Res P-91-39NO. P- 91-39
A OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF POWAY,
APPROVING VARIANCE 91-03
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 314-411-06
WHEREAS, 91-03, submitted by Jerry D. Douglas,
applicant, requests approval of a variance for a 6.5 foot retai lng
wall and five foot fence to be located one foot behind the wal at
13435 Mary Earl Lane where a six foot total height is the
permitted in the RS-7 zone and a five foot offset is requ red
between wall and fence; and
on June 18, 1991, the City Council held a duly
advertised public hearing to solicit comments from the public both
pro and con, relative to this application.
NOW, the City Council does hereby resolve as
follows:
This project
CEQA (Class
limitations.
is categorically exempt under the provisions of
5) because it is a minor alteration in land use
The proposed proJec
general plan given
there is a
be consistent with
will be consistent with the existing
he minimal nature of the request and
e probability that the project will
he proposed general plan.
There are special circumstances pplicable to the
property (size, shape, topograp y, location or
surroundings), or the intended use o the property, and
because of this, the strict applica ion of the Zoning
Ordinance deprives the property of pr vileges enjoyed by
other properties in the vicinity under identical zoning
classifications.
The unusual circumstances include the six to seven foot
grade differential between the building pad an adjoining
street. If a ~ wall were not used, t ere would
not be adequate usable area around the perime er of the
house on the subject property such as is enJoye by other
properties in the area.
~ the or its odification, is
for the preservation and en oyment of a substantia~
property right possessed by v her property in the same
vicinity and zone and denied o the property for which
Resolution No. P- 91-39
Page 2
the variance is sought in that the retaining wall and
fence are f to provide a usable side yard area.
the or its will not be
materia~ly detrimental to the public health, safet' or
welfare, or injurious to the roperty or improvement in
such vicinity and zone in whi h the property is loca ed,
because the fence and wall a ~oin a street rathe han
adjoining other building si s, and existing ouses
across the street from the wa 1/fence are oriente away
from the proposed fencing. In the des gn f
the wall, its stucco finish and brick trim, is compatib e
with adjacent development and conditions of approval wi 1
require planting in front of the wall to minimize i s
height.
The granting of this variance does not onstitute a
special privilege inconsi tent with the lim tations u on
other properties in the v cinity and zone n which s h
property is situated, n that other ots in e
subdivision have six foot igh privacy fencing along s e
and rear property lines and the variance will secure t s
right for the subject lot.
The granting of this variance does not allow a use or
activity which is ot otherwise expressly authorized by
the zoning requlat on governing the property because side
and rear property ine fencing is required by the Zoning
Ordinance for smal er single-family lots.
The City Council hereby approves Variance 91-03 subject to the
within 30 days of approval (1) The Applicant shall submit
in writing that all conditions of approval have been read
and understood; and (2) the property owner shall execute
a Covenant on Real Property.
The five foot strip of land between the retainin wall
and sidewalk will be planted with drought tolerant hrubs
(such as escallonia pittosporum, oleanders, or xy osma)
planted five feet on center, and provided w th a
permanent low flow irrigation system.
and
State of California, this
ATTEST:
Resolution No. P-91-39
Page 3
by the City Council of the City of Poway,
18th day of June 1991. ~
¥or
STATE OF )
) SS.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
I, MarJorie K. Wahlsten, City Clerk of the City of Poway, do
hereby certify, under the penalty of perjury, that the foregoing
Resolution, No. P-91-39 , was duly adopted by the City Council
at a meeting of said City Council held on the 18th day of
June , 1991, and that it was so adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: EMERY,
NOES: NONE
NONE
ABSENT: NONE
SNESKO,
REPORT\