Res P-05-48
RESOLUTION NO. P-05-48
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA,
FOR VARIANCE 05-03
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 321-270-21
WHEREAS, a request for a Variance (VAR 05-03) was submitted by Mike and
Diana Beszeditz to allow the following for an existing single-family residence located at
12471 White Oak Way, in the Residential Single-Family 7 (RS-7) zone: (1) A 5-foot
encroachment into the required 10-foot rear yard setback for a room addition; (2) a
7-foot-high fence on the interior side yard; and, (3) a carport structure in the front yard
setback up to the front property line; and
WHEREAS, on June 21, 2005, the City Council held a public hearing on the
above-referenced item; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has read and considered the agenda report for the
proposed project and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Poway
as follows:
Section 1: The proposed project is Categorically Exempt as a Class 5 Categorical
Exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15305 of the CEQA Guidelines, in that the project involves a minor alteration in land use
limitations on a developed single-family property.
Section 2: The findings, in accordance with Section 17.50.050 of the Poway Municipal
Code, to approve that portion of Variance 05-03 that pertains to the rear family room
addition, and allows the addition to observe a 5-foot setback instead of the required 10
feet as shown on the plan dated February 2, 2005, and on file in the Planning Division
office are made as follows:
A. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property in that the subject
property has a smaller rear yard than other properties in the area and the layout of
the existing single-family home limits the location of the rear family room addition
and the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance rear yard setback for the
addition would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the
vicinity and same zone. Others in the same development would be able to add the
same size rear addition without the need for a Variance.
B. Granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right enjoyed by other property owners in the same vicinity
and not afforded to the property for which the Variance is sought because the
property is constrained by limited developable living area in the rear, that do not
exist on nearby residential properties, and the installation of a family room addition
is in accordance with the Poway Municipal Code.
Resolution No. P-05-48
Page 2
C. Granting the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public health,
safety, or welfare in the vicinity in that the proposed rear yard addition backs onto
Metate Lane so no other residences are impacted to the south.
D. Granting the Variance does not constitute a special privilege that is inconsistent
with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity and zone because the
Variance will allow a family room addition that is allowable in this zone.
E. Granting the Variance would not allow a use not otherwise expressly authorized by
the RS-7 zone because room additions are a permitted use in the residential zone.
F. Granting the Variance will be compatible with the City's General Plan because the
use is permitted and does not result in a density increase.
Section 3: The findings, in accordance with Section 17.50.050 of the Poway Municipal
Code, to approve that portion of Variance 05-03 that a 27 foot lineal section of
wall/fencing be allowed at 7-feet-high on the interior side yard, instead of the required 6
feet as shown on the plan dated February 2, 2005, and on file in the Planning Division
office are made as follows:
A. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property and, because of
this, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance deprives the property of
privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the identical zoning
classification. The increased height will allow the property owners to provide
screening for the adjacent property's main living area.
B. Granting the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right enjoyed by other property owners in the same vicinity
and not afforded to the property for which the Variance is sought because the
property owner is not able to enjoy the right of privacy that other single-family
residences are allowed, and as it will screen the animal enclosure from view of the
nearby residences allowing the residences greater enjoyment of their back yard.
C. Granting the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public health,
safety, or welfare in the vicinity in that the wall will be located along the side
property line and a small portion adjacent to the garage will be constructed in
compliance with the Building Code.
D. That the granting of this Variance does not constitute a special privilege that is
inconsistent with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in that
other nearby lots in the Residential Single-Family-7 (RS-7) zone have extended
their rear fences to provide additional safety and privacy.
E. Granting the Variance would not allow a use or activity not otherwise expressly
authorized by the RS-7 zone because single-family homes are a permitted use,
and fences/walls are permitted as accessory to a single family home.
F. Granting the Variance will be compatible with the City's General Plan becaus.e a
fence/wall is permitted and does not result in a density increase.
Resolution No. P-05-48
Page 3
Section 4: The findings, in accordance with Section 17.50.050 of the Poway Municipal
Code, to deny that portion of Variance 05-03, that involves a request to allow a carport
structure in the 18-foot front yard setback up to the front property line and into the public
right of way, are as follows:
A. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property (size, shape,
topography, location, or surroundings) that, because of the strict application of the
Zoning Ordinance, deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties
in the vicinity or same zone, in that the property contains a two-car garage for
covering of vehicles. The size of the property is similar to other properties in the
neighborhood so denial of the variance would not deprive the applicants of a right
enjoyed by others in the same zone and vicinity. There are no unique
circumstances to the property that would warrant the approval into the front yard
setback.
B. Granting of this Variance would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the
limitation upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in that other properties in
the residential zone are required to comply with the minimum front yard setbacks.
Granting the Variance would give the property owner a special privilege by
creating two additional covered parking spaces when a 2-car garage already
exists on the site.
C. The granting of this Variance would be materially detrimental to the public health,
safety, or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and
zone in which the property is located in that the front carport will detract from the
neighborhood character of the existing development because of the bulk and
scale. Also it is partially within the public right-of-way resulting in an impact to the
public health and safety.
D. The granting of this Variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity
and zone in that other residential properties are not allowed to encroach
completely into the front yard setback with a carport structure.
E. The granting of this Variance for the carport would not result in a use or activity
that is not otherwise expressly authorized in that carports can be allowed in single-
family residential zones.
F. That granting the Variance for the carport will be incompatible with the City's
General Plan in that a goal of the General Plan is for the City to preserve Poway's
unique and desirable character as "The City in the Country" and standards
requiring keeping front yards open, and carport structures are considered to be
inconsistent with this goal.
Section 5: The City Council hereby approves Variance 05-03, to allow the construction
of a rear family room addition and a section of over height fence, located at 12471 White
Oak Way, in the Residential Single-Family 7 (RS-7) zone, as shown on the floor plan and
elevations dated February 2, 2005, subject to the following conditions:
Resolution No. P-05-48
Page 4
A. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any Sections of the
Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of
Building Permit issuance.
B. Within thirty (30) days after City Council approval of the Variance, the applicant
shall submit in writing to the City that all conditions of approval have been read
and understood.
C. The applicant shall for a Building Permit, for the rear family room addition and
fence, including all associated electrical permits needed, no later than July 25,
2005. The Building Permit shall be pursued with diligent effort and obtained within
60 days.
D. A Demolition Permit shall be obtained for the removal of the front carport structure
by July 12, 2005. The carport structure shall be removed by August 1, 2005.
E. Prior to Building Permit issuance for the family room addition and over height
fence, the applicant shall comply with the following:
1. The site shall be developed in accordance with the approved plans on file in
the Development Services Department and the conditions contained herein.
2. The building plans shall depict the building materials and colors of the rear
addition. The applicant shall submit a color sample of the exterior building
materials for review and approval by the Planning Division.
F. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall comply with the following fire safety
requirements to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal:
1. If the carport structure is approved to remain, the roof must be constructed
of non-combustible material.
2. Roof covering for the rear addition shall be fire retardant roof covering
material as per Uniform Building Code Sections 1503 and 1504, Uniform
Building Code Standard 15-2, and City of Poway Ordinance No. 64 and its
amended Ordinance No. 526.
3. Approved numbers or addresses, measuring 4 to 6 inches in height, shall
be placed on the building in such a position as to be plainly visible and
legible from the street fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast
with their background. Addresses shall be required at private driveway
entrances.
4. Each chimney used in conjunction with any fireplace shall be maintained
with a spark arrester.
G. Compliance with the following conditions is required prior to final inspection for the
rear yard addition:
1. The front carport must be removed and any other unpermitted structures.
Resolution No. P-05-48
Page 5
Section 6: The approval of Variance 05-03 expires on June 21, 2007, at 5:00 p.m.
unless, prior to that time, the conditions above have been completed in reliance on the
Variance approval and the use has commenced prior to its expiration.
Section 7: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020, the 90-day approval period
in which the applicant may protest the imposition of any fees, dedications, reservations,
or exactions imposed pursuant to this approval shall begin on June 21, 2005.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Poway,
State of California, at a regular meeting this 21 st day of June 2005.
ATTEST:
Ld~~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)SS.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
I, L. Diane Shea, City Clerk of the City of Poway, do hereby certify, under penalty
of perjury, that the foregoing Resolution No. P-05-48 was duly adopted by the City
Council at a meeting of said City Council held on the 21 st day of June 2005 and that it
was so adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
BOYACK, EMERY, HIGGINSON, REXFORD, CAFAGNA
NONE
ABSENT:
NONE
DISQUALIFIED:
NONE
:fi}~~c~
City of Poway