Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-90 - Approving UP2010-021 & Modification MD2010-027 (101 15th St.)RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -90 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPROVING USE PERMIT NO. UP2010 -021 AND MODIFICATION PERMIT NO. MD2010 -027 FOR AN ADDITION AND ALTERATIONS TO A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE THAT WILL ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS LOCATED AT 101 15TH STREET (PA2010 -105) WHEREAS, an application was filed by William Azzalino, with respect to property located at 101 15th Street, and legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 15, Section B, requesting approval of a use permit and modification permit; and WHEREAS, the applicant proposes an addition to a nonconforming, mixed -use structure. The Use Permit would allow an addition of up to 75 percent of the existing square footage and up to 75 percent structural alterations to the existing structures. The Modification Permit would allow the proposed addition to encroach five (5) feet into the required five -foot side setback on the northerly side of the property and eight (8) feet into the required ten -foot rear alley setback; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the Mixed -Use Cannery Village /15th St (MU -CV /15th St) Zoning District; however, the Retail and Service Commercial — Residential Overlay (RSC -R) District regulations from the 1997 Zoning Code apply to this project. The General Plan Land Use Element category is Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H4); and WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan category is Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H); and WHEREAS, this project has been determined to be categorically exempt under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15301 (Class 1 — Existing Facilities). Class 1 exempts minor alterations to existing facilities that involve negligible expansion of the use, including the addition of a new residential unit. The proposed project includes an addition to the existing residential unit, the construction of an additional unit, and the construction of a two -car garage and a two -car carport; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 25, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Zoning Administrator at this meeting; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator approved the application; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2011, Planning Commissioner Hawkins called the item up for review; and City Council Resolution No. 2011 -90 Paqe 2 of 10 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 7, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this meeting; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission denied the application and reversed the decision of the Zoning Administrator; and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2011, Mayor Henn called the item up for review; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 13, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the application and reversed the decision of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 20.91.035, Section 20.62.040, and Section 20.93.030 of the 1997 Zoning Code, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: A. The proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. Facts in Support of Finding: A -1. The site is located in the RSC -R (Retail and Service Commercial — Residential Overlay) District of the 1997 Zoning Code. The intent of this district to provide areas which are predominantly retail in character but which allow some service office uses. The intent and purpose of the Residential Overlay district is to provide for the establishment of residential uses in commercial districts. The proposed mixed use project is a permitted use in this district. The existing eating and drinking establishment and retail surf shop meet the intent of the RSC district, and the existing and proposed residential units meet the intent of the R- Overlay District. Finding: B. The proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the General Plan and the purpose of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the City Council Resolution No. 2011 -90 Paae 3 of 10 neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city. Facts in Support of Finding: B -1. The existing commercial structures and residential units on site are consistent with the Mixed Use - Horizontal (MU -H4) land use designation of the General Plan, which applies to properties where it is the intent to establish the character of a distinct and cohesively developed district or neighborhood containing multi - family residential with clusters of mixed -use and /or commercial buildings. Mixed -use or commercial buildings are required on parcels at street intersections. B -2. The neighborhood is developed with commercial, residential, and mixed use properties. The subject property has been developed with mixed use for at least fifty years, and the addition of one (1) residential dwelling unit will not create any significant negative impacts. B -3. The property abuts public rights -of -way of three sides; therefore, the addition is directly adjacent to only one (1) other property. B -4. The proposed addition will provide the required parking for the residential units. The existing commercial structures are not being enlarged or intensified, so the commercial parking demand is not being increased. B -5. The proposed addition will conform to all other requirements of the 1997 Zoning Code, including height and square footage limitations. Finding: C. The proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. Facts in Support of Finding: C -1. The proposed mixed -use project is consistent with the legislative intent of Chapter 20.15 (Commercial Districts) and Chapter 20.52 (Residential (R) Overlay District) of the 1997 Zoning Code. The proposed project meets the development standards of the RSC -R district in regards to minimum site area per unit, height limit, and minimum lot area. C -2. The existing structures are nonconforming due a 6- foot -2 -inch encroachment into the 10 -foot rear alley setback, a 5 -foot encroachment into the 5 -foot northerly side setback, and due to insufficient off - street parking for the commercial uses. The proposed remodel of the existing residential unit and the addition of a unit are in conformance with the standards of Chapter 20.62 (Nonconforming Structures and Uses) of the 1997 Zoning Code. Section 20.62.040 (Nonconforming Structures) City Council Resolution No. 2011 -90 Paqe 4 of 10 allows for structural alterations and additions of up to 75 percent with the approval of a use permit. C -3. The existing residential unit conforms with the parking requirements of the R- Overlay District of two (2) parking spaces per unit. The proposed construction includes the addition of two (2) parking spaces for a total of four (4) parking spaces, meeting the residential parking requirements. No addition is proposed to the commercial structures. Finding: D. The cost of improvements to be made is minor in comparison to the value of the existing nonconforming condition. Facts in Support of Finding: D -1. The existing mixed -use structure could not be rebuilt if it were to be demolished. In order to bring the existing buildings into conformance with the required setbacks, the removal of a significant portion of the residential living area and the retail surf shop would be necessary. The nonconforming, rear setback encroachment maintains the existing livable space within the structure. The five -foot encroachment of the retail surf shop into the side setback allows reasonable use of the commercial tenant space. The estimated cost of the proposed project is $550,000, which is minor in comparison to the value of the nonconforming parking and setbacks. D -2. Per the County Assessor's records, the total value of the property was assessed at $1,508,322 for the 2010 calendar year. Finding: E. The cost of correcting the nonconforming condition would exceed the cost of the other alterations proposed. Facts in Support of Finding: E -1. Correcting the nonconforming setbacks would require the removal of existing floor area from the residential structure and retail surf shop. The proposed alterations within the setback areas are only a minor portion of the entire project; therefore, the cost of the overall project is greater than the cost of the alterations within the setback areas. E -2. Demolition and replacement of the structures could not be accomplished without approval of a parking waiver. E -3. Based on information from the applicant, which was reviewed by staff, the estimated cost of demolishing the structures within the setbacks and rebuilding them would be approximately $860,000 and the estimated cost of the proposed project is $550,000 City Council Resolution No. 2011 -90 Page 5 of 10 E -4. The City has no plans on file for the original construction. Based on information from the County of Orange, the existing structures were built in the 1920s. Finding: F. Retention of the nonconforming condition is necessary to maintain reasonable use of the structure. Facts in Support of Finding: F -1. Retention of the nonconforming parking for the commercial structures is necessary because a mixed -use structure similar to the existing development could not be built under current development standards. The number of parking spaces required for the amount of commercial floor area allowed on this site is a minimum of ten (10) spaces based on a parking ratio of one (1) parking space for every 250 square feet of gross floor area. The minimum allowed floor area for a commercial structure on this mixed - use property is 1,250 square feet, which would require a minimum of five (5) parking spaces. This site does not provide adequate space for a code - compliant parking lot with 5 -10 parking spaces, in addition to the required residential parking. F -2. Retention of the nonconforming rear setback encroachment maintains the existing livable space within the structure. Removing the encroachments would result in one (1) less bedroom and reduced living area in the living room and master bedroom. Findinq: G. The addition and alteration does not increase the structure's inconsistency with the regulations of the Zoning Code. Facts in Support of Finding: G -1. The proposed project includes the addition of two (2) parking spaces, satisfying the requirements for residential parking. The commercial structures are not being enlarged or intensified. G -2. The proposed addition and alterations will meet all other development standards for the RSC -R District, with the exception of the Modification Permit requests. G -3. The proposed construction is contained generally within the footprint of the existing structure. Finding: H. The granting of the application is necessary due to the practical difficulties associated with the property and that the strict application of the Zoning Code results in physical hardships that are inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code. City Council Resolution No. 2011 -90 Paae 6 of 10 Facts in Support of Finding: H -1. The northerly side yard setback requirement of five (5) feet is due to the abutting property's Zoning designation of R -2 (Two -Unit Residential). The Zoning Code requires a side yard setback only because the abutting property is designated for residential use; however, the property to the north is developed with a mixed -use structure. This property is subject to abatement of the nonconforming mixed -use, but the property owner has applied for General Plan, Zoning Code, and Coastal Land Use Plan amendments to change the property to allow for mixed -use. If the amendment application is denied, then the property owner may request an extension on the abatement. Therefore, there is a possibility that the property will remain mixed -use for the foreseeable future. H -2. The additional dwelling unit is being proposed within the required setback in order for the wall to line up with the existing commercial structure on the first floor. H -3. The existing commercial structures and residential dwelling unit constitute a practical difficulty associated with the property as the only location available for the four -car parking is located within the side and rear yard setbacks. Finding: 1. The requested modification will be compatible with existing development in the neighborhood. Facts in Support of Finding: 1 -1. The deviation from the Zoning Code requested through this application is compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding properties, many of which do not provide side yard or rear yard alley setbacks, either because of differing Zoning Code requirements or nonconforming encroachments. 1 -2. Other properties on the block contain similar mixed -use projects with commercial structures on the first floor and residential uses above. Finding: J. The granting of such an application will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property and will not be detrimental to the general welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. Facts in Support of Finding: J -1. The alley is approximately 25 feet wide and provides sufficient access for vehicles to park in the garages and carports. The 25 -foot width is also adequate for circulation. City Council Resolution No. 2011 -90 Paqe 7 of 10 J -2. The existing structures on site are built up to the northerly property line. The existing mixed -use structure to the north is also built on the property line, and this layout has not proven to be detrimental. J -3. The proposed encroachment into the alley setback is for the carports and a deck above. No new living area is proposed within the alley setback. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1: Approve Use Permit No. UP2010 -021 and Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027 (PA2010 -105), reversing the decision of the Planning Commission, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. SECTION 2: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of September, 2011. MAYOR ATTFST- City Council Resolution No. 2011 -90 Paoe 8 of 10 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plans, and elevations, except as noted in the following conditions. 2. The guard rail for the deck adjacent to the alley shall be constructed with wrought iron, glass, or similar open or translucent material. 3. The addition is limited to 75 percent of the existing gross floor area. 4. The alterations are limited to 75 percent of the structural members. 5. All signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.67 of the Municipal Code or any applicable comprehensive sign program that is in force for the subject property. 6. No temporary "sandwich" signs, balloons or similar temporary signs shall be permitted, either on -site or off -site, to advertise the proposed food establishment, unless specifically permitted in accordance with the Sign Ordinance of the Municipal Code. Temporary signs shall be prohibited in the public right -of -way, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department in conjunction with the issuance of an encroachment permit or encroachment agreement. 7. All trash shall be stored within the building or within public dumpsters provided for the convenience of businesses in the area, or otherwise screened from view of neighboring properties except when placed for pick -up by refuse collection agencies. The trash dumpsters shall have a top which shall remain closed at all times, except when being loaded or while being collected by the refuse collection agency. 8. The applicant shall maintain the trash dumpsters or receptacles so as to control odors which may include the provision of fully self- contained dumpsters or may include periodic steam cleaning of the dumpsters, if deemed necessary by the Planning Division. Trash generated by the establishment shall be adequately contained in sealed plastic bags to control odors prior to placement in the trash dumpster. 9. Anything not specifically approved by this Use Permit and Modification Permit is prohibited and must be addressed in a separate and subsequent review. 10. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of the construction. The construction must meet all applicable Building Code requirements including parapets and guards and fire resistant construction, where required. 11. A copy of this approval letter shall be incorporated into the City and field sets of plans prior to issuance of the building permits. City Council Resolution No. 2011 -90 Page 9 of 10 12. Approval from the California Coastal Commission is required prior to issuance of a building permit. 13. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a covenant for review and approval by the Office of the City Attorney as to form and content, that will address holding the site to no more than two (2) dwelling units. Once approved and properly executed, that document shall be forwarded to the City officials for recordation against the property with the County Recorder. 14. If any of the existing public improvements surrounding the site are damaged by private work, new concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter, street pavement, and other public improvements will be required by the City at the time of private construction completion. Said determination and the extent of the repair work shall be made at the discretion of the Public Works inspector. 15. All work performed within the public right -of -way shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department under an encroachment permit/agreement, if required. 16. Any nonstandard encroachment within the public right -of -way shall be removed, including any stairs or railings. 17. Each unit shall be served by separate water and sewer, and traffic grade lids shall be provided for each. 18. The applicant is responsible for all upgrades to the City's utilities as required to fulfill the project's demands, if applicable. 19. New and existing fire services shall be protected by a USC approved double check detector assembly and installed per STD - 517 -L, if required by the Fire Department. 20. New water services shall be installed per STD -502 -L or STD - 503 -L, depending on the size. 21. New and existing commercial water meter(s) shall be protected by a USC approved reduced pressure backflow assembly and installed per STD - 520 -L -A. 22. Deleted. 23. The project will need to meet fire flow requirements with the addition to the building. The City and field sets of plans shall show all existing and proposed fire hydrants located within 300 feet of the project. 24. Smoke alarms will be required in the R occupancies and shall be installed as per California Building Code Section 907.2.11.2 outside of each separate sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of bedrooms and in each room used for sleeping purposes. City Council Resolution No. 2011 -90 Page 10 of 10 25. For new construction, an approved carbon monoxide alarm shall be installed in dwelling units and in sleeping units within which fuel- burning appliances are installed, and in dwelling units that have attached garages. 26. The address will need to be placed on the street side of the building, as required by the Fire Department. 27. Required vertical and horizontal occupancy separation must be met as per California Building Code Section 508.2.5.1. 28. As per California Fire Code Section 903.2.8, an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3 shall be provided throughout all buildings with a Group R fire area, as required by the Fire Department. 29. Exit hardware on new doors shall comply with California Fire Code Section 1008.1.9.3, as required by the Fire Department. 30. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of the Whitacre Residence including, but not limited to, Use Permit No. UP2010 -021 and Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and /or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition. 31. This approval shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the approval date, as specified in Section 20.93.050 (A) of the 1997 Zoning Code. Prior to the expiration date of this approval, an extension may be approved in accordance with Section 20.93.050 (B) of the 1997 Zoning Code. Requests for an extension must be in writing. STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH } I, Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 2011 -90 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council, duly and regularly held on the 13th day of September, 2011, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: Ayes: Gardner, Selich, Curry, Daigle, Mayor Henn Noes: Hill, Rosansky Absent: None Abstain: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of said City this 14th day of September, 2011. 0 , Q Nwp-- City Clerk Newport Beach, California (Seal)