HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0_Whitacre Residence_PA2010-105CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
July 7, 2011 Meeting
Agenda Item 3
SUBJECT: Whitacre Residence Appeal - (PA2010 -M5)
101 15th Street
• Use Permit No. UP2010 -021
• Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027
APPLICANT: William Azzalino, AIA
PLANNER: Fern Nueno, Assistant Planner
(949) 644 -3227, fnueno @newportbeachca.gov
PROJECT SUMMARY
An appeal of the Zoning Administrator's approval of Use Permit No. UP2010 -021 and
Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027, which allowed an addition to a nonconforming
structure. The Use Permit would allow for an addition of up to 75 percent of the existing
gross floor area and alterations of up to 75 percent of the existing structural elements of
the nonconforming structures. The Use Permit would not allow a demolition and rebuild
of the existing structures, only alteration of up to 75 percent of the structural elements.
The Modification Permit would allow for encroachments into the rear and side setbacks.
The site is developed with two (2) commercial structures adjacent to 15th Street and a
residential structure to the rear. The applicant proposes an addition to the existing
residence and the addition of a new dwelling unit above the commercial structures.
Four -car parking is proposed to satisfy the residential parking requirements.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Conduct a public hearing; and
2. Uphold or reverse the decision of the Zoning Administrator and adopt Resolution
No. _ (Attachment No. PC 1 or PC 2) for Use Permit No. UP2010 -021 and
Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027.
VICINITY MAP
GEN
Whitacre Residence Appeal
July 7, 2011
Page 2
Subject Property
bay°p�otvbw c -.< �' %keoe atvow '��R2
i bFlb63 bEVbw k- 3 f '..y P °gIBM BIV°W
7 u
MU-CV/15TH ST
'V ,.
� y R -2
rzr a y, P, 1.1(FAR R k Y
2 t
x
s
a P1.1;FAR.
':, (e. 9 ,.r. ':� a • r� Z R 2 R p w t o i gyp,„ `ti w
F.T =•4- �� "�,<,..'�v�x3�,� �,.. ...ix.. .,s.'u�.:.. _..,.... , },�'* "'��..,,d°RZR 2R3 �, _ R2•`. ,,.?
°ceavrb°H.w :
R "24M"`
v+„
ZONING
i RZ�S ar
CV1a,"✓�n6'iu
AU - CVNSTH 5T
Mixed Use Horizontal (MU -H4)
Mixed Use (MU -CV /15th St)
Mixed use with fast food, retail surf
shop, and residential
ticEµEF°HTw
�
� S
Two -Unit Residential (R -2)
`N12i;+
LOCATION
GENERAL PLAN
ZONING
CURRENT USE
ON -SITE
Mixed Use Horizontal (MU -H4)
Mixed Use (MU -CV /15th St)
Mixed use with fast food, retail surf
shop, and residential
NORTH
Two -Unit Residential (RT)
Two -Unit Residential (R -2)
Mixed use with acupuncture and
residential
SOUTH
Parks and Recreation PR
Parks and Recreation PR
Beach and public restrooms
EAST
Two -Unit Residential RT
Two -Unit Residential R -2
Multi -unit and two -unit residential
WEST
Two -Unit Residential RT
Two -Unit Residential R -2
Two -unit residential
Whitacre Residence Appeal
July 7, 2011
Page 3
INTRODUCTION
Project Setting
The subject property is located on the Balboa Peninsula on the corner of 15th Street and
West Ocean Front and is approximately 5,000 square feet in area (50 feet wide by 100
feet deep). The subject property is surrounded on three (3) sides by public rights -of -way
and is adjacent to a mixed -use structure located to the north. The nearby surrounding
area is developed with residential, commercial, places of worship, schools, beaches,
and parks.
Project Description
The applicant requests a use permit for an addition of up to 75 percent of the existing
gross floor area and alterations of up to 75 percent of the existing structural elements of
a nonconforming structure. The applicant also requests a modification permit to allow
the proposed addition to encroach five (5) feet into the required 5 -foot side setback on
the northerly side of the property in order for the proposed residential unit on the second
floor to line up with the wall of the commercial structure on the first floor. The
modification permit request is also to allow an 8 -foot encroachment into the required 10-
foot rear setback for the carports with a deck above. The site is developed with two (2)
commercial structures adjacent to 15th Street and a residential structure to the rear.
The applicant proposes an addition to the existing residence and the addition of a new
dwelling unit above the commercial structures. Four -car parking is proposed to satisfy
the residential parking requirements.
The existing mixed -use development is nonconforming due to encroachments into the
required 10 -foot rear alley setback and 5 -foot side setback along the northerly property
line. The property is also nonconforming because the commercial uses do not provide
off - street parking. Two (2) previous modification permits were approved for additions to
the nonconforming structure allowing encroachments into the rear alley setback. Of
those, only one (1) was constructed, which allowed encroachments into the required 10-
foot rear setback of 5 feet, 8 inches with an additional 6 inches for the roof eave. The
construction also included interior alterations that converted a duplex into a single -unit
residence.
Pursuant to Chapter 20.62 (Nonconforming Structures and Uses) of the 1997 Zoning
Code, an increase of up to 75 percent of the gross floor area and alteration of up to 75
percent of the structural elements are permitted with the approval of a use permit. The
proposed project is an addition to the existing residential structure and the addition of a
new residential unit. No intensification of the commercial uses is proposed. Since the
appeal, the applicant has submitted structural calculations demonstrating that the
structural alterations may be as low as 25 percent (Attachment No. PC 3). However,
because of the age of some of the structures on -site, dry rot, termite damage, or other
issues may lead to a higher percentage of structural alterations. Under no
Whitacre Residence Appeal
July 7, 2011
Page 4
circumstances could this approval allow more than 75 percent structural alterations or a
demolition and reconstruction of the existing structures in their entirety.
Background
On May 25, 2011, the Zoning Administrator conducted a public hearing, reviewed the
applicant's request, and received testimony from the applicant and members of the
public. The Zoning Administrator approved the application. A copy of the Action Letter
is attached (Attachment No. PC 4). Staff recommended approval of the project to the
Zoning Administrator based on the circumstances of the project and the facts in support
of the required findings.
Prior to the Zoning Administrator hearing, three (3) comment letters (Attachment No. PC
5) were received via email that expressed concerns about the project, including trash
and parking. Staff also described the project to members of the public in person and
over the telephone. During the hearing, members of the public expressed concerns
regarding allowing up to 75 percent structural alterations and the lack of parking for the
commercial portion of the development.
The Zoning Administrator determined that there were facts in support of the required
findings and approved the project. As part of the approval, a condition was included
requiring the trash to be located on site and screened from view.
On June 8, 2011, Planning Commissioner Hawkins appealed the Zoning Administrator's
action.
DISCUSSION
Ordinance 2010 -21, which adopted the current Zoning Code, provides that discretionary
applications deemed complete prior to the effective date of the ordinance may be
processed under the previous Zoning Code, provided they are found consistent with the
General Plan. The application was submitted and deemed complete prior to the
adoption of the current Zoning Code. Therefore, this project is being reviewed subject
to regulations of the previous Zoning Code (1997 Zoning Code).
Analysis
Required Findings
Section 20.91.035, Section 20.62.040, and Section 20.93.030 of the 1997 Zoning Code
require certain findings to be made in order to approve the project. In order to grant
approval of the Use Permit and Modification Permit, the Planning Commission must
make each of the following findings:
Whitacre Residence Appeal
July 7, 2011
Page 5
Use Permit
1. The proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning
Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located.
2. The proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions under which
it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the General Plan and
the purpose of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to
the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing
or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be
detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general
welfare of the city.
3. The proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any
specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be
located.
4. The cost of improvements to be made is minor in comparison to the value of the
existing nonconforming condition.
5. The cost of correcting the nonconforming condition would exceed the cost of the
other alterations proposed.
6. Retention of the nonconforming condition is necessary to maintain reasonable
use of the structure.
7. The addition and alteration does not increase the structure's inconsistency with
the regulations of the Zoning Code.
Modification Permit
8. The granting of the application is necessary due to the practical difficulties
associated with the property and that the strict application of the Zoning Code
results in physical hardships that are inconsistent with the purpose and intent of
the Zoning Code.
9. The requested modification will be compatible with existing development in the
neighborhood.
10. The granting of such an application will not adversely affect the health or safety
of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property and will not be
detrimental to the general welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the
neighborhood.
Whitacre Residence Appeal
July 7, 2011
Page 6
The Zoning Administrator believed that the proposed project meets the legislative intent
of the 1997 Zoning Code and that findings for approval could be made, and facts in
support of the required findings are included in the draft resolution upholding the Zoning
Administrator's decision (Attachment No. PC 1).
Appeal Letter
The letter of appeal (Attachment No. PC 6) listed seven (7) points regarding why the
decision was appealed. The appeal letter primarily addressed facts in support of fthe
required indings for the Use Permit regarding the alteration of up to 75 percent of the
structural elements. The numbered points below correspond to the seven (7) points
made in Commissioner Hawkins' letter.
1. Use permits are reviewed on a case -by -case basis. Several use permits for a
variety of developments and uses have been approved in the vicinity of the
proposed project, including use permits for a mixed -use structure with tandem
parking, a church, and alterations and additions to nonconforming structures.
2. Section 20.62.030.A states that the "Planning Director shall determine the
nonconformity of any use, building, structure, or lot." The project description
included in the Zoning Administrator Action Letter and public notice indicate that
the proposed project is a request to allow an addition to a nonconforming
structure. The existing structures are nonconforming due to deficient commercial
parking and setback encroachments into the rear and northerly side setback
areas.
3. The Zoning Administrator determined that the facts presented in the action letter
supported making the health, safety, and welfare finding. The required four -car
parking for the residential uses is proposed with the project and an enlargement
or intensification of the commercial uses is not proposed. Therefore, a request
for a parking waiver is not required or requested.
4. The cost of the proposed project is minor in comparison to the value of the
nonconforming condition. The existing development could not be built under
current development standards. The nonconforming, rear setback encroachment
maintains the existing livable space within the structure. The five -foot
encroachment of the retail surf shop into the side setback allows reasonable use
of the commercial tenant space. The estimated cost of the proposed project is
$550,000, which is minor in comparison to the value of the nonconforming
parking and setbacks.
5. The cost of correcting the nonconforming condition would exceed the cost of the
proposed project. Correcting the nonconforming setbacks would require the
removal of existing floor area from the residential structure and retail surf shop,
and would likely require demolition and reconstruction of the entire structures.
Whitacre Residence Appeal
July 7, 2011
Page 7
The proposed alterations within the setback areas are only a minor portion of the
entire project. Based on information from the applicant, which was reviewed by
staff, the estimated cost of demolishing the structures within the setbacks and
rebuilding them would be approximately $860,000 and the estimated cost of the
proposed project is $550,000.
6. Approval of the Use Permit for 75 percent structural alterations would not allow a
demolition and reconstruction of the existing structure as only alterations are
permitted.
7. The 1997 Zoning Code remains available at City Hall and is available online at
http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?paqe=175.
The link to the 1997 Zoning Code on the website was removed because only a
few projects remained under the 1997 Zoning Code. Additionally, even though
the website noted that the 1997 Zoning Code had been superseded and was
only being used for the projects that met the submittal deadline, having the link
posted on the website created confusion for the public. The City wanted to avoid
any potential misuse of the 1997 Zoning Code during project design; therefore,
staff made the determination that it was best to remove the link from the website.
The project title is "Whitacre Residence" even though this is a mixed -use
property because the addition is to the existing residence and the addition of a
second dwelling unit. This title was not intended to be misleading and the project
description describes the mixed -use development on -site.
Alternatives
1. Should the Planning Commission find there are facts to support the findings
required to grant approval of the Use Permit and Modification Permit, as
proposed or as modified, the Planning Commission should adopt Resolution No.
_ (Attachment No. PC 1), upholding the decision of the Zoning Administrator,
and approving Use Permit No. UP2011 -021 and Modification Permit No.
MD2010 -027.
2. Should the Planning Commission find the facts do not support the findings
required to grant approval of the Use Permit and Modification Permit, the
Planning Commission should adopt Resolution No. _ (Attachment No. PC 2),
reversing the decision of the Zoning Administrator, and denying Use Permit No.
UP2011 -021 and Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027.
Environmental Review
If upheld and approved, then this project is exempt from CEQA, pursuant to Section
15301 (Class 1 — Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of
Whitacre Residence Appeal
July 7, 2011
Page 8
Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, which exempts minor alterations to existing facilities that
involve negligible expansion of the use, including the addition of a new residential unit.
If reversed and denied, then the project is not subject to the California Environmental
Quality Act ( "CEQA ") review, pursuant to Section 15270 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Public Notice
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all property owners
within 300 feet of the property (excluding intervening rights -of -way), and posted at the
project site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this meeting consistent with the
Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which
was posted at City Hall and on the City website.
Prepared by:
Submitted by:
Fen /6e no Assistant Planner Gregg R irez, 8ehior Plan r
ATTACHMENTS
PC 1 Draft Resolution — Uphold
PC 2 Draft Resolution — Reverse
PC 3 Calculations of Structural Alterations
PC 4 Zoning Administrator Action Letter
PC 5 Correspondence
PC 6 Appeal Letter
PC 7 Project Plans
F: \Users \PLN \Shared \PA's \PAs - 2010 \PA2010 - 105 \PC 07 -07- 2011 \PA2010 -105 pc rpt.docx
Tmpll: 04118/11
Attachment N®. PC 1
Draft Resolution - Uphold
*Ii7RI]iWkgIk[�a
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND APPROVING USE PERMIT
NO. UP2010 -021 AND MODIFICATION PERMIT NO. MD2010 -027
FOR AN ADDITION AND ALTERATIONS TO A
NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE THAT WILL ENCROACH INTO
THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS LOCATED AT 101 15TH
STREET (PA2010 -105)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. An application was filed by William Azzalino, with respect to property located at 101 15"'
Street, and legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 15, Section B, requesting approval of
a use permit and modification permit.
2. The applicant proposes an addition to a nonconforming, mixed -use structure. The Use
Permit would allow an addition of up to 75 percent of the existing square footage and
up to 75 percent structural alterations to the existing structures. The Modification
Permit would allow the proposed addition to encroach five (5) feet into the required
five -foot side, setback on the northerly side of the property and eight (8) feet into the
required ten -foot rear alley setback.
3. The subject property is located within the Mixed -Use Cannery Village /15" St (MU-
CV /15ffi St) Zoning District; however, the Retail and Service Commercial — Residential
Overlay (RSC -R) District regulations from the 1997 Zoning Code apply to this project.
The General Plan Land Use Element category is Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -114).
4. The subject property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan
category is Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H).
5. A public hearing was held on July 7, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300
Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose'of
the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning
Commission at this meeting.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
1. This project has been determined to be categorically exempt under the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15301 (Class 1 —
Existing Facilities).
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Page 2 of 10
2. Class 1 exempts minor alterations to existing facilities that involve negligible expansion
of the use, including the addition of a new residential unit. The proposed project
includes an addition to the existing residential unit, the construction of an additional unit,
and the construction of a two -car garage and a two -car carport.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
In accordance with Section 20.91.035, Section 20.62.040, and Section 20.93.030 of the 1997
Zoning Code, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
A. The proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Code and
the purposes of the district in which the site is located.
Facts in Support of Finding:
A -1. The site is located in the RSC -R (Retail and Service Commercial — Residential
Overlay) District of the 1997 Zoning Code. The intent of this district to provide areas
which are predominantly retail in character but which allow some service office uses.
The intent and purpose of the Residential Overlay district is to provide for the
establishment of residential uses in commercial districts. The proposed mixed use
project is a permitted use in this district. The existing eating and drinking
establishment and retail surf shop meet the intent of the RSC district, and the existing
and proposed residential units meet the intent of the R- Overlay District.
Finding:
B. The proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions under which it would
be operated or maintained will be consistent with the General Plan and the purpose of the
district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the
neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements
in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city.
Facts in Support of Finding:
B -1. The existing commercial structures and residential units on site are consistent with the
Mixed Use - Horizontal (MU -H4) land use designation of the General Plan, which
applies to properties where it is the intent to establish the character of a distinct and
cohesively developed district or neighborhood containing multi - family residential with
clusters of mixed -use and /or commercial buildings. Mixed -use or commercial
buildings are required on parcels at street intersections.
B -2. The neighborhood is developed with commercial, residential, and mixed use
properties. The subject property has been developed with mixed use for at least fifty
Tmplt: 03/08/11
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Pape 3 of 10
years, and the addition of one (1) residential dwelling unit will not create any significant
negative impacts.
B -3. The property abuts public rights -of -way of three sides; therefore, the addition is directly
adjacent to only one (1) other property.
B -4. The proposed addition will provide the required parking for the residential units. The
existing commercial structures are not being enlarged or intensified, so the commercial
parking demand is not being increased.
B -5. The proposed addition will conform to all other requirements of the 1997 Zoning Code,
including height and square footage limitations.
Finding:
C. The proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any specific
condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located.
Facts in Support of Finding:
C -1. The proposed mixed -use project is consistent with the legislative intent of Chapter
20.15 (Commercial Districts) and Chapter 20.52 (Residential (R) Overlay District) of
the 1997 Zoning Code. The proposed project meets the development standards of the
RSC -R district in regards to minimum site area per unit, height limit, and minimum lot
area.
C -2. The existing structures are nonconforming due a 6- foot -2 -inch encroachment into the
10 -foot rear alley setback, a 5 -foot encroachment into the 5 -foot northerly side
setback, and due to insufficient off - street parking for the commercial uses. The
proposed remodel of the existing residential unit and the addition of a unit are in
conformance with the standards of Chapter 20.62 (Nonconforming Structures and
Uses) of the 1997 Zoning Code. Section 20.62.040 (Nonconforming Structures)
allows for structural alterations and additions of up to 75 percent with the approval of a
use permit.
C -3. The existing residential unit conforms with the parking requirements of the R- Overlay
District of two (2) parking spaces per unit. The proposed construction includes the
addition of two (2) parking spaces for a total of four (4) parking spaces, meeting the
residential parking requirements. No addition is proposed to the commercial structures.
Finding:
D. The cost of improvements to be made is minor in comparison to the value of the existing
nonconforming condition.
Tmplt: 03106/11
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Page 4 of 10
Facts in Support of Finding:
D -1. The existing mixed -use structure could not be rebuilt if it were to be demolished. In
order to bring the existing buildings into conformance with the required setbacks,'the
removal of a significant portion of the residential living area and the retail surf shop
would be necessary. The nonconforming, rear setback encroachment maintains the
existing livable space within the structure. The five -foot encroachment of the retail surf
shop into the side setback allows reasonable use of the commercial tenant space. The
estimated cost of the proposed project is $550,000, which is minor in comparison to
the value of the nonconforming parking and setbacks
D -2. Per the County Assessor's records, the total value of the property was assessed at
$1,508,322 for the 2010 calendar year.
Finding:
E. The cost of correcting the nonconforming condition would exceed the cost of the other
alterations proposed.
Facts in Support of Finding:
E -1. Correcting the nonconforming setbacks would require the removal of existing floor
area from the residential structure and retail surf shop. The proposed alterations
within the setback areas are only a minor portion of the entire project; therefore, the
cost of the overall project is greater than the cost of the alterations within the setback
areas.
E -2. Demolition and replacement of the structures could not be accomplished without
approval of a parking waiver.
E -3. Based on information from the applicant, which was reviewed by staff, the estimated
cost of demolishing the structures within the setbacks and rebuilding them would be
approximately $860,000 and the estimated cost of the proposed project is $550,000
E -4. The City has no plans on file for the original construction. Based on information from
the County of Orange, the existing structures were built in the 1920s.
Finding:
F. Retention of the nonconforming condition is necessary to maintain reasonable use of the
structure.
Facts in Support of Finding:
F -1. Retention of the nonconforming parking for the commercial structures is necessary
because a mixed -use structure similar to the existing development could not be built
under current development standards. The number of parking spaces required for the
Tmpil: 03/08/11
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Paqe 5 of 10
amount of commercial floor area allowed on this site is a minimum of ten (10) spaces
based on a parking ratio of one (1) parking space for every 250 square feet of gross
floor area. The minimum allowed floor area for a commercial structure on this mixed -
use property is 1,250 square feet, which would require a minimum of five (5) parking
spaces. This site does not provide adequate space for a code - compliant parking lot
with 5 -10 parking spaces, in addition to the required residential parking.
F -2. Retention of the nonconforming rear setback encroachment maintains the existing
livable space within the structure. Removing the encroachments would result in one
(1) less bedroom and reduced living area in the living room and master bedroom.
Finding:
G. The addition and alteration does not increase the structure's inconsistency with the
regulations of the Zoning Code.
Facts in Support of Finding:
G -1. The proposed project includes the addition of two (2) parking spaces, satisfying the
requirements for residential parking. The commercial structures are not being
enlarged or intensified.
G -2. The proposed addition and alterations will meet all other development standards for
the RSC -R District, with the exception of the Modification Permit requests.
G -3. The proposed construction is contained generally within the footprint of the existing
structure.
Finding:
H. The granting of the application is necessary due to the practical difficulties associated with
the property and that the strict application of the Zoning Code results in physical
hardships that are inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code.
Facts in Support of Finding:
H -1. The northerly side yard setback requirement of five (5) feet is due to the abutting
property's Zoning designation of R -2 (Two -Unit Residential). The Zoning Code
requires a side yard setback only because the abutting property is designated for
residential use; however, the property to the north is developed with a mixed -use
structure. This property is subject to abatement of the nonconforming mixed -use, but
the property owner has applied for General Plan, Zoning Code, and Coastal Land Use
Plan amendments to change the property to allow for mixed -use. If the amendment
application is denied, then the property owner may request an extension on the
abatement. Therefore, there is a possibility that the property will remain mixed -use for
the foreseeable future.
Tmplt: 03108/11
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Paae 6 of 10
H -2. The additional dwelling unit is being proposed within the required setback in order for
the wall to line up with the existing commercial structure on the first floor.
H -3. The existing commercial structures and residential dwelling unit constitute a practical
difficulty associated with the property as the only location available for the four -car
parking is located within the side and rear yard setbacks.
1. The requested modification will be compatible with existing development in the
neighborhood.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1 -1. The deviation from the Zoning Code requested through this application is compatible with
the characteristics of the surrounding properties, many of which do not provide side yard
or rear yard alley setbacks, either because of differing Zoning Code requirements or
nonconforming encroachments.
1 -2. Other properties on the block contain similar mixed -use projects with commercial .
structures on the first floor and residential uses above.
Finding:
J. The granting of such an application
persons residing or working in the
detrimental to the general welfare
neighborhood.
Facts in Support of Finding:
will not adversely affect the health or safety of
neighborhood of the property and will not be
or injurious to property or improvements in the
J -1. The alley is approximately 25 feet wide and provides sufficient access for vehicles to
park in the garages and carports. The 25 -foot width is also adequate for circulation.
J -2. The existing structures on site are built up to the northerly property line. The existing
mixed -use structure to the north is also built on the property line, and this layout has
not proven to be detrimental.
J -3. The proposed encroachment into the alley setback is for the carports and a deck
above. No new living area is proposed within the alley setback.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Use Permit
No. UP2010 -021 and Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027 (PA2010 -105), upholding the
Tmplt: 03/08/11
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Paqe 7 of 10
decision of the Zoning Administrator, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A, which
is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
2. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this
Resolution 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 7th DAY OF JULY, 2011.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN
ABSENT:
I_ -l'>t�
, Chairman
BY:
Secretary
TmpIC 03/06111
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Paae 8 of 10
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor
plans, and elevations, except as noted in the following conditions.
2. The guard rail for the deck adjacent to the alley shall be constructed with wrought iron,
glass, or similar open or translucent material.
3. The addition is limited to 75 percent of the existing gross floor area.
4. The alterations are limited to 75 percent of the structural members.
5. All signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.67 of the Municipal Code or any
applicable comprehensive sign program that is in force for the subject property.
No temporary "sandwich" signs, balloons or similar temporary signs shall be permitted,
either on -site or off -site, to advertise the proposed food establishment, unless specifically
permitted in accordance with the Sign Ordinance of the Municipal Code. Temporary
signs shall be prohibited in the public right -of -way, unless otherwise approved by the
Public Works Department in conjunction with the issuance of an encroachment permit or
encroachment agreement.
All trash shall be stored within the building or within public dumpsters provided for the
convenience of businesses in the area, or otherwise screened from view of neighboring
properties except when placed for pick -up by refuse collection agencies. The trash
dumpsters shall have a top which shall remain closed at all times, except when being
loaded or while being collected by the refuse collection agency.
8. The applicant shall maintain the trash dumpsters or receptacles so as to control odors
which may include the provision of fully self- contained dumpsters or may include periodic
steam cleaning of the dumpsters, if deemed necessary by the Planning Division. Trash
generated by the establishment shall be adequately contained in sealed plastic bags to
control odors prior to placement in the trash dumpster.
9. Anything not specifically approved by this Use Permit and Modification Permit is
prohibited and must be addressed in a separate and subsequent review.
10. This approval was based on the particulars of the individual case and does not, in and
of itself or in combination with other approvals in the vicinity or Citywide, constitute a
precedent for future approvals or decisions.
Tmplt: 03/08/11
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Page 9 dl
11. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of the construction. The
construction must meet all applicable Building Code requirements including parapets
and guards and fire resistant construction, where required.
12. A copy of this approval letter shall be incorporated into the City and field sets of plans
prior to issuance of the building permits.
13. Approval from the California Coastal Commission is required prior to issuance of a
building permit.
14. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a covenant for review
and approval by the Office of the City Attorney as to form and content, that will
address holding the site to no more than two (2) dwelling units. Once approved and
properly executed, that document shall be forwarded to the City officials for
recordation against the property with the County Recorder.
15. If any of the existing public improvements surrounding the site are damaged by private
work, new concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter, street pavement, and other public
improvements will be required by the City at the time of private construction
completion. Said determination and the extent of the repair work shall be made at the
discretion of the Public Works inspector.
16. All work performed within the public right -of -way shall be reviewed and approved by
the Public Works Department under an encroachment permit/agreement, if required.
17. Any nonstandard encroachment within the public right -of -way shall be removed,
including any stairs or railings.
18. Each unit shall be served by separate water and sewer, and traffic grade lids shall be
provided for each.
19. The applicant is responsible for all upgrades to the City's utilities as required to fulfill
the project's demands, if applicable.
20. New and existing fire services shall be protected by a USC approved double check
detector assembly and installed per STD - 517 -L, if required by the Fire Department.
21. New water services shall be installed per STD -502 -L or STD - 503 -L, depending on the
size.
22. New and existing commercial water meter(s) shall be protected by a USC approved
reduced pressure backflow assembly and installed per STD - 520 -L -A.
23. New and existing sewer laterals shall have a cleanout installed per STD - 406 -L.
Tmpll: 03/08/11
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Page 10 of 10
24. The project will need to meet fire flow requirements with the addition to the building.
The City and field sets of plans shall show all existing and proposed fire hydrants
located within 300 feet of the project.
25. Smoke alarms will be required in the R occupancies and shall be installed as per
California Building Code Section 907.2.11.2 outside of each separate sleeping area in
the immediate vicinity of bedrooms and in each room used for sleeping purposes.
26. For new construction, an approved carbon monoxide alarm shall be installed in
dwelling units and in sleeping units within which fuel- burning appliances are installed,
and in dwelling units that have attached garages.
27. The address will need to be placed on the street side of the building, as required by
the Fire Department.
28. Required vertical and horizontal occupancy separation must be met as per California
Building Code Section 508.2.5.1.
29. As per California Fire Code Section 903.2.8, an automatic sprinkler system installed in
accordance with Section 903.3 shall be provided throughout all buildings with a Group
R fire area, as required by the Fire Department.
30. Exit hardware on new doors shall comply with California Fire Code Section 1008.1.9.3,
as required by the Fire Department.
31. 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 Whitacre
Residence including, but not limited to, Use Permit No. UP2010 -021 and Modification
Permit No. MD2010 -027. 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.
32. This approval shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the approval date,
as specified in Section 20.93.050 (A) of the 1997 Zoning Code. Prior to the expiration
date of this approval, an extension may be approved in accordance with Section
20.93.050 (B) of the 1997 Zoning Code. Requests for an extension must be in writing.
Tmplt: 03/08/11
Attachment N®. PC 2
Draft Resolution - Reverse
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REVERSING THE DECISION OF
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND DENYING USE PERMIT
NO. UP2010 -021 AND MODIFICATION PERMIT NO. MD2010 -027
FOR AN ADDITION AND ALTERATIONS TO A
NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE THAT WILL ENCROACH INTO
THE SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS LOCATED AT 101 15TH
STREET (PA2010 -105)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. An application was filed by William Azzalino, with respect to property located at 101 151h
Street, and legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 15, Section B, requesting approval of
a use permit and modification permit.
2. The applicant proposes an addition to a nonconforming, mixed -use structure. The Use
Permit would allow an addition of up to 75 percent of the existing square footage and
up to 75 percent structural alterations to the existing structures. The Modification
Permit would allow the proposed addition to encroach five (5) feet into the required
five -foot side setback on the northerly side of the property and eight (8) feet into the
required ten -foot rear alley setback.
3. The subject property is located within the Mixed -Use Cannery Village /15`h St (MU-
CV /15th St) Zoning District; however, the Retail and Service Commercial — Residential
Overlay (RSC -R) District regulations from the 1997 Zoning Code apply to this project.
The General Plan Land Use Element category is Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -114).
4. The subject property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan
category is Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H).
5. A public hearing was held on July 7, 2011, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300
Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of
the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning
Commission at this meeting.
SECTION 2. FINDINGS.
The Planning Commission may approve a use permit and modification permit only after
making each of the required findings set forth in Section 20.91.035, Section 20.62.040, and
Section 20.93.030 of the 1997 Zoning Code. In this case, the Planning Commission was
unable to make the required findings based upon the following:
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Paqe 2 of 2
1. Allowing an addition above the commercial structures and alterations of up to 75
percent of the existing structural elements prolongs the life of the nonconforming
commercial structures. The nonconforming parking for the commercial uses is
detrimental to the community and the life of the structures should not be extended to
allow for an additional dwelling unit above.
2. The proposed structure should not be constructed within a setback area and the
structure should be at least partially brought into conformance with the required
setbacks.
SECTION 3. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby denies Use Permit No.
UP2010 -021 and Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027 (PA2010 -105), reversing the
decision of the Zoning Administrator.
2. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this
Resolution 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 7th DAY OF JULY, 2011.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN
ABSENT:
BY:
BY:
Tmplt: 03/08111
, Chairman
, Secretary
Attachment No. PC 3
Calculations of Structural Alterations
RESIDENTIAL
FOUNDATION AREAS
RESIDENTIAL
ROOF AREAS
COMMERCIAL SURF SHOP
168 SF
160 SF
❑ ❑ I
COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT
COMMERCIAL SURF SHOP
rA
1052 SF 4E SF
1064 SF 61 SF
COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT
AREA ANALYSIS CALCULATION
AREA
TOTAL SF
MODIFIED SF %MODIFIED
ROOFS
3833 SF
186 SF 4.9 %�i
RESTAURANT WALLS
FOUNDATIONS
2164 SF
76 SF r 3.6%
_AND
SURF SHOP WALLS
AND FOUNDATION
2145 SF
21 5� 1.04b j
RESIDENCE WALLS
AN_D_FO_IIN_DAIION
3708 SF
663 SF 18.6%
id SF 185E
21 SF 334 SF 21 Sr ed0 SF r� 245 SF
%11 SF 585F,( ❑ � ❑ ❑ Sd SF —� (-_
---� d'S �__..........._..._n. _ LJ-
WEST /BACK NORTH INTERIOR FRAME SOUTH INTERIOR FRAME EAST /FRONT
RESTAURANT
2 SF �- ❑ 607 SF 21 SF 986 SF
WEST /BACK EAST /FRONT NORTH SOUTH
SURFSHOP
70 SF 70 Sf
-- 229
617 SF 47 SF 362 SF 12 SF 392 SF %25 SF 3 47 SF
236 >F
NORTH GARAGE EAST RESIOENTJAI, WEST RESIDENTIAL NORTH RESIDENTIAL SOUTH RESIDENTIAL EAST GARAGE
RESIDENCE AND GARAGE AREAS
^Ii5 t�f. ii N
A
� R
or�lvuw .... •...
,�¢-m aq wwnn
/J W- Ply Mw Uk.
w
C
C
Attachment No. PC 4
Zoning Administrator Action Letter
Application No.
Applicant
Site Address
Legal Description
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION LETTER
PLANNING DIVISION
3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663
(949) 644.3200 FAX (949) 644 -3229
PA2010 -105
• Use Permit No. UP2010 -021
• Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027
William Azzalino, AIA
101 15th Street
Whitacre Residence
Lots 1 and 2, Block 15, Section B
On May 25, 2011, the Zoning Administrator approved the following: A use permit
application for an addition of up to 75 percent of the existing gross floor area and
alterations of up to 75 percent of the existing structural elements of a nonconforming
structure. The applicant also requested a modification permit to allow the proposed
addition to encroach into the required five -foot side setback on the northerly side of the
property and the required ten -foot rear setback. The site is developed with two (2)
commercial structures adjacent to 15th Street and a residential structure to the rear.
The applicant proposes an addition to the existing residence and the addition of a new
dwelling unit above the commercial structures. Four -car parking is proposed to satisfy
the residential parking requirements.
Ordinance 2010 -21, which adopted the current Zoning Code, provides that discretionary
and ministerial applications deemed complete prior to the effective date of the ordinance
may be processed under the previous Zoning Code, provided they are found consistent
with the General Plan. The application was submitted and deemed complete prior to the
adoption of the current Zoning Code. Therefore, this project is being reviewed subject
to regulations of the previous Zoning Code (1997 Zoning Code). The property is located
in the within the MU -CV /15th Street Zoning District, however, the RSC -R (Retail and
Service Commercial — Residential Overlay) District regulations from the 1997 Zoning Code
apply to this project.
The Zoning Administrator determined in this case that the proposed Use Permit and
Modification Permit are consistent with the legislative intent of the 1997 Zoning Code
and is approved based on the following findings per Section 20.91.035, Section
20.62.040, and Section 20.93.030 and subject to the following conditions:
Whitacre Residence
May 25, 2011
Page 2
Findings
CEQA Compliance
1. The project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15301 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of
the Implementing Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act. This
exemption allows for the minor alteration of existing buildings and the addition of a
new residential unit.
Use Permit
2. Finding: The proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of the
Zoning Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located.
Facts in support of finding:
• The site is located in the RSC -R (Retail and Service Commercial —
Residential Overlay) District of the 1997 Zoning Code. The intent of this
district to provide areas which are predominantly retail in character but which
allow some service office uses. The intent and purpose of the Residential
Overlay district is to provide for the establishment of residential uses in
commercial districts. The proposed mixed use project is a permitted use in
this district. The existing eating and drinking establishment and retail surf
shop meet the intent .of the RSC district, and the existing and proposed
residential units meet the intent of the R- Overlay District.
3. Finding: The proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions
under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the
General Plan and the purpose of the district in which the site is located; will not
be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of
persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and
will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the
general welfare of the city.
Facts in support of finding:
• The existing commercial structures and residential units on site are consistent
with the Mixed Use - Horizontal (MU -H4) land use designation of the General
Plan, which applies to properties where it is the intent to establish the
character of a distinct and cohesively developed district or neighborhood
containing multi - family residential with clusters of mixed -use and /or
commercial buildings. Mixed -use or commercial buildings are required on
parcels at street intersections.
F:1Users1PLN\Shared\PA's1PAs - 20101PA2010- 1051UP2010 -021 action.docx
Tmpi : 04114/10
Whitacre Residence
May 25, 2011
Page 3
• The neighborhood is developed with commercial, residential, and mixed use
properties. The subject property has been developed with mixed use for at
least fifty years, and the addition of one (1) residential dwelling unit will not
create any significant negative impacts.
• The property abuts public rights -of -way of three sides; therefore, the addition
is directly adjacent to only one (1) other property.
• The proposed addition will provide the required parking for the residential
units. The existing commercial structures are not being enlarged or
intensified, so the parking demand is not being increased.
• The proposed addition will conform to all other. requirements of the 1997
Zoning Code, including height and square footage limitations.
Finding: The proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including
any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it
would be located.
Facts in support of finding:
The proposed mixed -use project is consistent with the legislative intent of
Chapter 20.15 (Commercial Districts) and Chapter 20.52 (Residential (R)
Overlay District) of the 1997 Zoning Code. The proposed project meets the
development standards of the RSC -R district in regards to minimum site area
per unit, height limit, and minimum lot area.
The existing structures are nonconforming due to encroachments into the 10-
foot rear alley setback and 5 -foot northerly side setback, and due to
insufficient parking for the commercial uses. The proposed remodel of the
existing residential unit and the addition of a unit are in conformance with the
standards of Chapter 20.62 (Nonconforming Structures and Uses) of the 1997
Zoning Code. Section 20.62.040 (Nonconforming Structures) allows for
structural alterations and additions of up to 75 percent with the approval of a
use permit.
The existing residential unit conforms with the parking requirements of the R-
Overlay District of two (2) parking spaces per unit. The proposed construction
includes the addition of two (2) parking spaces for a total of four (4) parking
spaces, meeting the residential parking requirements. No addition is proposed
to the commercial structures.
5. Finding: The cost of improvements to be made is minor in comparison to the
value of the existing nonconforming condition.
Facts in support of finding:
F: \UsersIPLN \Shared \PA's \PAs - 2010\PA2010- 105iUP2010 -021 action.dom
TinpiC 04/1411
Whitacre Residence
May 25, 2011
Page 4
The cost of the addition and alterations in comparison to the value of the
existing nonconforming condition is minor because although the cost of the
remodel as proposed may be high, the existing mixed -use structure could not
be rebuilt if it were to be demolished. In order to bring the existing buildings
into conformance with the required setbacks, the removal of a significant
portion of the residential living area and the retail surf shop would be
necessary.
Per the County Assessor's records, the total value of the property was
assessed at $1,508,322 for the 2010 calendar year.
6. Finding: The cost of correcting the nonconforming condition would exceed the
cost of the other alterations proposed.
Facts in support of finding:
Correcting the nonconforming setbacks would require the removal of existing
floor area from the residential structure and retail surf shop. The proposed
alterations within the setback areas are only a minor portion of the entire
project; therefore, the cost of the overall project is greater than the cost of the
alterations within the setback areas.
Demolition and replacement of the structures could not be accomplished
without approval of a parking waiver.
The City has no plans on file for the original construction. Based on
information from the County of Orange, the existing structures were built in
the 1920s.
7. Finding: Retention of the nonconforming condition is necessary to maintain
reasonable use of the structure.
Facts in support of finding:
Retention of the nonconforming parking for the commercial structures is
necessary because a mixed -use structure similar to the existing development
could not be built under current development standards. The number of
parking spaces required for the amount of commercial floor area allowed on
this site is a minimum of ten (10) spaces based on a parking ratio of one (1)
parking space for every 250 square feet of gross floor area. The minimum
allowed floor area for a commercial structure on this mixed -use property is
1,250 square feet, which would require a minimum of five (5) parking spaces.
This site does not provide adequate space for a code - compliant parking lot
with 5 -10 parking spaces, in addition to the required residential parking.
F: \Users \PLN \Shared \PNs\PAs - 2010 \PA2010 - 105 \UP2010 -021 action.docx
Tmpll: 04114/10
Retention of the nonconforming rear
existing livable space within the stru
would result in one (1) less bedroom
room and master bedroom.
Whitacre Residence
May 25, 2011
Page 5
setback encroachment maintains the
:cure. Removing the encroachments
and reduced living area in the living
Finding: The addition and alteration does not increase the structure's
inconsistency with the regulations of the Zoning Code.
Facts in support of finding:
The proposed project includes the addition of two (2) parking spaces,
satisfying the requirements for residential parking. The commercial structures
are not being enlarged or intensified.
The proposed addition and alterations will meet all other development
standards for the RSC -R District, with the exception of the Modification Permit
requests.
The proposed construction is contained generally within the footprint of the
existing structure.
Modification Permit
Finding: The granting of the application is necessary due to the practical
difficulties associated with the property and that the strict application of the
Zoning Code results in physical .hardships that are inconsistent with the purpose
and intent of the Zoning Code.
Facts in support of finding:
The northerly side yard setback requirement of five (5) feet is due to the
abutting property's Zoning designation of R -2 (Two -Unit Residential). The
Zoning Code requires a side yard setback only because the abutting property
is designated for residential use; however, the property to the north is
developed with a mixed -use structure. This property is subject to abatement
of the nonconforming mixed -use, but the property owner has applied for
General Plan, Zoning Code, and Coastal Land Use Plan amendments to
change the property to allow for mixed -use. If the amendment application is
denied, then the property owner may request an extension on the abatement.
Therefore, there is a possibility that the property will remain mixed -use for the
foreseeable future.
• The additional dwelling unit is being proposed within the required setback in
order for the wall to line up with the existing commercial structure on the first
floor.
F: \Users\PLN \Shared \PA's \PAs - 2010 \PA2010 - 105 \UP2010 -021 action.docx
rinph: 04/14110
Whitacre Residence
May 25, 2011
Page 6
The existing commercial structures and residential dwelling unit constitute a
practical difficulty associated with the property as the only location available
for the four -car parking is located within the side and rear yard setbacks.
10. Finding: The requested modification will be compatible with existing development
in the neighborhood.
Facts in support of finding:
The deviation from the Zoning Code requested through this application is
compatible with the characteristics of the surrounding properties, many of which
do not provide side yard or rear yard alley setbacks, either because of differing
Zoning Code requirements or nonconforming encroachments.
Other properties on the block contain similar mixed -use projects with
commercial structures on the first floor and residential uses above.
11. Finding: The granting of such an application will not adversely affect the health or
safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property and will
not be detrimental to the general welfare or injurious to property or improvements
in the neighborhood.
Facts in support of finding:
The alley is approximately 25 feet wide and provides sufficient access for
vehicles to park in the garages and carports. The 25 -foot width is also
adequate for circulation.
The existing structures on site are built up to the northerly property line. The
existing mixed -use structure to the north is also built on the property line, and
this layout has not proven to be detrimental.
The proposed encroachment into the alley setback is for the carports and a
deck above. No new living area is proposed within the alley setback.
Conditions
The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot
plan, floor plans, and elevations, except as noted in the following conditions.
2. The guard rail for the deck adjacent to the alley shall be constructed with wrought
iron, glass, or similar open or translucent material.
3. All signs shall conform to the provisions of Chapter 20.67 of the Municipal Code or
any applicable comprehensive sign program that is in force for the subject property.
F:\Users \PLN\Shared \PA's\PAs - 2010 \PA2010 - 105 \UP2010 -021 action.docx
Tmplt! 04/14/10
Whitacre Residence
May 25, 2011
Page 7
4. No temporary "sandwich" signs, balloons or similar temporary signs shall be
permitted, either on -site or off -site, to advertise the proposed food establishment,
unless specifically permitted in accordance with the Sign Ordinance of the
Municipal Code. Temporary signs shall be prohibited in the public right -of -way,
unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department in conjunction with the
issuance of an encroachment permit or encroachment agreement.
5. All trash shall be stored within the building or within public dumpsters provided for
the convenience of businesses in the area, or otherwise screened from view of
neighboring properties except when placed for pick -up by refuse collection
agencies. The trash dumpsters shall have a top which shall remain closed at all
times, except when being loaded or while being collected by the refuse collection
agency.
The applicant shall maintain the trash dumpsters or receptacles so as to control
odors which may include the provision of fully self- contained dumpsters or may
include periodic steam cleaning of the dumpsters, if deemed necessary by the
Planning Division. Trash generated by the establishment shall be adequately
contained in sealed plastic bags to control odors prior to placement in the trash
dumpster.
7. Anything not specifically approved by this Use Permit and Modification Permit is
prohibited and must be addressed in a separate and subsequent review.
8. This approval was based on the particulars of the individual case and does not,
in and of itself or in combination with other approvals in the vicinity or Citywide,
constitute a precedent for future approvals or decisions.
9. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of the construction.
The construction must meet all applicable Building Code requirements including
parapets and guards and fire resistant construction, where required.
10. A copy of this approval letter shall be incorporated into the City and field sets of
plans prior to issuance of the building permits.
11. Approval from the California Coastal Commission is required prior to issuance of
a building permit.
12. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a covenant for
review and approval by the Office of the City Attorney as to form and content,
that will address holding the site to no more than two (2) dwelling units. Once
approved and properly executed, that document shall be forwarded to the City
officials for recordation against the property with the County Recorder.
13. If any of the existing public improvements surrounding the site is damaged by
private work, new concrete sidewalk, curb and gutter, street pavement, and other
FAUserslPLN \Shared \PA's\PAs - 2010 \PA2010 - 105 \UP2010 -021 action.docx
Tmpltr 04/14/10
Whitacre Residence
May 25, 2011
Page 8
public improvements will be required by the City at the time of private
construction completion. Said determination and the extent of the repair work
shall be made at the discretion of the Public Works inspector.
14. All work performed within the public right -of -way shall be reviewed and approved
by the Public Works Department under an encroachment permit/agreement, if
required.
15. Any nonstandard encroachment within the public right -of -way shall be removed,
including any stairs or railings.
16. Each unit shall be served by separate water and sewer, and traffic grade lids
shall be provided for each.
17. The applicant is responsible for all upgrades to the City's utilities as required to
fulfill the project's demands, if applicable.
18. New and existing fire services shall be protected by a USC approved double
check detector assembly and installed per STD - 517 -L, if required by the Fire
Department.
19. New water services shall be installed per STD -502 -L or STD - 503 -L, depending
on the size.
20. New and existing commercial water meter(s) shall be protected by a USC
approved reduced pressure backflow assembly and installed per STD - 520 -L -A.
21. New and existing sewer laterals shall have a cleanout installed per STD - 406 -L.
22. The project will need to meet fire flow requirements With the addition to the
building. The City and field sets of plans shall show all existing and proposed fire
hydrants located within 300 feet of the project.
23. Smoke alarms will be required in the R occupancies and shall be installed as per
California Building Code Section 907.2.11.2 outside of each separate sleeping
area in the immediate vicinity of bedrooms and in each room used for sleeping
purposes.
24. For new construction, an approved carbon monoxide alarm shall be installed in
dwelling units and in sleeping units within which fuel - burning appliances are
installed, and in dwelling units that have attached garages.
25. The address will need to be placed on the street side of the building, as required
by the Fire Department.
F:\Users\PLN\Shared\PNs\PAs-2010\PA2010-105\UP2010-021 action.dom
TnipR: 04n4w0
Whitacre Residence
May 25, 2011
Page 9
26. Required vertical and horizontal occupancy separation must be met as per
California Building Code Section 508.2.5.1.
27. As per California Fire Code Section 903.2.8, an automatic sprinkler system
installed in accordance with Section 903.3 shall be provided throughout all
buildings with a Group R fire area, as required by the Fire Department.
28. Exit hardware on new doors shall comply with California Fire Code Section
1008.1.9.3, as required by the Fire Department.
29. 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 Whitacre Residence including, but not limited to, Use Permit No. UP2010 -021
and Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027. 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.
30. This approval shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the approval
date, as specified in Section 20.93.050 (A) of the 1997 Zoning Code. Prior to the
expiration date of this approval, an extension may be approved in accordance
with Section 20.93.050 (B) of the 1997 Zoning Code. Requests for an extension
must be in writing.
APPEAL PERIOD
The applicant or any interested party may appeal the decision of the Planning Director,
Zoning Administrator and department staff to the Planning Commission by a written
request to the Planning Director within 14 days of the action date. A $4,333.00 filing fee
shall accompany any appeal filed. For additional information on filing an appeal, contact
the Planni ent at 949- 44 -3200,
By:
Patrick Alford, Zo ing Administrator
PA/fn
Attachments: Vicinity Map
Project Plans
F: \Users \PLN \Shared \PA's \PAs - 2010 \PA2010 - 105 \UP2010 -021 action.docx
TngilL 04114110
Whitacre Residence
May 25, 2011
Page 10
Use Permit No. UP2010 -021
Modification Permit No. MD2011 -027
PA2010 -105
101 15th Street
F: \UsersTLN\ Shared\ PA's \PAs- 2010\PA2010. 105 \UP2010 -021 action.docx
Tmpit: 04114110
v .,,q s ®e.MA
t.-As Y.SL LOL
LLO-owzaw Lzo-a an,,osat-8i"4
c
G
r/ It
•
uon00000nnonnq
UP
It
;;'L gip:$' �1r• �— },�
S 74 5, ht`�t
D n
tl
c }� e�s iDpISiIS�' II��
II.►I /I�
e
� 6
idsp
33
3
rastt
c
rya
$l
1il I
s L
111111!
g
iei€
piil!iiiji
� � 4 4 9
c
G
r/ It
•
uon00000nnonnq
UP
It
;;'L gip:$' �1r• �— },�
S 74 5, ht`�t
D n
tl
c }� e�s iDpISiIS�' II��
II.►I /I�
e
L
33
3
c
rya
gagg?
>�ja
rs
i
c:d8
t.Y
t�Y
s
b�$gg
S.s
�.�,
,� .�
o�tm o�� �n
oa,�� m, �,...,. M
0
0
0
.Q.— 1�
r
Z
O
zmv
m X,v
mm
➢ 2 P
nG ,
rz
rm
M.
D
z
C-)
m s
m
r_
m
m
0
� I
CENTERLINE of ALLEY 17-6-
EMOMMMMMMM
AO II �
R lf's
a�
MENJ
M.W
f
m
_ CENTERLINE of 15th STREET
® __�— ice__ -•.. ___���. —.�
MUNN a 0y Ve s 4�e
P, -' I a g1lt mis
€E�f�:a�' � 4 EF;
i � €ioE �� 33i! iI�@�y���6Si8$� ��� :�ifj:il�I ¢ 3
9E:� g° '�`�t i is�ag &� °a�`4� ��� I'i�iii�li a ' � .� s e � � § : J
3 � ��'' =3�t? 3 €�i�i`�3����4�� ��°� ij�ifjl,ji - - 4444444 ��
5 eF 5 3f� � FtS� 3 i rpi i { %I!!i 'ii �f 3 ! �_ F � fN•
5 f[ Rg ig1 @�ss'e4fia -oi @� �'e? I�Iii31�Ii § A a 5 r
Ma
�➢ ! �� ;� ?!i s�3E. ��e�ss 5 � IIII]i�j'i 4444444 yy
k
n
N
K
O
a
0 3:
Qg zj
B
z
0
w°
a N
z
1 �P
I
of
.j y4
`
; l
`•ijl
�iI�l``jill�lj
hill
FEE
.? t
1� ge�J
g
$} e
3
j
� i
II l
f
:i1
''
!
Fe•
9�;33
;
II,tl4li1
<J Q Q <J 4 Q Q
f
Fd
e �
a�
0
V
W
QJ
V
Attachment N®. PC 5
Correspondence
To: FILE
Subject: MAY 25, 2011 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR HEARING
PA2010 -105 for UP2010 -021, MD2010 -027
PA2010 -174 for LM2010 -007
From: Edward Healy fmailto :eheaiv5(o)sbcolobal.netl
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 1:49 PM
To: Nueno, Fern
Cc: Ed Healy
Subject: Stuff Surfer & Surf Shop Project 15th Street
Fern, my name is Ed Healy, owner of 2 lots on 15 Street (111 and 113 Fifteenth)...
I can not make the Planning Meeting on this project, but you like to voice a few concerns based on my
understanding of the project. Any new po ject on this property, should have to include moving the trash
"dumpster" in the street in front of the Stuff Surfer (not a good look to our street)... also parking and structual
design to build "on top of those old building" are questions the city will be all over, I assume.
Ed Healy
cell phone number 949 274 6452
home line 949 548 4122
To: FILE
Subject: MAY 25, 2011 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR HEARING
PA2010 -105 for UP2010 -021, MD2010 -027
PA2010 -174 for LM2010 -007
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Grace Dove Finailto :doveperch(@sbcglobal.netl
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 1:32.13M
To: Nueno, Fern
Cc: mhenn527(@hotmail.com
Subject: 101 15th Street: Zoning Administrator Hearing 5/25/11
The Whitacre /Angelo residence is scheduled for consideration of
discretionary actions by the Zoning Administrator on the Agenda of
5/25/11, Item 4. My comment is as follows:
This is a mixed use property. While the actions requested focus on
the residential portion of the property's use, consideration also
should be given to the trash disposal of the commercial uses.
Currently there is a commercial dumpster placed on the public street
(15th Street) in front of 101 15th Street adjacent to the beach
boardwalk. Commercial trash pickup is required inasmuch as the City
does not pick up commercial trash, only residential trash. This
dumpster should be accommodated on the property of the applicant, not
on a public street in full view of recreational visitors and local
residents. I recommend that the plans for this property accommodate
commercial trash pickup from the alley behind 101 15th Street.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Grace Dove
117 15th Street
Newport Beach
To: FILE
Subject: MAY 25, 2011 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR HEARING
PA2010 -105 for UP2010 -021, MD2010 -027
PA2010 -174 for LM2010 -007
From: Ria Van Ornum f mailto: riatwohawks(o)comcast. net]
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 1:45 PM
To: Nueno, Fern
Subject: Public Hearing 5/25 re: 101 15th street: project file PA2010 -105 and PA2010 -174
Dear Madam/ Sirs:
I am in receipt of your Notice of Public Hearing ( May 25) with regard to Project File nos: PA2010 -105 &
PA2010 -174: the Whitacre/ Angelo residence and adjacent commercial businesses.
As I cannot attend the hearing I would like to submit the following points of concern for the record:
1. It appears Mr Angelo is seeking to build a large unit over the "Stuff Surfer restaurant and Surf Shop on 15th
street.... and an adjacent unit to the existing house on the Ocean Front property- the resulting project being 3
residential units and 2 commercial businesses with parking for four cars. That is an awful lot of building on two
small lots !... and not enough parking!
2. The last remodel of 1504 Ocean Front ( done by Mr Angelo) took five years to complete! The entire
neighborhood had to live through a massive construction mess with all the "stops" and "starts ". It became a
safety issue for both pedestrians and residents in the area.
3. Additionally it should be noted that the two existing small businesses that will bear the "weight" of this
development- the Stuft Surfer and most especially the 15th Street Surf Shop are part of Newport local history.
The Surf Shop contains local Surf memorabilia going back to the 30's . Were a project of this size to be built, no
doubt these two iconic shops would be demolished to satisfy construction requirements. What a loss!
As a former resident and existing owner of 107 15th Street ( single residence) I am disheartened when I think of
the possibility of over development in the "Village ".
Please enter my comments into the record for this hearing.
I sincerely hope the city will be thoughtful and deliberate in its evaluation of this issue.
Sincerely
Ria Van Ornum- owner 107 15th Street
Newport Beach, CA 92663
riatwohawks@comcast.net
Attachment No. PC 6
Appeal Letter
Jun 08 2011 12:49PM Hawkins Law Offices (9491 650 -1181 P.2
LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT C. HAWKINS
Julie 8, 2011
Via Facsimile Only
Kimberly Brandt, Community- Development Director
James Campbell, Acting Planning Director
Planning Department
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, California 92663
Re: Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's Grant of Use Permit No. LTP2010.021 and
Modification Permit No. MD2010 -027 (PA2010 -105) for 101 15th Street also
known as the Whitacre Residence
Greetings
Pursuant to the current Zoning Code and the old 1997 Zoning Code, I appeal and/or call for
review of the captioned action on the following basis and grounds:
First, the Use Permit is inconsistent with other Use Permits in the vicinity. Second, the
Planning Director failed to make a finding that the captioned use and structure is non - conforming as
required by Section 20.62.040 A of the 1997 "Zoning Code. (Unless noted, all references herein at to
the 1997 Zoning Code.)
Third, the Planning Director failed to make the appropriate health, safety and welfare findings
as required by the Code and erroneously concluded that the captioned structure and use was not
injurious to the health, safety and welfare of the community and its residents. However, the Use Permit
acts to waive crucial parking in an area which has a severe parking shortage.
Fourth, the Planning Director failed to make the correct findings under Section 20.62 F. For
instance, Section 20.62.040 F (1) requires that the review authority including the Planning Director
make a finding that "[Ihc cost of the improvements to be made is minor in comparison to the value of
the existing nonconforming condition." However, the Planning Director admits that the cost of the
improvements "maybe high" but fails to provide any documentation regarding such costs. Moreover,
the Planning Director failed to consider alternative improvements which would eliminate or diminish
the nonconforming condition.
Fifth, Section 1.0.62.0401-(2) requires that the review authority including the Planning Director
make a finding that "[t1he cost of correcting the nonconforming condition would exceed the cost of
110 Newport Center Drive, Suite 200
1.eaport Brach, California 92660
(949) 650-5550
F= (949) 650. 1181
Jun 09 2011 12:49PM Hawkins Law Offices (9491 650 -1191 P.3
K:mbdiv 3nnd:, Comnnin ry Uavclo;_menr Direc:er
James Gm:,:beli, Acting Planning Ditnw- 'tire i, Zo. i
the other alterations proposed." However, as indicated above, the Planning Director provided no
specific basts for this finding. Further, the Planning Director erroneously found that demolition of the
structure would then necessitate a parking waiver, when the Use Permit in essence grants a parking
waiver.
Sixth, the subject property has a newer residential structure and aging commercial structures.
By allowing demolition of seventy-five (75 %) percent of the entire structure, the Use Permit could
authorize the retention of the newer residential structure and the complete demolition of the
commercial structure. The Use Permit would not require that the entirely new commercial structure
provide parking on site. In essence, it allows for a parking waiver for the new commercial space. A
the very least, the Use Permit should be conditioned to prohibit the complete demolition of the
commercial structure.
Finally, the Use Permit requires application of the 1997 Zoning Code. This Code is not
generally available to the public or decision makers. This absence makes it difficult to evaluate such
applications which require consideration of the 1997 Zoning Code. As long as the City processes such
applications, it should place the 1997 Zoning Code on the City's websitc. Also, the Use Permit is
captioned "Whitacre Residence." However, as indicated above, the concern is the non - conforming
commercial structures; calling it a "residence" is at best misleading.
Given that the hearing will be de novo. 1 reserve the right to supplement additional reasons
which may arise during this appeal process or in review of public records in connection with this
matter.
']'hank you for your assistance in this matter. Of course, notwithstanding this appeal, thank you
for the fine and difficult work that you and your department have done and continue to do. I look
forward to learning the date and time of the hearing on this appeal. Should you have any questions,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
! �""'.
� r
"et
r
RCH,'kw
cc: Lcilani Brown, City Clerk (Via Facsimile Only)
110 Newport Center Drive, Suite 200
Ne�a,porr Beach, Califomin 92061
(949) 650 -5550
Fax: (949),55C1141
Attachment N®. PC 7
Project Plans
O
R
< I
z
ii
JQ 0
O
tl
z
JQ 0
O
z
JQ 0
p"ii
Irly,'
J
EXISI"INGGA'F�A'G
aPROPERT'lJ CAE . .n1.�,'1 i AGCAR� i— ...
—. ExlsrwhvucroEo-RO "ot7t . =.,��4f .r�"'Rh�Lk. AEG' ...._..
104 75tA `Street�T,
NEW RESIDENTIAL OVER w
LU
,v,EST SJOE I EX� ' —'�.t_ ', �,a r� , I toy �x " EXkS €L S:F} 2 €� —P AND
(REgRI ! / h iii i_. t -
- a RESARAf PER'A -2 E�rSOE u~
exsr -so
LO
JLU
7j x cr�ti 7r]C j I �— fiZ srsn . o
JQ ;. �• 'i--C -G.- rp.'j- _4�'C' I'{-C �' }�rL ,t'� it 111 "i Jac coNCRErn e�oca wniTS ro aerwrv—�—' — LU .. ...-
ILL
J /
1W �„ ,-C' � trt�T � 1'- .i5tt�frAet C�..�.� -- - _ ........ .. U t
..
__
_ '•.•• � � _ 60WNPROPER"LY1,:4. '' ..
— CENTERLINE of the BOARDWALK �=
SITE / ROOF PLAN
SCALE I/4 "= 1' -0" ! .._ _. . ........
�r -..
F
iJ
.4
CARPORT -- NEW GARAGE
PMGGW,6I6If 0 OPEN
.. _. ..__.— GXSION
:
WAY EXISTING RETAIL (SURF SHOP)
CARPORT i NEW GARAGE I''' -27' fLEU .z g
,
DII r �
— w
II� w
I
ELEV. -33' t=
�
EXISTING WALKWAY
ELEV,.2r sLp
-
>
BEDROOM fI M RM I BEDROOM O
Ip O ILL- -' w, w
026 ER I• 'L..._����..: ..r..
EXISTING RESTAURANT F
z_ _ L
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL �a I 8 v
LIVINO ROOM �KITLHEN
CENTERLINE of the BOARDWALK
GROUNDF�OOR_P.LAN
LEGEND .. ..
PROPERTY LINE .,
_ -_ EXISTING WALL '
® NEW WALL
A-1 :::
r
Gl
Z
O
i
mvx
�
mm
yz�
rG1�
r ^�
hO
r
;O
O
A
i�
z
CENTERLINE of ALLEY
25W
HwrJ t
x .
Om x -
°y j!
sp
m
A
orj...
z
m
0
HwrJ t
lAo.
RE
IJ
I`
II �I
• ;N
{
s
ii
j
Q
i
11f
I
i
II �I
• ;N
{
s
ii
11f
I
II �I
• ;N
{
s
ii
i
U
'=
1
�
I
I
3
-,i
,9
p
r.
11 0
I
0
sir
e4,
�T
r
1
z
_
'I Jo <'o_
zo ovo
m
_
� x
S
0
N
..
J
O
O�
o z
W
_ _ o
z
O
L
Ij
U
U U
O �i
7
8
ZZ'
f
8
u3
n d�
n.
i
ZZ'
.L
o-
I
I
71
`s
I
u3
n d�
n.
i
ZZ'
.L
u3
n d�
n.
i
____._
7
f
i____ ___. _ _ -
��
--
.c�et
_ __._
._..__ _I _._ __ _ .. __
,_.
_ _. _ _ __ s -s _
I,I
T_
i _.,
�
i i
'� � -_-
38
_..6 - mi
-.ez
t
a
i _C
8
a
�_�
��
..__�_.,_...,_,, � � i
� 3a
c -:iz - �
i_