development Permit Regulations for the Mello II Local Coastal Program (LCP) Segment, Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapters 21.201, 21.203, and 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance); and Beach Area Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.82 of the Zoning Ordinance); and E. Growth Management Regulations (Chapter 21.90 of the Zoning Ordinance). The recommendation for denial of this project was developed by analyzing the project's consistency with the applicable City regulations and policies and determining inconsistencies would result from this project. The project's compliance, or non-compliance, with each of the above regulations is discussed in detail in the sections below. A. General Plan Table A: GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE TABLE USE, CLASSIFICATION., GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR PROPOSED USES & ELEMENT PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS COMPLIANCE Land Use Evaluate each application for The encroachment of the No ., .-- development of property structures into the future with regard to the following public right-of-way is not in specific criteria: Site design conformance with the quality which may be development standards in the indicated by the arrangement R-3 zone, which generally of the site for efficiency or apply to structures and circulation, or on-site and improvements contained off-site traffic safety, within property lines, not in privacy, etc. (Overall Land existing or future public Use Pattern-Policy C.7.3). rights-of-way. In addition, upon future road widening the structures in the right-of- way could preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a residential neighborhood. Public Safety Design all structures in The project was constructed Unknown. The accordance with the seismic without building permits and project should be design standards of the may not be compliant with inspected by a Uniform Building Code and current UBC & State building official State building requirements building requirements. to make the (Geology and Seismic Safety determination of -Policy C.17). compliance with current UBC & State building requirements. • i----- • • • • • CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHI. RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 4 Table A: GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE TABLE CONTINUED USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL, OBJECTIVE OR PROPOSED USES & ELEMENT PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS COMPLIANCE Open Space To minimize environmental Project is on the eastern Yes & impacts to sensitive portion of the lot and does Conservation resources within the City not impact sensitive (Special Resource Protection resources. -Objective B.6). Noise A City where land uses are Project is located within a Yes not significantly impacted by residential neighborhood and noise (Land Use -Goal A.1 ). is not impacted by potential noise generating sources. Circulation A City with streets designed The project would have No to balance vehicular structures encroaching into requirements with the needs the future public right-of- of all pedestrians including way, which would narrow children, the elderly and the the road in front of the --- disabled (Streets and Traffic property and create a smaller Control -Goal A.8). area for cars to park and thus force pedestrians and bike riders further into the public -right-of-way and areas ... traveled by cars. B. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3; Chapter 21.16 of the Zoning Ordinance) R-3 COMPLIANCE TABLE LCP Land Use Plan RH (Residential High Density) General Plan RH (Residential High Density) Zoning R-3 Grading Permit Required No Hillside Development Permit Required No Native Vegetation Impacts No STANDARD REQUIRED/ALLOWED PROPOSED/EXISTING Front Yard Setback 20' -2.5' (proposed & existing) Side Yard Setback 5.6' 5' * ( existing-north) 3' * ( existing-south) Rear Yard Setback 11' 85' ( existing) Max Building Height 30' 26.5' (existing) Lot Coverage 60% 34% (proposed & existing) * Existing non-conformity C. Variance Regulations The site is 8,850 square feet in size with a standard lot width of 56 feet by approximately 150 feet. The site is constrained by stringline and slopes on the west side of the lot, as well as a ~ CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIi RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 5 requirement to dedicate an additional 2.5 feet of property on the east side for the future widening of Ocean Street. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the front yard setback from 20 feet to -2.5 feet, and to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way. Zero foot front yard setback variance requests have been previously approved on lots located on the west side of Ocean Street. However, no other above grade structures have been approved within the future public right-of-way. Given the below analysis, staff cannot make all the required findings for the granting of a variance. Table D: VARIANCE FINDINGS TABLE FINDING RESPONSE That because of special circumstances That special circumstances do not apply to the applicable to the subject property, including subject property in that all the adjacent size, shape, topography, location or properties along the westerly side of Ocean surroundings, the strict application of the Street have not been granted a variance to zoning ordinance deprives such property of build above grade structures within the privileges enjoyed by other property in the existing or future public right-of-way. The vicinity and under identical zoning project could be modified and redesigned to classification. remove all structures from the future right.:-- of-way with a zero foot front yard setback consistent with approvals for other residences on the westerly side of Ocean Street. The strict application of the zoning -ordinance would not deprive said property of --privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under the identical zoning classification, because no other property owner has been allowed to build in the existing or future public right-of-way. That the variance shall not constitute a grant of That the granting ·of this variance would special privileges inconsistent with the constitute a grant of special privileges limitations upon other properties in the vicinity inconsistent with the limitations upon other and zone in which the subject property is properties in the vicinity and zone in which the located and is subject to any conditions· subject property is located and no conditions necessary to ensure compliance with this can be imposed to assure compliance with this finding. finding, in that no other properties in the vicinity have been allowed to encroach into the existing or future public right-of-way. The project could be redesigned without the structures in the right-of-way to be consistent with other properties in the vicinity and zone. That the variance does not authorize a use or That the variance does not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zone regulation governing authorized by the zone regulation governing the the subject property. subject property in that an enclosed patio at an existing single-family residence is a permitted ancillary use. • ---- • • • • • CDP 06-27N 06-02 -PHnl RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 6 Table D: VARIANCE FINDINGS TABLE CONTINUED FINDING RESPONSE That the variance is consistent with the general That the variance is not consistent with the purpose and intent of the general plan and any general purpose and intent of the general plan applicable specific or master plans. and any applicable specific or master plans in that the proposed structures would be in the future public right-of-way, which is not in conformance with the development standards in the R-3 zone. In addition, upon future road widening the structures in the right-of-way could preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a heavily traveled residential nei~hborhood. In addition, in the coastal zone, that the That the variance is not consistent with and variance is consistent with and implements the does not implement the requirements of the requirements of the certified local coastal certified local coastal program (LCP) in that program and that the variance does not reduce the granting of a variance to encroach into -- or in any manner adversely affect the the public right-of-way is not consistent with protection of coastal resources as specified in the City's Zoning Ordinance, which the zones included in this title, and that the implements the LCP, and the development variance implements the purposes of zones standards for the R-3 zone, which would not adopted to implement the local coastal program be consistent with Chapter 21.202.010 of the land use plan. Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay . Zone, in that the intent and purpose of the overlay zone is to provide for control over development and land use along the coastline to "promote public safety and access." Upon road widening the project has the potential to reduce the available parking in the area due to the narrowing of the road in front of the property and may preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a heavily traveled residential neighborhood. Therefore, the project would not be consistent with Chapter 21.82.010 (2) and (3) of the Beach Area Overlay Zone, in that the intent and purpose of the overlay zone is to "provide for adequate parking as needed by residential projects" and to "ensure that adequate public facilities will exist to serve the beach area." D . Review of Required Coastal Findings The project is subject to the following Coastal Zone Regulations: Coastal Development Permit Regulations for the Mello II Local Coastal Program (LCP) Segment, Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapters 21.201, r- CDP 06-27 N 06-02 -PHIi RESIDENCE February 20, 2008 Page 7 21.203, and 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance); and Beach Area Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.82 of the Zoning Ordinance). The granting of a CDP and a Variance for structures to encroach into the public right-of-way would not be consistent with Chapter 21.202.010 of the Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay · Zone, in that the intent and purpose of the overlay zone is to provide for control over development and land use along the coastline to "promote public safety and access." In addition, the project would not be consistent with Chapter 21.82.010 (2) and (3) of the Beach Area Overlay Zone, in that the intent and purpose of the overlay zone is to "provi~e for adequate parking as needed by residential projects" and to "ensure that adequate public facilities will exist to serve the beach area." E. Growth Management Regulations The proposed project is located within the Local Facilities Management Zone 1 in the northwest quadrant of the City. The encroachment of structures up to 2.5 feet into the future public right- of-way may have an adverse impact on public facilities because upon future road widening the structures in the right-of-way have the potential to reduce the available parking in the area due t-o--~- the narrowing of the road in front of the property and may preclude safe and efficient movement of traffic and pedestrians within a heavily traveled residential neighborhood. V. ENVIRONMENT AL REVIEW Should the proposal be denied, the project would be statutorily exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15270(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which states, "CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6388 (CDP) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6389 (V) 3. Location Map 4. Disclosure Statement 5. Background Data Sheet 6. Local Facilities Impact Assessment 7. Photo of Inside Area of Patio Enclosure 8. Applicant's Justifications for Variance Letter 9. Reduced Exhibits 10. Exhibits "A" -"C", dated February 20, 2008 • • • SITE MAP • N NOT TO SCALE Phipps Residence CDP 06-27 / V 06-02 • • • • • • l· City of Carlsbad •~Eiibii ,i• •'•i?:f.Jti hi4u• DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership iriterests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The fo1Iowing information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, . .... corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municip2Jity, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination a~ting as a unit." . Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. --~- 1. 2. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide th·e COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% ~OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) -Ji If Person !"'\\~v ~\.~ Corp/Part . 5 . ------------- Title APPL-\~,_-Title ____ ~---------- Address t,ZA €=. 'v~~~r-f~✓-t"T Address ____________ _ • .,,-. 'I.,, -- P:,;u;i"\.1> lt'>-C\ C.,.P. q L,,02.. '::> OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or - partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person A~ O sflf. Vii}\ 1 :v J~~ f h i'f f5 Corp/Part __________ _ 0 ' I/I'. Title 1 ,1 1 /\ J c IG--Title ______________ _ Address 3. O I _s; Ocec,,,,-r-St,~ddress -------------0: J Mx .il j~v C/d-oO&' .... 3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officeF: .. or director of the non-profit- organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. · Non Profit/Trust. ________ . Non Profit/Trust _________ _ Title ------'--------Title _____________ _ Address __________ _ Address ____________ _ -4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? D Yes ~ No If yes, please indicate person(s): ___________ _ NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. A8 vST.-1 V L ~~3 t ,v I A. Pl I P fo s Print or type name of. owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 • • • • • -BACKGROUND DATA SHEET - CASE NO: CDP 06-27 & V 06-02 CASE NAME: PHIPPS RESIDENCE APPLICANT: DAVE OLDS, SANTA FE DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for denial of a Coastal Development Permit for the illegal· construction of an existing 503-sguare-foot enclosure over an existing patio area, a fireplace/chimney, a built-in barbegue, and a block wall on the eastern portion of an existing single-family residence; and denial of a Variance to allow the block wall and a portion of the patio cover and fireplace/chimney to encroach up to 2.5 feet into the future public right-of-way of Ocean Street within the City's Coastal Zone located at 5013 Ocean Street within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The Southeasterly 58 feet of the following described property: that portion of Town of Carlsbad, in the City of Carlsbad, in the County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 365, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on February 2, 1887 and also'referred to as Assessor Parcel No. 203-251-03 APN: 203-251-03 Acres: 0.20 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: .;;;..1..a.lo"""'t'"-'-/""""1'-u=n=i-'-t _______ ---_--- GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Existing Land Use Designation: =-=RH=-----"-'H=igh==-=D--=-en=s=it"-'y _______________ _ Proposed Land Use Designation: -'-N-'--/A--=--------------------- Density Allowed: 15-23 du/acre Density Proposed: .:...Ne:..:/ A:....=_ _________ _ Existing Zone: R-3 Multi-Family Residential Proposed Zone:N -'--'--/A~---------- Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use: Zoning General Plan Current Land Use Site R-3 RH Single-Family North R-3 RH Single-Family South R-3 RH Single-Family East VR V Timeshare West Pacific Ocean Pacific Ocean Pacific Ocean LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM Coastal Zone: [gl Yes D No Local Coastal Program Segment: =M=e=ll=o...::;II=---- Within Appeal Jurisdiction: [gl Yes O No Coastal Development Permit: [8J Yes D No • Local Coastal Program Amendment: D Yes [8J No Existing LCP Land Use Designation: RH Existing LCP Zone: R-3 Proposed LCP Land Use Designation: '-N~/A __ _ Proposed LCP Zone: N.:....c:...:/ A:....=_ ____ _ Revised O I /06 School District: Carlsbad Unified PUBLIC FACILITIES Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): -=-1-=E=Dc.....U=----------------- ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT ASSESSMENT C8J Categorical Exemption, ~S_ec_t_io_n_1_5~3_0_1..._(e_,_) ________________ _ D Negative Declaration, issued ____________________ _ D Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated ______________ _ D Other, ___________________________ _ Revised O I /06 • • •· • • CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application) PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: PHIPPS RESIDENCE -CDP 06-27 & V 06-02 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: l GENERAL PLAN: """"RH ________ _ ZONING: R-3 ---------------------------- DEVELOPER'S NAME: DAVE OLDS, SANTA FE DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION ADDRESS: 324E. VALLEY PARKWAY PHONE NO.: 760-746-1000 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: =-20=3--=-2=5-=--1----"-0.=;__3 ______ _ QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): =0._20~A=C=------- ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: THE PROJECT HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED. A. B. C . D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage= Library: Demand in Square Footage= Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) Park: Demand in Acreage = Drainage: -, .. Demand in CFS = Identify Drainage Basin = (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) Circulation: Demand in ADT = (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) Fire: Open Space: Schools: (Demands to be determined by staff) Sewer: Served by Fire Station No. = Acreage Provided = Demands in EDU NIA* NIA* NIA* NIA* NIA* NIA* NIA* NIA* NIA* NIA* NIA* Identify Sub Basin = _N~I A-=--*----- (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) Water: Demand in GPD = NIA* • *NI A -There is no impact on local facilities as the proposed project is an addition to an existing residence. • • • Project: Owner: Address: Design & Construction 324 E. Valley Parkway• Escondido, Ca 92025 Lie. # B/C20/C47/C61/DO3 575117 760.746.1000 • 760.743.2753 Phipps Residence Virginia Phipps 3015 Ocean St. Carlsbad, Ca Justification For Variance -Variance Application 1.) Special Circumstances that would adequately ;usti-fv this application: The topography and general site location of the subject parcel is in itself a unique situation and location. The front of the parcel joins Ocean St., downtown Carlsbad.· The rear of the parcel/ property line is located on the existing High Tide line of the Pacific Ocean. Directly adjacent to the subject parcel is a large multi-story time-share, across the street on the corner of Ocean St. and Carlsbad Village Dr. The guests that stay in the rooms located along Ocean St. have a direct line of Site into the current courtyard, offering very-little privacy or security to the owners of the subject parcel. Vehicles, bikes and pedestrians.travel this road frequently as it is a frontagefoad to the Pacific Ocean and a source of congregation. We believe the proposed patio cover will provide the privacy and security enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and identical zoning. 2.) Variance is consistent with properties in the vicinitv: The subject parcel is located along a block of Ocean St. where variance applications of similar descriptions have been applied for and approved. 3.) New use or activity not otherwise expresslv authorized bv the zone regulations: There are no changes to the existing use and there are no new proposed activities. No current uses or activities are inconsistent with current zoning regulations for the subject site. 4.) The granting of this variance is consistent with the general purpose and intent of the current General Plan and any applicable Master Plans. The current zone is R-3 (Residential Use), Beach Area Overlay. The proposed patio cove·r does not inhibit the approved uses or activities of surrounding properties in the vicinity. Properties in the vicinity have submitted a variance application and have been approved for projects with very similar descriptions. The history and activity of properties in the vicinity is consistent with this application . GENERAL NOTES: 61. 00 NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. USE DIMENSIONS ONL r, J A DlSCREPANr I& FOUND TO EXIST NOTIFY DESIGNER. 62. neE PLANS, &PEC1RCA1/0NS AW AU. JWR"( SHALL CO/fl. 'f WI™ M 2001 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE FOUND IN Tl-IE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TITLE-24 CCR AS AMBIDEP AND ADOPTED er THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. rm UBC, 200S CEC, 2000 UHC, UPC • !AMFO, I 1002 NEC. 63. DETAILS ARE INTEHDED TO SI-IOW METl-k>D AND MANNER OF ACCOMPUSI-IIN6 IJJORI(. MINOR MOD/Ft:ATIONS MAY BE REQU~.ED TO SUJJ Tl-IE X,8 DIMENSIONS Olo! CONOITtON5 AWD IS TO BE ™CLLOED AS PART OF THE WO!ii!K, 6-4. D!HENSIONS ARE TAKEN FROM me FACE OF T\.IE ACTUAL STUD. vERn ALL OIMEWSIONS ANO CONDITIONS AT THE !!TE Pfil:lOR TO 5TA.RTIN6 At-lr WORK. YERfFY FINDINGS, DIFFERENCES AND SUGCiESTEO MODIFICATIONS WITI-I DESIGNER PR~ TO BE61N~Ci PRO.Eet STAKE Ol/T IOC'IRK FOR: OUINBi!S APPROVAL P!i<.IOR TO START!N6 AMY WORK. 65. ALL !laTI-IER EXPOSED SURFACES 51-1.41.L HAVE A WEATIER-RESISTIYE BARRIER TO F'ROTECT 11--IE INTERIOR l!IALL COVERING AND TI-IAT EXTERIOR OPENINGS ARE TO BE FLA51-1ED IN SUCI-I A MANNER: AS TO MAKE TI-IE11 WEATI-IER f'Jii1OOF, 66. me INSPECTOR HAY RE.CI--IECK FOR ExFANSIVE SOILS AND OR Glo!AOIN6 REQl/!RE11ENT5 AT Tl-IE FIRST FOUNDATION INSPEcTION. NO SOILS REPORT EXISTS AND THE EXISTING 601l BEARING VALUE 15 APP)(, l000 PS!. 61. GFC1 OUTLETS ARE REQU1RED OUTDOORS, BATI-IROOHS, WITHIN 6' OF KITCI-IEN SINK&, WET BARS, IN ATTACHED GARAGES. NEC M.&. 68. PROVIDE ALL NECE9SARl' BACK!Mei ANO FRAHtNG FOR ALL MOUNTED !TENS. Ll61-1TS, FAt-rS AND OTI-IElo! ITEMS TI-IAT REQUIRE SAHE. 6~. -NOT USE0- 6!0, -NOT USED· 610. All NAILING 61-!ALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITI-I TABLE 23-11-B-i COHMON li4n.s ONLY. 612. ALL RECEPTACLE ouner LOCATIONS 51-!ALL COMPL 'r IIATI-I ~C?.b NEC 210.51 a. 613, SET ALL WIMOOWS a ODORS TO 6'-&• TO TOP OF WINDOW/ DOOR, IJ.O.N. 614. CONTRACTOR AND/OR &UBCONTRACTOR 61-!ALL CAREFIJLL 'r &TIJP'r AND COMPARE ALL Olo!AWIN6S, OAT.A, DIMENSIONS, 5PEC. t EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS BEFORE PROCEEDING WIT4 ANY WORK, ANO REPORT TO me OESl6NER AT ONCE ANY ERROR, INCONSl5TANCY, ti~ OHHISION HE/51-1£ HAY Dl&coVB<!, 66. PERMANANT VAC:!IJM BREAKERS TO BE /NSTALLEV ON ALL I-IOSE B/85. • <EJ1'-,'I-IC.IICl1/BLOCt::. llL4il TO!W1A!M, ~ I "' "' a I :ii I u 'I C, I ~J .. IU!il I aJ (Qt: I e,[ _I ITTL I)~ ' ==;;:' I [fill ilj i ,,~: """S) IW\ <[ I I I I I I I I I r EXISTING 6UILDINC:r ROPOSEDS~ PATIO COYER. NEIIPATIO COVER &MALL EXlEllD TO !'ME EDGE OF T~E ExlSTIN6 !!LOCK llAU B!ITNOT8ETONDIIND!li!.ANTC~CUM!lANCF.&. -auEN TIIE Fl11\llil:E ROAD CID~ OCCUR& TME 81.0Ct::. Ill.AU A.WC> ALL )18,11 PA TIO IWOF WITll!M Tl-!'E J'.f.' 1.0.0. &I-IA.LL BE C!IT-6ACt::. OR REMOVEP TO CLEAR TllE I.O.P. AR~.- ,-cAR GARAGE tOREMAIN. i,'-O'l!l't:IFENCE ~,o, ((j I ..JJ I f.lfi.ll u I (Qf I '~ (Qt I I}- I =r,-' ~·~ m I l!J ~ e:<[ 21 (() ) 's[ ~ I I I I I I I I I ) I • BMF1&: (5TORM-tl/ATER QUALITY '8E5T MANAGEMENT PRACTICES') -TEl'IPO!Wn' e11P'1 - A.BBR. 6YM. DESCf21PTION WM-I m MAT£RIAL Ol;J..IYBi!Y I STORAC.E WH-• /~~ CONcRETE WAS,TE 11111-0 M SOLID WASTE MC:oMT. I M4TERIAL STAG!I-IG. .,,,., .• 8 SA.NIT.ART WASTE N6MT . WM_,, 6 I-IAZAROOU5 WASTE MGMT. 9&·6/8 .~ MIJLCM / (INTERIOR OF SILT FEMCEJ OC-1 _. SILT FENCE TOTAL C.ROUND AREA DISTURBED , .001 ACRE&. SITE FLAN SCALE-ldO PROJECT TEAM: OWNER, VIRGlNlA Pl4lPP5 301& OCEAN ST. CARLSBAD, CA PREPARED 6Y, MIC'4AEL MEE SANTA FE DESIGN 4 CONSTRUCTION 160 . 146 . 1000 LIC• B-!:i1Sl11 CONTRACTOR/ AC:.ENT, SANT A FE DESIGN 4 CONSTRUCTION CONTACT, MICHAEL 5MEE OR DAYE OLD5 324 E. VALLE.,.-F'KUJ'r. ESCONDIDO, CA 9202& PH, 160.146.1000 FAX, 760.143.21&3 EMAIL, MT5MEE•GMAILCOM S~EET INDEX: TS I.I A 2.1 A 2.2 COYER SI-IE!ET 4 SITE! PLAN. FLOOR PLAN. E!LEYATIONS 4 SECTIONS. PROJECT SCOPE: ~5Tl<UCT 5031 PATIO COVEi< TO THE EXl&TINC. COU!<TYAl<D. -VARIANCE !<EGlUIRED· -MISC. ELECTRICAL. -NO PLUHBINC.. BUILDING DATA: OII/NER, VIRGINIA PHIPPS OWNER II PROJECT ADDl'!Eee, 301& OCEAN 5T. CARL!lBAD, CA APN • , 203 . 2&1 • 03 . 00 ZONE/ GENERAl PtAN DE!llGNATION , 1'!-3 /RE51DENTIALJ BEACH AREA OYERLA 'r !lET-FRONT IFY/.10'-0" BACK!l, SIDE ISYJ-,'-o" MIN TO 10'-o' MAX /k:)% OF LOT UIDTHJ LOT , SE>' (.10), ~.b 5Y SETBACK REAR /RY/. REAR r ARD 15 LINE LOT OF ~16~ TIDE. COVERAGE, LOT , e,;o, FOOTPRINT , 3poo, 3,000 I 8~!0 , /33.9) 3" LOT COVERAGE lb0% MAX , COMPLIANCE) e,QUAFaE FOOTAGE, 2-UNIT5 EXISTING< TOTAL 2,121• VICINITY MAP: • 11'-,&" 14'-o" 12'-o" 61-611 ·--------------------''• .. ____ '---------------···.··········--·--··-.----------· ------~, ---· ~,,--... -----,~~~~-~~~>-=,_:.,='-'""'-=.;....al ' ' ◊ " "' '-' ·, ' ,_ __ __,_ __ '- "' ' "' ' ' 12'-6" so'-3" Wo" r .I 'i i LINE! Of 2'-6" r,;ii;ievocAaLE Of~ ' Of DEDICATIO'sl !'Ol't ~E: R0.40UM:IEN~Ci- 0 E)(l~TIN(i &ECl.:RITT GATE. ·-.... ',,,,-..,~~ ~.,.,~ -'-:," ~-- ' '12~AR. __ asl-R<46E.J , '· ' 211-611 ~'---------------, • MAINTAIN TI-I& EDGE OF AU. &Ti=aJCTI.JRAJ. M~ INCLLl'IHG POeT& AMO 81:Al"I& TO ee A MINIHUH OF 2'-1~· CLEA,:!: PROM Tl-IE EOCsE OF Tl-IE P'20P~TT LINE. -Tl-IE HOFl!IZONTAL I-IATCl-ltNCi O&IOTE& Tl-IE AREA TO KEEP CLEAR. ,. IJII-IEN Tl4E FUTW-1E ROAD WIDENING 0can;l!e, Tl-IE. E><l6TING C:MJ BLOCK WALL ANP PATIO COVE!=t: Fi:OOF &I-IALL ee REMOVED l'OR Tl-lE.7'-6" 1,0.D. -".' -"' ______ _,.,._ fil,...,~~~ CJ,' ~ -9 --.\) CJ,' -(Jl "- "- () -N -------------------, V 2013t TOT AL (E) I-IABIT ABLE (INCLUDING GARAGE) I No WORK IN sl-lADED AREAs1 ru.N.o.J I MAIN FLOOR FLAN ¼ = 1-0 r ~ :l! "' "" f r ~ ~ "' I NORTI-I (RIC::.HT) ELEVATION I I 5OUTH (LEFT) ELEV A TION I I EXISTING UPPER: UNIT I I 5ECTION -A-A-I I EA5T (FRONT) ELEVATION I ,;; ... ,j !,I-IE='f, -2,2