Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-5 - Approving an Appeal and Approving Lot Merger No. LM2013-003 and Staff Approval No. SA2013-011 for a Lot Merger and Alternative Setback Determination and Providing Relief from Council Policy L-2 for Property Located at 106 6th Street and 524 WestRESOLUTION NO. 2014 -5 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING AN APPEAL AND APPROVING LOT MERGER NO. LM2013 -003 AND STAFF APPROVAL NO. SA2013 -011 FOR A LOT MERGER AND ALTERNATIVE SETBACK DETERMINATION AND PROVIDING RELIEF FROM COUNCIL POLICY L -2 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 106 6T" STREET AND 524 WEST OCEAN FRONT (PA2013 -176). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Morgan Davis, with respect to property located at 106 6th Street and 524 West Ocean Front, and legally described as Lot 15, Block 10, East Newport Tract and Parcel 1 of Lot Line Adjustment LLA2001 -008, requesting approval of a Lot Merger and Alternative Setback Determination. 2. The applicant proposes to merge the two lots and requests a waiver of the parcel map requirement. The applicant also requests an Alternative Setback Determination to establish all required setbacks for the merged lot. 3. The subject properties are designated as Single -Unit Residential Detached (RS -D) in the General Plan Land Use Element and are located within the Single -Unit Residential (R -1) Zoning District. 4. The subject properties are located within the coastal zone and the Coastal Land Use Plan category is Single Unit Residential Detached (RSD -C). 5. Zoning Code Section 20.30.110 (C) states that in cases where the orientation of an existing lot and the application of the setback area are not consistent with the character or general orientation of other lots in the vicinity, the Community Development Director may redefine the location of the front, side, and rear setback areas to be consistent with surrounding properties. in this case, so that surrounding property owners would be notified of the application, staff referred the request to the Planning Commission for consideration and final action. 6. A public hearing was held on October 24, 2013, in the Corona del Mar Conference Room at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, related to the requested Lot Merger only. 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 Zoning Administrator at this meeting. The Zoning Administrator referred the Lot Merger application to the Planning Commission to allow for concurrent review with the Alternative Setback Determination. City Council Resolution No. 2014 -5 Paae 2 of 10 7. A public hearing was held on November 21, 2013, in the City Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. 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. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1925 approving the Lot Merger and Alternative Setback Determination. 8. On November 22, 2013, property owner Morgan Davis filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's action due to one of the approved setbacks and the condition of approval requiring the elimination of the curb cut along 6th Street. 9. A public hearing was held by the City Council on January 28, 2014, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. The City Council considered evidence both written and oral presented at this meeting. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 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 under Class 5 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations). 2. Class 5 consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20 percent, which do not result in any changes in land use or density. The proposed project would merge the lots and alter the required setbacks, but will not result in a physical change to the existing lot or structure, or any changes in land use or density. 3. The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. in addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. Lot Merger In accordance with Section 19.68.030 and 19.08.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth in regards to the subject lot merger: City Council Resolution No. 2014 -5 Pace 3 of 10 A. Approval of the merger will not, under the circumstances of this 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 lot merger is consistent with the legislative intent of this title. Facts in Support of Finding: The lot merger to combine two existing legal lots by removing the interior lot line between the lofts will not result in the creation of additional parcels. 2. The project is in an area with an average slope of less than 20 percent. 3. The future development on the proposed parcel will be subject to the Zoning Code development standards, including, floor area, setback requirements, and 3 -car garage parking for a house with over 4,000 square feet of floor area. 4. The Alternative Setback Determination will ensure that setback requirements and future development on the merged lot are consistent with surrounding properties and will provide adequate space for vehicle maneuverability in the alley. B. The lots to be merged are under common fee ownership at the time of the merger. Facts in Support of Finding: The two lots to be merged are under common fee ownership. C. The lots as merged will be consistent or will be more closely compatible with the applicable zoning regulations and will be consistent with other regulations relating to the subject property including, but not limited to, the General Plan and any applicable Coastal Plan or Specific Plan. Facts in Support of Finding: The merged lot will retain the Single -Unit Residential zoning designation, consistent with the surrounding area. The R -1 Zoning District is intended to provide for areas appropriate for a detached single- family residential dwelling units located on a single lot. 2. A minimum of one (1) single -unit dwelling located on the subject lots will be demolished prior to recordation of the Lot Merger, resulting in the merged lot containing one (1) City Council Resolution No. 2014 -5 Paoe 4 of 10 dwelling unit, consistent with the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code. 3. Section 20.18.030 of the Zoning Code establishes minimum lot area and width requirements. Each of the two existing lots provide less than the minimum lot area and lot width requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed merger of the lots would create one 5,250 - square -foot parcel that will be more consistent with the minimum lot standards of the Zoning Code. 4. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the subject site as Single -Unit Residential Detached (RS -D), which applies to a range of single - family residential dwelling units. The Coastal Land Use Plan designates this site as Single -Unit Residential Detatched (RSD -C) which provides for density ranges from 10.0 -19.9 dwelling units per acre. The land use will remain the same and the merger is consistent with the land use designations of the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan. 5. The subject property is not located within a Specific Plan area. Finding: D. Neither the lots as merged nor adjoining parcels will be deprived of legal access as a result of the merger. Facts in Support of Finding: The lots as merged will not be deprived of legal access as the merged lot will abut a street, an alley, and a beach front walk. 2. No adjoining parcels will be deprived of legal access as a result of the merger. The public alleys were developed to provide vehicular access for the properties located in the area, and vehicular access to and from the subject site and adjacent properties would remain via existing public alleys. Finding: E. The lots as merged will be consistent with the pattern of development nearby and will not result in a lot width, depth or orientation, or development site that is incompatible with nearby lots. In making this finding, the review authority may consider the following: a. Whether development of the merged lots could significantly deviate from the pattern of development of adjacent and/or adjoining lots in a manner that would result in an unreasonable detriment to the use and enjoyment of other properties. b. Whether the merged lots would be consistent with the character or general orientation of adjacent andlor adjoining lots. c, Whether the merged lots would be conforming or in greater conformity with the minimum lot width and area standards for the zoning district. City Council Resolution No. 2014 -5 Page 5 of 10 Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The house that could be constructed on the merged lot would be longer than most houses in the area as viewed from 6th Street, but the project views from the alley and West Ocean Front would remain unchanged and would be typical for the area. The overall length of what could be developed from the vantage point of 6th Street is mitigated by a larger setback by providing enhanced building articulation and open space. 2. Several lots in the area have been reoriented to front on West Ocean Front and West Balboa Boulevard, and 6th Street has both front and sides of residential lots and structures facing the street; therefore, the merger would not result in development that is inconsistent with the neighborhood. 3. The standard lot size of lots in the area is 30 feet by 70 feet (2,100 square feet), with nearby lots ranging from 1,830 to 6,289 square feet in area. The lots as merged will result in a 5,250 - square -foot parcel that is larger than the typical lot in the area, but smaller than the minimum 6,000- square -foot lot size requirement of the Zoning Code. Therefore, the lots as merged will not create an excessively large lot that would be incompatible with the surrounding development. 4. While the lots in the immediate vicinity are typically 70 or 90 feet deep, a 120 -foot deep lot is not a significant deviation to the pattern of development to the unreasonable detriment of surrounding properties. 5. Section 20.18.030 of the Zoning Code establishes minimum lot area and width requirements. Each of the two existing lots provide less than the minimum lot area and lot width requirements of the Zoning Code. The proposed merger of the lots would create one 5,250- square -foot parcel that will be more consistent with the minimum lot standards of the Zoning Code. Finding: F. The proposed division of land complies with requirements as to area, improvement and design, flood water drainage control, appropriate improved public roads and property access, sanitary disposal facilities, water supply availability, environmental protection, and other applicable requirements of this title, the Zoning Code, the General Plan, and any applicable Coastal Plan or Specific Plan. IMM •.• . . s 1. Future improvements on the site will be required to comply with the development standards of the Municipal Code, General Plan, and Coastal Land Use Plan. 2. The proposed lot merger combines the properties into a single parcel of land and does not result in the elimination of more than one lot. City Council Resolution No. 2014 -5 Paae 6 of 10 3. Approval of the proposed lot merger would remove the existing interior lot line, and allow the property to be used as a single site. The proposed lot would comply with all design standards and improvements required for new subdivisions by Title 19, General Plan, and Coastal Land Use Plan. 4. The subject property is not subject to a Speck Plan. Alternative Setback Determination In accordance with Zoning Code Section 20.30.110 (C), the following findings are set forth in regards to the subject Alternative Setback Determination: 1. The Municipal Code does not set forth any required findings for the approval of Alternative Setback Determinations. The application was reviewed for compatibility with the neighborhood based on setback area, floor area ratio (FAR), and other development standards, to ensure that alternative setbacks do not result in development that would be incompatible with and not detrimental to the neighborhood. 2. The application of the standard Single -Unit Residential (R -1) setbacks will result in a buildable area inconsistent with other lots in the vicinity and in the R -1 Zoning District by establishing a 10 -foot rear setback adjacent to a side setback and a 3 -foot side setback along a narrow alley when typically a rear yard setback of 5 feet would be required. 3. The alternative setback determination will not be detrimental to the neighborhood. The 5 -foot side setback to the alley will improve vehicular maneuverability in the alley and be consistent with how typical alley setbacks are regulated. The 3 -foot interior side setback and 8 -foot front setback requirements are consistent with surrounding properties. The 8 -foot street side setback will increase building articulation and open space mitigating the overall length of the building as viewed from 6th Street. The application of the alternative setbacks will allow development of the property with a floor area ratio that is comparable with nearby lots. Council Policy L -2 Council Policy L -2 does not allow vehicular access from a street where a property has adequate access from a public alley. The following findings are set forth in regards to relief from Council Policy L -2: 1. The property has an existing curb cut on 6th Street and the relocation of the curb cut would retain the existing number of five (5) on- street parking spaces. 2. The alley to the rear of the property is narrow and turns at a right angle, which negatively affects the functionality of a tandem- four -car garage; and the project would improve overall maneuverability within the alley as a whole. City Council Resolution No. 2014 -5 Paae 7 of 10 3. Due to e Street being a low traffic volume street, backing out of a garage directly onto 611' Street would not create a concern. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, hereby resolves as follows: Approve Lot Merger No. LM2013 -003 and Staff Approval No. SA2013 -011, approving the appeal, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A and subject to the setbacks set forth in Exhibit B, which are attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 2. Approve relief from Council Policy L -2, allowing a curb cut on 6u' Street. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2014. ATTEST: - ` ? 4=g=Q'T�— MAYOR CITY CLERK v City Council Resolution No. 2014 -5 Paae 8 of 10 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. 2. Should the property be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by either the property owner or the leasing agent. 3. Prior to recordation of the lot merger, one or both dwelling units shall be demolished to ensure that no more than one (1) single -unit dwelling exists on the merged lot. 4. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for construction to cross the existing interior lot line between the two lots proposed to be merged, recordation of the lot merger documents with the County Recorder shall be required. 5. The reconstructed curb cut shall have a maximum width of 17 feet for the approach bottom and a maximum width of 23 feet for the curb opening, subject to approval of the Public Works Department. 6. The 5 -foot side setback to the alley shall remain free and clear of any obstructions. There shall be no parking of vehicles within the 5 -foot setback. 7. All improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 8. An encroachment permit is required for all work activities within the public right -of -way. 9. Lot Merger No. LM2013 -003 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.54.060 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted. 10. 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 Davis Lot Merger and Setback Determination including, but not limited to, the Lot Merger No. LM2013 -003 and Staff Approval SA2013- 011. 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 City Council Resolution No. 2014 -5 Paae 9 of 10 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. City Council Resolution No. 2014 -5 Paqe 10 of 10 WEST BALBOA BLVD. w W co I 701 WEST OCEAN FRONT 35' 35' 524 West Ocean Front and 106 6th Street PA2013 -176 Determination of Alternative Setback Area Locations 0 10 20 Feet ;14 11 STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE J ss. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH } 1, Leilani 1. Brown, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 2014 -5 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council, duly and regularly held on the 28th day of January, 2014, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: Ayes: Gardner, Petros, Selich, Curry, Henn, Daigle, Mayor Hill Nays: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of said City this 291h day of January, 2014. if�Ait) a /K City Clerk Newport Beach, California (Seal)