HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC2023-006 - APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR REAR SETBACK ENCROACHMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 361 NEWPORT GLEN COURT (PA2021-119)RESOLUTION NO. PC2023-006 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR REAR SETBACK ENCROACHMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 361 NEWPORT GLEN COURT (PA2021-119) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Kendra Carney Mehr on behalf of the owner (“Applicant”), with
respect to property located at 361 Newport Glen Court, and legally described as Lot 8 of
Tract No. 9776 in the Unincorporated Territory of Orange County, California (“Property”), requesting approval of a variance. 2. The Applicant seeks to construct an addition of approximately 665 square feet to an
existing 3,740 square-foot single-family residence that would encroach up to 10 feet into
the required 20-foot rear setback (“Project”). The proposed addition would occupy the footprint of an existing raised deck that encroaches 10 feet into the rear setback. The Project includes replacement of the existing raised deck over the new addition area and would maintain the same 10-foot encroachment into the rear setback. The Project
complies with all other development standards such as lot coverage, height, and parking,
and no other deviations are requested. 3. The Property is categorized RS-D (Single Unit Residential Detached) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the R-1-7200 (Single-Unit Residential) Zoning
District.
4. The Property is not located within the coastal zone. 5. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 19, 2023, in the City
Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time,
place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with California Government Code Section 54950 et seq. (“Ralph M. Brown Act”) and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this
public hearing.
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 California Code of Regulations,
Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”), because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 2 of 11
2. The Class 1 exemption includes additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 50 percent of the floor area of the structure
before the addition, or 2,500 square feet whichever is less. In this case, the Project is
an addition of 665 square feet to an existing 3,740 square foot single-family residence, an increase of roughly 18 percent. Therefore, the Class 1 exemption applies. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
In accordance with Section 20.52.090(F) (Variances - Findings and Decision) of the NBMC, the following findings and facts in support of a variance are set forth: Finding:
A. That there are special or unique circumstances or conditions applicable to the Property (e.g.
location, shape, size, surrounding, topography, or other physical features) that do not apply
generally to other properties in the vicinity under an identical zoning classification.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Most residential properties without alley access are subject to a 10-foot rear setback; however, properties within the R-1-7200 Zoning District are subject to a 20-foot rear setback. Although the Property has a larger rear yard because of the larger setback,
that area is filled with mature trees and is not as functional as typical lots in the R-1-
7200 Zoning District. The majority of lots in the R-1-7200 Zoning District have flat, open rear yards that can accommodate pools, walk-out patios, and other typical yard amenities. Therefore, an outdoor deck is proposed above the new addition to provide functional outdoor space at the Property.
2. The Property is in the gated Newport Glen Court Community, which includes 11 single-family residences along Newport Glen Court, a private street and cul-de-sac that extends from the terminus of Tustin Avenue. This area of the City was annexed from the County of Orange in 2002. Of the 11 properties, 10 have standard driveway
access from Newport Glen Court with a garage that is facing the street. Four of the
residences are located on a small street (“accessway”) that extends from the circular portion of the Newport Glen Court cul-de-sac. The Property is located at the end of the accessway with a side-facing garage that is set back approximately 40 feet. Due to the unique configuration of the garage and location of the Property at the very end
of the accessway, the Property must maintain a significant driveway area to allow
vehicles to turnaround. Where the other single-family residences in the Newport Glen Court Community and within the R-1-7200 Zoning District have a street, accessway, or cul-de-sac to maneuver, the Property is not afforded the same type of access by its design. Instead, the Property’s driveway serves as a private turnaround area,
which is a unique circumstance
3. This on-site turnaround area significantly reduces the practical buildable area of the Property. Properties in the R-1-7200 Zoning District have a maximum lot coverage of 60 percent, which means that 60 percent of the entire lot can be covered by a roof
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 3 of 11
or deck over 30 inches in height. The proposed addition cannot be located within the 20 foot front setback, nor can it be in front of the garage within the on-site turnaround
area without completely rebuilding and reconfiguring the three car garage. The on-
site turnaround area is approximately 930 square feet and all setbacks on the Property add up to approximately 3,430 square feet. Both of these areas are “non-buildable.” As such, they reduce the potential onsite lot coverage from the 60 percent maximum coverage or 4,797 square feet, to 45 percent or 3,635 square feet of
covered area. This reduction represents a roughly 20 percent reduction in the overall
coverage area of the Property that is not applicable to similar properties within the same zoning district. Finding:
B. That strict compliance with Zoning Code requirements would deprive the Property of
privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under an identical zoning
classification.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Applicant seeks to maintain as much of the original construction as possible while adding two additional bedrooms. Other properties in the same zoning district do not have a side-access garage with necessary vehicular access areas and are
able to achieve a lot coverage that is closer to the maximum allowed in the Zoning
District (60 percent maximum). 2. The Property is 7,995 square feet and the maximum allowable lot coverage is 4,797 square feet. However, the practical buildable footprint (lot coverage) of the Property
is approximately 3,635 square feet or 1,162 square feet less than the limit allowed
by the R-1-7200 Zoning District. Other similarly sized properties in the within the same zoning district have buildable areas that allow them to build up to 60 percent lot coverage. Thus, the Property is disproportionally limited as compared to other properties of a similar shape with identical zoning.
3. Several alternatives were evaluated to provide the Applicant with additional floor area at the site in a manner that complies with Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC. Locating the addition area within the driveway maneuvering area was not feasible without completely redesigning the garage and the front of the single-family
residence. Additionally, adding the floor area as a loft level within the main living area
was not feasible due to the low ceiling heights resulting from the steep slope of the roof (12:12 pitch). Further, locating the addition on the existing garage would require the reconstruction of the garage to structurally accommodate the addition. Lastly, although the existing single-family residence has an open courtyard leading to the
main entrance of the residence, locating the new addition there would result in the
main entry to the residence through the existing master bedroom or the new bedrooms. Therefore, encroachment into the rear setback is the most viable option to provide additional floor area without rebuilding significant sections of the residence.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 4 of 11
Finding:
C. That the granting of the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
substantial property rights of the Applicant. Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The requested variance would allow for an addition that relocates potential floor area from the “unbuildable” on-site cul-de-sac to the rear setback. The proposed addition is 665 square feet, where the “unbuildable” area on the Property is 930 square feet. The Applicant is not requesting the full 930 square feet to be relocated in the setback.
Further, the proposed lot coverage of 45 percent is still less than the 60 percent
maximum allowed in the Zoning District. The proposed addition would allow the Property owner to achieve a lot coverage that is typical of other lots in the same Zoning District.
2. The design and location of the Project achieve reasonable development of the
Property while considering its constraints. The granting of the variance preserves the owner’s right to develop a useable structure that fits within the maximum limitations identified for the Zoning District. Furthermore, it preserves the owner’s ability to construct an uncovered outdoor deck at the second level, which is compatible with
the neighborhood where single-unit residences with outdoor decks are common.
3. Facts 1 and 2 in Support of Finding A are incorporated herein by reference. 4. Fact 3 in Support of Finding B is incorporated herein by reference.
Finding:
D. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district.
Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The granting of the variance would not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other residential properties, especially those zoned Single-Unit
Residential (R-1). It allows the Property owner to maintain equity with other single-
family residences in the neighborhood where additions or larger single-family residences have been constructed.
2. The requested variance would not result in more floor area or a higher lot coverage than surrounding properties of similar size in the same zoning district. There are
other properties in the Newport Glen community that cannot build up to the 60
percent maximum lot coverage due to setback application and lot configuration constraints, however, the Property is the most restricted with at least 930 square feet of the buildable area of the site rendered “unbuildable.”
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 5 of 11
3. The buildable area for the Property is disproportionately limited as compared to adjacent R-1-7200 zoned properties and the requested variance would allow the
Property to have a buildable area closer to other properties in the identical zoning
district. The Project would result in a lot coverage of approximately 45 percent (3,623 square feet), where 60 percent (4,797 square feet) lot coverage is allowed. Therefore, the Applicant would not be granted a greater lot coverage limit than adjacent property owners within identical zoning districts and no exceptions to lot
coverage are requested.
4. No other properties in the Newport Glen Court Community have their own on-site cul-de-sac to access the garage and street. The variance is uniquely tied to the configuration of the existing structure and would not be applied to the construction of a new single-family residence on the Property. Condition of Approval No. 5,
requires that any future construction be evaluated for substantial conformance with
this approval and that construction of a new single-family residence would not be considered substantially conforming. 5. The Project would not result in a substantial increase in total lot coverage on the
Property that could be viewed as the granting of a special privilege, and no additional
deviations are requested such as relief from garage size, lot coverage, or building height limitations. The Project would remain consistent with the lot coverage of other similarly shaped properties in the same zoning district.
Finding:
E. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly
growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in
the neighborhood.
Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The overall design, based upon the proposed plans, meets residential design criteria
provided within Section 20.48.180(B)(2) (Design Criteria) of the NBMC by avoiding
long unarticulated walls, and providing architectural treatment on the new elevations. The visual massing of the encroaching area is reduced by including variation in the wall plane and building modulation with an open, uncovered deck above the addition.
2. The City’s Public Works Department has reviewed the Project for compliance with
line-of-sight considerations and consistency with public easements. The proposed encroachment is in the rear of the site and adjacent to other rear setbacks of single-family residences. There are no roads, driveways, or other access areas within the rear of the Property. Additionally, there are easements located on other adjacent
properties that do not apply to this Property. Therefore, there are no circulation or
easement conflicts created by the encroachment.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 6 of 11
3. The proposed addition is located within the approximate footprint of an existing raised deck. Disturbance to the rear slope of the Property would be minimal. The
City’s Building Division reviewed the Project for compliance with water quality and
grading requirements and provided conditions of approval for the Project to prevent any hazards or safety issues. 4. The proposed addition will be required to comply the latest version of the California
Building Code including energy, seismic, and structural standards.
5. Based on permit records and historical aerial images, the existing raised deck in the rear setback was constructed at or around the time the single-family residence was built in 1980. The existing raised deck and required safety railing are roughly 10 feet
above the natural grade of the sloping rear yard. With implementation of the Project,
it would be replaced above the new bedroom addition. Therefore, the proposed deck railing would be approximately 10 feet higher than the existing height of the deck railing. The existing encroachment has not proven to be detrimental, nor has it created hazards to the public.
6. The proposed addition into the rear setback would be approximately 35 feet wide, where the existing primary structure is 52 feet wide. The remaining 17 feet of the existing primary structure would maintain the existing 20 foot-rear setback. The encroachment into the setback represents approximately 54 percent of the width of
the 65 foot wide lot and it is at the rear of the Property. Therefore, this variance would
not have a substantial visual effect on the neighborhood. 7. The proposed deck and addition area would be set back 14 to 15 feet from the side property lines, where only five foot side setbacks are required. This would create
visual relief and interest while respecting the privacy of adjacent neighbors.
Additionally, there are mature trees along the rear of the Property that provide a buffer from adjacent neighbors. Finding:
F. Granting of the variance will not be in conflict with the intent and purpose of this Section,
this Zoning Code, the General Plan, or any applicable specific plan. Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Property is zoned Single-Unit Residential (R-1-7200) which is intended to provide for single-family residential uses. The existing building is a single-family residence, which would not change as part of the Project; therefore, approval of the variance will not affect density or intensity of uses.
2. Pursuant to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC, a structure of up to 4,790
square feet of covered area (or 60 percent of the lot) could be constructed on the Property. The proposed addition and remodel would result in a structure totaling 4,404 square feet of floor area or 3,623 square feet of covered area, which includes
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 7 of 11
a 697 square foot three car garage. Thus, the rear setback encroachment is not requested for the purpose of overbuilding the site, but rather to accommodate a
reasonable sized single-family residence that would remain consistent with the
average size single-family residence in the vicinity.
3. The proposed encroachment of 10 feet into the required 20 foot rear setback would result in a 10 foot rear setback that is consistent with other R-1 Zoning Districts in the City.
4. The Property is not located within a specific plan area or the Coastal Zone.
SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds this Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act 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 Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Variance PA2021-119 subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit “A,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein 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 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 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023. AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Klaustermeier, Lowrey, and Rosene
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 8 of 11
BY:_________________________
Curtis Elmore, Chair
BY:_________________________ Sarah Klaustermeier, Secretary
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 9 of 11
EXHIBIT “A”
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(Project-specific conditions are in italics)
Planning Division
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 Project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
3. 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 variance.
4. The variance filed under PA2021-119 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from
the date of approval as specified in Section 20.54.060 (Time Limits and Extensions) of the
NBMC, unless an extension is otherwise granted.
5. This approval only applies to the Project proposed under PA2021-119. If more than 50 percent of exterior walls of the structure are removed and replaced, or the Building Division
deems the project new construction, then the variance is no longer effective, and the
Project will need to be revised to comply with all current Title 20 (Planning and Zoning)
regulations such as setbacks. If the existing single-family residence is demolished and new
structure is built, that structure shall be subject to all Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) standards in place at the time of new construction.
6. Demolition beyond the approved scope of work requires Planning Division approval prior
to commencement of work. Approval of revisions to project plans are not guaranteed. Any
changes in the current scope of work may require a new variance or other discretionary permit.
7. A copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit “A” shall be incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans prior to issuance of the building permits.
8. All landscape materials and irrigation systems shall be maintained in accordance with
the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of
regular maintenance.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 10 of 11
9. The site shall not be excessively illuminated based on the luminance recommendations of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, or, if in the opinion of the
Director of Community Development, the illumination creates an unacceptable negative
impact on surrounding land uses or environmental resources. The Director may order the dimming of light sources or other remediation upon finding that the site is excessively illuminated.
10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall pay any unpaid
administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning Division. 11. 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 either the
current business owner, Property owner or the leasing agent.
12. Construction activities shall comply with Section 10.28.040 (Construction Activity – Noise Regulations) of the NBMC, which restricts hours of noise-generating construction activities that produce noise to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise-generating construction
activities are not allowed on Sundays or Holidays. 13. 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 Richardson Residence Variance including, but not limited to, PA2021-119. 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. Building Division
14. 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 recent, City-adopted version of the California Building Code (CBC). The construction plans must meet all applicable State Disabilities Access requirements.
15. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the Project, subject to the approval of the Building Division and Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division. The WQMP shall
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-006 Page 11 of 11
provide appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to ensure that no violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements occur.
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a Geotechnical report shall be submitted to the building division for review. 17. The design shall include natural light and ventilation for the existing family room or
provide mechanical ventilation and artificial light in accordance with CBC Chapter
R303.1. 18. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project plans shall be updated to reflect that all site drainage will be taken to the street.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 0A21483B-A39E-4482-9DFE-B6E98EBE85B3