Laserfiche WebLink
RESOLUTION NO. HO 2019- 006 <br />A RESOLUTION OF A HEARING OFFICER OF THE CITY <br />OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING THE ABATEMENT <br />EXTENSION PERIOD FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT <br />1441 SUPERIOR AVENUE (PA 2011 -032) <br />WHEREAS, Chapter 20.38.100 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) <br />requires nonconforming nonresidential uses in residential zoning districts to be abated <br />and terminated upon the expiration of time periods identified by the NBMC. Following <br />the issuance of an Abatement Order, Chapter 20.38.100 provides that a property owner <br />may request an extension of the abatement period in order, to amortize a property <br />owner's investment in the property and avoid an unconstitutional taking of property; and <br />WHEREAS, an application was filed on behalf of The Rawlins Family Trust, the <br />owner of property located at 1441 Superior Avenue, and legally described as Portion of <br />Lot 819, First Addition to Newport Mesa Tract, requesting an extension of the abatement <br />period specified by the NBMC Section 20.38.100. If granted, the extension will allow the <br />continued operation of existing commercial use for ten years from the date of the Hearing <br />Officer's approval (December 15, 2021). The property is located in the RM (2420) <br />Zoning District, where such nonresidential uses are not permitted; and <br />WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on December 15, 2011, in the City Hall <br />Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, <br />place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the NBMC and other <br />applicable laws. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented and considered at this <br />meeting; and <br />WHEREAS, the hearing was presided over by Hon. John C. Woolley, retired <br />Judge (California Superior Court, Orange County), Hearing Officer for the City of <br />Newport Beach; and <br />WHEREAS, the findings and considerations of Section 20.38.100 (C.4(c)) of the <br />NBMC and facts in support of the findings and considerations are as follows: <br />1. The length of the abatement period is not appropriate considering the <br />owner's investment in the use; <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The one year abatement period specified by the Municipal <br />Code is not of sufficient duration to amortize the property owner's investment. The <br />information submitted by the applicant indicates that an extension of 10 years for the <br />abatement of the current uses is necessary to avoid an unconstitutional taking of the <br />applicant's property. Subsequently, the ten year period would allow the owner to <br />transition the current tenants out of the building to accommodate the future project. An <br />