HomeMy WebLinkAboutHO2016-002 - Reasonable Accommodation No. RA2016-001 - 2294 Channel Road RESOLUTION NO. H02016-002
A RESOLUTION OF THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING REASONABLE
ACCOMMODATION NO. RA2016-001 FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 2294 CHANNEL ROAD (PA2016-075)
THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. An application was filed by Charles and Marjorie Ryffel, with respect to property located
at 2294 Channel Road, and legally described as Tract 518, Lot 1, Block P, requesting
approval of a reasonable accommodation.
2. The applicant has submitted a reasonable accommodation application requesting relief
from the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.18.030 (Residential Zoning
Districts General Development Standards) to allow an elevator to encroach within the
required side setback area and to exceed the height limit of an existing single-family
home. The proposed elevator is approximately 6 feet 6 inches wide, encroaches into the
required side setback area (minimum 4 feet required, 3 feet 6 inches proposed), and
exceeds the allowed height for flat roofs (maximum 24 feet permitted, 31 feet 11 inches
proposed). The elevator is requested to provide access to the residence for an individual
with a disability. The existing residence is nonconforming related to the side setback and
height, providing a side setback of 3 feet and a maximum height of 37 feet 2 inches.
3. The subject property is located within the R-1 (Single-Unit Residential) Zoning District
and the General Plan Land Use Element category is RS-D (Single-Unit Residential
Detached).
4. The subject property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan
category is RSD-C (Single-Unit Residential Detached).
5. Chapter 20.52.070 (Reasonable Accommodations) of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code (NBMC) provides reasonable accommodations in the City's zoning and land use
regulations, policies, and practices when needed to provide an individual with any
disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.
6. A public hearing was held on June 27, 2016 in the Corona del Mar Conference Room
(Bay E-1st Floor) at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and
purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal
Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the
Hearing Officer at this meeting.
7. The hearing was presided over by William B. Conners, Municipal Law Consultant,
Hearing Officer for the City of Newport Beach.
Hearing Officer Resolution No. HO2016-002
Page 2 of 7
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
1. This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, California
Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential to have a significant
effect on the environment.
2. The project involves a minor addition and alterations to an existing single-family
residence involving the addition of an elevator within the side setback area.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
In accordance with Section 20.52.070(D)(2) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the
following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
i. That the requested accommodation is requested by or on behalf of one or more
individuals with a disability protected under the Fair Housing Laws.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. A letter from Tahseen Mozaffar, MD FAAN has been submitted by the applicant
supporting this claim and the need for convenient elevator access. The statement
indicates that the property will be occupied by an individual with a disability that
results in progressive weakness. The statement also indicates that the installation
of an elevator is necessary for the individual to access the upper levels of the
home, as a stair lift/chair is no longer providing sufficient access.
Finding:
ii. That the requested accommodation is necessary to provide one or more individuals with a
disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The elevator within the side setback is needed to gain reasonable access to the
upper levels of the residence for a person with a disability to more fully enjoy the
use of the home. Bedrooms and recreation areas are located on the upper levels.
2. In a letter dated April 27, 2016 by Pete Laux of Designdlaux, the project designer
states that alternative elevator locations within the home are infeasible due to the
age of the home and the unknown structural alterations that would be necessary.
3. With consideration of the factors provided by NBMC Section 20.52.070(D)(3-4), the
requested reasonable accommodation is necessary to provide the disabled
05-26-2016
Hearing Officer Resolution No. HO2016-002
Page 3 of 7
individual an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. If the requested
accommodation is granted, the disabled person will be able to access the upper
levels of the residence, thereby enhancing their quality of life. Any modifications
necessary to make the upper levels accessible cannot be accommodated within
the existing residence without more significant disruption to the interior of the
home. Approval of the accommodation will not alter the character of the
neighborhood, nor will it increase traffic or affect parking.
Finding:
iii. That the requested accommodation will not impose an undue financial or administrative
burden on the City as "undue financial or administrative burden"is defined in Fair Housing
Laws and interpretive case law.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Allowing the construction of an elevator within the side setback and exceeding
maximum height would not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on
the City. The administrative costs of processing the building permit will be offset by
normal building permit fees.
Finding:
iv. That the requested accommodation will not result in a fundamental alteration in the nature
of the City's zoning program, as "fundamental alteration" is defined in Fair Housing Laws
and interpretive case law.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The proposed accommodation would not result in any fundamental alterations to
the character and use of home or the neighborhood. The existing home provides
nonconforming side setbacks, and the proposed elevator will provide a greater
setback than what currently exists. Additionally, the existing residence is
nonconforming related to height, and the proposed elevator will have a maximum
height below what currently exists.
2. The proposed elevator would not intensify the existing single-unit residential use
and therefore would not undermine the express purpose or land use identified by
the City's General Plan.
Finding:
V. That the requested accommodation will not, under specific facts of the case, result in a
direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals or substantial physical damage to
the property of others.
05-26-2016
Hearing Officer Resolution No. HO2016-002
Page 4 of 7
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The elevator would be constructed in accordance with the required Building and
Safety Codes; therefore, the proposed project would not pose a threat to the health
or safety of other individuals or substantial physical damage to the property of
others. The approval of this Reasonable Accommodation is conditioned such that
the applicant is required to obtain all necessary permits in accordance with the
Building Code and other applicable Codes.
2. The proposed deviations from development standards, including encroaching into
the side setback area and exceeding the height limit, are less than the existing
setback and building height nonconformities. The structure has not proven to be
detrimental to the occupants of the property, nearby properties, neighborhood, or
City.
Finding:
vi. For housing located in the coastal zone, a request for reasonable accommodation under
this section may be approved by the City if it is consistent with the findings provided in
subsection (D)(2) of this section; with Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act of 1976; with
the Interpretative Guidelines for Coastal Planning and Permits established by the
California Coastal Commission dated February 11, 1977, and any subsequent
amendments, under the Local Coastal Program.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. In accordance with Section 30212 of the California Coastal Act, the proposed
modifications to the residence are not classified as new development and are
exempt from the California Coastal Act requirement for a Coastal Development
Permit since the modifications to the existing residence do not result an increase of
gross floor area, height, or bulk of the structure by more than 10 percent.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Hearing Officer of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves Reasonable
Accommodation No. RA2016-001 (PA2016-075), 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 14 days following the date this Resolution
was adopted 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.
05-26-2016
Hearing Officer Resolution No. HO2016-002
Page 5 of 7
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2016.
l' B. d6nners'
Hearing Officer for the City of Newport Beach
05-26-2016
Hearing Officer Resolution No. HO2016-002
Page 6 of 7
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor
plans and building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval. (Except
as modified by applicable conditions of approval.)
2. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City's Building
Division and Fire Department. The construction plans must comply with the most
recently, City-adopted version of the California Building Code. The construction plans
must meet all applicable State Disabilities Access requirements.
3. The exterior wall adjacent to property line must be one-hour construction per table
R302.1 (1) California Building Code (CBC).
4. The overhang construction adjacent to property line must be one-hour rated
construction per table R3002.1 (1) CBC.
5. The reasonable accommodation shall lapse if the exercise of rights granted by it are
discontinued for at least one hundred eighty(180) consecutive days.
6. Because of the substantial cost of this improvement, and because the elevator can
effectively be used by future owners of the property and are physically integrated into the
residential structure and cannot be easily removed or altered to make the residence
comply with the Zoning Code, the reasonable accommodation shall remain indefinitely
unless the Director determines that the modifications authorized by this reasonable
accommodation application are subject to removal under the NBMC and it is appropriate
to require such removal. It is the intent of the Hearing Officer based on the findings of
this case that the elevator remain indefinitely.
7. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless
specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
8. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Material violation of
any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this Use
Permit.
9. A copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit "A" shall be
incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans prior to issuance of the
building permits.
10. This approval shall expire and become void unless exercised within 24 months from the
actual date of review authority approval, except where an extension of time is approved
in compliance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code.
05-26-2016
Hearing Officer Resolution No. HO2016-002
Page 7 of 7
11. 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 2294 Channel Road Reasonable Accommodation
including, but not limited to, Reasonable Accommodation No. RA2016-001 (PA2016-
075). 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.
05-26-2016