Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01_Landon Elevator Addition_PA2018-069CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEARING OFFICER STAFF REPORT June 26, 2018 Agenda Item No. 1 SUBJECT: Landon Elevator Addition (PA2018-069) Reasonable Accommodation No. RA2018-001 SITE LOCATION: 205 North Bay Front APPLICANT: Benson Design and Architecture OWNER: Marvin Landon PLANNER: Melinda Whelan, Assistant Planner 949-644-3221, mwhelan@newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY A reasonable accommodation application to allow an elevator addition to exceed the maximum allowed floor area limit for an existing single-family home. The proposed elevator is approximately 5 feet wide, adding 40 square feet to the existing 3,403 -square- foot single-family dwelling. The existing dwelling and new elevator meet all other Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program requirements, including setbacks and height. The elevator addition is requested to provide an individual with a disability access to the upper levels of the residence. RECOMMENDATION 1)Conduct a public hearing; 2)Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3)Adopt Resolution No. _ approving Reasonable Accommodation No. RA2018-001 (Attachment No. HO 1). 1 Landon Elevator Addition Hearing Officer, June 26, 2018 Page 2 VICINITY MAP GENERAL PLAN ZONING LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE ON-SITE Two-Unit Residential (RT) Balboa Island (RB-I) Single-family dwelling NORTH Newport Bay RB-I Single- and Two-family dwellings SOUTH RT RB-I Single- and Two-family dwellings EAST RT RB-I Single- and Two-family dwellings WEST RT RB-I Single- and Two-family dwellings 2 Landon Elevator Addition Hearing Officer, June 26, 2018 Page 3 INTRODUCTION Project Setting The subject property is developed with an existing two-story, single-family dwelling located on the North Bay Front of Balboa Island . The dwelling includes a third level roof deck. Surrounding land uses include single-family and two-family development, and a public boardwalk to the north fronting the Newport Bay. Project Description A reasonable accommodation application requesting relief from Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning Districts General Development Standards) and Section 21.18.030 (Residential Coastal Zoning Districts General Development Standards) to allow an elevator addition, when added to the floor area of the existing home, to exceed the maximum allowed floor area for an existing single -family residence. The proposed elevator is approximately 5 feet wide, adding 40 square feet to the existing 3,403-square-foot, single-family dwelling. The resulting total floor area would be 3,443 square feet, 39 square feet over the maximum allowed floor area (3,404 square feet) established by the Zoning Code (Title 20) and Local Coastal Program (Title 21). The existing dwelling and new elevator meet all other applicable Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program requirements, including setbacks and building height. The existing single-family dwelling consists of two stories with all of the bedrooms on the second story and a third-level roof deck. Background The existing dwelling was originally constructed in 1991 with a total of 3,181 square feet, including a 401-square-foot, two-car garage. In 2016, a second-floor deck was enclosed to create an additional bedroom, which increased the total gross floor area to 3,403 square feet. DISCUSSION General Plan, Local Coastal Plan, and Zoning Code The subject property is designated RT (Two-Unit Residential) by the General Plan Land Use Element. The site is located within the RT-E (Two Unit Residential) land use category of the Coastal Land Use Plan. The site is located in the R-BI (Balboa Island) Zoning District and Coastal Zoning District. The single-family residence is a permitted use under these land use designations. Pursuant to NBMC Section 21.52.036.C.1, the project is exempt from the requirements of a coastal development permit since the modifications to the existing residence do not 3 Landon Elevator Addition Hearing Officer, June 26, 2018 Page 4 result in an increase of gross floor area, height, or bulk of the structure by more than 10 percent. The R-BI Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts allow a maximum floor area of 1.5 times the buildable area (lot size minus the setbacks) plus an additional 200 square feet. This results in a maximum allowed floor area of 3,404 square feet for the subject property. The existing floor area of the dwelling, including the two-car garage, is 3,403 square feet. The proposed elevator addition will add 40 square feet of floor area, resulting in a total gross floor area of 3,443 square feet, 39 square feet in excess of the standards. The proposed project conforms to all other applicable development standards, including, setbacks, height, and off-street parking as evidenced by the project plans and illustrated in Table 1 below: Table 1 – Development Standards Development Standard Required Existing Conditions Proposed Height (max.) 24 feet flat 1 or 29 feet sloped 24 feet flat 27 feet sloped Elevator - 29 feet flat1 No change to remaining roof elements Front Setback (North Bay Front) (min.) 7 feet 7 feet No change South Side Setback (min.) 3 feet 3 feet No change Rear Alley Setback (min.) 5 feet 5 feet No change Floor Area Limit 3,404 square feet ft. 3,403 square. feet. 3,443 square. feet. (reasonable accommodation requested) Parking (min.) 2 garage spaces 2 garage spaces No change 1. Elevator shafts are allowed to exceed the 24-foot height limit with a flat roof to 29 feet with a maximum area of 30 square feet pursuant to NBMC Sections 20.30.60.D.6 and 21.30.60.D.6. Reasonable Accommodation The proposed elevator addition requires a deviation from the development standards in the R-BI Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts for maximum allowed floor area limit. The applicant chose to request a reasonable accommodation because one of the persons residing in the home has a disability. In compliance with Federal and State fair housing laws, reasonable accommodations in the City’s zoning and land use regulations, policies, 4 Landon Elevator Addition Hearing Officer, June 26, 2018 Page 5 and practices are permitted when needed to provide an individual with any disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. The Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program include a procedure that allow for reasonable accommodations if certain findings can be made. The approval authority for a reasonable accommodation lies with the Hearing Officer in accordance with the provisions of Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.070(B) (Reasonable Accommodations, Review Authority). The Hearing Officer is also required to conduct a public hearing in compliance with NBMC Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings). Pursuant to Section 21.16.020.E. (Reasonable Accommodations) of the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, the review authority may also grant reasonable accommodations to the City’s coastal zoning and land use regulations, policies, and practices when needed to provide an individual with a disability an equal opportunity t o use and enjoy a dwelling in compliance with Federal and State Fair Housing Laws. The applicant states that an elevator is necessary to access the upper level bedrooms and recreation areas. A physician’s documentation prepared by Gregory Tchejevan, MD has been submitted by the applicant supporting the claim and the need for elevator access. Dr. Tchejevan recommends the avoidance of stairs and the use of an elevator due to the resident’s existing medical condition. The installation of an elevator would allow the individual to access the upper levels of the home including bedrooms without the use of stairs in accordance with Dr. Tchejevan’s recommendation. According to Dr. Tchejevan, the condition is severe enough to warrant the reasonable acc ommodation requested. Required Findings and Factors of Consideration The Hearing Officer is designated to approve, conditionally approve, or deny all applications for a reasonable accommodation. Section 20.52.070(D)(2) requires that all of the following findings be made in order to approve the reasonable accommodation: i. That the requested accommodation is requested by or on behalf of one or more individuals with a disability protected under the Fair Housing Laws. ii. That the requested accommodation is necessary to provide one or more individuals with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. iii. That the requested accommodation will not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City as “undue financial or administrative burd en” is defined in Fair Housing Laws and interpretive case law. iv. That the requested accommodation will not result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the City’s zoning program, as “fundamental alteration” is defined in Fair Housing Laws and interpretive case law. 5 Landon Elevator Addition Hearing Officer, June 26, 2018 Page 6 v. That the requested accommodation will not, under specific facts of the case, result in a direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals or substantial physical damage to the property of others. In addition to the required findings, the Hearing Officer may consider, but is not limited to, the following factors in determining whether the requested accommodation is the minimum necessary to provide one or more individuals with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling and whether the requested accommodation would require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a City program (NBMC Section 20.52.070(D)(3-4): a. Whether the requested accommodation will affirmatively enhance the quality of life of one or more individuals with a disability; b. Whether the individual(s) with a disability will be denied an equal opportunity to enjoy the housing type of their choice absent the accommodation; c. Whether the requested accommodation would fundamentally alter the cha racter of the neighborhood; d. Whether the accommodation would result in a substantial increase in traffic or insufficient parking; and e. Whether granting the requested accommodation would substantially undermine any express purpose of either the City’s General Plan or an applicable specific plan. Upon review of the application, staff believes that all of the findings can be made. The addition of the wheelchair accessible elevator that exceeds the floor area limit is necessary for the disabled property owner to gain access to the upper levels of the residence, including bedrooms, thus enhancing quality of life. Any alternative modifications necessary to make the upper levels accessible cannot be accommodated within the existing residence without more significant disruption to the interior of the home. In a justification letter dated May 2, 2018, by Jeff Benson, Architect (Attachment No. HO 3 ), he states that alternative elevator locations within the existing area of the home are infeasible due to the existing uni que configuration of a split vertical circulation. The existing configuration includes one stairway between the first and second floors, a separate stairway for the circulation between the second floor and the roof deck, and one hallway between the two stairs. Locating the elevator within the existing area would disrupt the existing hallways needed for wheelchair access, create loss of use of primary living spaces, and would cause unknown structural alterations with dramatically higher construction costs. Therefore, the disabled individual would be denied an equal 6 Landon Elevator Addition Hearing Officer, June 26, 2018 Page 7 opportunity to enjoy the upper levels of the residence without the reasonable accommodation. The proposed accommodation would not result in any fundamental alterations to the character and use of home or the neighborhood. The new elevator area is within an existing interior courtyard of the existing dwelling, about halfway down the northwesterly side of the property, and is not visible from the street or from the bay. The new area is partially covered by existing second floor area and the new footprint will extend approximately 5 feet by 5 feet into the existing courtyard area. The existing dwelling and the new elevator will meet all other applicable Code requirements, including height and setbacks requirements. The proposed elevator represents a nominal increase in floor area (1 percent) and would not intensify the existing single-unit residential use of the property; therefore, the requested accommodation would not undermine the express purpose or land use identified by the City’s General Plan. Furthermore, the addition of the elevator will not increase traffic or affect on-site parking. There are no feasible alterations for providing an accommodation at the dwelling that would provide greater consistency with the LCP. The resulting design, bulk, and scale of development maintains a building envelope consistent with the existing neighbor character and will not degrade the impacts to public views or coastal access. The proposed improvements would be subject to normal plan check and building permit processing and fees and therefore would not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City. The elevator would be constructed in accordance with the required Building and Safety Codes; therefore, the proposed project would not pose a threat to the health or safety of other individuals or substantial physical damage to the property of others. Alternatives 1. The Hearing Officer may approve other reasonable accommodations that provide a similar level of benefit to the applicant. In this case, the scope of work can be increased to remodel to the interior floor plan to accommodate the requested elevator within the existing dwelling and not increasing gross floor area. 2. The Hearing Officer may deny the Reasonable Accommodation request (Attachment No. HO 2). Environmental Review This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. Project implementation includes a 1 percent addition to an existing single-family dwelling. 7 Landon Elevator Addition Hearing Officer, June 26, 2018 Page 8 Public Notice Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of-way and waterways) including the applicant and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Prepared by: Submitted by: ATTACHMENTS HO 1 Draft Resolution Approving the Reasonable Accommodation HO 2 Draft Resolution Denying the Reasonable Accommodation HO 3 Architect’s Letter HO 5 Project Plans 01/12/18 8 Attachment No. HO 1 Draft Resolution Approving the Reasonable Accommodation 9 RESOLUTION NO. HO2018-#### A RESOLUTION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING REASONABLE ACCOMODATION NO. RA2018-001 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 205 NORTH BAY FRONT (PA2018-069) THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Jeff Benson, Architect on behalf of Marvin and Jill Landon, requesting approval of a reasonable accommodation, with respect to property located at 205 North Bay Front, Newport Beach, California and legally described as Lot 3 in Block 4 of the Re-Subdivision of Section 1 of Balboa Island in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as per map recorded in Book 6, Page 30 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the office of the County Recorder of said Orange County, Assessor’s Parcel No. 050-022-22 (“Property”). 2. The applicant has submitted a reasonable accommodation application requesting relief from the Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”) Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning Districts General Development Standards) and Section 21.18.030 (Residential Coastal Districts General Development Standards) to allow the addition of an elevator to exceed the maximum allowed floor area for an existing single-family home. The proposed elevator is approximately five feet (5’) wide, adding 40 square feet to the existing 3,403-square-foot single-family dwelling. The existing dwelling and new elevator meet all other Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program requirements including setbacks and height. The elevator is requested to provide access to the residence for an individual with a disability. 3. The Property is designated Two-Unit Residential (RT) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Balboa Island (R-BI) Zoning District. 4. The Property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan category is Two Unit Residential (RT-E) and it is located within the Balboa Island (R-BI) Coastal Zoning District. 5. The project is exempt from the requirements of a coastal development permit pursuant to NBMC Section 21.52.035.C because the project would not result in any improvement to the structure that results in changes in floor area exceeding ten percent (10%) of the existing floor area or ten percent (10%) of the existing height, parking demand, or change the general level of activity within the neighborhood. 6. A public hearing was held on June 26, 2018, in the Newport Beach Conference Room (Bay B – 1st Floor) at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to , and considered by, the Hearing Officer at this hearing. 10 Hearing Officer Resolution No. #### Page 2 of 7 04-24-18 SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. 2. The project involves a minor addition and alterations to an existing single-family residence involving the addition of an elevator. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. In accordance with NBMC Section 20.52.070(D)(2), the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: A. That the requested accommodation is requested by or on behalf of one or more individuals with a disability protected under the Fair Housing Laws. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. A letter from Gregory Tchejeyan, MD has been submitted by the applicant supporting this claim and the need for convenient elevator access. The statement indicates that due to the severity of the use of the knees that the doctor recommends avoidance of stairs and the use of elevators instead. The installation of an elevator is necessary for the individual to access the upper levels of the home, including bedrooms. Finding: B. That the requested accommodation is necessary to provide one or more individuals with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The addition of the wheel chair accessible elevator is needed to gain access to the upper levels of the residence for a person with a disability to more fully enjoy the use of the home. All of the bedrooms and recreation areas are located on the upper levels. 2. In a letter dated May 2, 2018, by Jeff Benson the project architect, states that alternative elevator locations within the existing area of the home are infeasible due to the existing unique configuration of a split vertical circulation. The existing configuration includes one stairway between the first and second floors, a separate 11 Hearing Officer Resolution No. #### Page 3 of 7 04-24-18 stairway for the circulation between the second floor and the roof deck, and one hallway between the two stairs. Locating the elevator within the existing area would disrupt the existing wheelchair accessible hallways, create loss of use of primary living spaces, and would cause unknown structural alterations with dramatically higher construction costs. 3. With consideration of the factors provided by NBMC Section 20.52.070(D)(3-4), the requested reasonable accommodation is necessary to provide the disabled individual an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. If the requested accommodation is granted, the disabled person will be able to access the upper levels of the residence, thereby enhancing their quality of life. Any modifications necessary to make the upper levels accessible cannot be accommodated within the existing residence without more significant disruption to the interior of the home and could be impossible given the existing layout. Approval of the accommodation will not alter the character of the neighborhood, because the 40-square-feet addition is a nominal increase (1 percent) in floor area, complies with applicable setback and height limitations, and retains a design, bulk, and scale of development that is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood pattern of development. Furthermore, the addition of the elevator will not increase traffic or affect on-site parking. Finding: C. That the requested accommodation will not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City as “undue financial or administrative burden” is defined in Fair Housing Laws and interpretive case law. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Allowing the construction of an elevator and exceeding maximum floor area by 40 square feet would not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City. The administrative costs of processing the building permit will be offset by normal building permit fees. Finding: D. That the requested accommodation will not result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the City’s zoning program, as “fundamental alteration” is defined in Fair Housing Laws and interpretive case law. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The proposed accommodation would not result in any fundamental alterations to the character and use of home or the neighborhood. The new elevator area is within an existing patio area within a cut-out of the existing dwelling, about halfway down the northwesterly side of the property and is not visible from the street or from the bay. The new area is partially covered by existing second floor area and the new footprint 12 Hearing Officer Resolution No. #### Page 4 of 7 04-24-18 will extend approximately five feet (5’) by five feet (5’) into the existing patio area. The existing dwelling and the new elevator will meet all of the code requirements for height and setbacks. 2. The proposed elevator represents a nominal increase in floor area (one percent) and would not intensify the existing single-unit residential use of the property; therefore, the requested accommodation would not undermine the express purpose or land use identified by the City’s General Plan. Finding: E. That the requested accommodation will not, under specific facts of the case, result in a direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals or substantial physical damage to the property of others. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The elevator would be constructed in accordance with the required Building and Safety Codes; therefore, the proposed project would not pose a threat to the health or safety of other individuals or substantial physical damage to the property of others. The approval of this reasonable accommodation is conditioned such that the applicant is required to obtain all necessary permits in accordance with the B uilding Code and other applicable codes. 2. The proposed deviation from development standards, exceeding the floor area limit by 40 square feet, is within an existing patio area that will be partially covered by existing second floor area. The elevator fits into the existing design of the dwelling, does not encroach into the setback areas and is compliant with the height limitations of the Zoning Code. The structure has not proven to be detrimental to the occupants of the property, nearby properties, neighborhood, or City. Finding: F. For housing located in the coastal zone, a request for reasonable accommodation under this section may be approved by the City if it is consistent with the findings provided in subsection (D)(2) of this section; with Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act of 1976; with the Interpretative Guidelines for Coastal Planning and Permits established by the California Coastal Commission dated February 11, 1977, and any subsequent amendments, under the Local Coastal Program. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Pursuant to Section 21.16.020.E, (Reasonable Accommodations) of the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, the review authority may grant reasonable accommodations to the City’s coastal zoning and land use regulations, policies, and practices when needed to provide an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling in compliance with Federal and State Fair Housing Laws. 13 Hearing Officer Resolution No. #### Page 5 of 7 04-24-18 2. Pursuant to NBMC Section 21.52.036.C.1, the project is exempt from the requirements from a coastal development permit since the modifications to the existing residence do not result in an increase of gross floor area, height, or bulk of the structure by more than ten percent (10%). 3. There are no feasible alterations for providing an accommodation at the dwelling that would provide greater consistency with the Certified Local Coastal Program. Any modifications necessary to make the upper levels accessible cannot be accommodated without more significant disruption to the interior of the home, including wheelchair accessible hallways, significant structural alterations and dramatically increased construction cost that may render the project infeasible. Furthermore, the resulting design, bulk, and scale of development maintains a building envelope consistent with the existing neighbor character and will not degrade the impacts to public views or coastal access. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Hearing Officer of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Reasonable Accommodation No. RA2018-001, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 2. This action shall become final and effective 14 days following the date this Resolution was adopted unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of NBMC Title 20 Planning and Zoning. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 26th DAY OF JUNE, 2018. _____________________________________ ________________________, Hearing Officer 14 Hearing Officer Resolution No. #### Page 6 of 7 04-24-18 EXHIBIT “A” CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLANNING 1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plans and building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval. (Except as modified by applicable conditions of approval). 2. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City’s Building Division and Fire Department. The construction plans must comply with the most recently, City - adopted version of the California Building Code. The construction plans must meet all applicable State Disabilities Access requirements. 3. The reasonable accommodation shall lapse if the exercise of rights granted by it are discontinued for at least one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. 4. If the person(s) initially occupying the residence vacates or conveys the property for which the reasonable accommodation was granted, the reasonable accommodation shall remain in effect only if the Director determines that the modifications authorized by this reasonable accommodation application are physically integrated into the residential structure and cannot be easily removed or altered to make the residence comply with the Zoning Code. 5. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of ap proval. 6. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Material violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this Use Permit. 7. A copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval set forth in this Exhibit “A”, shall be incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans prior to issuance of the building permits. 8. This approval shall expire and become void unless exercised within 24 months from the actual date of review authority approval, except where an extension of time is approved in compliance with the provisions of NBMC Title 20 Planning and Zoning. 9. 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 Landon Elevator Addition including, but not limited to, Reasonable Accommodation No. RA2018-001 (PA2018-069). This indemnification shall include, but 15 Hearing Officer Resolution No. #### Page 7 of 7 04-24-18 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. 16 Attachment No. HO 2 Draft Resolution Denying the Reasonable Accommodation 17 RESOLUTION NO. HO2018-#### A RESOLUTION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DENYING REASONABLE ACCOMODATION NO. RA2018-001 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 205 NORTH BAY FRONT (PA2018-069) THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Jeff Benson, Architect on behalf of Marvin and Jill Landon, with respect to property located at 205 North Bay Front, and legally described as Lot 3, Block 4, Section 1 of Balboa Island resubdivision requesting approval of a reasonable accommodation. 2. The applicant has submitted a reasonable accommodation application requesting relief from the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning Districts General Development Standards) and Section 21.18.030 Residential Coastal Districts General Development Standards) to allow the addition of an elevator to exceed the maximum allowed floor area for an existing single-family home. The proposed elevator is approximately 5 feet wide, adding 40 square feet to the existing 3,403-square-foot single- family dwelling. The existing dwelling and new elevator meet all other Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program requirements including setbacks and height. The elevator is requested to provide access to the residence for an individual with a disability. 3. The subject property is designated Two-Unit Residential (RT) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Balboa Island (R-BI) Zoning District. 4. The subject property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan category is Two Unit Residential (RT-E) and it is located within the Balboa Island (R-BI) Coastal Zoning District. 5. The project is exempt from the requirements of a coastal development permit pursuant to NBMC Section 21.52.035. C. because the project would not result in any improvement to the structure that results in changes in floor area exceeding 10 percent of the existing floor area or 10 percent of the existing height, parking demand, or change the general level of activity within the neighborhood. 6. A public hearing was held on June 26, 2018 in the Newport Beach Conference Room (Bay B – 1st Floor) at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Hearing Officer at this hearing. 18 Hearing Officer Resolution No. #### Page 2 of 2 04-24-18 SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to CEQA review. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. In accordance with Section 20.52.070(D)(2) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, required findings must be made in order to approve the reasonable accommodation. In this case, the Hearing Officer was unable to make the required findings based upon the following…. (Hearing Officer will fill-in). SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Hearing Officer of the City of Newport Beach hereby denies Reasonable Accommodation No. RA2018-001, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 2. This action shall become final and effective 14 days following the date this Resolution was adopted unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 26th DAY OF JUNE, 2018. _____________________________________ , Hearing Officer 19 Attachment No. HO 3 Architect’s Letter 20 234 Broadway, Costa Mesa, CA www.BDandArch.com May 2nd, 2018 Melinda Whelan Community Development Department - Planning Division City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear Melinda, The proposed location of the elevator represents the only way to provide wheelchair access to all three levels of the home (1st, 2nd, & Roof Deck) without resulting in a critical loss of habitable space. The unique configuration of the home’s existing split vertical circulation has one stairway between the first and second floors and another for the circulation between the second floor and the roof deck and the circulation space (hallway) between the two stairs led to the currently proposed location for the addition of an elevator. This existing layout, paired with the long narrow lot’s limitations, left few viable options for the addition of an elevator. For example, locating the elevator in the Family Room would result in loss of the living space, loss of the storage on the 2nd floor, and the elevator would not be able to discharge at the Roof Deck without demolishing part of the sloped roof and reframing to increasing the size of the roof deck. Conversely, if the elevator as proposed, was located closer to the Dining Room, it would result in 1st & 2nd floor hallways too narrow to be suitable for a wheelchair, would require the demolition of the French doors to the patio, while also require the replacement of the mechanical line sets for and relocation of the A/C condensers located in the screened area of the Roof Deck. Further, if the elevator were to be located within the existing first floor footprint, the loss of bedroom space and the interruption of the hallways would only be the start of the negative consequences. The foundation work and framing overhaul would be 2-3 times more costly due to the amount of limited access construction, the added demolition & replacement of existing 21 234 Broadway, Costa Mesa, CA www.BDandArch.com interior finishes, as well as the intricate balance of temporary shoring of the existing structure that would also be required. In short, alternative solutions would result in: • The loss of use of primary living spaces • An increased loss of use of the residence due to an extended sequencing of construction stages • A disruption of safe and clear egress circulation within the residence • Dramatically higher construction costs I hope this brief explanation helps in showing the thought and care put into the proposed solution. If there is anything else I can do to assist in the approval of the requested Reasonable Accommodation, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Jeff Benson, Architect 22 Attachment No. HO 4 Project Plans 23 NORTH BAY FRON T ℄ O F A L LEY SEA WA L LBOARDWALKPOCHED AREADENOTES PROPOSEDELEVATOR ADDITIONSHADED AREA DENOTESEXISTING FOOTPRINT(NO CHANGE)3'-0"SIDEYARDSETBACK3'-0"SIDEYARDSETBACK5'-0"REARYARDSETBACK7'-0"FRONT(SRINGLINE)SETBACKOUTLINE OFSECOND FLOORABOVEAA-4AA-4PROPERTY LINEEDGE OFBOARDWALKEXI S T ING P LAN TER TO REMA IN A-1AAC32268JRSNEDATTOEFCCIL SJ REN. R E FFE YE AHCR NOLIFIA TIEBS EMTCENONS9/19TITLE SHEET, SITE PLAN, & NOTESDATE:REVISION:REVISION:REVISION:REVISION:JOB #: 16-025BD& ARCH 234 Broadway Costa Mesa, CA 92627 949.534.2724 BDandArch.comSITE PLANSCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"C JEFFREY JAMES BENSON EXPRESSLY RESERVES HIS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS CONTAINED IN THESE PLANS. THE PLANS SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED, ALTERED, OR COPIED IN ANY WAY, NOR SHALL THEY BE ASSIGED TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE PERMISSION OF JEFFREY JAMES BENSON. IF THE PLANS ARE USED IN AN UNAUTHORIZED WAY, THE USER AGREES TO HOLD HARMLESS, INDEMNIFY, AND DEFEND JEFFREY JAMES BENSON FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING FROM SUCH UAUTHORIZED USE.NO CHANGE TO PARKINGNO CHANGE TO SITE DRAINAGELEGAL OWNERMARVIN LANDON5395 JED SMITH ROADHIDDEN HILLS, CA, 91302CONTACT: JEFF BENSON AT BD&ARCH(949) 534-2724ADD A 3-STOP RESIDENTIAL ELEVATOR TO PROVIDEACCESS TO THE EXISTING 1ST FLOOR, 2ND FLOOR, &ROOF DECK.LEGAL DESCRIPTIONSCOPE OF WORKMAPPING ID:A.P.N.:COUNTY:CITY:AREA:BLOCK 4, LOT 3050-022-22ORANGENEWPORT BEACHBALBOA ISLANDJEFFREY JAMES BENSON IS THE D.P.I.R.C. -THE REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL INRESPONSIBLE CHARGE SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FORREVIEWING AND COORDINATING SUBMITTALDOCUMENTS PREPARED BY OTHERS, INCLUDINGPHASED AND DEFERRED SUBMITTAL ITEMS, FORCOMPATIBILITY WITH THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING.DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGSCITY:ZONE:CODE:USE:CONSTRUCTION TYPE:OCCUPANCY:SETBACKS:FRONT-SIDES-REAR-MAXIMUM HEIGHT:DESIGN DATANEWPORT BEACHR-B12013 CRC, 2013, CBC,2013, CPC, 2013 CEC,2013 CMC, 2008 BEES,2013 CGBSCSFDVBR-3/USTRINGLINE (7')3'5'24' (FLAT ROOFS)/29' (SLOPED ROOFS)DESIGN DATALOT SIZE:(35'x101', ACTUAL WIDTH 30')BUILDABLE AREA:(24'x89')MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA:(1.5 x B.A.+200 SQ. FT.)3,030 SQ. FT.2,136 SQ. FT.3,404 SQ. FT.PROJECT NORTHN EXISTING 1ST FLOOR:EXISTING 2ND FLOOR:EXISTING GARAGE:EXISTING TOTAL:1,392 SQ. FT.1,602 SQ. FT.409 SQ. FT.3,403 SQ. FT.PROPOSED 1ST FLOOR:PROPOSED 2ND FLOOR:EXISTING GARAGE:PROPOSED TOTAL:+40 SQ. FT.-NO CHANGE--NO CHANGE-3,443 SQ. FT.SHEET INDEXA-1 TITLE SHEET, SITE PLAN, & NOTESA-2 FIRST FLOOR PLANA-3 SECOND FLOOR & ROOF PLANA-4 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS & SECTION LANDON RESIDENCE 205 NORTH BAY FRONT NEWPORT BEACH, CAVICINITY MAPBALBOA AVE.NORTHBAY FRONTSOUTH BAY FRONTBALBOA ISLANDPARK AVE.MARINEAVE.PACIFIC COAST HWY.BAYSIDE DR.J A M B O R E E R D .NEWPORTBAYPROJECTSITE24 LIVING ROOM (NO CHANGE) ENTRY (NO CHANGE) (NO CHANGE) 2-CAR GARAGE (NO CHANGE) BEACH BATH FAMILY ROOM (NO CHANGE) KITCHEN (NO CHANGE) NOOK (NO CHANGE) DINING ROOM (NO CHANGE) COAT CLOSET (NO CHANGE) EXIST'G STAIR UP (NO CHANGE) PATIO 7'-0" FRO NT Y A R D (STRI N GLI N E) SETB A C K3'-0"SIDEYARDSETBACK3'-0"SIDEYARDSETBACK5'-0" REA R YAR D SETB A C K OUTLINE OF SECOND FLOOR ABOVE ENTRY PATIO (NO CHANGE) OUTLINE OF SECOND FLOOR ABOVE A A-4 NEW ELEVATOR 5'-01 8"5'-614"3'-212"3'-101 8"3'-105 8" 1'-15 8" NEW RESIDENTIAL 950 LB. CAPACITY ELEVATOR BY ACME HOME ELEVATOR INC. - PROVIDE 4'-6" WIDE BY 4'-10" DEEP SHAFT (CLEAR DIMS) A A-4 A-2 A A C32268 J RSNED ATTO E F CCILSJREN. REFFEYE A H C RNOLIF IATI EB S EM TCENONS9/19FIRST FLOOR PLANDATE: REVISION: REVISION: REVISION: REVISION: JOB #: 16-025BD&ARCH234 BroadwayCosta Mesa, CA 92627949.534.2724BDandArch.comLANDON RESIDENCE205 NORTH BAY FRONTNEWPORT BEACH, CAFIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0" PROJECT NORTH N CJEFFREY JAMES BENSON EXPRESSLY RESERVES HIS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS CONTAINED IN THESE PLANS. THE PLANS SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED, ALTERED, OR COPIED IN ANY WAY, NOR SHALL THEY BE ASSIGED TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE PERMISSION OF JEFFREY JAMES BENSON. IF THE PLANS ARE USED IN AN UNAUTHORIZED WAY, THE USER AGREES TO HOLD HARMLESS, INDEMNIFY, AND DEFEND JEFFREY JAMES BENSON FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING FROM SUCH UAUTHORIZED USE.WALL LEGEND EXISTING WALL TO TO REMAIN BE REMOVED EXISTING WALL NEW WALL FLOOR PLAN NOTES: 1. IF ANY DISCREPANCY IS FOUND BETWEEN THE EXISTING BUILT CONDITION AND THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, BRING IT TO THE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT. 2. THE SITE'S SURFACE DRAINAGE TO REMAIN UNCHANGED. 25 (NO CHANGE) MASTER BEDROOM MASTER WIC LAUNDRY MASTER BATH (NO CHANGE) W.C. (N/C) (NO CHANGE) (NO CHANGE) OPEN TO BELOW HALL (NO CHANGE) EXIST'G STAIR DOWN (NO CHANGE) STORAGE (NO CHANGE) BEDROOM 1 (NO CHANGE) BATH 1 (NO CHANGE) BATH 2 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 3 EXISTING DECK EXIST'G STAIR UP (NO CHANGE) EXISTING DECK GUARDRAIL TO REMAIN OUTLINE OF FIRST FLOOR BELOW3'-0"SIDEYARDSETBACK3'-0"SIDEYARDSETBACK5'-0" REA R YAR D SETB A C K 7'-0" FRO NT Y A R D (STRI N GLI N E) SETB A C K A A-4 NEW ELEVATOR (NO CHANGE) (NO CHANGE) (NO CHANGE) BATH 3 (NO CHANGE) 5'-01 8"5'-614"A A-4 EXST'G DECK BELOW RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE RIDGE EXISTING ROOF DECKA/C A/C A A-4 2'-6"5'-41 4"5'-614"A A-4 LOW SLOPED ROOF ABOVE ELEVATOR SHAFT (29.5 SQ FT); SEE "ROOF DECK ELEVATOR PLAN" DETAIL 2% SLOPE NEW ELEVATOR 5'-41 4"5'-614"A-3 A A C32268 J RSNED ATTO E F CCILSJREN. REFFEYE A H C RNOLIF IAT I EB S EM TCENONS9/19SECOND FLOOR PLANDATE: REVISION: REVISION: REVISION: REVISION: JOB #: 16-025BD&ARCH234 BroadwayCosta Mesa, CA 92627949.534.2724BDandArch.comLANDON RESIDENCE205 NORTH BAY FRONTNEWPORT BEACH, CASECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0" PROJECT NORTH N CJEFFREY JAMES BENSON EXPRESSLY RESERVES HIS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS CONTAINED IN THESE PLANS. THE PLANS SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED, ALTERED, OR COPIED IN ANY WAY, NOR SHALL THEY BE ASSIGED TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE PERMISSION OF JEFFREY JAMES BENSON. IF THE PLANS ARE USED IN AN UNAUTHORIZED WAY, THE USER AGREES TO HOLD HARMLESS, INDEMNIFY, AND DEFEND JEFFREY JAMES BENSON FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING FROM SUCH UAUTHORIZED USE.WALL LEGEND EXISTING WALL TO TO REMAIN BE REMOVED EXISTING WALL NEW WALL ROOF PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" PROJECT NORTH N ROOF DECK ELEVATOR PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 26 EXISTING F.F.(NO CHANGE)EXISTING F.F.(NO CHANGE)EXISTING T.O.P.(NO CHANGE)SHADED AREADENOTES PROPOSEDELEVATOR ADDITION24'-0"HEIGHT LIMIT (FLAT ROOFS)29'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT (SLOPED ROOFS)MATCH EXISTINGSIDING/ CASING/ TRIMSTYLE AND COLOREXISTINGFINISHEDGRADE29'-0"⅊S.B.⅊S.B.EXISTING F.F.(NO CHANGE)EXISTING F.F.(NO CHANGE)EXISTING T.O.P.(NO CHANGE)24'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT (SLOPED ROOFS)29'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT (FLAT ROOFS)EXISTINGFINISHEDGRADE24'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT (FLAT ROOFS)29'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT (SLOPED ROOFS)27'-9"⅊S.B.EXISTING F.F.(NO CHANGE)EXISTING T.O.P.(NO CHANGE)EXISTING F.F.(NO CHANGE)⅊DINING ROOMEXISTING CRAWL SPACEELEVATORSHAFTMASTER BATHROOMHALLEXISTING ATTIC SPACE1'-0" 1'-2"EXISTINGFINISHEDGRADEA-4AAC32268JRSNEDATTOEFCCIL SJ REN. R E FFE YE AHCR NOLIFIA TIEBS EMTCENONS9/17EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSDATE:REVISION:REVISION:REVISION:REVISION:JOB #: 16-025BD& ARCH 234 Broadway Costa Mesa, CA 92627 949.534.2724 BDandArch.com LANDON RESIDENCE 205 NORTH BAY FRONT NEWPORT BEACH, CAWEST ELEVATIONSCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"C JEFFREY JAMES BENSON EXPRESSLY RESERVES HIS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTS CONTAINED IN THESE PLANS. THE PLANS SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED, ALTERED, OR COPIED IN ANY WAY, NOR SHALL THEY BE ASSIGED TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE PERMISSION OF JEFFREY JAMES BENSON. IF THE PLANS ARE USED IN AN UNAUTHORIZED WAY, THE USER AGREES TO HOLD HARMLESS, INDEMNIFY, AND DEFEND JEFFREY JAMES BENSON FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ARISING FROM SUCH UAUTHORIZED USE.NORTH ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"SECTION ASCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"27