Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-14-2023_Order After Hearing- 3 Rocky Point RoadFinance Department CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 949 644-3141 PH | 949 644-3073 FAX newportbeachca.gov October 4th, 2023 George Gemayel 3 Rocky Point Rd Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 Re: Three Year Construction Time Limit Extension Hearing Results Dear Appellant: Attached please find the Hearing Officer’s findings regarding your appeal of Three Year Construction Time Limit Extension. If you require further information, please call 949-644-3141. Sincerely, Evelyn Tseng Revenue Manager 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF DECISION AFTER HEARING BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA IN RE 3 Rocky Point Road APPLICATION FOR PERMIT EXTENSION (NBMC 15.02.095) FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF DECISION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER Hearing Officer: Steven Graham Pacifico Date: September 14, 2023 Time: 10:00 a.m. INTRODUCTION 1. This matter involves an extension of time to complete construction for work under a building permit issued for 3 Rocky Point Road (“Subject Property”) in the City of Newport Beach under Section 105.3.4 of the Newport Beach Administrative Code (a locally amended version of the California Building Code) as codified at Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”) Section 15.02.095. Steven Graham Pacifico (“Hearing Officer”), sitting as the Hearing Officer under NBAC Section 105.3.4 heard this matter on September 14, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. (the “Hearing”). The Hearing Officer is a licensed attorney in the State of California and serves as Hearing Officer under contract with the City of Newport Beach (“City”). Pursuant to NBAC Section 105.3.4 the Hearing Officer shall hear and decide whether this application for extension should be granted, conditionally granted, or denied. 2. City is a charter city and municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of California. The City was represented at the Hearing by Tonee Thai, Chief Building Official (“City Representative”). Also in attendance from the City was Principal Building Inspector Steven Lane. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF DECISION AFTER HEARING 3. Sosi Bardakjian, the Subject Property owner’s niece (“Owner’s Representative”), appeared in support of the application for an extension of time. Collectively, the Owner’s Representative and Owner, George Gemayel, are referred to as the “Applicant.” 4. A member of the public, Julie Bas (“Ms. Bas”), the property owner across the street from the Subject Property, was also in attendance. 5. The following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision and Order are based on the evidence presented during the Hearing. 6. The Hearing Officer considered the testimony of all witnesses at the Hearing and all documents made part of the administrative record. The mere fact that a witness’s testimony or document may not be specifically referred to below does not and shall not be construed to mean that said testimony or document was not considered. 7. Pursuant to the Administrative Hearing Rules and Procedures of the City of Newport Beach, the Hearing was digitally recorded. 8. The documents presented to the Hearing Officer during the hearing are attached hereto as Exhibit A and form the administrative record of the hearing. ISSUES 8. Pursuant to Section 105.3.4 of the NBAC, the issue to be determined by the Hearing Officer is whether to grant, or conditionally grant, up to a one hundred and eighty (180) calendar day extension, based on a finding that either (i) special circumstances warrant an extension of time or (ii) the failure to meet the time limit was caused by circumstances beyond the property owner’s, applicant’s or their contractor’s control. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 9. This matter is before the Hearing Officer consistent with Section 105.3.4 of the NBAC. 10. The City of Newport Beach adopted the 2019 California Building Code by reference under Ordinance No. 2019-17 as the Newport Beach Administrative Code, codified at Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 15.02.010, which reads in part, “The City Council adopts and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF DECISION AFTER HEARING incorporates by reference, as though set forth in full in this section, Chapter 1, Division II of the 2019 Edition of the California Building Code as published by the International Code Council.” 11. The City of Newport Beach adopted certain additions, amendments, and deletions to the 2019 California Building Code, pursuant to its authority under California Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5. 12. One such addition is the addition of Sections 105.3.3, 105.3.4, and 105.3.5 to the Newport Beach Administrative Code, codified at Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 15.02.095. Section 105.3.3 reads: “For any one-unit or two-unit dwelling for which a tentative and final tract map is not required, the maximum allowable time to complete construction for any work that requires a building permit including, but not limited to, any construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, renovation, addition(s), modification(s), improvement(s), or alteration(s), shall be limited to three (3) years, unless an extension is granted in accordance with Section 105.3.4. For building permits issued on or after June 1, 2019, the time limit to complete construction shall begin on the date of issuance of the first or original building permit. For building permits issued prior to June 1, 2019, the time limit to complete construction shall be three (3) years from June 1, 2019. Final inspection and approval of the construction work by the City shall mark the date of construction completion for purposes of Section 15.02.095. Time limits set forth herein shall not be extended by 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF DECISION AFTER HEARING issuance of a subsequent building permit(s) for the same project.” (emphasis added). 13. Permit No. X2018-3317 was issued by the City of Newport Beach on August 21, 2019 (“Permit”). The Permit was set to expire on August 21, 2022. 14. Permits may be extended up to one year beyond the initial three-year deadline by application to the City Building Official. (NBAC 105.3.4(1)). 15. The full-year extension was granted by the Building Official via two actions, with the first extension on February 24, 2022, and the second extension on May 26, 2022. As a result of the Building Official’s actions, the Permit was set to expire on August 20, 2023. 16. Section 105.3.4 provides that if a project is not completed within the timeframe authorized by the Building Official, the property owner or their authorized agent may seek further extension from the City’s Hearing Officer. The property owner or applicant may seek two extensions from the Hearing Officer which shall not exceed 180 days each. To grant the extension, the Hearing Officer must find that either (i) special circumstances warrant an extension of time or (ii) the failure to meet the time limit was caused by circumstances beyond the property owner’s, applicant’s, or their contractor’s control. Any approval of an extension should include conditions to ensure timely completion of the project in a manner that limits impacts on surrounding property owners. Applicant filed a request for an extension with the City Hearing Officer seeking an extension for the full 180 days possible under the code. 17. The City Representatives presented uncontroverted evidence that there has been consistent and diligent progress made toward the completion of the project under the Applicant. The City Representatives estimate that the project is seventy-five percent completed. There was no objection from the City Representatives to the Hearing Officer granting an extension from the City. 18. Applicant, through testimony of the Owner’s Representative, provided uncontroverted evidence that the project was nearing completion and that the delays in the project were the result of the inability to find workers to complete the construction on the project as a result of the COVID- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF DECISION AFTER HEARING 19 pandemic and supply chain issues with materials. Through testimony of the Owner’s Representative, it was indicated that in 2021, Applicant was diagnosed with cancer and, as a result, was otherwise occupied. 19. Applicant, through testimony of the Owner’s Representative, also testified there were delays in construction due to specific requirements from the City since the Subject Property is located on a hill. Those specific requirements in connection with stabilization and grading had to be fulfilled before construction was permitted. Additionally, the Owner’s Representative testified that the project’s architectural plans had to be modified to address concerns from surrounding neighbors. 20. Ms. Bas spoke at the Hearing and testified that the construction at the Subject Property has been noisy, there has been a significant lack of parking due to the construction, and there has been an increase in trash due to various workers on the Subject Property. 21. The Owner’s Representative testified that another home was being constructed on the same street, which contributed to the parking issues. 22. The Applicant anticipates completion of the project within four to six months. 23. Applicant indicated that no stop order was received and was not aware that the City had issued a stop order for the Subject Property in August 2023. 24. Credibility determinations were made in favor of the Applicant and the City. The Applicant presented credible evidence that the delays were due to circumstances beyond their control resulting from labor and material shortages due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Hearing Officer noted the concerns of Ms. Bas regarding parking, trash, and noise levels in the residential neighborhood. DECISION AND ORDER 25. The Applicant has presented sufficient evidence to establish that “the failure to meet the time limit was caused by circumstances beyond the property owner’s, applicant’s, or their contractor’s control.” The Applicant could not have foreseen the significant delays caused by labor and material shortages caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The owner, applicant, and/or 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6 FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF DECISION AFTER HEARING contractor were not the cause of those delays, nor could they have been avoided with reasonable diligence. 26. The Hearing Officer conditionally granted an extension to January 5, 2024, in order to ensure the timely completion of the project. 27. In response to the neighbors’ concerns, the Hearing Officer imposes the following condition of approval on the grant of an extension: a) Applicant and all contractors, agents, and employees working on the project shall not violate the City’s noise ordinance. b) Applicant and all contractors, agents, and employees working on the project shall not violate the City’s parking ordinance. c) The Subject Property must remain free of all trash, debris, and rubbish. d) Applicant must comply with all lawful orders of the City’s Building Division. 28. Under NBAC 105.3.4 this decision is final and not appealable to any City body. 29. Any person aggrieved by an administrative decision of a Hearing Officer on an administrative citation may obtain review of the administrative decision by filing a petition for review with the Orange County Superior Court in accordance with the timelines and provisions as set forth in California Government Code Section 53069.4. There may be other time limits which also affect your ability to seek judicial review. Dated: October 4, 2023 /s/ Steven Graham Pacifico Administrative Hearing Officer