Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20190502_FINDINGSFindings 365 Via Lido Soud 1 Required Findings for CDP – Demolition Pursuant to IP Section 21.52.15 (F) (Findings and Decision), the City may approve or conditionally approve a coastal development permit application only after first making the following findings related to the proposed development: Finding: A. Conforms to all applicable sections of the certified Local Coastal Program (e.g. development standards, no impacts to public views, natural resources, etc.). Facts in Support of Finding: 1. As analyzed herein, the proposed demolition of an existing residence will conform to the City’s LCP policies. The location of the project site within an established residential neighborhood ensures that there will be no impacts to public views, natural resources or cultural resources due to demolition activities. The project site is not located near designated public view points or coastal view roads and will not impact public coastal views. 2. The project site is located in an area known for potential seismic activity and liquefaction. All projects are required to comply with the California Building Code and Building Division standards and policies in addition to all applicable safety regulations related to potential seismic events. 3. No natural or cultural resources are located on the site, which has been developed for many years. The demolition will remove the residence, landscaping, and hardscape improvements. BMPs will be required that ensure the demolition will not result in water quality impacts due to construction debris or run-off entering the waters of Newport Bay or onto adjacent properties. The planned construction of two new single-family residences in the future will require separate Coastal Development Permits. The attached Topographic Survey identifies BMPs related to demolition, which are also listed in the Project Description above. Finding: B. Conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act if the project is located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline of any body of water located within the coastal zone. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. As analyzed herein, as shown on the Coastal Access and Recreation exhibit (Map 3 -1) in the LUP, public beach access is available from Via Lido Soud approximately 90 feet north of the project site and also approximately 60 feet south of the project site. The demolition of the residence will not alter or remove any existing public access, as adequate access has been provided at locations referenced and identified on Map 3-1; therefore, no additional access is required. PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 2 Pursuant to Chapter 20.34 of the Zoning Code – Conversion or Demolition of Affordable Housing, whenever three or more dwelling units located in one structure are to be converted or demolished (Section 20.34.020.B), the Director shall make a determination as to the applicability of this chapter to the proposed conversion or demolition by making the following findings: Finding: A. How many dwelling units were occupied by low- and moderate-income persons or families? Facts in Support of Finding: There are no records of any of the units being occupied by low- and moderate-income persons or families. The owner of the property passed away in February 2017. Based on written communication with a Trustee of the Estate, each tenant was promptly advised that as part of the process of winding up the affairs of the estate, the property would be vacated and sold. After providing the tenants adequate time to move out, the property was listed for sale 1 year and 3 months later. The units were vacant prior to the property being listed for sale in May 2018. In response to a request for prior rental agreements or rental applications, the Trustee indicated that after an exhaustive search, it was determined that no such documents exist. There is no evidence that the units were occupied by low- or moderate-income persons or families. Finding: B. Whether the conversion or demolition proposes to come from residential to nonresidential and if so, whether the proposed new use is coastal dependent. Facts in Support of Finding 1. The demolition of the existing residential structure will be replaced with residential. Finding: C. Whether a feasibility analysis is required to be prepared. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. No analysis is required, because there is no evidence that the units are and/or were occupied by low- and moderate-income families or persons. Finding: D. The feasible number of affordable units required to be replaced, if any. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. No replacement units are required because there is no evidence that the units are and/or were occupied by low- and moderate-income families or persons. Finding: E. Whether the required replacement affordable units are to be located on-site or off-site. 1. No replacement units are required, because there is no evidence that the units are and/or were occupied by low- and moderate-income families or persons. PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 3 Required Findings for CDP – Tentative Parcel Map The Zoning Administrator must determine that the Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and approves the Coastal Development Permit based on the following findings per Section 21.52.015.F of Title 21: Finding: A. That the proposed map conforms to all applicable sections of the certified Local Coastal Program. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The Tentative Parcel Map is for the purpose of subdividing an existing lot into two distinct parcels and meets all of the requirements of the Local Coastal Program, including 21.30.025 Coastal Subdivisions. 2. The property is located in an area known for potential seismic activity and liquefaction. All projects are required to comply with the California Building Code and Building Division standards and policies. 3. The Tentative Parcel Map is for a property within a developed neighborhood that is located approximately 15 feet from the water and environmentally sensitive habitat areas. Finding: B. Conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act if the project is between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline of any body of water located within the coastal zone. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The project site is located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline. The lot does not currently provide or inhibit public coastal access. Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 21.30A.040 requires that the provision of public access bear a reasonable relationship between the requirement and the project’s impact and be proportional to the impact. In this case the project is a tentative parcel map. Thus, the project does not involve a change in land use, density or intensity that will result in increased demand on public access and recreation. The Zoning Administrator must determine that the Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and approves the Tentative Parcel Map based on the following findings per Section 19.12.070 of Title 19: PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 4 Finding: A. That the proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and with applicable provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and this Subdivision Code. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The Tentative Parcel Map is for the purpose of subdividing an existing lot into two distinct parcels. The existing residence is a 2-story 4-unit structure with an attached 6-car garage that will be demolished. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the density of the RM Zoning District and the current General Plan Land Use Designation (Multiple- Unit Residential). 2. The new subdivision would not result in additional dwelling units beyond what the underlying lots would allow. 3. The subject property is not located within a specific plan area. Finding: B. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The lot is physically suitable for two separate parcels. 2. The subject property is accessible from Via Lido Soud and is adequately served by existing utilities. Finding: C. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, the decision-making body may nevertheless approve such a subdivision if an environmental impact report was prepared for the project and a finding was made pursuant to Section 21081 of the California Environmental Act that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigations measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. A four-unit structure will be demolished and the existing parcel will be subdivided into two separate parcels. 2. The property is located in an urbanized area that does not contain any sensitive vegetation or habitat. 3. The project is categorically exempt under Section 15315 (Article 19 of Chapter 3), of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines – Class 15 (Minor Land Alterations). PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 5 Finding: D. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The Tentative Parcel Map is for the purpose of subdividing an existing lot into two distinct parcels. All improvements associated with the project will comply with all Building, Public Works, and Fire Codes that are place to prevent serious public health problems. Public improvements will be required of the developer per Section 19.28.010 (General Improvement Requirements) of the Municipal Code and Section 66411 (Local Agencies to Regulate and Control Design of Subdivisions) of the Subdivision Map Act. All ordinances of the City and all Conditions of Approval will be complied with. Finding: E. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the decision-making body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided and that these easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to the City Council to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within a subdivision. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. There is an existing 4-foot utility easement in favor of the City of Newport Beach located directly behind the right of way of Via Lido Soud. The proposed subdivision would not conflict with this easement or access to the existing easement. Finding: F. That, subject to the detailed provisions of Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act, if the land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act), the resulting parcels following the subdivision of the land would not be too small to sustain their agricultural use or the subdivision will result in residential development incidental to the commercial agricultural use of the land. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The property is not subject to the Williamson Act, because the subject property is not designated as an agricultural preserve and is less than 100 acres in area. 2. The site is developed for residential use and is located in a Zoning District that permits residential uses. PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 6 Finding: G. That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been satisfied in accordance with Sections 66473.1 and 66475.3 of Subdivision Map Act. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. California Business and Professions Code Section 1100.5 has been repealed by the Legislature. However, the project site is not considered a “land project” as previously defined in Section 11000.5 of the California Business and Professions Code, because the project site does not contain 50 or more parcels of land. 2. The project is not located within a Specific Plan area. Finding: H. That the subdivision is consistent with Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and Section 65584 of the California Government Code regarding the City’s share of the regional housing need and that it balances the housing needs of the region against the public service needs of the City’s residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The Tentative Parcel Map and any future improvements are subject to Title 24 and Section 65584 of the California Government Code, which requires new construction to meet minimum heating and cooling efficiency standards depending on location and climate. The Newport Beach Building Division enforces the Title 24 compliance through the plan check and inspection process. Finding: I. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer system will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The proposed subdivision would divide a parcel into two individual parcels and would not create waste that would result in a violation of the existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Finding: J. For subdivisions lying partly or wholly within the Coastal Zone, that the subdivision conforms with the certified Local Coastal Program and, where applicable, with public access and recreation policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act. Facts in Support of Finding: 1. The subject property is within the Coastal Zone. The facts in support of findings A and B above are hereby incorporated by reference. PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 7 Relief from the Implementation Plan Development Standards – CDP In accordance with Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 21.52.090(D) Findings and Decision, the review authority may approve or conditionally approve a modification or waiver to a development permit standard of this Implementation Plan only after making all the following findings: Finding: 1. The granting of the modification is necessary due to practical difficulties associated with the property and that the strict application of the Implementation Plan results in physical hardships; or The requested modification is specifically permitted pursuant to the provisions set forth in Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Chapter 20.18.030 Table 2-3, Note 2, which provides that a parcel may be subdivided to a minimum lot size not less than the original underlying lots on the same block face in the same zoning district. The requested 35-foot lot widths are consistent with the 30-foot to 40-foot lot widths contained on the original block face in the same zoning district, and with the provision of Chapter 19.24.130.A. The Zoning and Implementation Plan documents are meant to function jointly as governing documents. However, when Title 21 (Implementation Plan) was adopted, Chapter 21.18, Table 21.18-4 did not carry over Note 2 from Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Chapter 20.18.030 Table 2-3. The requested subdivision and deviation from the design standards to allow for a 35-foot lot width are consistent with the LCP. In the absence of Note 2 from Chapter 21.18, Table 21.18-4, relief from the Implementation Plan Development Standards is necessary due to practical difficulties, and strict application of the Implementation Plan would result in physical hardship. 2. The granting of a variance is necessary due to special circumstances applicable to the property, including location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, and/or other physical features, the strict application of the development standards otherwise applicable to the property denies the property owner privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and in the same coastal zoning district: and A variance is not required as part of the proposed project. Nevertheless, the requested 35-foot lot widths are consistent with the 30-foot to 40-foot lot widths contained on the original block face within the same zoning district and with the provision of Chapter 19.24.130.A. In addition, the 35-foot lot widths are consistent with the prevailing development in the immediate surrounding area. The lots on either side of the site are 30-foot wide lots. Denial of the parcel map would deny the property owners privileges enjoyed by many surrounding properties, including by the properties on either side of the subject site. 3. The modification or variance complies with the findings required to approve a coastal development permit; The requested subdivision complies with the findings required to approve a Coastal Development Permit. The requested relief from the Implementation Plan Standards, to allow for the deviation permitted in the Zoning Code and the Subdivision Code, also complies with the findings required to approve a coastal development permit, as it is consistent with the certified Local Coastal Program to the maximum extent feasible; and there are no alternatives PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 8 that would provide greater consistency with the Local Coastal Program and/or that are more protective of Coastal Resources. 4. The modification or variance will not result in development that blocks or significantly impedes public access to and along the sea or shoreline and to coastal parks, trails or coastal bluffs; The requested relief from the Implementation Plan Development Standards is necessary due to the absence of Note 2 from Chapter 21.18, Table 21.18-4, which provides that a parcel may be subdivided to a minimum lot size not less than the original underlying lots on the same block face in the same zoning district. The requested 35-foot lot widths are consistent with the 30-foot to 40-foot lot widths contained on the original block face and with provision of Chapter 19.24.130.A. The proposed subdivision would not block or impede public access, because the subject property is a private residential property and there is no public access across the property. 5. The modification or variance will not result in development that blocks or significantly impairs public views to and along the sea or shoreline or to coastal bluffs and other scenic coastal areas; The requested relief from the Implementation Plan Development Standards is necessary due to the absence of Note 2 from Chapter 21.18, Table 21.18-4, which provides that a parcel may be subdivided to a minimum lot size not less than the original underlying lots on the same block face in the same zoning district. The requested 35-foot lot widths are consistent with the 30-foot to 40-foot lot widths contained on the original block face and with provision of Chapter 19.24.130.A. The proposed subdivision would not result in development that would block or significantly impair views to and along the sea or shoreline or to the coastal bluffs and other scenic areas, because the subject property is an existing Multi-Unit Residential use. 6. The modification or variance will not result in development that has an adverse effect either individually or cumulatively, on coastal resources, including wetlands, sensitive habitat, vegetation, or wildlife species; The requested relief from the Implementation Plan Development Standards will not result in development that has an adverse effect either individually or cumulatively on coastal resources, including wetlands, sensitive habitat, vegetation, or wildlife species, because the subject property is developed with an existing Multi-Unit Residential use. 7. The granting of the modification or the variance will not be contrary to, or conflict with, the purpose of this Implementation Plan, nor to the applicable policies of the certified Local Coastal program. The requested relief from the Implementation Plan Development Standards is necessary due to the absence of Note 2 from Chapter 21.18, Table 21.18-4, which provides that a parcel may be subdivided to a minimum lot size not less than the original underlying lots on the same block face in the same zoning district. The requested 35-foot lot widths are consistent with the 30-foot to 40-foot lot widths contained on the original block face and with provision of Chapter 19.24.130.A. In addition, the 35-foot lot widths are consistent with the existing surrounding development. The existing lots on either side of the subject site are 30-feet wide. PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 9 Granting relief from the Implementation Plan Development Standards will not be contrary to, or conflict with, the purpose of this Implementation Plan, nor to the applicable policies of the certified Local Coastal Program, because the proposed subdivision is consistent with the certified LCP. PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 10 Required Considerations – Coastal Development Permit When reviewing a coastal development permit application for development modification or variance, the review authority shall consider the following per Section 21.52.090.C Considerations.: 1. Whether or not the development is consistent with the certified Local Coastal Program to the maximum extent feasible; and 2. Whether or not there are feasible alternatives that would provide greater consistency with the certified Local Coastal Program and/or that are more protective of Coastal Resources. The development is consistent with the certified Local Coastal Program to the maximum extent feasible; and there are no alternatives that would provide greater consistency with the Local Coastal Program and/or that are more protective of Coastal Resources. The requested subdivision is consistent with the Local Coastal Program and would not impact Coastal Resources. PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 11 Required Findings to Allow Deviation – Subdivision Code A deviation from any of the design standards set forth by Chapter 19.24 may be approved by the tentative map decision making body if it makes all of the following findings: 1. The requested deviation(s) will create a land plan or development design equal or superior to that under the baseline design standards in this chapter; The requested deviation will create a development design equal to the baseline standards of Chapter 19.24 and are specifically permitted pursuant to the provisions set forth in Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Chapter 20.18.030 Table 2-3, Note 2, which provides that a parcel may be subdivided to a minimum lot size not less than the original underlying lots on the same block face in the same zoning district. The requested 35-foot lot widths are consistent with the 30-foot to 40-foot lot widths contained on the original block face within the same zoning district and with the provisions of Chapter 19.24.130.A. The resulting subdivision will divide the existing RM parcel into two RM parcels that will be compatible with the pattern of the surrounding subdivision, which consists of lot widths ranging from 30 feet to 40 feet, with the lots located immediately on either side of the subject property being 30 feet. 2. The deviation(s) will not negatively impact the carrying capacity of the local vehicular circulation network; The requested lot width deviation would have no impact on the local vehicular circulation network, because no improvements or changes would be made and no additional capacity would be introduced into the roadways. 3. The deviation(s) will not negatively impact pedestrian circulation; The requested lot width deviation would have no impact on the local pedestrian circulation network, because no improvements or changes would be made and no additional capacity would be introduced into the pedestrian walkways. 4. The resulting subdivision will be compatible with the pattern of surrounding subdivisions; The requested subdivision is located within the RM (Multiple-Unit Residential) General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning Code district, and is also surrounded by R-1 (Single Family) residential. The resulting subdivision will divide the existing RM parcel into two RM parcels that will be compatible with the pattern of the surrounding subdivision, which consists of lot widths ranging from 30 feet to 40 feet, with the lots located immediately on either side of the subject property being 30 feet. 5. The resulting subdivision design and improvements will be consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and will conform to the Subdivision Map Act and all other provisions of this Subdivision Code; and The proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the General Plan, Title 19-Subdivisions of the Municipal Code, and with the applicable provisions of the Subdivision Map Act that provide for allowances under Chapter 19.24.130 Deviations from Design Standards, provided that the applicant is able to establish adequate justification and meet the required findings. The requested deviation is specifically permitted as set forth in Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Chapter 20.18.030 Table 2-3, Note 2, which provides that a parcel may be subdivided to a minimum lot size not less than the original PA2019-085 Findings 365 Via Lido Soud 12 underlying lots on the same block face in the same zoning district. The requested 35-foot lot widths are consistent with the 30-foot to 40-foot lot widths contained on the original block face and with provision of Chapter 19.24.130.A. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the density of the RM Zoning District and the RM General Plan Land Use Designation (Multiple-Unit Residential) that allows for a housing density of 36 units/acre. The subject site is not located within a Specific Plan area. 6. The resulting subdivision design and improvements will not be materially detrimental to the residents or tenants of the proposed subdivision or surrounding properties, nor to public health or safety. The resulting subdivision will maintain the existing RM (Multi-Unit Residential) use and will not result in any environmental risks. The requested deviation from design standards to allow for the modified standards per Title 20 (Zoning and Planning) would not create any noise, traffic, or other environmental effects that could be detrimental to the residents of the proposed subdivision or surrounding properties, nor to public health or safety. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the existing surrounding development, which has lot widths ranging from 30 feet to 40 feet with the lots located immediately on either side of the subject property being 30 feet. PA2019-085