HomeMy WebLinkAbout16 - Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)Q SEW Pp�T
CITY OF
z NEWPORT BEACH
c�<,FORN'P City Council Staff Report
January 28, 2020
Agenda Item No. 16
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director - 949-644-3232,
sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Jaime Murillo, AICP, Principal Planner,
jmurillo@newportbeachca.gov
PHONE: 949-644-3209
TITLE: Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation
Ordinance (PA2019-181)
ABSTRACT:
The proposed amendments to the Local Coastal Program (Coastal Land Use Plan and
Implementation Plan), Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Title 20 (Planning and
Zoning), and Title 15 (Building and Construction) will provide a voluntary option for
homeowners seeking to remodel, but preserve traditional beach cottages. Typically,
cottages do not provide all the code -required parking and additions are limited to 10 percent
of the existing floor area. The amendments would allow larger additions (up to 50 percent
of the existing floor area or a maximum of 500 square feet) without providing the minimum
code -required parking when the project would result in the preservation of the cottage
character and building envelope that is representative of traditional development patterns
in the City.
RECOMMENDATION:
a) Conduct a public hearing;
b) Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Section 21065 of CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060
(c)(2), 15060 (c)(3), and 15378. The proposed action is also exempt pursuant to State
CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it has no potential to have a
significant effect on the environment;
c) Waive reading, read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2020-4, An Ordinance of
the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting Code Amendment
No. CA2019-006 to Amend Title 15 Entitled "Building and Construction" and Title 20
Entitled "Planning and Zoning" of the City of Newport Beach Code Related to Cottage
Preservation (PA2019-181), and pass to second reading on February 11, 2020; and
d) Adopt Resolution No. 2020-12, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport
Beach, California, Authorizing Submittal of Local Coastal Program Amendment
No. LC2019-004 to the California Coastal Commission to Amend Title 21 Entitled
"Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan" of the City of Newport Beach Municipal
Code and the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan
Related to Cottage Preservation (PA2019-181).
16-1
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 2
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.
INTRODUCTION
Study Session
As a result of growing community concerns related to the loss of small residential cottages
and the bulk and mass associated with new single and two -unit dwelling developments in
the City, the City Council held a study session on April 23, 2019. At the conclusion of the
study session, the City Council directed staff to return with a resolution to initiate code
amendments to address these concerns, including incentivizing the preservation of
cottages. Study session minutes are included as Attachment C.
1937 Cottage 2014 Redevelopment
ONE
WAY �� i � -�..�i IS1�'; lel
�i -
n .
Initiation of Code Amendment
City Council Policy K-1 (General Plan and Local Coastal Program) provides that a City -
sponsored amendment to the certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) shall be initiated by
the City Council. Additionally, NBMC Section 20.66.020 allows amendments to the Zoning
Code to be initiated by the City Council. The subject amendment was initiated by the City
Council on May 14, 2019 (Attachment D), as one of two proposed amendments under
City Council Resolution No. 2019-43 (PA2019-070).
Community Meeting and Outreach
On August 19, 2019, the Community Development Department staff hosted a community
meeting to share proposed changes to residential design standards. Notice of the
meeting was distributed to affected homeowners' associations, distributed as a
Newsplash to interested members of community who have requested notice of important
planning and land use activities in the City, and distributed to a list of known designers
and architects that work in Newport Beach. The meeting was well attended by 64
members of the public, including design professionals.
16-2
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 3
Included in the discussion were proposed changes to incentivize the preservation of small
cottages by allowing increased additions and alterations that provide an option to
complete redevelopment of property. The proposed changes related to cottage
preservation were supported by meeting attendees. General comments in support
included:
• Design professionals explained that it is more difficult to remodel and preserve a
cottage than to demolish and reconstruct a new home due to the current restrictive
code requirements that are in place. The proposed changes would create a
feasible option for preservation by removing these code -related constraints;
• Attendees appreciated the fact that the changes were incentive -based instead of
a firm restriction on property owner's rights; and
• The incentive allows a reasonably sized addition for nonconforming structures that
do not provide adequate parking, which is appropriate if it discourages property
owners from tearing down older cottage structures.
On September 10, 2019, a study session was held with the City Council to share the
results of the August 2019 community meeting and proposed code amendments. At the
conclusion of the study session, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the cottage
preservation amendments as proposed.
Lastly, on November 23, 2019, staff presented the proposed amendments to the Balboa
Island Improvement Association with minimal comments received from the community.
Planning Commission Review
On October 17, 2019, staff presented the proposed amendments to the Planning
Commission for review and recommendation. At the conclusion of the meeting, the
Commission voted to continue the item to allow staff additional time to revise certain
aspects of the amendments. Minutes from the October 17, 2019, meeting are included as
Attachment E.
On November 21, 2019, staff presented revisions of the proposed amendments to the
Planning Commission addressing concerns raised at the prior hearing, including clarifying
the applicability of the program, and prohibiting short-term rentals. At the conclusion of
the meeting, the Commission voted 5-1 to recommend approval of the amendments to
the City Council (Attachments F and G - Planning Commission Resolutions).
The Planning Commission did request the City Council consider increasing the maximum
addition allowed under the program from 500 square feet to 750 square feet. Also, for
the City Council to consider a requirement for the payment of an in -lieu parking fee. An
analysis of these recommendations is provided later in this report. Minutes from the
November 21, 2019, meeting are included as Attachment H.
16-3
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 4
DISCUSSION
What constitutes a cottage for the purpose of this ordinance?
There is no definition that accurately describes what constitutes a cottage. However, as
used by the community, the term cottage refers to the smaller residential dwellings or
structures that are representative of the traditional development patterns in the City,
particularly in old Corona del Mar, Balboa Island, and the Balboa Peninsula. These
structures are typically one-story, with the exception of a small second story above
parking in the rear of a lot. Many cottages vary in architectural style and year of
construction. Therefore, for the purpose of this amendment, the cottage preservation
incentive will be granted for those projects that agree to maintain a building envelope
representative of traditional cottages.
The building envelope for cottage preservation eligibility would be limited as follows:
• Front half of lot limited to one story and a maximum height of 16 feet;
• Rear half of lot limited to two stories and a maximum height of 24 feet; and
• Third floors or third floor decks would be prohibited.
Figure 1. Qualifying Building Envelope for Cottage Preservation
16' max
Side View
Rear half of lot
Why are we losing cottages?
24' max
The primary reason for the loss of cottages is many of these properties were historically
used as beach homes or second homes, but are now predominantly used as principal
residences. As such, property owners are seeking to maximize the size of their homes to
increase the livability and include modern features. Additionally, as property values in the
City have significantly increased, property owners are now seeking to construct the
maximum allowable floor area and height to ensure they are receiving the highest and
best return on their investment.
16-4
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 5
However, there are property owners who would like to preserve their older cottages, but
have run into complications when seeking to remodel to add an extra bedroom or
bathroom. Two existing code restrictions lead property owners to demolish the old cottage
in favor of developing a new, larger home.
1. Nonconformina Parkina Limitations (Title 20 and 21
As the minimum parking requirements have increased over time, due to changes
in zoning requirements, most cottages are nonconforming because they no longer
provide the minimum number of parking spaces on-site (e.g., minimum parking
requirements for a single-family dwelling increased from zero spaces, to one
space, to two spaces per unit). In other cases, the cottages comply with required
number of spaces, but no longer comply with current parking size dimensions.
NBMC Sections 20.38.060 (Nonconforming Parking) of the Zoning Code (Title 20)
and 21.38.060 (Nonconforming Parking) of the Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan (Title 21) both limit the allowable area of additions for
residential dwellings that are nonconforming due to parking to a maximum of 10
percent of the existing floor area of the structure. This 10 percent limitation is
typically not sufficient to accommodate the addition of a new master bedroom or
justify the cost of a remodel.
Modifying a small cottage to create a two -car garage cannot be done without
significantly altering the cottage thus defeating the owner's hope to preserve the
small home.
2. Building Code Limitations (Title 15)
Currently, Section 102.7 (Remodel or renovation) of Section 15.02.060 of the
NBMC requires a dwelling to be subject to building code regulations as a new
structure when the valuation of the permit for a remodel or renovation exceeds 50
percent of the market value of the dwelling. As a result of this 50 percent valuation
threshold, many small remodeling and addition projects require substantial
improvements beyond the original scope of work in order to comply with building
code regulations as if the house is a new construction. Due to this increased scope
of work and costs, many property owners decide that it is not financially feasible to
maintain their existing residential cottages and instead decide to demolish and
rebuild.
What are the proposed changes/incentives?
In order to loosen constraints discussed above, the following amendments are proposed
in exchange for a property owner's commitment to maintain the required cottage building
envelope as previously described. An underline/sty t version of the proposed
amendments are included as Attachment I for reference.
1. Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan) Changes:
16-5
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 6
a. Increase addition limits from ten (10) to fifty (50) percent, with a maximum cap
of 500 square feet - Cottages are typically smaller structures that are built
significantly below the allowable floor area limitations of a site. Therefore, staff
is recommending to increase the allowable area of additions for residential
dwellings that are nonconforming due to parking to a maximum of fifty (50)
percent of the existing floor area of the structure. This new standard would
allow for a reasonably sized addition as a realistic alternative to demolishing
and redeveloping their properties. However, in certain situations this may allow
for a large addition beyond the original intent. Therefore, a maximum cap of
500 square feet would be allowed.
b. Require recordation of a revocable deed restriction - It is important to
emphasize that this is a voluntary program that affords property owners
increased opportunity to remodel and expand their cottage properties in
exchange for preserving the cottage building envelope and overall form of the
development of the property (i.e., one-story and 16 feet high within front half of
lot and two-story, 24 feet high within rear half of lot). To ensure this building
envelope is retained and the property owner does not subsequently add
additional floor area that violates the prescribed building envelope, a deed
restriction would be required. However, the deed restriction would not require
that the cottage be preserved indefinitely. Should a property owner desire to
redevelop the property in future, the deed restriction would allow
redevelopment of the property in compliance with development standards in
affect at the time, including providing code -required parking.
Fioure 2. Proposed Increased Allowance for Cottage Preservation
Current Limitation
Proposed Allowance
Rear half of lot
2nd FloorMP,
24' max
11 Floor(Existing Area)
16' max
11 Floor (Existing Area)
Side View
Side View
2. Title 15 Chanae - Remove new construction code reauirements for eliaible cottaae
preservation projects - In the event that the construction valuation exceeds fifty
(50) percent of the value of the structure, only the components of the structure that
are affected by the renovation/addition will have to comply with new building code
requirements. For example, in the case of a new bedroom addition over the
garage, the addition and portions of the existing garage that are affected by the
addition will have to comply with current building code requirements. However, the
existing one-story component of the house that would remain would no longer have
to be fully retrofitted to comply with building code standards as a new home
constructed today.
16-6
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 7
It should be noted, if a property is located within a special flood hazard area as
mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a separate
valuation threshold will continue to apply as required by FEMA. The FEMA
threshold is more restrictive and may trigger a need to substantially improve the
existing structure to avoid the identified flood hazard. Improvements would typically
include raising the finish floor of the structure, which typically leads property
owners to demolish the structure and construct a new home.
Figure 3. Fxamole Cottaae Preservation Proiect
What types of residential development would this apply to?
The intent of these code amendments is to incentivize the preservation of cottages that
are representative of the historic areas of the City, such as in Corona del Mar, Balboa
Island, and the Balboa Peninsula. A majority of the lots in these areas allow two -unit
development and include two -unit cottages. In Corona del Mar, the 300 block of
Marguerite Avenue is zoned for multi -unit residential and several of the lots are currently
developed with three -unit cottages (See Figure 4 below).
16-7
Typical Cottage
IF
f
.ti
Example Cottage Preservation Project
1•
What types of residential development would this apply to?
The intent of these code amendments is to incentivize the preservation of cottages that
are representative of the historic areas of the City, such as in Corona del Mar, Balboa
Island, and the Balboa Peninsula. A majority of the lots in these areas allow two -unit
development and include two -unit cottages. In Corona del Mar, the 300 block of
Marguerite Avenue is zoned for multi -unit residential and several of the lots are currently
developed with three -unit cottages (See Figure 4 below).
16-7
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 8
Restricting applicability of these amendments to single -unit dwellings only would have the
effect of excluding a majority of the cottages in Corona del Mar and Balboa Island from
taking advantage of this new incentive.
Figure 4. Three -unit Cottage Example on Marguerite Avenue
Y-
r
It is not uncommon for a property owner to live in the front unit of a duplex and rent out
the smaller, rear unit for income. Allowing a property owner of a duplex to remodel and
expand their front unit would provide a realistic alternative to redeveloping the entire
property. Therefore, the proposed amendments would apply the cottage preservation
incentives to residential developments consisting of three (3) units or less. By restricting
the applicability to single -unit dwellings only, staff believes the ordinance would be
ineffective and not achieve the desired goal and intent.
Why is Short -Term Lodging prohibited?
Several cottages are currently utilized for short-term lodging. However, the intent of the
amendments is to provide an alternative to a homeowner seeking to preserve their
cottage while allowing for a reasonable size addition to accommodate kitchen or bedroom
expansions and enhance the livability of their homes. Concerns were raised during the
Planning Commission discussion that the incentives could be used to further expand
cottages used for short-term rentals, increasing occupancy and exacerbating existing
potential conflicts these units create, including increased demand for on -street parking
and removal of rental units from the housing stock. Therefore, the proposed amendments
include a prohibition of the use of the property for short-term rentals. This prohibition will
be included in the required deed restriction and any existing short-term lodging permit
would be revoked.
Why is Coastal Commission review required?
Properties located in the Coastal Zone (Attachment J) of the City are regulated by the
Local Coastal Program (LCP), which is comprised of the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP),
a policy document, and the Implementation Plan (IP or Title 21), a regulatory document.
Any amendments to the LCP must be reviewed and approved by the City Council, with a
recommendation from the Planning Commission, prior to submitting the amendment
request to the California Coastal Commission (CCC). The CCC is the final decision-
making authority on amendments to the certified LCP.
16-8
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 9
In addition to the proposed changes to Title 21 as described above, staff is recommending
that Coastal Land Use Plan Policy 2.9.3-8 be amended to include a policy to support the
proposed Title 21 cottage preservation amendment described above. A change to the
policy is important to avoid a determination that the proposed Title 21 code amendment
may be inconsistent with the current language of Policy 2.9.3-8. Additionally, regulations
in Title 21 require policies in the Coastal Land Use Plan.
2.9.3-8 Continue to require properties with nonconforming parking to provide code -
required off-street parking when new uses, alterations, or additions result in increased
parking demand. However, additions of up to fifty (50) percent of the existing floor
area, but not greater than 500 square feet, of a residential development of three (3)
units or less may be allowed without requiring the code -required parking when the
project would result in the preservation of the cottage character of the existing
development and a building envelope representative of traditional cottage
development patterns in the City.
Should the City Council approve the proposed ordinance adopting the amendments to
Title 15 and 20, the cottage preservation incentives would temporarily only be permissible
for developments located outside the Coastal Zone. Upon approval of the proposed LCP
amendments by the CCC, staff will return to the City Council with an ordinance adopting
the LCP Amendments, thereby allowing the cottage preservation incentives citywide.
Analysis of Planning Commission Recommendation- Increasing Maximum Cap to 750
Square Feet
At the November 21, 2019, Planning Commission meeting, several Balboa Island
residents spoke in support of the proposed amendments but requested that the maximum
cap on allowable additions be increased from 500 square feet to 750 square feet. The
Planning Commission did not make the change to the resolution of approval; however,
they requested that staff present the idea to the City Council for further consideration.
After further research and consideration, staff believes retaining a maximum cap of 500
square feet is appropriate and more in line with the original intent of creating these
incentives for the following reasons:
• 500 square feet allows for significantly larger additions than what has been
permitted in past utilizing the 10 percent addition allowance.
• A typical ancillary bedroom measures approximately 150 to 250 square feet in
area. Master bedrooms vary in size, but can generously be accommodated within
the 500 square -foot cap.
• For perspective, 750 square feet is the size of a typical one -bedroom apartment
unit and could potentially allow the addition of up to three smaller bedrooms to a
cottage that may be deficient to parking.
16-9
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 10
Analysis of Planning Commission Recommendation - Consider Requiring An In -lieu
Parking Fee
The Planning Commission also requested that staff present the idea of requiring the
payment of an in -lieu parking fee in exchange for use of these incentives when a cottage
was nonconforming due to the number of spaces provided. After further consideration,
staff believes it would not be appropriate to include an in -lieu fee payment at this time for
the following reasons:
• The intent of the amendments is to provide an alternative to redeveloping cottage
properties by providing a voluntary option or incentive for preservation. The more
restrictions that are imposed for project eligibility reduces the attractiveness of this
program and may drive a property owner to redevelop their property (elimination
of the cottage). For example, the proposed Building Code exemption that requires
the entire structure be brought up to Code was intended to reduce the scope and
costs of cottage preservation project. The payment of an in -lieu parking fee would
serve as a disincentive to use the proposed cottage preservation incentives.
• The City does not currently have an in -lieu parking fee program in effect.
Therefore, to implement and develop an in -lieu parking fee, a comprehensive fee
study would need to be completed in accordance to state law requirements
(Mitigation Fee Act). This would result in a significant delay in the approval of these
amendments.
Although the hope is that several property owners take advantage of these
incentives, it is not expected that there would be a sufficient number of projects for
an in -lieu fee program based on cottage preservation projects to have an impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The action proposed herein is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) in accordance with Section 21065 of CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15060 (c)(2), 15060 (c)(3), and 15378. The proposed action is also exempt from
the CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule that
CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on
the environment. Lastly, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265(a)(1), local
governments are exempt from the requirements of CEQA in connection with the adoption
of a Local Coastal Program. The Amendment itself does not authorize any development
and therefore would not directly result in physical change to the environment.
NOTICING:
Pursuant to Section 13515 of the California Code of Regulations, a review draft of the
LCP Amendment was made available and a Notice of Availability was distributed on
October 4, 2019, to all persons and agencies on the Notice of Availability mailing list and
posted online. Revisions to the draft LCP Amendment have also been posted online.
16-10
Ordinance No. 2020-4: Introduction of a Cottage Preservation Ordinance (PA2019-181)
January 28, 2020
Page 11
In addition, notice of these amendments was published in the Daily Pilot as an eighth -
page advertisement, consistent with the provisions of the NBMC. The item also appeared
on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website.
Lastly, notice of this amendment was emailed to interested parties that attended the
community meeting or that have expressed interest in this item.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Ordinance No. 2020-4
Attachment B — Resolution No. 2020-12
Attachment C
— April 23, 2019 City Council Study Session Minutes
Attachment D
— Initiation of amendments; City Council Resolution No. 2019-43
Attachment E
— October 17, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes
Attachment F
— Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-033
Attachment G
— Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-034
Attachment H
— November 21, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes
Attachment I
— Underline/sty Version of Amendments
Attachment J
— Coastal Zone Map
16-11
ATTACHMENT A
ORDINANCE NO. 2020-.4
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING CODE
AMENDMENT NO. CA2019-006 TO AMEND TITLE 15
ENTITLED "BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION" AND TITLE
20 ENTITLED "PLANNING AND ZONING" OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO
COTTAGE PRESERVATION (PA2019-181)
WHEREAS, amendment to Title 15 ("Building and Construction") and Title 20
("Planning and Zoning") (collectively Title 15 and Title 20 "Code Amendment") of the City
of Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") is necessary to incentivize the preservation
of cottages;
WHEREAS, Section 102.7 (Remodel or renovation) of Section 15.02.060 of the
NBMC currently requires a dwelling to be subject to building code regulations as a new
structure when the valuation of the permit for a remodel or renovation exceeds fifty (50)
percent of the market value of the dwelling. As a result of this fifty (50) percent valuation
threshold, many small remodel and residential addition projects require substantial
improvements to comply with building code regulations as new construction. Due to this
increased scope of work and costs, many property owners decide that it is not financially
feasible to maintain their existing residential cottages and decide to demolish these
cottages. The current redevelopment trend is to reconstruct new single- or two-family
dwellings that maximize the building envelope, including three-level development, to
realize the maximum return on investment,
WHEREAS, authorizing the amendment to Title 15 of the NBMC would incentive
the preservation of cottages by removing the valuation threshold requiring building code
compliance as new construction and allowing reasonable size additions to existing
residential developments that preserve their cottage character and building envelope;
WHEREAS, authoring the amendment to Title 20 of the NBMC would incentivize
the preservation of cottages by increasing the percentage of an allowed addition to a
nonconforming residential structure thereby eliminating a design constraint that has
resulted in property owners choosing to demolish older cottages and redevelop the site
with new, larger, three-level homes that maximize the allowable building envelope;
16-12
Ordinance No. 2020 -
Page 2 of 6
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on October 17,
2019, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in
accordance with the California Government Code Section 54950 et seq, the ("Ralph M.
Brown Act"), and Chapter 20.62 of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the October 17, 2019, hearing, the Planning
Commission voted to continue the item to allow staff additional time to revise certain
aspects of the amendments. Requested changes included clarifying the applicability,
prohibiting short-term rentals, and reducing the amount of expansion permitted;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on November
21, 2019, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in
accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and Chapter 20.62 of the NBMC. Evidence, both
written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this
public hearing;
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2019, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. PC2019-034 by a majority vote (5 ayes, 1 nay), recommending to the City
Council approval of Code Amendment No. CA2019-006; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on January 28, 2020, in
the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the
Ralph M. Brown Act and Chapter 20.62 of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral,
was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ordains as
follows:
Section 1: Section 102.7 (Remodel or renovation) of Section 15.02.060 (added to
Section 102.7) of Title 15 (Administrative Code) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
15.02.060 Amendment to Section 102.7.
Section 102.7 is amended to read as follows:
Section 102.7 Remodel or renovation. If the valuation of the permit for the
remodel or renovation of a building is equal to or exceeds 50 percent of the
market value of such building, then the entire building shall comply with the
Code provisions for new construction.
16-13
Ordinance No. 2020 -
Page 3 of 6
Exceptions:
1. This provision does not apply for permit valuations less than $220,700;
2. This provision does not apply to projects that meet the criteria set forth in
Section 20.38.060(A)(3) and are not located in a Special Flood Hazard Area
per the latest revision of the Federal Insurance Rate Map.
3. The Chief Building Official is authorized to accept less than the
requirements for new construction if substantial conformance to the
requirements is found and the protection of life and property are maintained.
Section 2: Subsection A of Section 20.38.060 (Nonconforming Parking) of Title 20
(Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.38.060 Nonconforming Parking.
A. Residential. Where a residential structure or use is nonconforming only because it
does not conform to the off-street parking requirements of this Zoning Code, only the
following alterations may be allowed:
1. Number of Spaces. A residential development having less than the required
number of parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be allowed the following repairs,
alterations, and additions:
a. Repair and maintenance, interior alterations, and structural
alterations, as provided for in Section 20.38.040(A) through (F); and
b. Additions up to a maximum of ten (10) percent of the existing floor
area of the structure within a ten (10) year period as provided in Section
20.38.040(G).
2. Dimensions or Type of Parking Spaces. Residential developments that are
nonconforming because they do not have the required type of covered or enclosed
parking spaces or because amendments to this Zoning Code have changed the
dimensions of required parking spaces subsequent to the original construction of
the structure may be altered or expanded as follows:
a. All improvements and expansions allowed under subsection (A)(1)
of this section; or
b. Additions larger than those allowed under subsection (A)(1) of this
section may be allowed subject to the approval of a modification permit in
compliance with Section 20.52.050 (Modification Permits).
16-14
Ordinance No. 2020 -
Page 4 of 6
3. Exception for Cottage Preservation. Notwithstanding the provisions of
subsections (A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(b) of this section, additions of up to fifty (50)
percent of the existing floor area of the structure, but no more than 500 square
feet, are permitted for a residential dwelling, duplex, or triplex that comply with the
following criteria:
a. The floor area of any addition, together with the floor area of the
existing structure, shall not exceed the allowed maximum floor area for the
zoning district where the property is located;
b. The addition shall comply with all applicable development standards
and use regulations of this Zoning Code;
C. The square footage of residential parking area additions identified
below shall be excluded from the allowed expansion under subsection
(A)(3), but shall be included as gross floor area;
Required Parking
Maximum Excluded Area
One -car garage
200 square feet
Two -car garage
400 square feet
Three -car garage
600 square feet
d. The height of the residential structure shall not exceed the following,
regardless of roof pitch:
i. Front half of lot: single story with a maximum height of
sixteen (16) feet; and
ii. Rear half of lot: two story with a maximum height of twenty
four (24) feet;
e. The residential structure shall not include a third floor deck;
f. Dwellings within the residential development shall not be rented for
periods of less than thirty (30) days; and
16-15
Ordinance No. 2020 -
Page 5 of 6
g. Deed Restriction and Recordation Required. Prior to the issuance of
a building permit for a cottage preservation project, the property owner shall
record a deed restriction with the Orange County Recorder's Office, the
form and content of which is satisfactory to the City Attorney, agreeing to
maintain the property consistent with the limitations specified above for
cottage preservation and the restrictions on short-term lodging. The deed
restriction document shall notify future owners of the restriction. This deed
restriction shall remain in effect so long as the cottage preservation project
exists on the property.
Section 3: An amendment to the Local Coastal Program ("LCP") is also underway.
LCP Amendment No. LC2019-004 amending Section 21.38.060 (Nonconforming Parking)
of Title 21 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code shall not become effective for projects
located in the coastal zone for which the LCP is applicable until approval of the subject LCP
amendment by the California Coastal Commission and adoption, including any
modifications suggested by the California Coastal Commission, by resolution and/or
ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach.
Section 4: The recitals provided in this ordinance are true and correct and are
incorporated into the operative part of this ordinance.
Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the
validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council
hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection,
sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections,
subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 6: The City Council finds this action is exempt from environmental review
under California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Section 21065 of the
California Public Resources Code and Sections 15060 (c)(2), 15060 (c)(3), and 15378
of the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines").
This action is also exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the general
rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant
effect on the environment. Lastly, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265(a)(1),
local governments are exempt from the requirements of CEQA in connection with the
adoption of a Local Coastal Program. The Amendment itself does not authorize
development that would directly result in physical change to the environment.
Section 7: Except as expressly modified in this ordinance, all other sections,
subsections, terms, clauses and phrases set forth in the NBMC shall remain unchanged
and shall be in full force and effect.
16-16
Ordinance No. 2020 -
Page 6 of 6
Section 8: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of
this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be
published pursuant to City Charter Section 414.
This ordinance was reintroduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Newport Beach held on the 28th day of January, 2020, and adopted on the 11th
day of February, 2020, by the following vote, to -wit:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
WILL O'NEILL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
LEILANI I. BROWN, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
---iA(7_A__
R N C. HARP, CITY ATTORNEY
16-17
ATTACHMENT B
RESOLUTION NO. 2020- 12
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING
SUBMITTAL OF LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT NO. LC2019-004 TO THE CALIFORNIA
COASTAL COMMISSION TO AMEND TITLE 21 ENTITLED
"LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN"
OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE
AND THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM COASTAL LAND USE PLAN RELATED TO
COTTAGE PRESERVATION (PA2019-181)
WHEREAS, Section 30500 of the California Public Resources Code requires each
county and city to prepare a local coastal program ("LCP") for that portion of the coastal
zone within its jurisdiction;
WHEREAS, in 2005, the City of Newport Beach ("City") adopted the City of
Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan ("Local Coastal Program")
as amended from time to time including most recently on January 22, 2019, via Resolution
No. 2019-8;
WHEREAS, the California Coastal Commission effectively certified the City's Local
Coastal Implementation Plan on January 13, 2017, and the City added Title 21 ("Local
Coastal Program Implementation Plan") ("Title 21") to the City of Newport Beach
Municipal Code ("NBMC") whereby the City assumed coastal development permit -issuing
authority on January 30, 2017;
WHEREAS, amendment to Title 21 and the Local Coastal Program is necessary
to incentivize the preservation of cottages ("LCP Amendments");
WHEREAS, authorizing the amendment to Title 21 of the NBMC and the City's
Local Coastal Program incentivizes the preservation of cottages by increasing the
percentage of an allowed addition to a nonconforming residential structure, thereby
eliminating a design constraint that has resulted in property owners choosing to demolish
older cottages and redevelop properties with new, larger, three-level homes that
maximize the allowable building envelope;
16-18
Resolution No. 2020 -
Page 2 of 4
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on October 17,
2019, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in
accordance with the California Government Code Section 54950 of seq. the ("Ralph M.
Brown Act"), and Chapter 21.62 of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the October 17, 2019, hearing, the Planning
Commission voted to continue the item to allow staff additional time to revise certain
aspects of the amendments. Requested changes included clarifying the applicability,
prohibiting short-term rentals, and reducing the amount of expansion permitted;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on November
21, 2019, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in
accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and Chapter 21.62 of the NBMC. Evidence, both
written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this
public hearing;
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2019, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. PC2019-034 by a majority vote (5 ayes, 1 nay), recommending to the City
Council approval of Local Coastal Program Amendment No. LC2019-004;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on January 28, 2020, in
the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the
Ralph M. Brown Act and Chapter 21.62 of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral,
was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 13515 of the California Code of Regulations Title
14, Division 5.5, Chapter 8, Subchapter 2, Article 5 ("Public Participation"), drafts of the LCP
Amendments were made available and a Notice of Availability was distributed on October
4, 2019, at least six (6) weeks prior to the City Council public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as
follows:
16-19
Resolution No. 2020 -
Page 3 of 4
Section 1: The City Council does hereby authorize City staff to submit LCP
Amendment No. LC2019-004 to the California Coast Commission for review and
approval, amending Section 21.38.060 (Nonconforming Parking) of Title 21 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and amending the
City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan as set forth in Exhibit
A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2: LCP Amendment No. LC2019-004 shall not become effective until
approved and adopted by the California Coastal Commission, including any modifications
suggested by the California Coastal Commission, by resolution(s) and/or ordinance(s) of
the City Council of the City of Newport Beach.
Section 3: The Local Coastal Program including the proposed LCP Amendment
No. LC2019-004 will be carried out in full conformity with the California Coastal Act,
codified in Public Resources Code Section 30000 et seq.
Section 4: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are
incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.
Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution
is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the
validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council
hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection,
sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections,
subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 6: This action is exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Public
Resources Code and Sections 15060 (c)(2), 15060 (c)(3), and 15378 of the California
Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines"). This action is
also exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), which states that CEQA
applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the
environment. Lastly, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15265(a)(1), local
governments are exempt from the requirements of CEQA in connection with the adoption
of a Local Coastal Program. LCP Amendment No. LC2019-004 itself does not authorize
development that would directly result in physical change to the environment.
16-20
Resolution No. 2020 -
Page 4 of 4
Section 7: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the
City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 28th day of ,January, 2020.
Will O'Neil
Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
-IA� n
V
Aaron C.rp
City Atto r ey
Attachment: Exhibit A - Proposed Amendment to the City of Newport Beach Local
Coastal Program Related to Cottage Preservation (LC2019-004)
16-21
EXHIBIT "A"
Proposed Amendment to the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program
Coastal Land Use Plan ("Local Coastal Program")
Related to Cottage Preservation (LC2019-004)
Section 1: Amend Policy 2.9.3-8 of Chapter 2.0 (Land Use and Development) of the
Local Coastal Program as follows, with all other provisions of the Local Coastal Program
remaining unchanged:
2.9.3-8 Continue to require properties with nonconforming parking to provide code -
required off-street parking when new uses, alterations, or additions result in increased
parking demand. However, additions of up to fifty (50) percent of the existing floor
area, but not greater than 500 square feet, of a residential development of three (3)
units or less may be allowed without requiring the code -required parking when the
project would result in the preservation of the cottage character of the existing
development and a building envelope representative of traditional cottage
development patterns in the City.
Section 2: Amend Section 21.38.060 (Nonconforming Parking) of Title 21 (Local
Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to read as
follows:
21.38.060 Nonconforming Parking.
A. Residential. Where a residential structure or use is nonconforming only because it
does not conform to the off-street parking requirements of this Implementation Plan, the
following provisions shall apply -
1 .
pply:
1. Number of Spaces. A residential development having less than the required
number of parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be allowed the following repairs,
alterations, and additions:
a. Repair and maintenance, interior alterations, and structural
alterations, as provided for in Section 21.38.040(A) through (F);
b. Additions up to a maximum of ten (10) percent of the existing floor
area of the structure as provided in Section 21.38.040(G);
C. Any repair, maintenance, or additions shall not result in loss of
existing parking spaces; and
d. Required parking shall be provided where feasible.
1 16-22
2. Dimensions or Type of Parking Spaces. Residential developments that are
nonconforming because they do not have the required type of covered or enclosed
parking spaces or because amendments to this Implementation Plan have
changed the dimensions of required parking spaces subsequent to the original
construction of the structure may be altered or expanded as follows:
a. All improvements and expansions allowed under subsection (A)(1)
of this section; or
b. Additions larger than those allowed under subsection (A)(1) of this
section may be allowed subject to the approval of a coastal development
permit.
3. Alley Access. Where applicable, residential development involving repairs,
alterations, and additions to residential development having less than the required
number of parking spaces per dwelling unit shall provide alley access to parking
area if it would result in additional public street parking.
4. Exception for Cottage Preservation. Notwithstanding the provisions of
subsections (A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(b) of this section, additions of up to fifty (50)
percent of the existing floor area of the structure, but no greater than 500 square
feet, are permitted for a residential dwelling, duplex, or triplex that comply with the
following criteria:
a. The floor area of any addition, together with the floor area of the
existing structure, shall not exceed the allowed maximum floor area for the
coastal zoning district where the property is located;
b. The addition shall comply with all applicable development standards
and use regulations of this Implementation Plan;
C. The square footage of residential parking area additions identified
below shall be excluded from the allowed expansion under subsection
(A)(4), but shall be included as gross floor area;
Required Parking
Maximum Excluded Area
One -car garage
200 square feet
Two -car garage
400 square feet
Three -car garage
600 square feet
2 16-23
d. The height of the residential structure shall not exceed the following,
regardless of roof pitch:
i. Front half of lot: single story with a maximum height of
sixteen (16) feet; and
ii. Rear half of lot: two story with a maximum height of twenty-
four (24) feet;
e. The residential structure shall not include a third floor deck;
f. Dwellings within the residential development shall not be rented for
periods of less than thirty (30) days;
g. Deed Restriction and Recordation Required. Prior to the issuance of
a building permit for a cottage preservation project, the property owner shall
record a deed restriction with the Orange County Recorder's Office, the
form and content of which is satisfactory to the City Attorney, agreeing to
maintain the property consistent with the limitations specified above for
cottage preservation and the restrictions on short-term lodging. The deed
restriction document shall notify future owners of the restriction. This deed
restriction shall remain in effect so long as the cottage preservation project
exists on the property; and
h. The addition complies with the limitations of Section
21.38.040(G)(1).
3 16-24
Attachment C
April 23, 2019, City Council Study Session Minutes
16-25
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Minutes
Study Session and Regular Meeting
April 23, 2019
I. ROLL CALL - 4:00 p.m.
Present: Council Member Brad Avery, Council Member Joy Brenner, Council Member Duffy Duffield,
Council Member Jeff Herdman, Council Member Kevin Muldoon, Mayor Pro Tem Will O'Neill,
Mayor Diane Dixon
II. CURRENT BUSINESS
SS1. Clarification of Items on the Consent Calendar
Mayor Dixon announced she will be requesting that the minutes (Item 1) be continued to the
May 14, 2019 City Council meeting.
In response to Council Member Muldoon's questions, Public Works Director Webb indicated the
contract for Item 7 would need to be modified if organics were to be used and there would be no
pesticide usage related to Item 8.
Prior to responding to Council Member Brenner's question regarding Item 5, Council Member
Muldoon recused himself due to property interest conflicts. City Manager Leung and
Public Works Director Webb noted Item 5 is for playground equipment replacement and only
new equipment requests need to be discussed at a Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission
meeting.
SS2. Poppy Month Proclamation
Carolyn Whitlinger and Debbie Schubert, American Legion Auxiliary, provided the background
on Poppy Month and received the proclamation from Mayor Dixon. Council Member Brenner
expressed the importance of Poppy Month.
SS3. CASA of Orange County Day Proclamation
Stefanie Gillett provided Court Appointed Special Advocate's (CASA's) background, gave
pinwheels to each of the Council Members, discussed Foster Care Awareness Month and the
CASA Pinwheel Project (CASAoc.org/events), and received the proclamation from Mayor Dixon.
SS4. Recognition of Ford W. Fairon
Chief Lewis, on behalf of the Police and Fire Departments, commended Ford Fairon for his
bravery and heroic actions on January 21, 2019. Ford Fairon thanked the Police and Fire
Departments for being our everyday heroes, and received the proclamation from Mayor Dixon.
SS5. Potential Changes to Residential Development Standard to Preserve Cottages and
Address 3rd Story Massing
Community Development Director Jurjis and Principal Planner Ramirez utilized a PowerPoint
presentation to display the location map and discuss reasons the City is losing beach cottages,
cottage sizes, the number of cottages in the City, standards for Council to study, and the
amendment process.
Discussion ensued relative to increasing buildable square footage for cottage owners if they
maintain a single story, finding incentives to keep the cottages, conducting extensive outreach
before any code amendment occurs, streamlining the process, considering amending parking
requirements for cottages, and discussed how many cottages have been replaced with larger
homes.
16-26
Volume 64 - Page 84
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
April 23, 2019
Ron Yeo provided a handout, indicated he inventoried the current cottages in Corona del Mar,
believed parking is the biggest issue, and expressed hope the City could assist with keeping the
cottages in the City.
Jerry Jansen, past President of the Balboa Island Improvement Association, expressed support
for retaining cottages and allowing them to rebuild in the same or similar footprint without
requiring parking.
Tanya, cottage owner, indicated she would like to expand a little but cannot due to the parking
restrictions.
Nancy Arrache expressed concern with setbacks and amending parking standards in high
density areas.
Mark Becker expressed support for preserving Balboa Island's uniqueness.
David Tanner believed parking exceptions should be made to preserve the cottages.
Gary Cruz requested and received clarification that redevelopment does not have to be done by
the original cottage owner and there is no restriction to the number of people living in a home.
Andrew Goetz believed an owner should be able to fix other parts of the home without triggering
a complete teardown.
Karen Tringali expressed support for the cottage community.
Denys Oberman believed parking problems are created by the larger buildings and that this
issue should be considered with the City's total housing stock.
Regarding residential height and massing, Senior Planner Ramirez utilized a PowerPoint
presentation to display a map of high density neighborhoods and discuss the goals of the 2010
code amendments, R-1 and R-2 height and bulk standards, third story covered decks, issues in
the RM Zoning District, changes for Council to consider, and the amendment process.
Discussion ensued relative to how staircases and vaulted ceilings are counted toward the total
square footage, setbacks, third story decks, height and floor area standards in RM Zoning
Districts, and design articulation.
Ron Yeo discussed third stories and suggested counting covered deck areas as square footage.
Mark Becker believed the large envelopes are destroying the intimacy in neighborhoods and
provided his recommendations.
Vicky Swanson indicated she cannot enjoy her home because the houses next to her are too large
and she loses light.
Andrew Goetz expressed concern with the wall heights relative to the roof and suggested
minimizing the wall area around cabanas or minimizing the amount of ridge area that sits on
the lot.
Denys Oberman took issue with the 2010 code changes and highlighted confusing terminology.
David Tanner requested that any change to the code not make areas worse, questioned how
height limits will account for sea level rise, and believed single family homes are being rented
as duplexes.
16-27
Volume 64 - Page 85
City of Newport Beach
Study Session and Regular Meeting
April 23, 2019
Linda Watkins questioned how a large home was built in a gated community and requested the
City tighten the zoning codes.
Jim Mosher noted that the code contains a section about ministerial design criteria that applies
to all areas of the City and asked how they are being applied.
Karen Tringali indicated the City may adjust the code to preserve the nature and qualities of
certain neighborhoods.
Council indicated that potential considerations moving forward include counting two-story
vaulted ceilings, all levels of staircases and anything with a roof as square footage; maintaining
the setback that was allowed between multiple lots; ensuring property rights are maintained;
revisiting how third story decks are handled with preference of having all sides open; and
expediting the simpler issues.
With Mayor Pro Tem O'Neill dissenting, the majority of Council requested the City Attorney
look into implementing a moratorium on RM Zoning District conversions to single-family homes,
believing a standard height limit should be set for all single-family homes.
SS6. On -Street Parking Impacts Due to Construction Activities
Community Development Director Jurjis and Deputy Community Development Director Ghosn
utilized a PowerPoint presentation to provide the background and discuss the public outreach
meetings, feedback received, and staff suggestions.
Discussion ensued relative to implementing rules only in areas that are most impacted by this
issue, not allowing Saturday construction, the importance of code enforcement, determining if
all parts of the City would want to utilize the signage, and looking at short term lodging impacts
separately.
Council Member Herdman expressed his gratitude to staff for the attempt, but felt it best not to
move forward with this effort.
Nancy Orazi expressed concerns with the number of short term lodging on the Peninsula and
Balboa Island, and noted that parking issues are also due to other sources, not just contractors.
Jeff Stolrow discussed parking impacts and safety concerns due to construction on Lido Isle.
Gary Cruz expressed concerns regarding parking impacts and disturbances due to construction
on Newport Island, and requested notification about meetings regarding this issue.
Vicky Swanson believed the City should require construction management plans.
David Tanner believed short term lodging adds to the parking issues and the City should
identify how the code is being gamed.
Mayor Dixon indicated short term lodging issues will be coming before Council at a later date.
Council unanimously concurred to bring back an item to add a parking enforcement person
through AmeriPark for seasonal parking enforcement; Mayor Dixon and Council Members
Duffield, Herdman and Brenner concurred that no construction should occur on Saturdays; and
all Council Members, except for Council Member Avery, concurred that the restrictions should
only apply in high density areas.
SS7. City Emergency Council Update
The item was continued to a future meeting.
16-28
Volume 64 - Page 86
Attachment D
Initiation of Amendments; City Council Resolution No. 2019-43
16-29
RESOLUTION NO. 2019-43
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING
AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 20 ENTITLED "PLANNING AND
ZONING" AND TITLE 21 ENTITLED "LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN" OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO
MASSING OF THREE STORY RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
SMALL BEACH COTTAGES (PA2019-070)
WHEREAS, Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") Section 20.66.020
provides that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ("City Council") may initiate
an amendment to NBMC Title 20 with or without a recommendation from the Planning
Commission;
WHEREAS, City Council Policy K-1 entitled "General Plan and Local Coastal
Program" requires amendments to the City of Newport Beach certified Local Coastal
Program codified in NBMC Title 21 to be initiated by the City Council;
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to modify regulations related to third story
residential building massing and provide flexibility in certain development standards
that may allow more improvements to smaller beach cottages; and
WHEREAS, in order to implement the aforementioned modifications,
amendments to Title 15, Title 20 and Title 21 are required.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as
follows:
Section 1: The City Council hereby initiates amendments to NBMC Title 20
"Planning and Zoning" and Title 21 "Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan" to
modify regulations relating to nonconforming structures, nonconforming parking, off-
street parking spaces required, residential development standards and design criteria
and associated definitions of specialized terms and phrases. Modifications to Title 15
may be implemented as authorized by the NBMC.
16-30
Resolution No. 2019-43
Page 2of2
Section 2: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall
not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The
City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are
incorporated into the substantive portion of this resolution.
Section 4: The City Council finds the adoption of this resolution is
categorically exempt pursuant to Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, of the California
Code of Regulations, Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) Guidelines
for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). Section
15262 exempts projects involving feasibility or planning studies for possible future
actions which the agency, board, or commission has not approved or adopted.
Section 5: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by
the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting this resolution.
ADOPTED this 14T" day of May, 2019.
Diane B. Dixon
Mayor
ATTEST:
i
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
54tAaro C. Harp
City Ayorney
16-31
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; the foregoing resolution, being Resolution
No. 2019-43 was duly introduced before and adopted by the City. Council of said City at a regular meeting
of said Council held on the 14th day of May, 2019; and the same was so passed and adopted by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Member Brad Avery, Council Member Joy Brenner, Council Member Duffy
Duffield, Council Member Jeff Herdman, Council Member Kevin Muldoon, Mayor Pro Tem
Will O'Neill, Mayor Diane Dixon
NAYS: None
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of
said City this 151h day of May, 2019.
&4N��
Leilani I. Brown ,
City Clerk
Newport Beach, California
16-32
Attachment E
October 17, 2019, Planning Commission Minutes
16-33
Planning Commission Minutes
October 17, 2019
ITEM NO.4 COTTAGE PRESERVATION CODE AND LCP AMENDMENTS (PA2019-181)
Site Location: Citywide
Summary:
The City is proposing amendments to the Local Coastal Program (Coastal Land Use Plan and
Implementation Plan), Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Title 20 (Planning and Zoning), and Title
15 (Building and Construction) to provide an option to preserve traditional beach cottages. Typically,
cottages do not provide all the code -required parking and additions are limited to 10 percent of the existing
floor area. The amendments would allow larger additions of up to 50 percent or 500 square feet, whichever
is greater, of the existing floor area without providing the minimum code -required parking when the project
would result in the preservation of the cottage character and building envelope that is representative of
traditional development patterns in the City. Eligible projects would also receive relief from a building code
valuation threshold requiring building code compliance as new construction.
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
21065 of CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060 (c)(2), 15060 (c)(3), and 15378. The
proposed action is also exempt pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it
has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment;
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2019-033 recommending the City Council approve Code Amendment
No. CA2019-006; and
4. Adopt Resolution No. PC2019-034 recommending the City Council authorize staff to submit Local
Coastal Program Amendment No. LC2019-004 to the California Coastal Commission.
Principal Planner Jaime Murillo reported in May 2019, the City Council directed staff to prepare Code
amendments in response to community concerns about the loss of cottages and developments replacing
cottages. The Code amendments pertain to reducing third floor massing; reducing the height and bulk of
single- and two-family development projects within the Multiple Unit Residential (RM) Zoning District; and
incentives to preserve cottages.
Principal Planner Murillo further reported that staff conducted a community meeting on August 19, 2019, to
share proposed amendments. Public comments at the meeting indicated demolishing and building a new
home is easier than remodeling a cottage because of existing Code requirements. The community preferred
incentives rather than restrictions of property rights to achieve cottage preservation. The community seemed
to support allowing increased floor area for nonconforming structures if it resulted in preservation of cottages.
Principal Planner Murillo went on to state that the draft amendment defines cottages as existing smaller
residential structures that tend to be one or two units and that are representative of traditional development
patterns common in Corona del Mar, the Balboa Peninsula, and Balboa Island. Cottages are typically one
story but may have a second story at the rear of the structure. The use of cottages has changed from a second
home to a primary residence. Cottages typically are nonconforming because they have zero or one parking
space, when two parking spaces are currently required. The Zoning Code limits an addition to an existing
structure that is nonconforming due to parking requirements to 10 percent of existing floor area, which
precludes many remodel projects. The Building Code requires a homeowner to bring the entire structure into
compliance with the current Building Code if the cost of a project is more than 50 percent of the replacement
value of the structure excluding the land value. Often, demolishing and building a new structure is less
expensive than remodeling.
Principal Planner Murillo indicated that staff proposes incentives to increase the 10 -percent limit to 50 percent
for existing nonconforming structures and to exempt cottages from the 50 -percent replacement value
threshold. The exemption would not apply to structures located in special flood hazard areas. In exchange
for the incentives, the front half of the lot would be restricted to a one-story structure no more than 16 feet in
height, and the back half of the lot would be restricted to a two-story structure no more than 24 feet in height.
Third floors and third -floor decks would not be allowed. A deed restriction would be required for current and
9of12
16-34
Planning Commission Minutes
October 17, 2019
subsequent property owners to maintain the cottage; however, if the property owner decided to redevelop the
property in the future consistent with the Zoning Code standards in effect at that time, they would be permitted
to demolish the cottage and redevelop the property.
Principal Planner Murillo indicates that staff has received comments expressing concerns about allowing
expansions for nonconforming structures when the availability of on -street parking is already limited. The
remodel project will have to fit within the form -based building envelope proposed, which will constrain the
property owner from over -building a site. A great deal of flexibility is needed to achieve preservation of
cottages; however, the 50 -percent allowance could be reduced. Alternatively, the 50 -percent allowance could
be maintained, but an addition could be capped at 750 square feet. The total floor area could also be limited
to no more than 75 percent of the maximum allowed. As proposed, the amendment could apply to a 10 -unit
building. Therefore, staff recommends the amendment apply only to single-family duplexes, duplexes, or
triplexes. In addition, staff recommends the amendment prohibit short-term rentals through the required deed
restriction. Second -floor decks are common amenities throughout Corona del Mar and Balboa Island and
should be allowed. Next steps include City Council review of proposed amendments, submission of proposed
amendments to the California Coastal Commission for review and approval, and City Council adoption.
Vice Chair Weigand expressed concern that cottages in each area of the City are slightly different such that a
one -size -fits -all approach to preservation may not be appropriate. He suggested continuing the item so that
additional outreach can be conducted with stakeholders and the community.
Commissioner Kleiman could not envision a scenario where a property owner would deed restrict his property
such that the resale value would be limited. She did not support the amendment as drafted. Presenting the
amendment to the Coastal Commission would be a waste of time.
In response to Chair Koetting's inquiry, Principal Planner Murillo advised that the architectural style of existing
cottages varies. The form is more important than the style of the cottage. The property owner could employ
a Mid -Century Modern style as long as the structure complies with the required form and height limit.
Principal Planner Murillo explained that compliance with the preservation ordinance would be voluntary. If the
property owner wants to redevelop the property compliant with the Code, staff would remove the deed
restriction. The deed restriction is intended to prevent a property owner from utilizing the incentives and
subsequently proposing a second -story addition at the front of the structure. The deed restriction would run
for the duration of the structure. Condominiums are prohibited on Balboa Island. The current Code requires
compliance with parking requirements in order to convert existing units to condominiums. Cottages typically
do not conform to parking requirements.
Chair Koetting opened the public hearing.
Charles Klobe believed there is a market for preserved cottages. The community has made no negative
comments about the proposed amendment at community meetings.
Carmen Rawson expressed concern that the amendments would allow a property owner to add two or three
bedrooms to a rental cottage such that there would be multiple tenants and no parking. She wanted the
amendments to apply to single-family units only.
Ken Rawson related that the primary concern is parking. The proposed amendment will only increase parking
congestion. The 50 -percent threshold is too much. Parking requirements should be maintained for all but
single-family homes.
Jim Mosher expressed confusion about the calculation of the limit on floor area. The third exception in the
Building Code amendment should be the second exception. He questioned the waiver of Subsections (A)(1)
and (A)(2) in the Local Coastal Program amendment. The City is not complying with Section 13515 of the
California Code of Regulations as stated in Section 1.5 of the Statement of Facts.
Chair Koetting closed the public hearing
10 of 12
16-35
VIII.
IX.
Planning Commission Minutes
October 17, 2019
In answer to Commissioner Kleiman's question, Principal Planner Murillo indicated approximately half of the
target areas on Balboa Island and portions of the Peninsula are located in special flood hazard areas.
Motion made by Vice Chair Weigand and seconded by Commissioner Ellmore to continue the item to a later
date.
Chair Koetting felt the 50 -percent limit is too high.
Amended Motion made by Vice Chair Weigand and seconded by Commissioner Ellmore to continue the item
so that staff can draft language applicable to specific areas and reconsider waiving parking requirements for
duplexes and triplexes.
Vice Chair Weigand recommended staff hold community meetings in each area.
Community Development Director Jurjis clarified that staff held a community meeting and presented the issue
as a study session before the City Council. The Council directed staff to carve out requirements for cottages
and to proceed.
AYES: Koetting, Weigand, Ellmore, Klaustermeier, Rosene
NOES: Lowrey, Kleiman
RECUSED:
ABSENT:
DISCUSSION ITEMS
ITEM NO. 5 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT (RHNA)
Summary:
Staff will provide a presentation providing an update regarding the Regional Housing Needs Assessment
(RHNA) process. The presentation will include the regional determination made by the State Department
of Housing and Community Development and current draft allocation methodology recommended by the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
Chair Koetting announced the item is continued due to the late hour.
STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS
ITEM NO. 6 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
None
ITEM NO. 7 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS
WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE
AGENDA.
Community Development Director Jurjis reported the community fair on October 26 will launch the General Plan
Update. The new website for the General Plan Update is now available at newporttogether.com.
Deputy Community Development Director Campbell noted one item, review of the Newport Auto Center, is
scheduled for the November 7 meeting. He suggested scheduling the item to November 21 and canceling the
November 7 meeting. The RHNA presentation and the cottage preservation amendments, if ready, can be
scheduled for November 21.
Community Development Director Jurjis indicated the November 7 meeting will be canceled.
Chair Koetting requested a future agenda item to discuss deadlines for submission of documents.
11 of 12
16-36
Attachment F
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-033
16-37
RESOLUTION NO. PC2019-033
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CITY
COUNCIL ADOPTION OF CODE AMENDMENT NO. CA2019-006
TO AMEND TITLE 15 (BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION) AND
TITLE 20 (PLANNING AND ZONING) OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO COTTAGE
PRESERVATION (PA2019-181)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
An amendment to Title 15 (Building and Construction) and Title 20 (Planning and
Zoning) ("Code Amendment") of the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC")
is necessary to incentivize the preservation of cottages.
2. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on October 17, 2019, in the Council
Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time,
place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the California
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act") and Chapter 20.62 of
the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the
Planning Commission at this public hearing.
3. At the conclusion of the October 17, 2019, hearing, the Planning Commission voted to
continue the item to allow staff additional time to revise certain aspects of the
amendments. Requested changes included clarifying the applicability, prohibiting short-
term rentals, and reducing the amount of expansion permitted.
4. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on November 21, 2019, in the
Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice
of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act and Chapter 20.62 of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION
The action proposed herein is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act
("CEQA") in accordance with Section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code and
Sections 15060 (c)(2), 15060 (c)(3), and 15378 of the California Code of Regulations Title 14,
Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines"). The proposed action is also exempt pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects
which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The Amendment
itself does not authorize development that would directly result in physical change to the
environment.
16-38
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-033
Paae 2 of 6
SECTION 3. FINDINGS.
Currently, Section 102.7 (Remodel or renovation) of Section 15.02.060 of the NBMC
requires a dwelling to be subject to building code regulations as a new structure when the
valuation of the permit for a remodel or renovation exceeds fifty (50) percent of the market
value of the dwelling. As a result of this fifty (50) percent valuation threshold, many small
remodel and residential addition projects require substantial improvements to comply with
building code regulations as new construction. Due to this increased scope of work and
costs, many property owners decide that it is not financially feasible to maintain their existing
residential cottages and decide to demolish these cottages. The current redevelopment
trend is to reconstruct new single- or two-family dwellings that maximize the building
envelope, including three-level development, to realize the maximum return on investment.
2. Authorizing the amendment to Title 15 (Building and Construction) of the NBMC would
incentive the preservation of cottages by removing the valuation threshold requiring building
code compliance as new construction and allowing reasonable size additions to existing
residential developments that preserve their cottage character and building envelope.
3. Authorizing the amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC would
incentivize the preservation of cottages by increasing the percentage of an allowed addition
to a nonconforming residential structure thereby eliminating a design constraint that has
resulted in property owners choosing to demolish older cottages and redevelop the site with
new, larger, three-level homes that maximize the allowable building envelope.
4. An amendment to Title 21 and the Local Coastal Program ("LCP") to incentivize the
preservation of cottages ("LCP Amendments") is also proposed for properties located in the
coastal zone. The Code Amendment shall not become effective for projects located in the
coastal zone until approval of the LCP Amendments by the California Coastal Commission
and adoption, including any modifications suggested by the California Coastal Commission,
by resolution and/or ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Planning Commission finds the proposed code amendments are not a projects subject
to CEQA pursuant to Section 21065 of Public Resources Code and the CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15378. The proposed action is also statutorily
exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it has no potential to
have a significant effect on the environment.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends approval of
Code Amendment No. CA2019-006 as set forth in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019.
16-39
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-033
Paqe 3 of 6
AYES: Klaustermeier, Koetting, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand
NOES: Kleiman
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Ellmore
16-40
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-033
Paae 4 of 6
*:/:11-3 11 itl/_Vtl
Proposed Code Amendment No. CA2019-006 Related to Cottage Preservation
Section 1: Amend Section 102.7 (Remodel or renovation) of Section 15.02.060 of the
Newport Beach Municipal Code as follows:
15.02.060 Added to Section 102.7.
Section 102.7 is added to read as follows:
Section 102.7 Remodel or renovation. If the valuation of the permit for the
remodel or renovation of a building is equal to or exceeds 50 percent of the market
value of such building, then the entire building shall comply with the Code
provisions for new construction.
Exceptions:
1. This provision does not apply for permit valuations less than $220,700;
2. This provision does not apply to projects meeting the criteria for cottage
preservation pursuant to Section 20.38.060(A)(3) and not located in a Special
Flood Hazard Area per the latest revision of the Federal Insurance Rate Map.
3. The Chief Building Official is authorized to accept less than the requirements for
new construction if substantial conformance to the requirements is found and the
protection of life and property are maintained.
Section 2: Amend Section 20.38.060 (Nonconforming Parking) of Title 2 (Planning and
Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal to read as follows:
20 38.060 Nonconforming Parking.
A. Residential. Where a residential structure or use is nonconforming only because it does
not conform to the off-street parking requirements of this Zoning Code, only the following
alterations may be allowed:
1. Number of Spaces. A residential development having less than the required
number of parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be allowed the following repairs,
alterations, and additions:
16-41
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-033
Paae 5 of 6
a. Repair and maintenance, interior alterations, and structural alterations,
as provided for in Section 20.38.040(A) through (F); and
b. Additions up to a maximum often (10) percent of the existing floor area
of the structure within a ten (10) year period as provided in Section
20.38.040(G).
2. Dimensions or Type of Parking Spaces. Residential developments that are
nonconforming because they do not have the required type of covered or
enclosed parking spaces or because amendments to this Zoning Code have
changed the dimensions of required parking spaces subsequent to the original
construction of the structure may be altered or expanded as follows:
a. All improvements and expansions allowed under subsection (A)(1) of
this section;
b. Additions larger than those allowed under subsection (A)(1) of this
section may be allowed subject to the approval of a modification permit in
compliance with Section 20.52.050 (Modification Permits).
3. Exception for Cottage Preservation. Notwithstanding the provisions of
subsections (A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(b) of this section, additions of up to fifty (50)
percent of the existing floor area of the structure, but no more than 500 square
feet, are permitted for projects that remodel and expand a residential dwelling,
duplex, or triplex that comply with the following criteria:
a. The floor area of any addition, together with the floor area of the existing
structure, shall not exceed the allowed maximum floor area for the zoning
district;
b. The addition shall comply with all applicable development standards
and use regulations of this Zoning Code;
c. The square footage of residential parking area additions identified below
shall be excluded from the allowed expansion under subsection (A)(3), but
shall be included as gross floor area;
16-42
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-033
Page 6 of 6
Required
Maximum Excluded
Parking
Area
One -car garage
200 square feet,
maximum
Two -car garage
400 square feet,
maximum
Three -car
600 square feet,
garage
maximum
d. The height of the resulting structure shall not exceed the following,
regardless of roof pitch:
i. Front half of lot: one story and 16 feet; and
ii. Rear half of lot: two stories and 24 feet.
e. The residential structure shall not include a third floor deck;
f. Dwellings within the residential development shall not be rented for
periods of less than thirty (30) days; and
g. Deed Restriction and Recordation Required. Prior to the issuance of a
building permit for a cottage preservation project, the property owner shall
record a deed restriction with the County Recorder's Office, the form and
content of which is satisfactory to the City Attorney, agreeing to maintain the
property consistent with the limitations specified above for cottage
preservation and the restrictions on short-term lodging. The deed restriction
document shall notify future owners of the restriction. This deed restriction
shall remain in effect so long as the cottage preservation project exists on
the property.
16-43
Attachment G
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-034
16-44
RESOLUTION NO. PC2019-034
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CITY
COUNCIL AUTHORIZE SUBMITTAL OF LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. LC2019-004 TO THE CALIFORNIA
COASTAL COMMISSION TO AMEND TITLE 21 (LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN) OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE AND THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM COASTAL
LAND USE PLAN RELATED TO COTTAGE PRESERVATION
(PA2019-181)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
Section 30500 of the California Public Resources Code requires each county and city
to prepare a local coastal program ("LCP") for that portion of the coastal zone within its
jurisdiction.
2. In 2005 the City of Newport Beach ("City") adopted the City of Newport Beach Local
Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan ("Local Coastal Program") as amended from
time to time including most recently on January 22, 2019, via Resolution No. 2019-8.
3. The California Coastal Commission effectively certified the City's Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan on January 13, 2017, and the City added Title 21 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan) ("Title 21") to the Newport Beach Municipal Code
("NBMC") whereby the City assumed coastal development permit -issuing authority as
of January 30, 2017.
4. An amendment to Title 21 and the Local Coastal Program is necessary to incentivize
the preservation of cottages ("LCP Amendments").
5. Pursuant to Section 13515 of the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 5.5,
Chapter 8, drafts of the LCP Amendments were made available and a Notice of Availability
was distributed on October 4, 2019 at least six (6) weeks prior to the anticipated final
action date.
6. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on October 17, 2019, in the Council
Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time,
place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph M.
Brown Act and Chapter 21.62 of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing.
7. At the conclusion of the October 17, 2019, hearing, the Planning Commission voted to
continue the item to allow staff additional time to revise certain aspects of the
16-45
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-034
Page 2 of 6
amendments. Requested changes included clarifying the applicability, prohibiting short-
term rentals, and reducing the amount of expansion permitted.
8. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on November 21, 2019, in the
Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice
of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act and Chapter 20.62 of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
The action proposed herein is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act
("CEQA") in accordance with Section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code and
Sections 15060 (c)(2), 15060 (c)(3), and 15378 of the California Code of Regulations Title 14,
Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines"). The proposed action is also exempt pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects
which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Lastly, pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15265(a)(1), local governments are statutorily exempt from the
requirements of CEQA in connection with the adoption of a local coastal program. The LCP
Amendment itself does not authorize development that would directly result in physical change
to the environment.
SECTION 3. FINDINGS.
Authorizing the amendment to Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the
NBMC and the City's Local Coastal Program would incentivize the preservation of cottages
by increasing the percentage of an allowed addition to a nonconforming residential
structure, thereby eliminating a design constraint that has resulted in property owners
choosing to demolish older cottages and redevelop properties with new, larger, three (3) -
level homes that maximize the allowable building envelope.
2. The LCP Amendments shall not become effective until approval by the California Coastal
Commission and adoption, including any modifications suggested by the California Coastal
Commission, by resolution and/or ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach.
3. The Local Coastal Program and Title 21, including the proposed LCP Amendments, will be
carried out fully in conformity with the California Coastal Act.
4. The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the
operative part of this resolution.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
16-46
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-034
Page 3 of 6
1. The Planning Commission finds the LCP Amendments are not a project subject to CEQA
pursuant to Section 21065 of CEQA and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060 (c)(2), 15060
(c)(3), and 15378. The proposed action is also exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15061(b)(3) because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the
environment. Finally, the adoption of local coastal programs are statutorily exempt
according to Section 15265(a)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends submittal of
Local Coastal Program Amendment No. LC2019-004 related to cottage preservation,
amending Section 21.38.060 (Nonconforming Parking) of Title 21 (Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and amending the City of
Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan as set forth in Exhibit "A,"
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, to the California Coastal
Commission.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019.
AYES: Klaustermeier, Koetting, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand
NOES: Kleiman
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Ellmore
16-47
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-034
Paae 4 of 6
EXHIBIT "A"
Proposed Amendment to the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program
Related to Cottage Preservation (LC2019-004)
Section 1: Amending Policy 2.9.3-8 of Chapter 2.0 (Land Use and Development) of the
Coastal Land Use Plan as follows, with all other provisions of the Coastal Land Use Plan
remaining unchanged:
2.9.3-8 Continue to require properties with nonconforming parking to provide code -
required off-street parking when new uses, alterations, or additions result in increased
parking demand. However, additions of up to fifty (50) percent of the existing floor area of
a residential development may be allowed without requiring the code -required parking when
the project would result in the preservation of the cottage character of the development and
a building envelope representative of traditional cottage development patterns in the City.
Section 2: Amend Section 21.38.060 (Nonconforming Parking) of Title 21 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to read as follows:
21.38.060 Nonconforming Parking.
A. Residential. Where a residential structure or use is nonconforming only because it does
not conform to the off-street parking requirements of this Implementation Plan, the following
provisions shall apply:
1. Number of Spaces. A residential development having less than the required
number of parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be allowed the following repairs,
alterations, and additions:
a. Repair and maintenance, interior alterations, and structural alterations,
as provided for in Section 21.38.040(A) through (F);
b. Additions up to a maximum often (10) percent of the existing floor area
of the structure as provided in Section 21.38.040(G);
c. Any repair, maintenance, or additions shall not result in loss of existing
parking spaces; and
d. Required parking shall be provided where feasible.
2. Dimensions or Type of Parking Spaces. Residential developments that are
nonconforming because they do not have the required type of covered or
enclosed parking spaces or because amendments to this Implementation Plan
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-034
Paae 5 of 6
have changed the dimensions of required parking spaces subsequent to the
original construction of the structure may be altered or expanded as follows:
a. All improvements and expansions allowed under subsection (A)(1) of
this section;
b. Additions larger than those allowed under subsection (A)(1) of this
section may be allowed subject to the approval of a coastal development
permit.
3. Alley Access. Where applicable, residential development involving repairs,
alterations, and additions to residential development having less than the
required number of parking spaces per dwelling unit shall provide alley access to
parking area if it would result in additional public street parking.
4. Exception for Cottage Preservation. Notwithstanding the provisions of
subsections (A)(1)(b) and (A)(2)(b) of this section, additions of up to fifty (50)
percent of the existing floor area of the structure are permitted for projects that
remodel and expand a residential dwelling, duplex, or triplex that comply with the
following criteria.-
a.
riteria:
a. The floor area of any addition, together with the floor area of the existing
structure, shall not exceed the allowed maximum floor area for the coastal
zoning district;
b. The addition shall comply with all applicable development standards
and use regulations of this Implementation Plan;
c. The square footage of residential parking area additions identified below
shall be excluded from the allowed expansion under subsection (A)(4), but
shall be included as gross floor area,
Required Maximum Excluded
Parking Area
16-49
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2019-034
M--- 1-1 _t
One -car garage
200 square feet,
maximum
Two -car garage
400 square feet,
maximum
Three -car
600 square feet,
garage
maximum
d. The height of the resulting structure shall not exceed the following,
regardless of roof pitch:
Front half of lot: one story and 16 feet; and
Rear half of lot: two stories and 24 feet.
e. The residential structure shall not include a third floor deck;
Dwellings within the residential development shall not be rented for
periods of less than thirty (30) days; and
g. The addition complies with the limitations of Section 21.38.040(G)(1).
16-50
Attachment H
November 21, 2019, Planning Commission Minutes
16-51
determined that the project complies with the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and the goals of alleviating coastal
hazards and allowing public coastal access. The design will open some public views of the Bay. The proposed
home will be massed and situated similar to the existing home. Staff has received written confirmation that the
applicant and appellant have reached an agreement that includes lowering certain rooflines, reducing the chimney
height and using a transparent material for the top 15 inches of the driveway guardrail.
In reply to Chair Koetting's questions, Planning Consultant Schuller reiterated that she received written
confirmation of an agreement from the appellant's representative.
In answer to Commissioner Rosene's query, Principal Planner Jaime Murillo recalled Mr. Mosher's suggestion of
an open design for the driveway gate to enhance the public view from the roadway. That suggestion is not a
component of the proposal.
Chair Koetting opened the public hearing.
Chris Brandon, applicant representative, reported the parties have reached an agreement.
In response to Commissioners' inquiries, Mr. Brandon advised that the proposed home will have four bedrooms.
The driveway gate will be located below the level of the curb. Mr. Brandon indicated he would have to consult with
his clients about using a transparent material or an openwork design for the gate.
Mr. Mosher believed the Planning Commission had to require a transparent material or an open design for the
gate in order to enhance the view from a designated viewpoint. The Coastal Commission would likely require
glass that minimizes bird strikes for the proposed home and the guardrail.
Chair Koetting closed the public hearing.
Motion made by Vice Chair Weigand and seconded by Secretary Lowrey to adopt Resolution No. PC2019-
032, overturning the Zoning Administrator's approval of Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-076.
Commissioner Rosene requested an amendment to include conditions of approval requiring an open design
for the driveway gate and the architect to explore special glass to minimize bird strikes.
Mr. Brandon explained that an open-work gate would not improve the view as the driveway would be the only
view through a gate with an open design. The Coastal Commission considers special materials for glazing on
railings and other elements of the exterior of the home but not for glazing on the house. He would have to
investigate whether special materials are available for curved glazing.
Commissioner Rosene expressed certainty that an open design for the gate would be beneficial.
Chair Koetting did not believe a solid gate would obstruct the view but would provide privacy.
AYES: Koetting, Weigand, Lowrey, Klaustermeier, Kleiman
NOES: Rosene
RECUSED:
ABSENT: Ellmore
ITEM NO. 4 COTTAGE PRESERVATION CODE AND LCP AMENDMENTS (PA2019-181)
Site Location: Citywide
Summary:
Amendments to the Local Coastal Program (Coastal Land Use Plan and Implementation Plan), Newport
Beach Municipal Code Title 20 (Planning and Zoning), and Title 15 (Building and Construction) to
incentivize the preservation of cottages. Specifically, the amendments would allow larger additions of up
to fifty (50) percent of the existing floor area of a residential development that is nonconforming due to
parking when the project would result in the preservation of the cottage character of the development and
a building envelope representative of traditional development patterns in the City. Eligible projects would
16-52
also receive relief from a building code valuation threshold, which requires building code compliance as
new construction.
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
21065 of CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and 15378. The
proposed action is also exempt pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it
has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment;
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2019-033 recommending the City Council approve Code Amendment
No. CA2019-006; and
4. Adopt Resolution No. PC2019-034 recommending the City Council authorize staff to submit Local
Coastal Program Amendment No. LC2019-004 to the California Coastal Commission.
Principal Planner Jaime Murillo reported the Planning Commission raised a number of concerns and directed
staff to refine the amendments on October 17. In response to community concerns regarding the massing of
new residential development, the City Council directed staff to explore Code amendments that could reduce
the massing of new residential development, particularly for three-story developments. The Council also
directed staff to explore incentives that encourage homeowners to retain the historic look of cottages when
remodeling them.
Principal Planner Murillo described that defining a cottage is difficult because cottages do not have a specific
architectural style and were not built in a specific timeframe. Cottages typically have one story, but some may
have a second -story component above parking at the rear of the lot. Cottages have been characterized as
second homes or beach cottages, but they are now being used as primary residences. Property owners are
redeveloping cottages to include modern amenities and improve livability. Because of high property values,
property owners maximize the height and square footage of development to obtain the maximum return on
investment. Two Code sections contribute to property owners' decisions to demolish cottages. Many cottages
are nonconforming because they do not have the Code -required number of parking spaces or the existing
parking spaces do not meet current size requirements. The Code limits additions to no more than 10 percent
of the existing floor area for nonconforming structures. With the small size of cottages, a 10 -percent addition
does not benefit the property owner. A standard in the Building Code states that if the cost of improvements
exceeds 50 percent of the replacement value of the home, excluding the value of the land, the structure must
comply with the current Building Code standards. The cost of retrofitting deters homeowners from improving
cottages.
Principal Planner Murillo stated that staff proposes an incentive program that allows additions of up to 50
percent of the existing floor area for nonconforming structures and provides an exception to the Building Code
limitation. In exchange for the incentives, the remodel or addition would comply with a specific building
envelope, and the homeowner would agree to a deed restriction. The specific building envelope is a one-story
elevation at a maximum height of 16 feet on the front half of the lot and a two-story elevation at a maximum
height of 24 feet on the rear half of the lot. Third floors and third -floor decks would not be allowed. The
incentive program would be voluntary. At some future time, the homeowner could choose to redevelop the
property, and the City would remove the deed restriction and require the homeowner to redevelop the property
consistent with current Code requirements.
Principal Planner Murillo reported that previously, the Planning Commission raised concerns regarding
applicability, parking impacts, the size of additions, and short-term rentals. Staff revised the amendments to
limit incentives to projects of three units or less; to limit additions to 50 percent of floor area up to a maximum
of 500 square feet; and to prohibit the use of cottage projects for short-term lodging. Limiting the incentive
program to single-family projects would render the program ineffective. The specific building envelope
restrictions may further help to limit the size of cottage additions. Staff has received public comments regarding
nonconformance of cottages. With respect to Mr. Mosher's proposed revisions, staff concurs with correcting
the valuation number, striking subjective language, and correcting the typographical errors.
In reply to Commissioners' questions, Principal Planner Murillo explained that the previously suggested cap of
750 square feet on additions was thought to be too high. The case study analyzed additions of 500 square
16-53
feet. Staff consulted with architects, and they generally supported a cap of 500 square feet. The 500 -square -
foot limit applies to the total structure. He also clarified that the program would allow second -floor decks.
Chair Koetting suggested a requirement to recess second -floor decks and development of an in -lieu parking
fee program.
Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis advised that the City does not require in -lieu parking fees.
A nexus study would have to be conducted if there is a recommendation for some type of in -lieu fee program.
Commissioners disclosed no ex parte communications for Item No. 2. Vice Chair Weigand disclosed ex parte
communications with Chris Brandon and the Vallejos for Item No. 3. The remaining Commissioners disclosed
no ex parte communications for Item No. 3. For Item No. 4, Secretary Lowrey disclosed communications with
residents of Balboa Island, and Vice Chair Weigand disclosed communications with staff. The remaining
Commissioners disclosed no ex parte communications for Item No. 4.
Commissioner Kleiman remarked that absent of a complete revision of development standards, the program
will be ineffective. The program is limited to a small number of units and will not address residents' concerns.
Removing a deed restriction from title is extremely difficult.
Chair Koetting opened the public hearing.
Julie Luckey noted the difficulties of installing appliances in cottages and supported the incentive program.
Jim Moloney explained that cottages have no attics or basements. Therefore, the garage is used for storage.
With two- and three-story homes adjacent to his cottage, he cannot view a sunrise or sunset. He supported
an addition of 750 square feet. Cottages represent the history of Newport Beach.
Tom Houston supported and appreciated the program.
Lee Pearl, Balboa Island Improvement Association, felt the program would be important to preserving cottages
on Balboa Island. A limit of 750 square feet for additions would be better than 500 square feet. Staff has not
considered filling in breezeways. Balboa Island residents support the program.
Charles Klobe emphasized that few residents opposed the program. He encouraged the Planning Commission
to support the program.
Mr. Mosher noted the requirement for the City to revise the Local Coastal Program (LCP) available to the
public. He inquired whether the program would apply to cottages that do not conform to modern setbacks and
whether a homeowner could utilize the program more than once. The addition could be greater than 500
square feet if the homeowner provides parking. The word "smaller" should be replaced with "single-family."
Chair Koetting closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Kleiman advised that she supported the spirit of the program, but the program may not apply
to many cottages. At some point, a cottage owner will want a two -or three-story home to escape the shadow
of surrounding two- and three-story homes.
Vice Chair Weigand felt increasing the cap to 750 square feet and developing an in -lieu fee program warranted
further discussion. Making the preservation of cottages attractive is important.
In reply to Chair Koetting's inquiry, Principal Planner Murillo indicated the City has designated a couple of
properties as historic. A property owner typically initiates the process.
Secretary Lowrey appreciated staff preparing incentives rather than additional regulations. The program
provides the opportunity for owners to improve their cottages and for people to purchase cottages with the idea
of improving them. Commissioner Kleiman made some good points, but the program will benefit some owners.
He could support increasing the limit to 750 square feet.
16-54
Chair Koetting requested staff suggest in -lieu parking fees to the City Council. The variety of existing cottages
is surprising.
Assistant City Attorney Summerhill advised that the recommendations to the Council do not have to include a
finite number for the limit.
Motion made by Secretary Lowrey and seconded by Commissioner Klaustermeier to approve staff's
recommendation with revisions to consider increasing the square footage minimums and to include the
changes Principal Planner Murillo proposed.
AYES: Koetting, Weigand, Lowrey, Klaustermeier, Rosene
NOES: Kleiman
RECUSED:
ABSENT: Ellmore
VIII. DISCUSSION ITEMS
ITEM NO. 5 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT (RHNA)
Summary:
Staff will provide a presentation regarding the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process.
The presentation will include the regional determination made by the State Department of Housing and
Community Development and current draft allocation for the City recently identified by the Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG).
Principal Planner Murillo reported the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is
tasked with determining regional housing needs. HCD has determined 1.3 million housing units are needed for
the region. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) will develop a methodology to allocate the
regional housing need to each jurisdiction. The City is required to identify sites and to zone the sites for the
potential development of housing units. The planning period is October 2021 to October 2029. In August 2019,
SCAG released three draft methodologies for public review. Under those methodologies, the City would be
responsible for planning for 2,300 to 5,200 units. City staff is participating in SCAG outreach meetings. In October
2019, SCAG released a hybrid methodology, which allocated approximately 2,700 units to Newport Beach. In
November 2019, the regional council changed the methodology to focus housing growth on jurisdictions close to
jobs and transit. That change increased the number of housing units allocated to Newport Beach to approximately
4,800 units. SCAG has submitted the draft methodology to HCD, who will review and comment on the
methodology. SCAG will develop a final methodology, which may be released in February 2020.
Principal Planner Murillo stated that there is an appeal process for jurisdictions to appeal the number of units
allocated to them. The methodology has two components, projected need and existing need. Orange County
received approximately 171,000 units. Irvine's projected need is approximately 22,000 units, 13,000 units for
Huntington Beach, 11,000 units for Costa Mesa, and 390 units for Laguna Beach. The next step is to distribute
the local allocation to different income levels. The allocation for Newport Beach is composed of 1,452 units for
very low income, 928 units for low income, 1,048 for moderate income, and 1,405 units for above moderate
income.
Principal Planner Murillo reported that the City must update its General Plan, specifically the Housing Element.
HCD reviews and approves Housing Elements. The City's updated Housing Element is due in October 2021. The
City will identify sites for potential housing development and develop an inventory of sites. If the City misses the
October 2021 deadline, its cycle will change from eight years to four years. If the City fails to zone adequate sites,
it will have to adopt a program for by -right project approval. If the City fails to adopt a compliant Housing Element,
any unaccommodated need will roll into the next cycle. A court may impose additional requirements. AB 101
allows the State to fine local jurisdictions for noncompliance. The City is seeking community feedback through the
General Plan Update Listen and Learn workshops and the website newporttogether.com.
16-55
Attachment I
Underline/strut version of amendments
16-56
Cottage Preservation (PA2019-181) Underline/ Strikeout Revisions
Proposed Zoning Code Amendment
20.38.060 Nonconform.in.9..Parkin.9.....................................................................................................................................................................................................
A. Residential. Where a residential structure or use is nonconforming only because it does not conform to the
off-street parking requirements of this Zoning Code, only the following alterations may be allowed:
1. Number of Spaces. A residential development having less than the required number of
parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be allowed the following repairs, alterations, and
additions:
a. Repair and maintenance, interior alterations, and structural alterations, as provided for
in Section 20.38.040(A) through (F); and
b. Additions up to a maximum of ten (10) percent of the existing floor area of the
structure within a ten (10) year period as provided in Section 20.38.040(G).
2. Dimensions or Type of Parking Spaces. Residential developments that are nonconforming
because they do not have the required type of covered or enclosed parking spaces or because
amendments to this Zoning Code have changed the dimensions of required parking spaces
subsequent to the original construction of the structure may be altered or expanded as follows:
a. All improvements and expansions allowed under subsection (A)(1) of this section;
b. Additions larger than those allowed under subsection (A)(1) of this section maybe
allowed subject to the approval of a modification permit in compliance with Section
20.52.050 (Modification Permits).
3. Exception for Cottage Preservation. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (A)(1)(b)
and (A)(2)(b) of this section, additions of up to fifty (50) percent of the existing floor area of the
structure, but no more than 500 square feet, are permitted for a residential dwelling, duplex, or
triplex that comply with the following criteria:
a. The floor area of any addition, together with the floor area of the existing structure,
shall not exceed the allowed maximum floor area for the zoning district where the
Property is located;
16-57
b. The addition shall comply with all applicable development standards and use
regulations of this Zoning Code;
c. The square footage of residential parking area additions identified below shall be
excluded from the allowed expansion under subsection (A)(3), but shall be included as
gross floor area;
Required Parking
Maximum Excluded Area
One -car garage
200 square
Two -car garage
400 square feet
Three -car garage
600 square feet
d. The height of the residential structure shall not exceed the following, regardless of
roof pitch:
i. Front half of lot: single story with a maximum height of sixteen (16) feet; and
ii. Rear half of lot: two story with a maximum height of twenty-four (24) feet.
e. The residential structure shall not include a third floor deck;
f. Dwellings within the residential development shall not be rented for periods of less
than thirty (30) days; and
g. Deed Restriction and Recordation Required. Prior to the issuance of a building permit
for a cottage preservation project, the property owner shall record a deed restriction with
the Orange County Recorder's Office, the form and content of which is satisfactory to the
City Attorney, agreeing to maintain the property consistent with the limitations specified
above for cottage preservation and restrictions on short-term lodging. The deed restriction
document shall notify future owners of the restriction. This deed restriction shall remain in
effect so long as the cottage preservation protect exists on the property.
16-58
Proposed Building Code Amendment
15.02.060 Amendment to Section 102.7.
Section 102.7 is amended to read as follows:
Section 102.7 Remodel or renovation. If the valuation of the permit for the remodel or renovation of a
building is equal to or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of such building, then the entire building
shall comply with the Code provisions for new construction.
Exceptions:
1. This provision does not apply for permit valuations less than $220,700;
2. This provision does not apply to projects that meet the criteria set forth in Section 20.38.060(A)(3)
and are not located in a Special Flood Hazard Area per the latest revision of the Federal Insurance
Rate Map.
23. The Chief Building Official is authorized to accept less than the requirements for new construction if
substantial conformance to the requirements is found and the protection of life and property are
maintained.
16-59
Proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment
Coastal Land Use Plan — Amendment to Policy 2.9.3-8
2.9.3-8 Continue to require properties with nonconforming parking to provide code -required off-street
parking when new uses, alterations, or additions result in increased parking demand. However, additions of
up to fifty (50) percent of the existing floor area, but not greater than 500 square feet, of a residential
development of three (3) units or less may be allowed without requiring the code -required parking when the
project would result in the preservation of the cottage character of the existing development and a building
envelope representative of traditional development patterns in the City.
Implementation Plan — Amendment to Section 21.38.60
21.38.060 Nonconformina Parki
A. Residential. Where a residential structure or use is nonconforming only because it does not conform to the
off-street parking requirements of this Implementation Plan, the following provisions shall apply:
1. Number of Spaces. A residential development having less than the required number of
parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be allowed the following repairs, alterations, and
additions:
a. Repair and maintenance, interior alterations, and structural alterations, as provided for
in Section 21.38.040(A) through (F);
b. Additions up to a maximum of ten (10) percent of the existing floor area of the
structure as provided in Section 21.38.040(G);
c. Any repair, maintenance, or additions shall not result in loss of existing parking
spaces; and
d. Required parking shall be provided where feasible.
2. Dimensions or Type of Parking Spaces. Residential developments that are nonconforming
because they do not have the required type of covered or enclosed parking spaces or because
amendments to this Implementation Plan have changed the dimensions of required parking
spaces subsequent to the original construction of the structure may be altered or expanded as
follows:
a. All improvements and expansions allowed under subsection (A)(1) of this section;
16-60
b. Additions larger than those allowed under subsection (A)(1) of this section maybe
allowed subject to the approval of a coastal development permit.
3. Alley Access. Where applicable, residential development involving repairs, alterations, and
additions to residential development having less than the required number of parking spaces
per dwelling unit shall provide alley access to parking area if it would result in additional public
street parking.
4. Exception for Cottage Preservation. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (A)(1)(b)
and (A)(2)(b) of this section, additions of up to fifty (50) percent of the existing floor area of the
structure, but no greater than 500 square feet, are permitted for a residential dwelling, duplex,
or triplex that comply with the following criteria:
a. The floor area of any addition, together with the floor area of the existing structure,
shall not exceed the allowed maximum floor area for the coastal zoning district where the
Property is located;
b. The addition shall comply with all applicable development standards and use
regulations of this Implementation Plan;
c. The square footage of residential parking area additions identified below shall be
excluded from the allowed expansion under subsection (A)(4), but shall be included as
gross floor area;
Required Parking
Maximum Excluded Area
One -car garage
200 square feet
Two -car garage
400 square feet
Three -car garage
600 square feet
d. The height of the residential structure shall not exceed the following, regardless of
roof pitch:
i. Front half of lot: single story with a maximum height of sixteen (16) feet; and
ii. Rear half of lot: two story with a maximum height of twenty-four (24) feet;
16-61
e. The residential structure shall not include a third floor deck;
f. Dwellings within the residential development shall not be rented for periods of less
than thirty (30) days;
g. Deed Restriction and Recordation Required. Prior to the issuance of a building
permit for a cottage preservation project, the property owner shall record a deed
restriction with the Orange County Recorder's Office, the form and content of which is
satisfactory to the City Attorney, agreeing to maintain the property consistent with the
limitations specified above for cottage preservation and the restrictions on short-term
lodging. The deed restriction document shall notify future owners of the restriction. This
deed restriction shall remain in effect so long as the cottage preservation project exists on
the property; and
h. The addition complies with the limitations of Section 21.38.040(G)(1).
16-62
Attachment J
Coastal Zone Map
16-63
100
Legend
..........:
-----------------
-- Local Coastal Plan Boundary
---- City Boundary
Coastal Zone Area
Coastal Zone
City of Newport Beach, California
Coastal_Zone_Featured_Areas.mA November/2008
Newport Coast Se
_ mot A Part)
�MC
0 0.225 0.45 0.9 Miles
1 1 1
tg:f