HomeMy WebLinkAboutTabak Residence (PA2003-180)CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 5
September 18, 2003
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: William Cunningham, Contract Planner
(949) 644 -3200
SUBJECT: Variance No. 2003 -005 and Amendment to Modification Permit No. 2002-
049 - Tabak Residence (PA2003 -180)
3431 Ocean Boulevard
APPLICANT NAME: Tom Stewart/Fleetwood Joiner Associates
INTRODUCTION:
The applicant proposes to demolish an existing structure and construct a new four -story
residence. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the 24 -foot height limit to be
exceeded. In addition, the applicant requests a Modification Permit to encroach into
the 10 -foot front yard setback by 8 feet.
RECOMMENDATION:
Hold a public hearing and deny the applicant's variance request and approve the
Modification Permit by adopting the resolution contained in Exhibit No. 1.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The property is currently developed with a single family residence constructed in 1958.
The existing dwelling is a three story structure that is constructed partially into and down
the hillside. The property is accessed by a public driveway from Ocean Boulevard. The
driveway is located within the Ocean Boulevard right -of -way, and the total distance from
the sidewalk to the property line is approximately 60 feet. The applicant proposes to
demolish the existing structure and construct a new dwelling. The proposed new
structure will be 6,710 sq. ft. of living area, will have a 615 sq. ft. three -car garage, and
will have four levels that will be excavated into the hillside. The floor plan will consist of
the following:
Tabak Residence
September 18, 2003
Page 2
Level 4 (3rd floor) — Garage, entry, office and bath —1,363 sq. ft. (incl. 615
sq. ft. garage)
Level 3 (2nd floor) — 3 bedrooms, 2 baths and rumpus room —1,990 sq. ft.
Level 2 Oat floor) — Master bedroom suite —1,910 sq. ft.
Level 1 (Basement) — Living areas, kitchen and dining room — 2,062 sq. ft.
The plans also contain a pool and deck off of the lower ( "Basement") level.
The applicant requested a Modification Permit (MD2002 -049) from the City to permit the
structure to encroach five feet into the 10 -foot front yard setback. That Modification was
approved by the Modifications Committee on May 29, 2002. Subsequently, the
applicant submitted plans to the Coastal Commission, which approved the project on
January 10, 2003. The Coastal Commission's approval included the location of the pool
and deck, and included a requirement that the structure not exceed the 24 -foot height
limit. The applicant has revised his plans to bring the wall of the upper two levels in line
with the adjacent residence to the west. In order to do so, the proposed structure was
extended 3 ft. 8 in, away from Ocean Boulevard, which results in that portion of the
structure encroaching above the height limit. The encroachments include up to 12 feet
at the southeast corner; up to 21 feet at the southwest corner; and a small corner of the
third level deck and glass guardrail. (Note: the existing structure currently is in line
with the adjacent dwelling, and the upper level of the structure encroaches into the
building height limit). In addition, the applicant now proposes to encroach an additional
three feet into the front setback, for a total front setback encroachment of eight feet into
the ten -foot setback.
Tabak Residence
September 18, 2003
Page 3
Analysis
The project, other than height and front setback encroachment, complies with other
applicable site development standards of the Zoning Code (height and setback are
discussed in detail in following sections) as outlined in the following table:
Front
loft.
2 ft.
Sides
411.
4 ft.
Rear
10 ft.
30.5 ft.
Building Height
24 ft.
Varies
Building Area
7,325 sq. ft
7,325 sq. R
General Plan:
The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the site for single - family residential
use and the proposed project is consistent with that land use designation.
Tabak Residence
September 18, 2003
Page 4
Policy "D" of the Land Use Element of the General Plan states:
"The siting of new buildings and structures shall be controlled and regulated to
insure, to the extent practical, the preservation of public views, the preservation of
unique natural resources, and to minimize the alteration of natural land forms along
bluffs and cliffs."
In addition to the General Plan Policy "D ", the City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) contains
a similar policy that finds that natural bluffs represent a significant scenic and
environmental resource" and requires that "the location and design of a proposed project
shall take into account public view potential."
In order to preserve the natural bluff to the degree possible, the applicant proposed to
excavate into the hillside below the existing residence, with nearly all of the proposed
added living area located within the excavated area. However, a pool, deck and
supportive retaining wall will be located on the lower ( "basement) level, which extends the
developed area further down the bluff disturbing what appears to be a natural bluff. The
applicant submitted his plans to the Coastal Commission, which approved the project
substantially as currently proposed in terms of modifications to the coastal bluff (i.e., the
pool, deck and retaining walls) and resultant impact on public views. While Coastal
Commission staff recommended that the pool and related improvements be moved back
or eliminated, the Coastal Commission approved the plans, and in essence made the
finding consistent with Policy "D" that public views were being maintained and that the
alteration of the natural bluff was not inconsistent with the Coastal Act.
Staff believes the improvements in the bluff area are minor, and much of the proposed
new structure will be located in the excavated area below the existing residence and will
not be visible from the vantage points of Ocean Boulevard or from Inspiration Point (which
is located above and to the southeast of the property; individuals viewing the site from
Inspiration Point actually view the back of the property and the bluff area below the house).
The project will result in a structure that will be similar in size and bulk to other ocean -front
structures located in the vicinity. Therefore, in staffs opinion, the project is consistent with
the General Plan, including Policy "D."
Building Height:
The applicant proposes to construct the residence with the south - facing (ocean side) walls
in line with the existing residence located to the west. The maximum height allowed is
measured 24 feet over the natural grade. The project complies with the top of curb height
limitation (the highest point of the roof is at the approximate 92 -foot elevation and the
height of curb is at approximately the 94.5 -foot elevation). However, in order to construct
the structure as proposed, portions of the dwelling will exceed the maximum height limit as
measured from natural grade. These encroachments above the height limit are
demonstrated on Sheet A6 of the project plans (Exhibit No. 3), and will consist of: (1) a
portion of the third and fourth level walls at the southwest corner of the building to a depth
of approximately 3 ft. 8 in.; (2) a portion of the fourth level wall at the northeast corner of
Tabak Residence
September 18, 2003
Page 5
the building to a depth of approximately 3 ft. 8 in.; and (3) a small comer of the deck and
glass rail on the third level deck.
The Zoning Code requires the Planning Commission to make certain findings for
Variances. These mandatory findings are listed and discussed below:
That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land,
building or use referred to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do
not apply generally to land, buildings andlor uses in the same district.
The applicant contends that the proposed structure is consistent with surrounding
residences, and that the proposed building wall is in line with the adjacent structure as well
as the existing structure on the site (the proposed encroachment into the height limit is
similar to the current structure's encroachment). In addition, the applicant states that
another reason for extending the upper level walls to be in line with the adjacent residence
is to preserve and enhance ocean views from those levels. Staff concurs that the structure
will be similar in size and bulk to other houses in the vicinity. However, in staffs opinion,
the finding of "exceptional or extraordinary circumstances" cannot be made in this case.
Even though the property has topographical constraints and the exceptionally large
distance from the Ocean Boulevard to the property line exists, the fact that the applicant is
excavating into the hillside allows him the opportunity to construct a dwelling that
maximizes the net building square footage of the site, without the need to encroach into
the height limit. The plans approved under Modification Permit No. 2002 -049 resulted in a
total building area of 7,321 square feet — 4 square feet less than the proposed project
without encroaching above the height limit.
2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
of substantial property rights of the applicant.
While the applicant's request will result in a structure that will be similar in appearance to
surrounding properties, and the unusual location and topography of the site present design
constraints, in staffs opinion, the height variance request is not "necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of property rights." The applicant has stated that part of the
intent is to improve his views from the upper levels of the structure. However, while
preservation of views is a stated goal, staff notes that the preservation and enhancement
of private views is not a goal of the General Plan and is not guaranteed by the Zoning
Code. Nevertheless, the applicant's views are maintained even with the dwelling designed
within the height limits. If the variance is not granted, the wall of the upper levels will need
to be moved back approximately 3 ft. 8 in., which will still give the applicant ample room to
accommodate the uses proposed on the third and fourth levels. Given the already
approved Modification Permit and the additional requested setback encroachment
requested with this application, the area is further increased within which to allow
adequate design options on the upper levels. As noted above, the applicant has already
demonstrated with the plans approved for the original Modification Permit that the full
allowable building square footage (7,325 square feet) can be achieved without the
Tabak Residence
September 18, 2003
Page 6
variance. Therefore, in staffs opinion, the variance is not required for the preservation of
property rights and the finding cannot be met.
3. That the granting of the application is consistent with the purposes of this code and
will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on
other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district.
The variance requested by the applicant, if granted, would constitute "a grant of special
privilege" is arguable in staffs opinion. The purpose of the height limit is to preserve the
character and scale of the community. As noted above, the proposed new structure will
be in line with the adjacent residence, and will have an appearance and design similar to
other homes located in the vicinity, and from that standpoint is not an unreasonable
request. On the other hand, to grant a variance based on the specific circumstances of
this case for the sole purpose of private view enhancement could be considered as
granting a special privilege. In addition, uniform compliance with the height limit and the
elimination of nonconformities is also a purpose of the Zoning Code. The proposed
project does not achieve this purpose.
4. That the granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the
particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing
or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not under
the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood
The height of the proposed structure will be approximately 3 feet higher than the roof line
of the existing residence that is proposed to be demolished (the new roof line will be the
same height as the adjacent residence). Staff notes that the wall of the existing house that
is proposed to be demolished is in line with the adjacent residence and that a portion of
the upper level of the currently- existing structure encroaches into the 24 -foot height limit.
Upon completion, the highest portion of the new structure will be slightly more than 3 feet
below the grade level of the sidewalk along Ocean Boulevard and will not block public
views from that vantage point beyond the currently- existing situation. Also, the views from
Inspiration Point are not blocked, restricted or significantly altered with the proposed
project due to the fact that Inspiration Point is further to the south and closer to the ocean
than the proposed structure. In addition, the building walls along the south of the
residence are proposed to be in line with the residence located to the west, and, therefore,
will not block views from that structure. Therefore, in staffs opinion, the finding that the
project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare could be made.
In summary, in staffs opinion, while the fourth finding can be made, the findings relative to
"extraordinary circumstances', "preservation of property rights" and "grant of special
privilege" should not be made.
Setback Modification:
Tabak Residence
September 18, 2003
Page 7
i
The applicant proposes to construct the residence to within two feet of the front property
line. A Modification Permit (MD2002 -049) was approved by the Modifications Committee
on May 29, 2002, to allow the structure to encroach 5 feet into the required 10 -foot front
yard setback. The applicant has revised the plans, and now proposes to encroach an
additional 3 feet into the front setback, which requires an amendment to the originally -
approved Modification Permit. In approving MD2002 -049, staff noted the unusual
topography and location of the site; the fact that the encroachments on the lower levels are
below grade and will not be visible; and the fact that the completed project will not obstruct
sight distance views or views from adjacent properties. As noted above, the property is
unusual in that the access is via a driveway that winds down the hillside from Ocean
Boulevard, and the front property line is approximately 60 feet from the sidewalk along
Ocean Boulevard. The top of the upper level wall that encroaches into the setback will be
over three feet below the grade level of the sidewalk along Ocean Boulevard (the lower
level walls are below grade and cannot be viewed). In addition, most of the
encroachments are located below grade and will not be visible. Of the upper level walls
that are visible above grade, approximately 31 feet (56 %) of the total 55 feet of wall
frontage are proposed for the additional encroachment into the front setback. The subject
property is the last house located along the access driveway, so no through circulation is
required to gain access to other properties. Also, up to 25 feet is maintained to allow the
residents maneuvering space for backing out of the garage. In addition, the applicant is
proposing to maintain the existing retaining wall along the driveway and will not modify the
wall or bluff area in the front of the property that is within the public right -of -way (the trash
enclosure will be relocated to facilitate vehicle maneuvering). Therefore, in staffs opinion,
the original findings can be made for the additional 3 -foot front yard encroachment, and it
is staffs recommendation that the Amendment to the Modification Permit be approved.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, in staff's opinion, the mandatory findings for granting a variance cannot be
made. On the other hand, the request for the modification to allow encroachment into the
front yard setback is reasonable. Therefore, staff has prepared a draft resolution for the
denial of the Variance and the approval of the Modification Permit.
Environmental Review:
The proposed project qualifies for a categorical exemption from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures). The approval of a variance to the height of a structure and the
modification to allow encroachments into required front yard setback are alterations in
development standards and do not result in a change in land use or density and does not
affect any significant environmental resources.
Tabak Residence
September 18, 2003
Page 8
Public Notice:
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within
300 feet of the property and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this
hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the
agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city website.
Alternatives:
The Planning Commission has the option to deny both the Variance and the
Modification Permit requests. The applicant would then be able to implement the
project consistent with the plans previously approved by the City and the Coastal
Commission. The Commission also has the option to approve both the Variance and
Modification Permit, in which case it would be appropriate to offer findings for approval
of the Variance (the findings for the approval of the Modification Permit are already
included within the draft resolution, which is included as Exhibit No. 1).
Prepared by:
William Cunningham
Contract Planner
Exhibits:
Submitted by:
Patricia L. Temple
Planning Director
1. Draft Resolution, including Conditions
2. Applicant's justification and letters of support
3. Aerial photo
4. Project plans
EXHIBIT NO. 1
DRAFT RESOLUTION
0
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DENYING VARIANCE NO. 2003-
005 AND APPROVING AMENDMENT TO MODIFICATION
PERMIT NO. 2002 -049 (PA2003 -180) FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 3431 OCEAN BOULEVARD
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS,
RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was filed by Tom Stewart/Fleetwood Joiner Associates on
behalf of the property owners, Lawrence and Lana Tabak, with respect to property located at
3431 Ocean Boulevard, and legally described as Lot 8, Tract 1257, requesting approval of a
Variance to construct a 7,325 square foot residence that exceeds the 24 -foot height limit and
encroaches up to 8 feet into the required 10 foot front yard setback. Both the Land Use Element
of the General Plan and the Zoning Code designate the site as Single Family Detached
Residential.
Section 2. A public hearing was held on September 18, 2003, in the City Hall Council
Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place
and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was given. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the requested variance is not justified
and is hereby denied for the following reasons:
a) Although the property has topological constraints, the applicant has chosen to heavily
excavate the property, which alleviates the topography constraint, rather than
developing the property utilizing the current physical characteristics. Therefore, there
are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the property or use
referred to in the application that would preclude development of the property with a
single family residence designed in compliance with the height limit. The previously
approved plans for Modification Permit No. 2002 -049 show that a residence at or near
the maximum allowable floor area allowed can be designed within the 24 -foot height
limit.
b) The granting of the application is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
a substantial property right in that private view enhancement is not a General Plan
goal nor are private views protected by the Municipal code. The applicant's views are
maintained without the encroachment into the height limit, and full building area can be
achieved without the encroachment into the height limit. Therefore, approval of the
Variance is not necessary to preserve a substantial property right.
c) The granting of the application is not consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code
and will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with limitations placed on
other properties in the vicinity within the same zoning district in that the encroachment
into the height limit for the purpose of enhancing a private view is not a goal of the
1b
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 2 of 5
General Plan or a guarantee of the Zoning Code. Additionally, approval of the
Variance to the height limit does not achieve the goal of the Zoning Code in regards to
the reduction of nonconformities and consistent application of regulations.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the requested amendment to
Modification Permit No. 2002 -049 for encroachments within the front yard setback will not,
under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace,
comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such
proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the
neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and further that the proposed modification is
consistent with the legislative intent of this code for the following reasons:
a) The proposed encroachments will be approximately 60 feet from the existing
sidewalk. This increased distance sufficiently separates the building mass from the
sidewalk especially due to the fact that the height of the proposed residence does not
exceed the adjacent top of curb height, and is actually below the top of curb. The
majority of the proposed encroachment is below grade and will not be visible.
b) The code provides flexibility in the application of land use and development
regulations by way of permitting modification and variance applications. This
procedure is intended to resolve practical and unnecessary physical hardships
resulting from the unique topography and lot configurations that exist in the area
and on this lot.
c) The proposed front yard encroachment is a reasonable design solution given the
topography and location of the site in that the encroachments on the first, second,
and third levels are below the driveway grade levels of the subject property and
cannot be viewed from the street level, and, further, that the proposed
encroachments are on the street side of the property.
d) The proposed modification will not be detrimental to persons, property or
improvements in the neighborhood or increase any detrimental effect of the use in
that the portion of the encroachment that is above grade will not block line of sight
or views from the adjacent property.
e) The proposed modification will not affect the flow of air or light to adjoining
residential properties in that the encroachments are located on the street side of
the property and the required side yard setbacks are maintained.
f) The proposed front yard encroachment will not obstruct views from adjoining
residential properties nor from the public in that the structure is located below the
grade of the sidewalk along Ocean Boulevard, and the views from the adjacent
property are oriented to the south and opposite the side of the dwelling for which
the encroachment is proposed. Views from Inspiration Point are also not affected
as the encroachment is on the north side of the residence and the residence itself
is positioned between the encroachment and the view from Inspiration Point.
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 3 of 5
5) The property is located at the end of the driveway access and no through
circulation is required beyond the property, and sufficient space remains for
vehicular access and maneuvering.
6) The proposed front setback modification will not require changes to the
improvements and natural bluff area located within the public right -of -way abutting
the property.
c) The project has been reviewed and it has been determined that it is categorically
exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under Class
3 (Construction of a single-family residence in a residential zone).
Section 4. Based on the aforementioned findings, the Planning Commission denies
Variance No. 2003 -005 and approves Amendment to Modification Permit No. 2002 -049, subject
to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "K.
Section 5. 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 or this
action is called for review by the City Council in accordance with the provisions of Title 20,
Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2003.
BY:
Earl McDaniel, Chairman
FI-B
Michael Toerge, Secretary
AYES:
ABSENT:
NOES:
J�-
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 4 of 5
EXHIBIT " A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
AMENDMENT TOMODIFICATION PERMIT NO. 2002-049
1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the plot plan, floor plans and
elevations dated July 10, 2003 with the exception of revisions required to eliminate any
encroachments into the 24 -foot height limit and any revisions required by the following
conditions.
2. Amendment to Modification Permit No. 2002 -049 shall expire unless exercised within 24
months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.91.050 of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted.
3. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City Building and Fire
Departments. The project shall comply with all applicable Fire and Building Code
regulations, including the requirement for installation of a sprinkler and fire suppression
system.
4. All improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works
Department.
5. Exiting from each level of the residence shall comply with applicable standards of the Fire
and Building Code.
6. Prior to the issuance of demolition, grading or building permits, the applicant shall
obtain approval from the California Coastal Commission for the demolition of the
existing residence and the construction of the new residence, if necessary.
7. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of
construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and
flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be
conducted in accordance with state and local requirements.
8. Chimney heights shall comply with the regulations specified by section 20.65.070 of the
Zoning Code.
9. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, a drainage plan shall be prepared
and approved by the Building, Public Works and Planning Departments.
10. The project shall conform to the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). Prior to the issuance of grading or building permit for new
construction, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared by the
applicant and submitted for review by the Building, Planning and Public Works
l�
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Paae 5 of 5
Departments. The WQMP shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the
issuance of a grading or building permit for new construction.
11. As part of the submittal requirements for grading and building permits, an extensive
geotechnical investigation and geotechnical report shall be prepared. Included in the
recommendations shall be a shoring plan designed to protect the adjacent properties
and right of way from damage resulting from the temporary removal of lateral support.
12. During excavation and construction, vehicular access to adjacent properties shall be
maintained at all times.
�A
EXHIBIT NO.2
APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION
AND LETTERS OF SUPPORT
�5
F L E E T
W
O
O
D B.
J
O I N E R
&
ASSOCIATES,
INC.
July 21, 2003
Mr. James Campbell
City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92658
RE: TABAK RESIDENCE
3431 Ocean Blvd.
Corona Del Mar, CA. 92625
Reference: Title 20 Municipal Code Variance Request
Modification Permit # MD 2002 -049, Dated 5/29/02
Dear Mr. Campbell,
We are hereby requesting the following variance items. We understand that each item
will be evaluated separately by staff and will also be considered separately for approval
in the public hearing.
1. Variance to Building Height Envelope. A variance is requested for the
reasons of providing privacy and allowing the proposed residence to align with
the existing adjacent structure.
To accomplish this we request to extend the upper two floors of the west
elevation (facing the ocean) 3' -0" beyond the vertical step of the building
envelope, in order to align the proposed building face with the existing adjacent
residence. This will allow privacy from the neighbor's existing deck, which
extends beyond and has potential views back into the proposed residence. In
addition, the variance, if granted, will protect the owner's valuable ocean view
that would otherwise be partially blocked by the neighbor's existing residence.
It should also be noted that the upper floor of the existing residence aligns with
the neighboring home at present, and that the owner simply wants to maintain
this existing alignment.
2. Variance to Front Yard setback. A variance is requested for the reason of
providing additional buildable space below grade, as has been approved for
other homes in the area, due to the topography of the site.
To accomplish this we request to extend a portion of the east elevation wall
(facing the driveway) to a distance of 2' -0" from the property line for a portion of
one story above grade (extending as shown on drawings into the modified front
yard setback), and for three levels below grade (extending 3' wide x 57' long into
the modified front yard setback).
A R C H I T E C T U R E - P L A N N I N G
P. O. BOX 10296 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 Phone (949) 640 -0606
fleetjoiner@earthlink.net
14
A zoning modification, referenced above, has been previously approved by the
City to allow a partial 5'-0° front yard setback. This additional extension would
allow the owner to have more functional floor areas on the lower living levels
within the home, since 45% of the site is required by the California Coastal
Commission to remain undeveloped, and this area is therefore functionally
unusable. The proposed encroachment will not affect any neighbor's views nor
the public's views, since it will be mostly below grade and because the residence
is the last of a string of homes that terminates against Inspiration Point Bluff.
Several neighbors directly adjacent to the proposed residence have reviewed the
attached drawings, and have written letters of endorsement for this improvement to the
neighborhood with the variances requested. These letters are attached for review and
consideration.
The requested variances are considered by the owner to be important in establishing a
functional floor plan for,his family, while'.having little to no negative effect on neighbors'
and public views of the ocean and surrounding land features. In fact, the proposed low
massing of the home (below the maximum average roof height) will enhance the public
views across the flat roof fours, towards the ocean.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Fleetwood B. Joiner and Associates, Inc.
Thomas Stewart, Project Manager
Cc: Lawrence and Lana Tabak
Attachments: Letters of endorsement from local neighbors
Variance application and check for fees
Variance submittal drawings (Architectural)
Address labels
!1
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
To Whom It May Concern:
I have reviewed the plans of our neighbors Lawrence and Lana Tabak, including the
proposed variance they plan to file for, as they will be submitted for public hearing.
I support and endorse this proposal as I feel it will not impair my views in anyway.
Moreover, replacing an outdated dilapidated home with a more modem and attractive
structure will add to the beauty of the neighborhood,
Should you have any questions= please don't hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
/ Y
eAf
J�
City of Newport Beach
Building Department
To Whom It May Concern:
I have reviewed the plans of our neighbors Lawrence and Lana Tabak, including the
proposed variance they plan to file for, as they will be submitted for public hearing.
I support and endorse this proposal as I feel it will not impair my views in any way.
Moreover, replacing an outdated dilapidated home with a more modem and attractive
structure will add to the beauty of the neighborhood.
Should you have any gaestions, please don't hesitate-to call me.
S' ely,
.,r
COQT
(zd✓kl a12 Zs-
9 � 9 V3-.55e) l
�q
City of Newport Beach
Building .Department
To Whom It May Concern:
I have reviewed the plans of our neigbbors Lawrence and Lana Tabak, including the
proposed variance they plan to file for, as they will be submitted for public hearing.
I support and endorse this proposal as I feel it will not impair my views in any way.
Moreover, replacing an outdated dilapidated home with a more modern and attractive
structure will add to the beauty of the neighborhood.
Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate-to call me.
Sincerely,
2,
M3
E�
OCEAN BOULEVARD
PARCEL 3
LOT -7
62.14 FF AT 2ND FLOOR
! Htl8tl1 3Hll x�a i"�°°ao u� ® i Y3 it.,_.4 P < .. -.. ..
00 dOo
BREAKERS DRIVE
BEACH
O
z
>
opt
aMA
W
J
EL
0
CL
CL
0
z
O
m m
CO 0
Z W
O N
t- Ca
g� W w
Eg Cn Q
0
30N30IS38 1Itlfltll 31I1
I
�I
se W
' U
a
' c a
? N Z
W 0
I
U)W
I
LUa)
�I R
i
it
1
man
gill'
fill to
P I
Ef 1 y� y 1
E
pE�
°4
1 a�
gi!
&4
0
30N30IS38 1Itlfltll 31I1
I
�I
se W
' U
a
' c a
? N Z
W 0
I
U)W
I
LUa)
�I R
i
it
1
man
gill'
fill to
P I
Ef 1 y� y 1
E
pE�
°4
1 a�
m�S
S�4
gg
BREAKERS DRIVE
BEACH
�� I
I33N301SM
•NJ I
MtlBtll
W
W m`
OCEAN
BOULEVARD
-
m m
v~
'
22;
Lu
U
m�S
S�4
gg
BREAKERS DRIVE
BEACH
�� I
l
30N30IS3M )MOZ rm
z
OCEAN BOULEVARD
uj
UJI I--
77
CL U) b?
T
"A
C
"X,
BREAKERS DRIVE
BEACH
1:
i Atl9tll 3Hl va
2
flip
o I o I
$ LL H
a
Z
a
a�
LL,
0=
a"'
a�ri�rr�neera .�zr�r>tiu.!��:a�I-
M
F
b
t
CJ
LL �
qg
Z
a
i
J
o
m
0
m- _
J
o
�{
LL
j
i�t
i
s
J
�'
I
H
M
F
b
t
CJ
LL �
qg
U)
z.
LU
U) � 3,
I
El
b 35
LA
ed
U)
z.
LU
U) � 3,
I
F, IN
\f /�
Nil
P
0
R
w
RSllle-�',
--ff
�
/s »� � � � �
,.<,
�
2
\
\ ~\ \
oil
} n
3
LLJ
Ly.
LU
10,
1" a
h
F, IN
\f /�
Nil
P
0
R
w
RSllle-�',
--ff
�