HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-52 - 2808 and 2812 Lot MergerRESOLUTION NO. 2012 -52
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH, APPROVING LOT MERGER NO. LM2011 -002 TO MERGE
THE FOLLOWING PROPERTIES, UNDER COMMON OWNERSHIP:
PORTIONS OF LOTS 4, 5, AND 6 OF BLOCK 34 LOCATED IN
CORONA DEL MAR, MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS 2808 AND 2812
OCEAN BOULEVARD (PA2011 -141).
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. An application was filed by the John Guida Trust and the Julie Guida Trust, with respect to
properties located at 2808 and 2812 Ocean Boulevard, and legally described as Portions of Lots
4, 5, and 6 of Block 34 of Corona del Mar requesting approval of a lot merger.
2. The applicants propose a lot merger for the following property under common ownership:
portions of Lots 4, 5, and 6 of Block 34 located in Corona del Mar. Also included in the
application is a request to waive the requirement to file a parcel map.
3. The subject property is located within the Single -Unit Residential (R -1) Zoning District and the
General Plan Land Use Element category is Single -Unit Residential Detached (RS -D) and the
subject property is not identified in the housing sites inventory contained in the City's adopted
Housing Element.
4. The subject property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan category is
Single -Unit Residential Detached (RSD -B).
5. A public hearing was held by the Zoning Administrator on September 14, 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 Zoning
Administrator at this meeting.
6. Based on the facts of finding for approval and subject to the conditions of approval in the
Zoning Administrator Action Letter, the Zoning Administrator approved the proposed lot
merger application.
7. On September 23, 2011, the Zoning Administrator's decision to approve Lot Merger No.
LM2011 -022 was appealed by Mr. Clifford Jones (2800 Ocean Boulevard), Ms. Joan Campbell
(2811 Ocean Lane), and Mr. John Silva (2821 Ocean Lane).
8. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on October 20, 2011, in the City Hall
Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. The Planning
Commission 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. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the
Planning Commission at this meeting.
9. The Planning Commission determined that the required findings for approval could not be
made and reversed the decision for approval of the Zoning Administrator thereby denying the
application.
10. On October 27, 2011, Mr. John Guida filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's action.
11. A public hearing was held by the City Council on January 24, 2012, 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.
12. The applicant requested that the City Council continue the appeal in order to allow him time to
develop and present voluntary alternative development standards more restrictive than those
required by the Zoning Code for development of the merged property.
13. The City Council voted unanimously to continue the hearing and refer the matter back to the
Planning Commission for reconsideration, directing the Planning Commission to make a
recommendation of approval or denial of the lot merger based on a review of the applicant's
proposed alternative development standards.
14. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on March 22, 2012, 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.
15. At the hearing, the applicant voluntarily proposed alternative development standards which are
more restrictive than those required by the Zoning Code: 1.0 floor area limit (FAL), 6- foot -side
setbacks, and maximum height - 15 feet 6 inches measured from an established grade of 70.2'
(NAVD88), which is calculated pursuant to the Zoning Code requirements. The applicant
proposed these alternative development standards with the goal of ensuring that the mass and
scale of future development on the merged property would be compatible with the neighboring
properties and surrounding area.
16. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the lot merger to the City Council with
alternative development standards proposed by the applicant, plus additional restrictions that
limit the floor area to 0.75 of the buildable area, and reduce the height limit proposed by the
applicant by 3 feet by measuring from an established grade of 67.2' (NAVD88) rather than
70.2' (NAVD88) as required by the Zoning Code and proposed by the applicant. The Planning
Commission also recommended that the condition of approval related to the applicant's
restrictive covenant be subject to enforcement by the City and the property owners at 2811
and 2821 Ocean Lane.
17. A public hearing was held by the City Council on April 24, 2012, 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.
18. A memorandum received from staff recommended continuation of the item to May 8, 2012, to
allow the applicant sufficient time to prepare and execute a restrictive covenant that would include
development standards as voluntarily proposed by the applicant. The City Council approved a
motion to continue the item to May 8, 2012.
19. A public hearing was held by the City Council on May 8, 2012, 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 City Council at this meeting.
20. For the public hearing, the applicant provided a signed document entitled "Restrictive
Covenant." The document stated that the applicant will comply with the following voluntarily
proposed alternative development standards:
o Floor Area Limit (FAL):
1.0 (1.0 x 9,488.02 square feet = 9,488.02 square feet)
Subterranean basements shall not be included in maximum FAL (per Newport
Beach Zoning Code)
o Maximum height for flat roof:
- 34 percent up to 15 feet 6 inches (floor of roof deck)*
- 33 percent up to 15 feet (measured to top of roof)
- 33 percent up to 14 feet (measured to top of roof)
- "Established Grade" for the purpose of measuring height for the principal structure
shall be 70.2' (NAVD88)
*Roof deck railings shall be transparent. Roof deck railings may exceed the maximum
height, but shall be no higher than the minimum height required by the latest California
Building Code.
o Setbacks:
- Front — 20 feet
- Rear — 10 feet
- Right Side — 6 feet
- Left Side — 6 feet
21. During the public comment period, the applicant also stated that the Restrictive Covenant
would be amended to further restrict the allowed floor area limit (FAL) from 1.0 to 0.75, as
recommended by the Planning Commission at its March 22, 2012, meeting.
22. After the public comment period and discussion of the issues, the City Council voted to
continue the appeal to the June 26, 2012, meeting in order to allow City staff to facilitate
meetings between the applicant and surrounding neighbors to try to resolve issues related to
the applicant's voluntarily proposed alternative development standards.
23. On June 18, 2012, the applicant provided the City with a copy of a document entitled
"Restrictive Covenant" that incorporated revisions to the original document provided to the City
Council at the May 8, 2012, City Council meeting. The applicant proposes to record the
restrictive covenant with the Orange County Recorder's Office as a deed restriction against the
merged property, if the lot merger is approved.
24. As stated in the revised "Restrictive Covenant" provided to the City June 18, 2012, the
applicant proposes the following voluntary alternative development standards:
o Floor Area Limit (FAQ:
- 0.75 (0.75 x9,488.02 square feet = 7,116 square feet)
- Subterranean basements shall not be included in maximum FAL (per Newport
Beach Zoning Code)
G Maximum heicht for flat roof or top of floor of roof deck:
- 14 feet
- "Established Grade" for the purpose of measuring height for the principal structure
shall be 68.7' (NAVD88)
*Roof deck railings shall be transparent. Roof deck railings may exceed the maximum
height, but shall be no higher than the minimum height required by the latest California
Building Code.
o Setbacks:
- Front — 20 feet
- Rear — 10 feet
- Right Side — 6 feet
- Left Side — 6 feet
25. Pursuant to the regulations of Categorical Exclusion Order (CEO) E -77 -5 for single -unit and
two -unit dwellings located within the Coastal Zone, CEO No. 23 -11 for the demolition of the
single - family residences located on the subject properties was issued September 27, 2011,
and became effective October 7, 2011. Demolition permit X2011 -2490 was issued by the
City's Building Division on October 11, 2011. On June 13, 2012, the applicant exercised the
permit and demolished the existing single - family residences.
26. A public hearing was held by the City Council on June 26, 2012, 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 City Council at this
meeting.
27. Based on the following facts of finding for approval and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval, the City Council approved the proposed lot merger application reversing the
Planning Commission's decision of denial at its October 20, 2011, meeting.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
The City Council find this project exempt from CEQA, pursuant to Section 15303 (Class 3 — New
Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), Section 15305 (Class 5 - Minor Alterations in
Land Use Limitations), and Section 15 (Class 15 — Minor Land Divisions) of the Implementing
Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), because it has no potential to
have a significant effect on the environment.
The proposed project involves the merger of two lots into one parcel and the lot is zoned for
single - family residential use. In this case, the following exemptions are applicable:
Class 5 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) exempts projects which consist of
minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than twenty
percent, which do not result in any changes in land use or in density, including but not
limited to, minor lot line adjustments not resulting in the creation of any new parcel. The
existing and proposed properties have a slope less than twenty percent. The Land Use
Element of the General Plan designates the subject properties as Single -Unit Residential
Detached (RS -D), which is intended to provide primarily for single - family residential units
on a single legal lot and does not include condominiums or cooperative housing. The
Coastal Land Use Plan designates the properties as Single -Unit Residential Detached
(RSD -B) which provides for density ranges from 6.0 -9.9 DU /AC. The Zoning Code
designation is Single -Unit Residential (R -1), which is also intended for single - family
residential development. The existing development of single -unit dwellings on each
property and the proposed development of a single -unit dwelling on the merged site are
consistent with these designations.
Class 15 (Minor Land Divisions, Section 15315) exempts divisions of property zoned for
residential use into four or fewer parcels when in conformance with the General Plan and
zoning, no variances or exceptions are required and all services and access are available.
In this case, the parcel merger will combine the existing lots into one parcel and the
resulting lot complies with the General Plan and zoning. Additionally, access is provided
and all services are available.
Anticipated re- development on the merged lot would be limited to construction of a single
family home and typical accessory structures. This activity would qualify for a Class 3
Exemption.
Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, Section 15303) exempts
projects that consist of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities
or structures and includes construction of one single - family dwelling unit in a residential
zone.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
In accordance with Section 19.68.030.H of Title 19 (Subdivision Code: Lot Mergers, Required
Findings) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the following findings and facts in support of such
findings are set forth:
Finding
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 Title 19.
Facts in Support of the Finding:
A -1. The future development on the proposed parcel will comply with the Zoning Code
development standards.
A -2. The proposed merger will not cause future development to impact public views of the ocean as
no public view presently exists.
A -3. The project site described in the proposal consists of legal building sites.
A -4. The lot merger to combine the existing legal lots by removing the interior lot lines between them
will not result in the creation of additional parcels.
A -5. The project is in an area with an average slope less than 20 percent and no changes in land
use or increase in density will occur as a result of the merger.
Finding
B. The lots to be merged are under common fee ownership at the time of the merger.
Facts in Support of the Finding:
B -1. The portions of lots 4, 5, and 6 to be merged are under common ownership
Finding
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 the Finding:
C -1. The previously existing single -unit dwellings located on the subject sites have been demolished,
and the proposed lot would be redeveloped with a new single -unit dwelling. Section 20.18.030 of
the Zoning Code establishes minimum lot area and width requirements. Each of the two existing
lots meet the minimum lot area required, but do not meet the minimum lot width required (50
feet). The proposed merger would create one lot, which would comply with the minimum lot width
and lot area standards required by the Zoning Code.
C -2. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the subject properties as Single -Unit
Residential Detached (RS -D), which is intended to provide primarily for single - family residential
units on a single legal lot and does not include condominiums or cooperative housing. The
subject properties are not identified in the Housing Sites Inventory contained in the City's adopted
Housing Element. The Coastal Land Use Plan designates the properties as Single -Unit
Residential Detached (RSD -B) which provides for density ranges from 6.0 -9.9 DU /AC. The
density ranges, polices and narrative of the CLUP indicate that the density range is
representative of the predominant development of the entire RSD -B area in old Corona del
Mar and that development should not exceed the maximum density. The lot merger does not
cause the maximum density for the area to be exceeded. The Zoning Code designation is
Single -Unit Residential (R -1), which is also intended for single - family residential development.
The existing development of single -unit dwellings on each property and the proposed
development of a single -unit dwelling on the merged site are consistent with these designations.
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 the Finding:
D -1. Vehicular access to and from the subject site and adjacent properties is available via an ingress
and egress easement at the rear of the site. Should the ingress and egress easement be
terminated, vehicular access is possible from Ocean Boulevard at the front of the existing or
merged parcels.
Finding
E. The lots as merged will be consistent with the surrounding pattern of development and will not
create an excessively large lot that is not compatible with the surrounding development.
Facts in Support of the Finding:
E -1. Corona del Mar consists of lots of varying shapes and sizes. The subject lots, as merged, will
result in a parcel with a width of 80 feet and area of 13,678 square feet. Other nearby lots on
Ocean Boulevard have lot widths as wide as 73 feet and area as large as 13,325 square feet.
The merger of the two lots will not create an excessively large lot in comparison to many of the
existing lots in the surrounding area.
E -2. Under the City's Zoning Ordinance, development within the R -1 (Single -Unit Residential) Zoning
District within Corona del Mar can have a maximum floor area limit (FAQ 1.5 times the buildable
area of the lot. The applicant has provided a copy of a signed "Restrictive Covenant" setting forth
more restrictive alternative development standards for height, side setbacks, and maximum floor
area.
Finding
F. That 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.
Facts in Support of the Finding:
F -1. The existing lots do not meet the lot width standards of the Zoning Code. The proposed lot would
comply with the design standards and improvements required by the Zoning Code, General Plan,
and Coastal Land Use Plan.
F -2. The proposed lot merger combines the lot portions into a single parcel of land and does not result
in the elimination of more than three lot portions. In this case, pursuant to Title 19: Subdivision
Code, Section 19.08.030 ( Waiver of a Parcel Map Requirement), the requirement for approval of
a parcel map may be waived.
F -3. Approval of the proposed lot merger would remove the existing interior lot lines, and allow the
property to be redeveloped as a single site. The proposed lot would comply with all design
standards and improvements required for new subdivisions by Title 19 and the Zoning Code. The
Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the subject properties as Single -Unit
Residential Detached (RS -D), which is intended to provide primarily for single - family residential
units on a single legal lot and does not include condominiums or cooperative housing. The
subject properties are not identified in the Housing Sites Inventory contained in the City's adopted
Housing Element.The Coastal Land Use Plan designates the properties as Single -Unit
Residential Detached (RSD -B) which provides for density ranges from 6.0 -9.9 DU /AC. The
density ranges, policies and narrative of the CLUP indicate that the density range is
representative of the predominant development of the entire RSD -B area in old Corona del
Mar and that development should not exceed the maximum density. The lot merger does not
cause the maximum density for the area to be exceeded. The Zoning Code designation is
Single -Unit Residential (R -1), which is also intended for single - family residential development.
The existing development of single -unit dwellings on each property and the proposed
development of a single -unit dwelling on the merged site are consistent with these designations.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE TO:
Approve Lot Merger No. LM2011 -002 with the alternative development standards as voluntarily
proposed by the applicant, and waive the requirement to file a parcel map for property, under
common ownership, consisting of portions of Lots 4, 5, and 6 of Block 34 located in Corona del
Mar, and subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and
incorporated by reference. This approval reverses the decision of denial of the Planning
Commission on October 20, 2011.
2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City
Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
3. 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.
4. This resolution was approved, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Newport Beach, held on the 26th day of June, 2012.
MAYOR
ATTEST
MIA- /�
CITY CLERK
y- d �.y1r �IffI
EXHIBIT "A'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Pursuant to Chapter 19.68.030.E (Lot Mergers) and 19.08.030.E (Waiver of Parcel Map
Requirement), the applicant shall file a document, approved by the City in writing, specifying
the names of the record owners of the fee interest and particularly describing the real property
with a site map for recordation with the Orange County Recorder.
Prior to recordation of the lot merger, grant deeds indicating any changes in titles of ownership
should be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval and all other
actions to support the findings approving the lot merger shall be submitted to the Community
Development Director.
3. The lot merger and grant deeds reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department
should be filed concurrently with the Orange County Recorder and County Assessor's Offices.
4. Prior to issuance of the building permit for any new construction on the property, the Planning
Division shall verify recordation of the lot merger with the Orange County Recorder. The
design of the development shall not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large
for access through or use of property within the proposed development.
5. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit written evidence to the
satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that a certified archaeologist,
paleontologist, and representative (s) of interested cultural organization(s) have been retained
to observe grading activities and salvage and catalogue fossils and artifacts as necessary.
They shall be present at the pre -grade conference, shall establish procedures for
archaeological, paleontological, and cultural resource surveillance and shall establish, in
cooperation with the City, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit
sampling, identification, and evaluation of the findings. If major archaeological, paleontological,
and /or cultural resources are discovered, which require long -term halting or redirecting of
grading, such findings shall be reported to the City and the applicant. The archaeologist,
paleontologist, and /or representative (s) of interested cultural organization(s) shall determine
appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, which ensure proper exploration and /or
salvage. Excavated finds shall be offered to the City, or its designee, on a first - refusal basis.
The applicant may retain said finds if written assurance is provided that they will be properly
preserved in Orange County, unless said finds are of a special significance, or a museum in
Orange County indicates a desire to study and /or display them at the time, in which case items
shall be donated to the City, or designee.
7. All improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works
Department.
8. The existing broken and /or otherwise damaged concrete sidewalk panels along the Ocean
Boulevard frontage shall be reconstructed. Limits of the reconstruction shall be determined by
the City Public Works Inspector.
9. All existing drainage facilities in the public right -of -way, including the existing curb drains along
Ocean Boulevard, shall be retrofitted to comply with the City's on -site, non -storm runoff
retention requirements.
10. All on -site drainage shall comply with the latest City water quality requirements.
11. All existing private, non - standard improvements within the public right -of -way and /or
extensions of private, non - standard improvements into the public right -of -way fronting the
development site shall be removed.
12. New sod or low groundcovers, as approved by the City, shall be installed within the parkway
fronting the development site along Ocean Boulevard.
13. An encroachment permit is required for all work activities within the public right -of -way.
14. All improvements shall comply with the City's sight distance requirement. See City Standard
110 -L.
15. The existing sewer lateral to be used for the future dwelling unit shall have a sewer cleanout
installed within the utilities easement per STD - 406 -L. All other laterals to be abandoned shall
be capped at the property line.
16. All unused water services to be abandoned shall be capped at the corporation stop.
17. In case of damage done to public improvements surrounding the development site by the
private construction, additional reconstruction within the public right -of -way could be required
at the discretion of the Public Works Inspector.
18. All applicable Public Works Department plan check fees shall be paid prior to review of the lot
merger and grant deeds.
19. No building permits may be issued until the appeal period has expired, unless otherwise
approved by the Planning Division.
20. This approval shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as
specified in Section 20.93.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
21. 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 2808 and 2812
Ocean Boulevard Lot Merger including, but not limited to, Lot Merger No. LM2011 -002
(PA2011 -141). 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.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } ss.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH }
I, Leilani I. 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. 2012 -52 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 26'h day of June, 2012, and that the same
was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit:
Ayes: Hill, Rosansky, Curry, Selich, Henn, Mayor Gardner
Noes: Daigle
Absent: None
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of
said City this 27th day of June, 2012.
Am , W- -
City Clerk '
Newport Beach, California
(Seal)