HomeMy WebLinkAboutSokolich 5-22-2019From: Lee, Amanda
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 10:35 AM
To: Murillo, Jaime
Subject: FW: 1113 Kings Road Variance VA2019-002
From: Gary Sokolich <Gary_Sokolich@dslextreme.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 10:35 AM
To: Planning Commissioners <PlanningCommissioners@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: 1113 Kings Road Variance VA2019-002
Honorable Planning Commissioners
As a resident of Newport Beach, who has lived at 801 Kings Road for the past thirty years, I am
writing to ask you to deny the requested height variance VA2019-002 pertaining to the proposed
construction of a 10800 sq ft residence at 1113 Kings Road.
There are may reasons why the requested variance should be denied. However, in this
communication I want to address the handful of emphasized bullet points in the section of the
Staff Report entitled "Required Variance Findings" .
1) The assertion by Staff that "There are special or unique circumstances or conditions
applicable to the subject property...that do not apply generally to other properties in the
vicinity....." is grossly misleading because it fails to paint a complete picture of the actual
situation. Specifically, it fails to point out the fact that the lot is considerably wider than adjacent
lots in order to compensate for the existence of the gully and to provide comparable buildable
area. So when viewed in terms of buildable area, the circumstances of the subject property are
not unique.
2) The assertion by Staff that "Strict compliance with Zoning Code requirements would deprive
the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity" is preposterous,
absurd and demonstrably false. Aside from the presence and location of the gully, which is
compensated for by the extra width of the lot, the subject property has as much if not more
buildable area as any of the adjacent properties.
3) The assertion by Staff that "Granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant" is the exact opposite of the reality of
the situation. What is appropriate and necessary is the preservation and enjoyment of substantial
property rights of the nearby neighbors, and the only way to do that is to deny the requested
variance. .
4) The assertion by Staff that "Granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege....." could not be further from the truth. The fact of the matter is that granting the
requested variance is a perfect example of what constitutes special privilege.
5) The assertion by Staff that "Granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the
harmonious and orderly growth of the City" is naive, short sighted and denies the reality of the
situation. The fact of the matter is that the requested variance is both unnecessary and
inappropriate , and that approving it will set a very bad precedent that will have a detrimental
impact involving all future constructions on the south side of Kings Road for decades to come.
In addition to the comments above, I would like to also express my displeasure with and concern
about the blatant lack of objectivity that the Staff Report represents. The so-called "Findings"
are not findings at all. In reality, they are nothing other than a compilation of unsubstantiated
assertions and misrepresentations that reflect a clear bias in favor of the applicant and against the
impact of the proposed construction on nearby neighbors. In that regard, the Staff Report is a
disgrace, and those who prepared it and who approved it should be ashamed.
Lastly, whether the requested variance is granted or not, the construction of a new residence at
1113 Kings Road is going to have a detrimental impact on nearby neighbors. So the only choice
before the Planning Commission at this time is how detrimental the inevitable impact is going to
be.
W. Gary Sokolich, Ph.D.
Scientific & Technical Consultant
WGS & ASSOCIATES
801 Kings Road
Newport Beach CA 92663
,