Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07_Argent LLC Lot Merger_PA2018-261 Q��W PO Rr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH y0 e� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT F t n 100 Civic Center Drive V )1C~j Z Newport Beach,California 92660 4W `p. 949 644-3200 Gq<�F00.P newportheachca.gov/communitydevelopment Memorandum To: Zoning Administrator From: Liz Westmoreland, Assistant Planner Date: May 21, 2019 Re: Item No. 7 - Argent LLC Lot Merger (PA2018-261) Zoning Administrator Hearing May 30, 2019 The Argent LLC. Lot Merger Application was continued from the April 25th Zoning Administrator Hearing date, to the May 16th Zoning Administrator Hearing, and then the May 30th Zoning Administrator hearing in order to resolve a mapping discrepancy. The Staff Report, Resolution, and Lot Merger Exhibits incorrectly cite the depth of the lot as approximately 173 feet. The length of the lot was incorrectly shown on past records, and the error was carried over to the draft Lot Merger Exhibits. However, the surveyor has updated the exhibits to reflect the accurate depths of the lots as merged (approximately 191 feet). The revised lot merger exhibit is included as Attachment A. The revised resolution has been updated to reflect this change and is included as Attachment B. Attachments: A Revised Project Plans B Revised Draft Resolution Community Development Depa Attachment A Revised Project Plans Tmplc-02/05/15 A2 EXHIBIT (`B" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT MERGER NO. LM _10 16 - 0 0 6 MAP OWNER OWNER OWNER ARGENT, LLC 048-231-10 PARCEL 1 ARGENT, LLC 048-231-41 PARCEL 1 LOT 3 ,00,00,E I 190.96' LOT 3 i t 10L35" 54.09' s I^ (30.264 97.00' (974 7A I wl (30 I$ 1 $ LOT 2 SAI /�l W — — f 553M' y 11 ► <11�C�` J ci I BAY AVE. ^I f O � � ABANDONED oo4� sl � PARCEL 1 v� • I �. Z Iy LOT 1 si (3a) I= Ld J � 7• s� i J _ Iri N00.00'00'E 173.37' 190.96' >>b z 19.59' _ _176.37' n f H N00' 00.00'E STREET C,L - L. .z LEGEND OF SYMBO 3c= BOUNDARY OF NEW PARCEL 1 PARCEL AREA PER THIS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PARCEL No. AREA nf EXIST. SCALE V = 30' REMOVED T LINE TO BE PARCEL 1 11,457.60 S.F. . — EXIST.- EXIST. LOT UNE PREPARED BY: INDICATES RECORD DATA pUCA—McCoy �IINC. PER M.M. 4/20 AND M.M. 6/15 >Y QBE" ^•its 3840 E. COAtT HWY. 9 OR NA DEL MAR, CA 92625 ; �949� 675-4487 No. 24668 P---Q 1 �Lc4. k Exo_e s_is'�q P TE J. DUC R.C.E. 24668 DATE cIwL F�UeentCDD1$nWeOwamnWlanninp qN,pn�q�.�nonaLLABLMUn/a_U�M_Rer_MpZte.Uom, UPd~ ijs As EXHIBIT "C" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT MERGER NO. LM . 2 01 SITE PLAN ARGENT, LLC 048-231-40 PARCEL 1 ARGENT, LLC 048-231-41 PARCEL 1 I I I LOT 3 I ,�,�E I LOT 3 l r 181.35" 190.%' I3 Q 54.09' . ' ( 79 �I 4 L❑ 2 I (30) CDNc .1`S 10EXISTING a' ° —I I 1 �RC HOUSE C> sI I SAND I BAY AVE, .: CSO�<\ j W �I ABANDONED a W �" N� ( +{ PARCEL 1 O0� 8 z LOT 1 1s I DECPO.' 8I W J � ss. v' � J Ili i - .173.37'. I Q cc733 �^' in N00.00'O'E 190.96' 13 19.59' 176.37' + I ND'00'00'E 193,96' H STREET C,L. oil VizLEGEND OFOF SYMBw r33 BOUNDARY OF NEW PARCEL 1 PARCEL AREA PER THIS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PARCEL No. EXIST. LOT LINE TO BE SCALE V 30' REMOVED PARCEL 1 11,457.60 S.F. = PREPARED BY: — — EXIST. LOT LINE UCA-McCoy INC. INDICATES RECORD AD AM.M. 6 15 PER M.M. 4 R840E.E. COAT HWY. ;' ��= 1`D COR NA DEL MAR, CA 92625 (g(C4>9) 67DEL MA f - No. 2464 n n pri PETE J. DUC R.C.E. 24668 DATE , , ' F:IUNIMCDD"'W*d.(QmnW4mmng-"L -wi PPI a onslLABLM\IMo I -LM Rev_Wo218.00u UPdaled 1/041188 A /1 Attachment B Revised Resolution of Approval Tmplc-02/05/15 AJC RESOLUTION NO. ZA2019-### A RESOLUTION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING LOT MERGER NO. LM2018-006 AND A WAIVER OF THE PARCEL MAP REQUIREMENT, FOR A LOT MERGER LOCATED AT 1601 EAST BAY AVENUE (PA2018-261) THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. An application was filed by Swift Slip & Dock with respect to property located at 1601 East Bay Avenue and described as APN 048 231 40 and 048 231 41 requesting approval of a Lot Merger. 2. The applicant proposes to merge three underlying legal lots including Parcel 1 of LLA 2004-003, the abandoned right-of-way of Bay Avenue, and Lot 1 and Lot 2 of Block P. The applicant requests to waive the parcel map requirements for properties under common ownership. 3. The subject property is designated Single-Unit Residential Detached (RS-D) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Single-Unit Residential (R-1) Zoning District. 4. The subject property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan category is Single Unit Residential Detached —(6.0—9.9 DU/AC)(RSD-B) and it is located within the Single Unit Residential (R-1) Coastal Zoning District. The lot merger would not result in a change in intensity or density of the project site, because the underlying legal Lots 1 and 2 of Block P cannot be developed separately with any dwelling units. Additionally, the potential building size would not be altered with the approval of the lot merger, since the setbacks and associated buildable area would remain the same. Therefore, a coastal development permit is not required. 5. A public hearing was held on May 30, 2019 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 Zoning Administrator at this hearing. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15315 under Class 15 (Minor Land Divisions) 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. AO Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2019-### Page 2 of 6 2. The Class 15 exemption allows the division of property in urbanized areas zoned for residential, commercial, or industrial use into four (4) or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with the General Plan and Zoning; no variances or exceptions are required; all services and access to the proposed parcels are available; the parcel was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous two (2) years; and the parcel does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent. This exemption includes a minor lot merger not resulting in the creation of any new parcel that complies with the conditions specified above. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. In accordance with Section 19.68.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (Title 19 Subdivisions), 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 this title. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The requested lot merger is proposed to clean up the underlying legal lot configuration under one ownership to mirror similar properties in the area and allow future construction over underlying legal lot lines. Lot 1 and Lot 2 of Block P do not currently allow for independent residential development and the functionality of these lots would not change with the merger. All of these lots have historically been utilized as a single building site. 2. The lot merger is consistent with the purpose and intent of Title 19 (Subdivisions). 3. Any future development on the proposed parcel will be subject to the Zoning Code development standards, which are intended to promote orderly development, protect neighborhood character, and preserve public health, safety, and general welfare of the City. Finding: 8. The lots to be merged are under common fee ownership at the time of the merger. Fact in Support of Finding: 1 . The lots to be merged are under common fee ownership. 01-25-19 A7 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2019-### Page 3 of 6 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 Finding: 1. The merged parcels will retain the Single-Unit Residential (R-1) zoning designation, consistent with the surrounding area. The R-1 Zoning District is intended to provide areas appropriate for a detached single-family residence located on a single lot. 2. 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 Detached (RSD-B), which provides for density ranges from 6.0-9.9 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. 3. The subject property is not located within a Specific Plan area. 4. Section 20.18.030 of the Zoning Code establishes minimum lot area and width requirements. The proposed merger would result in an approximatley 11,457-square-foot parcelthat is in conformance with the minimum 6,000-square-foot corner lot area standard of the Zoning Code. Additionally, the proposed merger would maintain a width of 60 feet, meeting the minimum 60-foot corner lot width standard of the Zoning Code. 5. The existing Lots 1 and 2 of Block P do not meet the minimum width or lot area requirements of the Zoning Code, as the lots are approximately 30-feet-wide and contain approximately 1,620 square feet (not including any portion of the abandoned right-of-way). Although not formally a lot, the abandoned right-of-way consists of approximately 1,832 square feet (sf). Merging the three lots and abandoned right-of-way would create one parcel that meets the minimum requirements of the Zoning Code (and Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan)for lot width and 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: 1. Legal access to the site is provided from East Bay Avenue, and will remain unchanged. The site does not currently provide access to any other properties. Currently, Lots 1 and 2 of Block P are not independently accessible from the street. The merger would formally 01-25-19 A2 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2019-### Page 4 of 6 allow all of the lots to be recognized as one. Thus, no adjoining parcels will be deprived of legal access as a result of the merger. 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 the development of the merged lots could significantly deviate from the pattern of development of adjacent and/oradjoining 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 and/or 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. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. Existing property widths along East Bay Avenue primarily consist of 30-, 45-, and 60- foot-wide lots. All of the nearby waterfront properties have similar lot depths as the proposed project, with approximately 191-foot lot depths. The subject site is the only waterfront property in the vicinity that does not have this configuration where the lots from Block P and the abandoned right-of-way appear as one single lot. The lot merger would allow the removal of underlying legal lots to create a single parcel that is consistent with the existing development pattern in the area. 2. The proposed lot width of 60 feet would not change the configuration of the property as currently utilized. Lots 1 and 2 of Block P would be brought into conformance, as they are currently 30 feet wide and do not comply with the required width of 60 feet for corner lots and 50 feet for interior lots. There are existing lots in the surrounding development similar to the proposed lot width. 3. Merging underlying Lots 1 and 2 of Block P with Parcel 1 of LLA2004-003 would not change the development potential or size of structure that could be constructed on-site. Regardless of the lot merger, no single-family residences could be constructed on the underlying Lots 1 and 2 of Block P because of the size and location of the lots. Furthermore, the front setback and associated buildable area will continue to be measured from the abandoned right-of-way line regardless of the proposed lot merger. The lot merger would both formally change the configuration of lots on record, and allow accessory structures such as pools, fences, and bulkheads to be constructed across underlying legal lot lines. 4. Although the proposed lot merger will result in a larger lot, it will not create a lot that is inconsistent with the surrounding neighborhood. There are existing lots in the surrounding development that are similar to the proposed lot area such as 1513 East 01-25-19 A9 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2019-### Page 5 of 6 Bay Avenue (8,592 sf), 1813 East Bay Avenue (14,481 sf) and 1507 East Bay Avenue (8,592 sf), among others. 5. Although the current configuration contains multiple parcels and an abandoned right-of- way, the property is used as a single parcel with one single-family residence. APN 048 23140 contains the residence, and APN 048 23141 contains the front yard and a portion of Newport Bay. As a result, the proposed merger will not result in a visible change in character to the neighborhood and will continue to allow the property to be used for single-family purposes. 6. Orientation and access to the parcel would remain from East Bay Avenue. Thus, the resulting lot configuration will not change the existing pattern of development in the area. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves LM2018-006 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 10 days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal or call for review is filed with the Director of Community Development in accordance with the provisions of Title 19 Subdivisions, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2019. Patrick J. Alford, Zoning Administrator 01-25-19 A10 Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2019-### Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLANNING 1 . The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved exhibits, stamped and dated with the date of this approval (except as modified by applicable conditions of approval). 2. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. 3. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. 4. Prior to recordation, the map shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for final map review and approval. All applicable fees shall be paid. 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits for construction across the existing interior lot lines, recordation of the lot merger documents with the County Recorder shall be required. A copy of the recorded document shall be provided to the City. 6. 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 current business owner, property owner or the leasing agent. 7. 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 19 Subdivisions of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 8. 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 the City's approval of Argent LLC Lot Merger including, but not limited to, Lot Merger No. LM2018- 006 (PA2018-261). 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. 01-25-19 Al2 Zoning Administrator-May 30, 2019 Item Nos. la,2a,3a,4b, 5a, 7a-ADDITIONAL MATERIALS RECEIVED 5. Martin Residence Coastal Development Permit No. CD2019-008 • In cons) consistency with the LCP, it seems relevant that the proposal to construct a single residence on a , 4 square foot (0.16 acre) lot creates a density of 6.2 dwelling units per acre. Unless 1 have miscalc d, this is slightly inconsistent within the density range of 0-5.9 DU/AC required by the CLUP for the -A land use designation (as quoted on page 1 of the staff report and in Section 1.5 of the reso • The staff report contains statements about Pub ccess and Views (page 4), that do not seem to have been fully incorporated into the resolution (pag . In addition, handwritten page 10 includes a label for a "Fact 10" (following "9"), but no Fact 10, the Fact 1 at the bottom of the page contains at least one typo: "The proposed replacement of thee ' single-family residence with a new single-family residence does not aloes include any fea s that would provide or inhibit coastal public access opportunities. ." The missing sentence after " (?) and the extra period at the end of"1" suggest the resolution may have been printed before it w final form. Item 7. rgent LLC Lot Merger No. LM2018-006 (PA2018-261) • elieve some of the comments I submitted when this matter was first heard on April 25, 2019, remain relevant. • It is good to see the distance indicated from the front property line on the unnamed alley to the bulkhead is now close to that shown in the City's GIS mapping. • It remains a bit disturbing that the bearings do not agree (the submitted parcel maps showing a perfectly north-south and east-west orientation, where other sources, including the City's GIS, show the lines to be significantly rotated). • It also continues to be disturbing that the proposed action takes two lots consistent with the CLUP's RSD-B land use designation and makes of them a single lot with that designation, but on which the density of development attained by a single home, 3.8 DU/AC, will fall far outside the allowable range of 6.0-9.9 DU/AC. • Most importantly, despite the assurances in the resolution that "the front setback and associated buildable area will continue to be measured from the abandoned right-of-way line," I see no condition to ensure that will, in fact, be the case. And it is contrary to my impression that mergers change setbacks. Indeed, I would assume the reason for the present merger is to allow structures to be built over that very line. The sentence following the previously- quoted one in Fact E.3 in the resolution (page A9) says as much. Doesn't the approval need to be conditioned on the "front" setback continuing to be measured from the landward edge of the abandoned Bay Avenue right-of-way (making the entire area bayward of that a front setback area)?