Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04_Faerber Residence CDP_PA2020-029CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR STAFF REPORT June 25, 2020 Agenda Item No. 4 SUBJECT:Faerber Residence (PA2020-029) Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013 SITE LOCATION:405 Cortes Circle APPLICANT:Architectural Design Solutions OWNER:Dr. Wade and Cynthia Faerber PLANNER:Liane Schuller, Planning Consultant 949-644-3200, lschuller@newportbeachca.gov LAND USE AND ZONING General Plan:RS-D (Single-Unit Residential Detached) Zoning District: R-1-6000 (Single-Unit Residential) Coastal Land Use Category: RSD-A (Single-Unit Residential Detached) (0.0-5.9 DU/AC) Coastal Zoning District: R-1-6000 (Single-Unit Residential) PROJECT SUMMARY A request for a coastal development permit to enclose two existing 65-square-foot covered decks on the main and lower floor levels of an existing single-family home in order to enlarge two existing adjacent bedrooms, and to construct a 210-square-foot upper level addition. The existing development is legal nonconforming because the existing covered decks extend beyond the allowable development area identified in the Canyon Overlay District. As such, the project includes a request for relief from Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan), pursuant to Section 21.52.090 (Relief from Implementation Plan Development Standards). The proposed project complies with all other applicable development standards and no new development is proposed outside of the footprint of the existing structure. 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, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and 3) Adopt draft Zoning Administrator Resolution No. _ approving Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013 (Attachment No. ZA 1). 1 Faerber Residence (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator, June 25, 2020 Page 2 DISCUSSION Land Use and Development Standards The subject property in the R-1-6000 (Single-Unit Residential) Coastal Zoning District, which provides for detached single-unit residential development and is consistent with the allowed uses of the City’s General Plan, Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program. A coastal development permit is required due to the request to deviate from development standards, and the property is not eligible for a waiver for de minimis development because the property is in the Coastal Commission Appeal Area. The property is currently developed with a two-story, 3,606-square-foot, single-family residence that has a roof deck and a 540-square-foot, attached two-car garage. The existing residence was permitted in 2000 and subsequently constructed. The applicant desires to enclose two existing 65-square-foot covered decks on the main and lower floor levels to enlarge two existing adjacent bedrooms. The decks are already partly enclosed with a solid railing and roof. The project simply involves enclosing the space between the solid railing and the roof, and removing the wall and existing glass doors separating the bedroom and deck area. The existing residence is a legal nonconforming structure because portions of the development extend beyond the allowable development area identified in Policy 4.4.3-18 of the Coastal Land Use Plan and the Implementation Plan Canyon Overlay District provided in NBMC Section 21.28.050. The policy and regulation require the establishment of canyon development setbacks based upon the predominant line of existing development. The policy and regulation go farther and prohibit development beyond the predominant line of existing development by establishing a development stringline drawn between nearest adjacent development. Development stringlines are to be established for principal structures and accessory improvements and structures. This Coastal Land Use Plan policy was certified by the Coastal Commission in late 2005. The Implementation Plan was certified by the Coastal Commission in late 2016. The existing structure pre-dates the policy and regulation. The applicant also desires to construct a 210-square-foot addition on the upper level. As this addition will increase the existing overall height of the structure by more than 10 percent, a coastal development permit is required. The addition complies with the stringline setback and maintains the appearance of two stories from the street. The proposed project will conform to all applicable Title 20 and Title 21 development standards, including floor area limit, setbacks, height and parking, as evidenced by the project plans and illustrated in Table 1 below. 2 Faerber Residence (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator, June 25, 2020 Page 3 Table 1 – Development Standards Development Standard Standard Proposed Setbacks (min.) Front 5 feet 5 feet (no change) Side 6 feet each 6 feet each (no change) Rear**6 feet 99 feet (no change to existing condition) Allowable Floor Area (max.) 10,370 square feet 4,486 square feet Parking (min.) 2 enclosed 2 enclosed Height (max.) Flat Sloped 24-foot flat roof 29-foot sloped roof 22-foot flat roof ** Canyon Stringline also applies. Stringline bisects existing development. As noted, the existing residence was constructed in 2001, prior to the adoption and implementation of the City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Canyon Overlay District. The canyon development setback drawn consistent with the LCP bisects the existing residence. Nearly one-half of the existing structure extends beyond the currently applicable canyon stringline. The existing residence is considered legal, nonconforming due to noncompliance with the applicable canyon stringline. Section 2.2.5 of the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan sets forth policies related to existing nonconforming structures. Policy 2.2.5-1 specifically allows limited renovations that improve the physical quality and character of a structure provided such renovations do not involve demolition or replacement of 50 percent or more of the nonconforming exterior walls and do not increase the degree of the structure’s nonconformity. The project involves enclosing two existing 3 Faerber Residence (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator, June 25, 2020 Page 4 covered decks above the ground level and within the existing structural envelope, with no grading, development or further encroachment beyond the applicable stringline. The deck floor and solid railing will remain in place, and approximately 66 square feet of exterior wall area separating the bedroom and deck area will be removed. The addition to the upper level is limited in size and is within the principal structure stringline. Therefore, the project will have no detrimental effect on environmental or visual coastal resources that the stringline is intended to protect. Pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 21.38.040(C), nonconforming structural elements of a primary structure (excepting foundation) may be modified provided the degree of nonconformity is not increased. The proposed project will occur within the confines of the existing structural footprint above the ground level and will not increase the existing degree of nonconformity. Section 21.52.090 of the NBMC provides standards and approval findings for relief from the development standards of the Implementation Plan when doing so is consistent with the purpose of the certified Local Coastal Program and will not have an adverse effect on coastal resources. Approval findings include a determination that there are practical difficulties and special circumstances associated with the property, and that the approval will not negatively affect environmental or coastal resources. Staff believes all required findings for approval can be made and is recommending approval for the reasons detailed in the attached draft resolution. Hazards Pursuant to Section 21.30.015(D)(3)(c) of the NBMC, the property owner will be required to acknowledge any hazards present at the site and unconditionally waive any claim to damage or liability against the decision authority prior to the issuance of building permits for construction. The property in an area known for the potential for seismic activity. All projects are required to comply with the California Building Code (CBC) and Building Division standards and policies. Geotechnical investigations specifically addressing liquefaction are required to be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. Permit issuance is also contingent on the inclusion of design mitigation identified in the investigations. Construction plans are reviewed for compliance with approved investigations and CBC prior to building permit issuance. Public Access The project site is located north of Pacific Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. The site is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline, and the project will not affect the public’s ability to gain access to use and/or view the coast and nearby recreational facilities. 4 Faerber Residence (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator, June 25, 2020 Page 5 Section 21.30A.040 (Determination of Public Access/Recreation Impacts) of the NBMC requires that the provision of public access bear a reasonable relationship between the requirement and the project’s impact and be proportional to the impact. In this case, the project involves minor additions within the structural footprint of an existing single-family residence located on a lot in the Coastal Zone. The project does not involve a change in land use, density or intensity that will result in increased demand on public access and recreation opportunities. Furthermore, the project site is located north of Pacific Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. Therefore, coastal access conditions will not be affected by the project. Coastal access is currently provided and will continue to be provided by street ends throughout the neighborhoods located south of Pacific Coast Highway with access to the coast. The project site is not located adjacent to a coastal view road or coastal viewpoint identified by Local Coastal Program maps. The project site may be located within the viewshed of distant public viewing areas; however, the project is limited to minor additions within the established structural footprint and complies with all applicable LCP development standards. Therefore, the project does not have the potential to degrade the visual quality of the Coastal Zone or result in significant adverse impacts to public views. 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, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. The Class 1 exemption includes minor additions to existing private structures. The proposed project involves enclosing two existing 65-square-foot covered decks on the main and lower floor levels to enlarge two existing adjacent bedrooms and constructing a 210-square-foot upper level addition. PUBLIC NOTICE Notice of this application was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners and residential occupants 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 hearing, 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. APPEAL PERIOD: This action shall become final and effective 14 days following the date the Resolution is adopted unless within such time an appeal or call for review is filed with the Community 5 Faerber Residence (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator, June 25, 2020 Page 6 Development Director in accordance with the provisions of Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Final action taken by the City may be appealed to the Coastal Commission in compliance with Section 21.64.035 of the City’s certified LCP and Title 14 California Code of Regulations, Sections 13111 through 13120, and Section 30603 of the Coastal Act. For additional information on filing an appeal, contact the Planning Division at 949-644-3200. Prepared by: BMZ/ls Attachments: ZA 1 Draft Resolution ZA 2 Vicinity Map ZA 3 Applicant’s Justification ZA 4 Project Plans 6 Attachment No. ZA 1 Draft Resolution 7 RESOLUTION NO. ZA2020-### A RESOLUTION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. CD2020-013 FOR MINOR ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND GRANTING RELIEF FROM THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AT 405 CORTES CIRCLE (PA2020-029) THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1.An application was filed by Architectural Design Solutions (“Applicant”), with respect to adding 340 square feet of habitable area to the existing residential property located at 405 Cortes Circle, and legally described as Lot 66, Tract 1237 requesting approval of a coastal development permit. 2.The Applicant proposes to enclose two (2) existing 65-square-foot covered decks on the main and lower floor levels to enlarge two (2) existing adjacent bedrooms, and to construct a 210-square-foot upper level addition, thereby adding 340 square feet of habitable area to the existing residence. No change is proposed to the footprint of the existing structure. 3.The existing legal nonconforming development predates the City's Local Coastal Program and adopted Canyon Overlay District, and the existing decks extend beyond the currently applicable Canyon Stringline. Pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 21.38.040(C), nonconforming structural elements of a primary structure (excepting foundation) may be modified provided the degree of nonconformity is not increased. The proposed project will occur within the confines of the existing structural footprint and will not increase the existing degree of nonconformity. 4.The subject property is located within the R-1-6000 (Single-Unit Residential) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is RS-D (Single-Unit Residential Detached). 5.The subject property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan category is RSD-A (Single Unit Residential Detached) (0.0 - 5.9 DU/AC) and the Coastal Zoning District is R-1-6000 (Single-Unit Residential). 6.A public hearing was held on June 25, 2020, in the Corona del Mar Conference Room, Bay 1E located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California, due to the Declaration of a State of Emergency and Proclamation of Local Emergency related to COVID-19. A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Zoning Administrator at this hearing. 8 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 2 of 9 SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. This Project is categorically 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, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. 2. Class 1 exempts additions of up to 10,000 square feet where public services and utilities are available and the area is not considered environmentally sensitive. The proposed project is limited to enclosing two (2) existing 65-square-foot covered decks on the main and lower floor levels to enlarge two (2) existing adjacent bedrooms, and to construct a 210- square-foot upper level addition, thereby adding 340 square feet of habitable area to the existing residence. The proposed area of work is not within an environmentally sensitive area. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. In accordance with Section 21.52.015 (Coastal Development Permits) of the NBMC, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: A. Conforms to all applicable sections of the certified Local Coastal Program. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The proposed structure conforms to all applicable development standards including, but not limited to, site coverage limitation, setbacks, height, and parking: a. The maximum floor area limitation is 10,370 square feet and the proposed gross floor area is 4,486 square feet. b. The proposed development will provide the required setbacks, which are 5 feet along the front property line, 6 feet along the side property lines, and 6 feet along the rear property line. c. The project complies with the maximum height limitation. The highest flat roof or parapet of the upper level addition is 5.5 feet below the maximum height limit of 24 feet, measured from established grade at every point as required by Zoning Code Section 20.30.050(B)(3). d. The project includes existing garage parking for two (2) vehicles, which complies with the minimum two (2)-space parking requirement for single-family residences with less than 4,000 square feet of livable floor area. The existing living area is 3,606-square-feet and the proposed living area is 3,946-square-feet. 9 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 3 of 9 2. The proposed design, bulk, and scale of the development is consistent with the existing neighborhood’s pattern of development and expected future development consistent with applicable development standards. The upper level addition complies with the stringline setback and maintains the appearance of two (2) stories from the street. 3. The project will be required to comply with the California Building Code (CBC) and Building Division standards and policies. 4. As conditioned, the property owner will also be required to acknowledge any hazards present at the site and unconditionally waive any claim to damage or liability against the decision authority, consistent with Section 21.30.015(D)(3)(c) of the NBMC prior to the issuance of building permits for construction. 5. The property is not located near coastal view roads and is not located near any identified public viewpoints; therefore, the project will not negatively impact public coastal views. Finding: B. Conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act if the project is located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline of any body of water located within the coastal zone. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The project site is located north of Pacific Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. The site is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline, and the project will not affect the public’s ability to gain access to use and/or view the coast and nearby recreational facilities. 2. Section 21.30A.040 (Determination of Public Access/Recreation Impacts) of the NBMC requires that the provision of public access bear a reasonable relationship between the requirement and the project’s impact and be proportional to the impact. In this case, the project involves minor additions within the structural envelope of an existing single-family residence located on a lot in the Coastal Zone. The project does not involve a change in land use, density or intensity that will result in increased demand on public access and recreation opportunities. Furthermore, the project site is located north of Pacific Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. Therefore, coastal access conditions will not be affected by the project. Coastal access is currently provided and will continue to be provided by street ends throughout the neighborhoods located south of Pacific Coast Highway with access to the coast. 3. The project site is not located adjacent to a coastal view road or coastal viewpoint identified by Local Coastal Program maps. The project site may be located within the viewshed of distant public viewing areas; however, the project is limited to enclosing two (2) small decks within the established structural footprint and building envelope and complies with all applicable Local Coastal Program (LCP) development standards. 10 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 4 of 9 Therefore, the project does not have the potential to degrade the visual quality of the Coastal Zone or result in significant adverse impacts to public views. Finding: C. The granting of the modification is necessary due to practical difficulties associated with the property and the strict application of the Implementation Plan results in physical hardships. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The existing residence was constructed approximately 20 years ago, prior to the LCP and Canyon Overlay District, which became effective in 2017. Nearly one-half of the existing structure extends beyond the subsequently adopted canyon stringline, creating practical difficulties in renovating the existing structure. 2. The strict application of the canyon stringline results in physical hardships inconsistent with the intent and purpose of the LCP. The enclosing of existing covered decks above the ground level and within the existing structural envelope has no detrimental effect on environmental or visual resources that the canyon stringline is intended to protect. Section 21.52.090(B)(1) of the NBMC specifically allows modification or waiver of development standards through approval of a coastal development for projects that will not have an adverse effect on coastal resources. Finding: D. The modification complies with the findings required to approve a coastal development permit in Section 21.52.015(F). Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The project conforms to applicable sections of the LCP in that the proposed work will occur within the confines of the existing structural footprint above the ground level and will not increase the existing degree of nonconformity. No grading or further encroachment beyond the applicable stringline will occur. Therefore, the project will have no detrimental effect on coastal resources that the stringline is intended to protect. 2. The project site is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline. The project site is located north of Pacific Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. 3. All Facts in Support of Findings A and B above are hereby incorporated by reference. Finding: E. The modification will not result in development that blocks or significantly impedes public access to and along the sea or shoreline and to coastal parks, trails, or coastal bluffs. 11 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 5 of 9 Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Public coastal access conditions will not be affected by the project. The property is located north of Pacific Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. Coastal access is currently provided and will continue to be provided by street ends throughout neighborhoods located south of Pacific Coast Highway with access to the coast. There are no public trails located on the project site. 2. Facts in Support of Finding B.1 and B.2 are hereby incorporated by reference. Finding: F. The modification will not result in development that blocks or significantly impairs public views to and along the sea or shoreline or to coastal bluffs and other scenic coastal areas. Fact in Support of Finding: 1. Fact in Support of Finding B.3 is hereby incorporated by reference. Finding: G. The modification will not result in development that has an adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on coastal resources, including wetlands, sensitive habitat, vegetation, or wildlife species. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The covered decks to be enclosed are located within the already developed area of the property and within the existing structural envelope. No new development or grading is proposed outside of the existing structural footprint and the project will not impact any coastal resources, which the stringline setback is intended to protect. 2. Site-specific conditions, including the location of the property at the end of the Cortes Circle cul-de-sac and the location of existing improvements that establishes the canyon stringline for the project site, are unique to this property and, therefore, do not establish a precedent for approval of other requests that would contribute to cumulative adverse effects on coastal resources. Finding: H. The granting of the modification will not be contrary to, or in conflict with, the purpose of this Implementation Plan, nor to the applicable policies of the certified Local Coastal Program. 12 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 6 of 9 Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Approval of the coastal development permit will not be contrary to the applicable policies of the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan intended to protect coastal resources. Policy 2.2.5-1 specifically allows limited renovations to existing nonconforming structures that improve the physical quality and character of a structure provided such renovations do not involve demolition or replacement of 50 percent or more of the nonconforming exterior walls and do not increase the degree of the structure’s nonconformity. The project involves enclosing existing covered decks within the existing structural envelope above the ground level, with no grading or further encroachment beyond the applicable stringline. 2. The granting of the coastal development permit to allow the enclosing of two (2) existing covered decks within the existing building envelope is consistent with NBMC Section 21.52.090, which provides for relief from development standards for projects that will have no detrimental effect on environmental or visual coastal resources. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds this Project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. 2. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit “A,” which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 3. This action shall become final and effective 14 days following the date this Resolution was adopted unless within such time an appeal or call for review is filed with the Community Development Director in accordance with the provisions of Title 21 Local Coastal Implementation Plan, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Final action taken by the City may be appealed to the Coastal Commission in compliance with Section 21.64.035 of the City’s certified LCP and Title 14 California Code of Regulations, Sections 13111 through 13120, and Section 30603 of the Coastal Act. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 25th DAY OF JUNE, 2020. ____________________________ Jaime Murillo, Zoning Administrator 13 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 7 of 9 EXHIBIT “A” CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 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). There shall be no further encroachment that extends beyond the current structural footprint of the residence. 2. Revisions to the approved plans shall require separate review by the Planning Division and may require an amendment to this Coastal Development Permit or the processing of a new coastal development permit. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall provide a notarized, signed letter acknowledging all hazards present at the site, assuming the risk of injury or damage from such hazards, unconditionally waiving any claims of damage against the City from such hazards, and to indemnify 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, judgements, 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 development. The letter shall be scanned into the plan set prior to building permit issuance. 4. No demolition or construction materials, equipment debris, or waste, shall be placed or stored in a location that would enter sensitive habitat, receiving waters, or a storm drain or result in impacts to environmentally sensitive habitat areas, streams, the beach, wetlands or their buffers. No demolition or construction materials shall be stored on public property. 5. The Applicant is responsible for compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). In compliance with the MBTA, grading, brush removal, building demolition, tree trimming, and similar construction activities shall occur between August 16 and January 31, outside of the peak nesting period. If such activities must occur inside the peak nesting season from February 1 to August 15, compliance with the following is required to prevent the taking of Native Birds pursuant to MBTA: A. The construction area shall be inspected for active nests. If birds are observed flying from a nest or sitting on a nest, it can be assumed that the nest is active. Construction activity within 300 feet of an active nest shall be delayed until the nest is no longer active. Continue to observe the nest until the chicks have left the nest and activity is no longer observed. When the nest is no longer active, construction activity can continue in the nest area. B. It is a violation of state and federal law to kill or harm a native bird. To ensure compliance, consider hiring a biologist to assist with the survey for nesting birds, and to determine 14 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 8 of 9 when it is safe to commence construction activities. If an active nest is found, one (1) or two (2) short follow-up surveys will be necessary to check on the nest and determine when the nest is no longer active. 6. Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Good Housekeeping Practices (GHPs) shall be implemented prior to and throughout the duration of construction activity as designated in the Construction Erosion Control Plan. 7. The discharge of any hazardous materials into storm sewer systems or receiving waters shall be prohibited. Machinery and equipment shall be maintained and washed in confined areas specifically designed to control runoff. A designated fueling and vehicle maintenance area with appropriate berms and protection to prevent spillage shall be provided as far away from storm drain systems or receiving waters as possible. 8. Debris from demolition shall be removed from work areas each day and removed from the project site within 24 hours of the completion of the project. Stockpiles and construction materials shall be covered, enclosed on all sites, not stored in contact with the soil, and located as far away as possible from drain inlets and any waterway. 9. Trash and debris shall be disposed in proper trash and recycling receptacles at the end of each construction day. Solid waste, including excess concrete, shall be disposed in adequate disposal facilities at a legal disposal site or recycled at a recycling facility. 10. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. 11. 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 Coastal Development Permit. 12. This Coastal Development Permit may be modified or revoked by the Zoning Administrator if determined that the proposed uses or conditions under which it is being operated or maintained is detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or if the property is operated or maintained so as to constitute a public nuisance. 13. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit “A” shall be incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division an additional copy of the approved architectural plans for inclusion in the Coastal Development file. The plans shall be identical to those approved by all City departments for building permit issuance. The approved copy shall include architectural sheets only and shall be reduced in size to 11 inches by 17 inches. The plans shall accurately depict the elements approved by this Coastal Development Permit. 15 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 9 of 9 15. Prior to the issuance of building permit, the Applicant shall pay any unpaid administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning Division. 16. Should the property be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by the current property owner or agent. 17. Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 21.54.060 (Time Limits and Extensions) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted. 18. 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 Faerber Residence including, but not limited to Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013 (PA2020-029). 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. 16 Attachment No. ZA 2 Vicinity Map 17 VICINITY MAP Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013 PA2020-029 405 Cortes Circle Subject Property 18 Attachment No. ZA 3 Applicant’s Justification 19 20 21 22 Attachment No. ZA 4 Project Plans 23 M A R K S. D W Y E RA R C H I T E C T U R A L D E S I G N S O L U T I O N SA R C H I T E C TN C A R BFaerber residential remodel / addition24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 15'-0"16'-0"32 15'-0"16'-0"33 1 From:CDD Sent:Wednesday, June 24, 2020 12:53 PM To:Murillo, Jaime Cc:Palencia, Ketshy Subject:FW: Public Hearing comments Faerber residence 405 Cortes Circle From: Julie Means <means4us@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2020 11:53 AM To: CDD <CDD@newportbeachca.gov> Cc: Schuller, Liane(Contractor) <lschuller@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Public Hearing comments Faerber residence 405 Cortes Circle [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Zoning Administrator, We received a notice about the potential changes to the Faerber residence located at 405 Cortes Circle, Corona del Mar. We live across and diagonally from the residence. The Faerbers have a beautiful home and we understand their desire to expand it to suit their family’s needs. We would like to continue to be good neighbors to those that share the beauty of Buck Gully, the Pacific Ocean, and our wonderful community of Corona del Mar. We are concerned about the impact on our view and potential property value of our home due to the construction on the top level of their home and the proposed 215 foot structure. It is difficult to imagine how this might impact our property value without seeing some sort of visual marker. We understand that the city does not guarantee views for private residences, however, we would like to see how this additional structure on top along with the variance that is requested for the addition of the bedrooms might look as a complete project. We would like to see a temporary physical representation of the proposed structures before we are able to understand and assess how it could potentially impact our view and property values. We would like to suggest the use of story poles to assist us in visualizing the actual addition on the third story along with the additions to the bedrooms. We respectfully and politely request a continuance of this project with extra conditions to allow us to evaluate the potential impact of the project. While the home may look like a simple two story home from the street side, from our side it looks like a much bigger structure. Please see the attached photos to see visual representation of the view from our home. The photos were taken from the exterior and interior of our home. We are emailing you our concerns as we are unable to attend the actual public hearing due to work and community volunteer commitments. Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4a Additional Materials Received Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) 2 Thank you very much for this opportunity to express our views. Sincerely, J.R and Julie Means 544 Hazel Dr. Corona del Mar Cell: 949-500-2406 Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4a Additional Materials Received Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) 3 Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4a Additional Materials Received Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) 4 Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4a Additional Materials Received Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) 5 Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4a Additional Materials Received Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) June 25, 2020, Zoning Administrator Agenda Comments Comments submitted by: Jim Mosher ( jimmosher@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229) Item 4. Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013 (PA2020-029) A staff report for what appears to have been an earlier proposal was posted for agenda Item No. 6 on April 30, 2020, but taken off calendar. Although the undated “Applicant’s Justification” (Attachment ZA 3) does not see m to have changed, comparing Table 1 with the same table in the earlier report, the present proposal involves 211 square feet more floor area, but has a 2-foot lower roof. The staff report does not make clear if there is a Coastal Development Permit for th e existing development, to which this might be a modification. From the “Applicant’s Justification” letter, it appears the applicant feels development should follow the natural contours of the canyon, and to the extent the stringline concept does not follow those contours, applying the stringline rule is unfair and improperly burdens impacted property owners. Unfortunately for the applicant, following the contours is not the City’s policy, and applying the stringline rule, while burdening them and allo wing less development than might be possible without it, does not appear to deny them the economic enjoyment of their parcel. I personally see little detriment in enclosing the existing covered patios, however it is difficult to see how adding floor area to a part of a non-conforming structure where floor area is not currently allowed could not be seen as increasing the degree of non-conformity. Yet the staff report (page 4) cites NBMC Section 21.38.040(C) as requiring, for consistency with the LCP, no increase in non-conformity. Based on the preceding observation, it is difficult to accept the statements that there is no increase in non-conformity in Section 1.3 (page 8), Fact D.1 (page 11) and Fact H.1 (page 13) of the proposed resolution. I am also struggling to understand how adding the roof-top “Craft Room Addition” shown on page 31 results, according to Table 1 on page 3, that is 2 feet lower (“22-foot flat roof”) than it was in the proposal without the addition presented on April 30 (“24 -foot flat roof”). And the roof -top addition is not mentioned in the “Applicant’s Justification” letter, which does not seem to have been updated. Further regarding the present staff report and resolution: Handwritten page 2, end of third bullet from end: “The Implementation Plan was certified by the Coastal Commission in late 2016 early 2017.” [I believe the Implementation Plan was certified at the Coastal Commission’s January 2017 meeting.] Handwritten page 8, Section 1.3: “The existing legal nonconforming development predates certification of the City's Local Coastal Program and adopted Canyon Overlay District, and the existing decks extend beyond the currently applicable Canyon Stringline.” [The existing development does not predate the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan and its policies, which date back to the 1980’s.] Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4b Additional Materials Received Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Handwritten page 8, Section 1.6: “A public hearing was held on June 25, 2020, in the Corona del Mar Conference Room, Bay 1E located at 100 Civic Center Drive, New port Beach, California, observing restrictions due to the Declaration of a State Emergency and Proclamation of Local Emergency related to COVID-19.” [As proposed, “due to” implies the declaration and proclamation were responsible for the hearing being held at an unusual location. Since this conference room is the normal hearing location, I don’t think the “due to” clause is needed at all unless it was intended to acknowledge the special access and social distancing measures applied as a result of the emergency.] Handwritten page 9, Fact A.1.b: “The proposed development will provide the required setbacks, which are 5 feet along the front property line, 6 feet along the side property lines, and 6 feet along the rear property line.” [This seems a bit disingenuous when then Implementation Plan requires structures to also be set back from the stringline. If it includes that, it is inaccurate as to the patio enclosures.] Handwritten page 9, Fact A.1.c: “The project complies with the maximum height limitat ion. The highest flat roof or parapet of the upper level addition is 5.5 feet below the maximum height limit of 24 feet, measured from established grade at every point as required by Zoning Code Section 20.30.050(B)(3) Implementation Plan Section 21.30.050(B)(3).” [See comments, below on pages 32 and 33. The cited section applies to lots with more than five percent slope, and involves a complex procedure. No topographic survey is included in the staff report, and I am unable to find any indication this procedure was applied. Instead, the applicant appears to have relied on the single-point, horizontal plane procedure of Section 21.30.050(B)(2 ).] Handwritten page 32: The applicant has provided heights “AMSL” (above mean sea level). This is confusing when the City’s standard reference point for heights is NAVD 88. Also, in reporting the height of the “Craft Room Addition” above grade, the applicant seems to have arbitrarily chosen a single point rear its middle. I believe the City’s height standard applies to the roof’s highest point above grade, which would be at its downslope edge. Normally such diagrams would include a line, following the grade slope, representing the code -required height envelope that cannot be penetrated by the manmade structures (as well as a line showing the established grade). Without such a line, it is difficult to assess the height compliance of this structure. Is it true that this steeply sloping lot does not have a sloping grade, but rather a single, flat established grade of 96.50’ as claimed in the diagrams on pages 32 and 33? Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4b Additional Materials Received Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) RESOLUTION NO. ZA2020-### A RESOLUTION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. CD2020-013 FOR MINOR ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND GRANTING RELIEF FROM THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AT 405 CORTES CIRCLE (PA2020-029) THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1.An application was filed by Architectural Design Solutions (“Applicant”), with respect to adding 340 square feet of habitable area to the existing residential property located at 405 Cortes Circle, and legally described as Lot 66, Tract 1237 requesting approval of a coastal development permit. 2.The Applicant proposes to enclose two (2) existing 65-square-foot covered decks on the main and lower floor levels to enlarge two (2) existing adjacent bedrooms, and to construct a 210-square-foot upper level addition, thereby adding 340 square feet of habitable area to the existing residence. No change is proposed to the footprint of the existing structure. 3.The existing legal nonconforming development predates the City's Local Coastal Program and adopted Canyon Overlay District, and the existing decks extend beyond the currently applicable Canyon Stringline. Pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 21.38.040(C), nonconforming structural elements of a primary structure (excepting foundation) may be modified provided the degree of nonconformity is not increased. The proposed project will occur within the confines of the existing structural footprint and will not increase the existing degree of nonconformity. 4.The subject property is located within the R-1-6000 (Single-Unit Residential) Zoning District and the General Plan Land Use Element category is RS-D (Single-Unit Residential Detached). 5.The subject property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan category is RSD-A (Single Unit Residential Detached) (0.0 - 5.9 DU/AC) and the Coastal Zoning District is R-1-6000 (Single-Unit Residential). 6.A public hearing was held on June 25, 2020, in the Corona del Mar Conference Room, Bay 1E located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California, observing restrictions due to the Declaration of a State of Emergency and Proclamation of Local Emergency related to COVID-19. A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Zoning Administrator at this hearing. Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 2 of 10 SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. This Project is categorically 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, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. 2. Class 1 exempts additions of up to 10,000 square feet where public services and utilities are available and the area is not considered environmentally sensitive. The proposed project is limited to enclosing two (2) existing 65-square-foot covered decks on the main and lower floor levels to enlarge two (2) existing adjacent bedrooms, and to construct a 210- square-foot upper level addition, thereby adding 340 square feet of habitable area to the existing residence. The proposed area of work is not within an environmentally sensitive area. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. In accordance with Section 21.52.015 (Coastal Development Permits) of the NBMC, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: A. Conforms to all applicable sections of the certified Local Coastal Program. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The proposed structure conforms to all applicable development standards including, but not limited to, site coverage limitation, setbacks, height, and parking: a. The maximum floor area limitation is 10,370 square feet and the proposed gross floor area is 4,486 square feet. b. The proposed development will provide the required setbacks, which are 5 feet along the front property line, 6 feet along the side property lines, and 6 feet along the rear property line. c. The project complies with the maximum height limitation. The highest flat roof or parapet of the upper level addition is approximately 45.5 feet below the maximum height limit of 24 feet, measured from established grade at every point as required by Implementation PlanZoning Code Section 201.30.050(B)(3). d. The project includes existing garage parking for two (2) vehicles, which complies with the minimum two (2)-space parking requirement for single-family residences with less than 4,000 square feet of livable floor area. The existing living area is 3,606-square-feet and the proposed living area is 3,946-square-feet. Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 3 of 10 2. The proposed design, bulk, and scale of the development is consistent with the existing neighborhood’s pattern of development and expected future development consistent with applicable development standards. The upper level addition complies with the stringline setback and maintains the appearance of two (2) stories from the street. 3. The property is not located within an area identified as hazardous due to erosion factors or coastal hazards. The project will be required to comply with the California Building Code (CBC) and Building Division standards and policies. 4. As conditioned, the property owner will also be required to acknowledge any hazards present at the site and unconditionally waive any claim to damage or liability against the decision authority, consistent with Section 21.30.015(D)(3)(c) of the NBMC prior to the issuance of building permits for construction. 5. The property is not located near coastal view roads and is not located near any identified public viewpoints; therefore, the project will not negatively impact public coastal views. Finding: B. Conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act if the project is located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline of any body of water located within the coastal zone. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The project site is located north of PacificEast Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. The site is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline, and the project will not affect the public’s ability to gain access to use and/or view the coast and nearby recreational facilities. 2. Section 21.30A.040 (Determination of Public Access/Recreation Impacts) of the NBMC requires that the provision of public access bear a reasonable relationship between the requirement and the project’s impact and be proportional to the impact. In this case, the project involves minor additions within the structural envelope of an existing single-family residence located on a lot in the Coastal Zone. The project does not involve a change in land use, density or intensity that will result in increased demand on public access and recreation opportunities. Furthermore, the project site is located north of PacificEast Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. Therefore, coastal access conditions will not be affected by the project. Coastal access is currently provided and will continue to be provided by street ends throughout the neighborhoods located south of PacificEast Coast Highway with access to the coast. 3. The project site is not located adjacent to a coastal view road or coastal viewpoint identified by Local Coastal Program maps. The project site may be located within the viewshed of distant public viewing areas; however, the project is limited to enclosing two (2) small decks within the established structural footprint and building envelope and complies with all applicable Local Coastal Program (LCP) development standards. Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 4 of 10 Therefore, the project does not have the potential to degrade the visual quality of the Coastal Zone or result in significant adverse impacts to public views. Finding: C. The Zoning Administrator has considered the following: i. Whether or not the development is consistent with the certified Local Coastal Program to the maximum extent feasible; and ii. Whether or not there are feasible alternatives that would provide greater consistency with the certified Local Coastal Program and/or that are more protective of coastal resources. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. With exception of the Variance to the canyon stringline, the proposed development complies with and is consistent with the certified LCP. Fact in Support of Findings A and B above. 2. The subject property located on a coastal canyon and is presently developed with a single-family residence and accessory structures. All proposed work will occur within the confines of the existing structural footprint above the ground level and will not increase the existing degree of nonconformity beyond the canyon stringline. Therefore, the project will have no detrimental effect on coastal resources that the stringline is intended to protect, with or without the project. Finding: C.D. The granting of the modification is necessary due to practical difficulties associated with the property and the strict application of the Implementation Plan results in physical hardships. The granting of the variance is necessary due to special circumstances applicable to the property, including location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, and/or other physical features, the strict application of the development standards otherwise applicable to the property denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and in the same coastal zoning district. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The existing residence was constructed approximately 20 years ago, prior to the LCP and Canyon Overlay District, which became effective in 2017. Nearly one-half of the existing structure extends beyond the subsequently adopted canyon stringline, creating special circumstancespractical difficulties in renovating the existing structure. 2. The strict application of the canyon stringline results in physical hardships inconsistent with the intent and purpose of the LCP. The enclosing of existing covered decks above the ground level and within the existing structural envelope has no detrimental effect on Formatted: List Paragraph,Discussion Text - List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 0.75", No widow/orphan control, Don't adjust space between Latin and Asian text, Don't adjust space between Asian text and numbers Formatted: Justified, Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B, C, … + Start at: 4 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.25" Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 5 of 10 environmental or visual resources that the canyon stringline is intended to protect. Section 21.52.090(B)(1) of the NBMC specifically allows modification or waiver of development standards through approval of a coastal development for projects that will not have an adverse effect on coastal resources. 3. Typical properties subject to the canyon stringline on the west side of the canyon located along Hazel Drive experience a straight-line of development along a straight roadway where the canyon stringline methodology more appropriately maintains the existing line of development. Conversely, properties on the east side of canyon are situated around more curvilinear streets, including three cul-de-sacs, where the typical canyon stringline methodology does not work, does not represent the predominate line of development, and nearly bisects the existing development. 4.Furthermore, given the project’s location at the end of the cul-de-sac, the property naturally extends further into the canyon than the neighboring properties, which wrap around Cortes Circle. As such, the development area is more impacted than the immediately adjoining parcels. 2. Finding: D.E. The modification variance complies with the findings required to approve a coastal development permit in Section 21.52.015(F). Facts in Support of Finding: 1.The project conforms to applicable sections of the LCP in that the proposed work will occur within the confines of the existing structural footprint above the ground level and will not increase the existing degree of nonconformity. No grading or further encroachment beyond the applicable stringline will occur. Therefore, the project will have no detrimental effect on coastal resources that the stringline is intended to protect. 2. The project site is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline. The project site is located north of PacificEast Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. 3. All Facts in Support of Findings A and B above are hereby incorporated by reference. Finding: E.F. The variancemodification will not result in development that blocks or significantly impedes public access to and along the sea or shoreline and to coastal parks, trails, or coastal bluffs. Facts in Support of Finding: Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, Condensed by 0.15 pt Formatted: Left, Indent: Left: 0.5", Add space between paragraphs of the same style, No bullets or numbering, Hyphenate Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, Condensed by 0.15 pt Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, Condensed by 0.15 pt Formatted: Normal, No bullets or numbering Formatted: List Paragraph,Discussion Text - List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: 0.5", Don't add space between paragraphs of the same style, Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.25", Don't hyphenate Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B, C, … + Start at: 4 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.25" Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B, C, … + Start at: 4 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.25" Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 6 of 10 1. Public coastal access conditions will not be affected by the project. The property is located north of PacificEast Coast Highway, approximately one-half mile from the coast. Coastal access is currently provided and will continue to be provided by street ends throughout neighborhoods located south of PacificEast Coast Highway with access to the coast. There are no public trails located on the project site. 2. Facts in Support of Finding B.1 and B.2 are hereby incorporated by reference. Finding: F.G. The variancemodification will not result in development that blocks or significantly impairs public views to and along the sea or shoreline or to coastal bluffs and other scenic coastal areas. Fact in Support of Finding: 1.Fact in Support of Finding B.3 is hereby incorporated by reference. Finding: G.H. The modification variance will not result in development that has an adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on coastal resources, including wetlands, sensitive habitat, vegetation, or wildlife species. Facts in Support of Finding: 1.The covered decks to be enclosed are located within the already developed area of the property and within the existing structural envelope. No new development or grading is proposed outside of the existing structural footprint and the project will not impact any coastal resources, which the stringline setback is intended to protect. 2. Site-specific conditions, including the location of the property at the end of the Cortes Circle cul-de-sac and the location of existing improvements that establishes the canyon stringline for the project site, are unique to this property and, therefore, do not establish a precedent for approval of other requests that would contribute to cumulative adverse effects on coastal resources. Finding: H.I. The granting of the variancemodification will not be contrary to, or in conflict with, the purpose of this Implementation Plan, nor to the applicable policies of the certified Local Coastal Program. Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B, C, … + Start at: 4 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.25" Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B, C, … + Start at: 4 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.25" Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B, C, … + Start at: 4 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.25" Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 7 of 10 Facts in Support of Finding: 1.Approval of the coastal development permit will not be contrary to the applicable policies of the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan intended to protect coastal resources. Policy 2.2.5-1 specifically allows limited renovations to existing nonconforming structures that improve the physical quality and character of a structure provided such renovations do not involve demolition or replacement of 50 percent or more of the nonconforming exterior walls and do not increase the degree of the structure’s nonconformity. The project involves enclosing existing covered decks within the existing structural envelope above the ground level, with no grading or further encroachment beyond the applicable stringline. 2. The granting of the coastal development permit to allow the enclosing of two (2) existing covered decks within the existing building envelope is consistent with NBMC Section 21.52.090, which provides for relief from development standards for projects that will have no detrimental effect on environmental or visual coastal resources. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds this Project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. 2. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit “A,” which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 3. This action shall become final and effective 14 days following the date this Resolution was adopted unless within such time an appeal or call for review is filed with the Community Development Director in accordance with the provisions of Title 21 Local Coastal Implementation Plan, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Final action taken by the City may be appealed to the Coastal Commission in compliance with Section 21.64.035 of the City’s certified LCP and Title 14 California Code of Regulations, Sections 13111 through 13120, and Section 30603 of the Coastal Act. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 25th DAY OF JUNE, 2020. ____________________________ Jaime Murillo, Zoning Administrator Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 8 of 10 EXHIBIT “A” CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 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). There shall be no further encroachment that extends beyond the current structural footprint of the residence. 2. Revisions to the approved plans shall require separate review by the Planning Division and may require an amendment to this Coastal Development Permit or the processing of a new coastal development permit. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall provide a notarized, signed letter acknowledging all hazards present at the site, assuming the risk of injury or damage from such hazards, unconditionally waiving any claims of damage against the City from such hazards, and to indemnify 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, judgements, 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 development. The letter shall be scanned into the plan set prior to building permit issuance. 4. No demolition or construction materials, equipment debris, or waste, shall be placed or stored in a location that would enter sensitive habitat, receiving waters, or a storm drain or result in impacts to environmentally sensitive habitat areas, streams, the beach, wetlands or their buffers. No demolition or construction materials shall be stored on public property. 5. The Applicant is responsible for compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). In compliance with the MBTA, grading, brush removal, building demolition, tree trimming, and similar construction activities shall occur between August 16 and January 31, outside of the peak nesting period. If such activities must occur inside the peak nesting season from February 1 to August 15, compliance with the following is required to prevent the taking of Native Birds pursuant to MBTA: A. The construction area shall be inspected for active nests. If birds are observed flying from a nest or sitting on a nest, it can be assumed that the nest is active. Construction activity within 300 feet of an active nest shall be delayed until the nest is no longer active. Continue to observe the nest until the chicks have left the nest and activity is no longer observed. When the nest is no longer active, construction activity can continue in the nest area. B. It is a violation of state and federal law to kill or harm a native bird. To ensure compliance, consider hiring a biologist to assist with the survey for nesting birds, and to determine Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 9 of 10 when it is safe to commence construction activities. If an active nest is found, one (1) or two (2) short follow-up surveys will be necessary to check on the nest and determine when the nest is no longer active. 6. Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Good Housekeeping Practices (GHPs) shall be implemented prior to and throughout the duration of construction activity as designated in the Construction Erosion Control Plan. 7. The discharge of any hazardous materials into storm sewer systems or receiving waters shall be prohibited. Machinery and equipment shall be maintained and washed in confined areas specifically designed to control runoff. A designated fueling and vehicle maintenance area with appropriate berms and protection to prevent spillage shall be provided as far away from storm drain systems or receiving waters as possible. 8. Debris from demolition shall be removed from work areas each day and removed from the project site within 24 hours of the completion of the project. Stockpiles and construction materials shall be covered, enclosed on all sites, not stored in contact with the soil, and located as far away as possible from drain inlets and any waterway. 9. Trash and debris shall be disposed in proper trash and recycling receptacles at the end of each construction day. Solid waste, including excess concrete, shall be disposed in adequate disposal facilities at a legal disposal site or recycled at a recycling facility. 10. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. 11. 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 Coastal Development Permit. 12. This Coastal Development Permit may be modified or revoked by the Zoning Administrator if determined that the proposed uses or conditions under which it is being operated or maintained is detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or if the property is operated or maintained so as to constitute a public nuisance. 13. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit “A” shall be incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division an additional copy of the approved architectural plans for inclusion in the Coastal Development file. The plans shall be identical to those approved by all City departments for building permit issuance. The approved copy shall include architectural sheets only and shall be reduced in size to 11 inches by 17 inches. The plans shall accurately depict the elements approved by this Coastal Development Permit. Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2020-### Page 10 of 10 15. Prior to the issuance of building permit, the Applicant shall pay any unpaid administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning Division. 16. Should the property be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by the current property owner or agent. 17. Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 21.54.060 (Time Limits and Extensions) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted. 18. 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 Faerber Residence including, but not limited to Coastal Development Permit No. CD2020-013 (PA2020-029). 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. Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Received After Deadline - Staff Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) 1 From:Erich Funke <erichfunke@me.com> Sent:Wednesday, June 24, 2020 5:20 PM To:CDD Subject:PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: Faerber Residence. Comments. [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.  To the zoning administrator,   I live at 536 Hazel Drive, CDM, 92625, and my comments are as follows:  A)  If the city allows the Faerber Residence to go ahead and enclose the two existing 65‐square‐foot covered decks on the  main and lower floor levels in order to enlarge two existing adjacent bedrooms, I certainly will count on the zoning  administrator to allow me to enclose two existing decks (on the gully side) of my residence: 536 Hazel Drive, CDM,  92625  B)  With regard to the following point:  “...the Faerber Residence and to construct a 210‐square‐foot upper level addition….”  Additionally there is already a code‐violation on the roof top of this residence (an odd gazebo‐style construction ‐ see  attached images) for which the permit has fallen away and was never renewed.  ‐ I don’t know how or why this was ever given a permit.  The existing structure is an eye sore and brings down the aesthetic of this gully and our picturesque neighborhood.  (Furthermore I have had to deal with a number of city planners personal points‐of‐view regarding the “look” of the  house I’m proposing to remodel at 536 Hazel drive. All of the personal points‐of‐view amounted to me having to change  the street‐facing design of my house on the plans.  Yet the Faerber Residence originally got approval for this ugly structure on top of their house?  I am perplexed. (And concerned).  Sincerely,  Erich Funke  949‐202‐6308  Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Received Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029) 2 Zoning Administrator - June 25, 2020 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Received Faerber Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2020-029)