Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPP_CONCEPT_APPROVAL IN CONCEPT APPEAL DENIAL #2805-89 309 E. EDGEWATER AVE (SANDS)�l COMMISSIONERS dYI 1-\ ' dry February 22, 1990MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX of the subject property will not be striped for about six mon Commissioner Edwards, Chairman Pomeroy, and Mr. b discussed the feasibility of moving the power pole. Commissioner Pers6n commented that the P g Commission should not encourage situations that wo slow down the traffic inasmuch as the City is attem ' g to improve vehicular motion * circulation by widening Irvin venue. Motion was made to support staffs decision tc quire a minimum driveway width of 24 feet in conjunctio th the intensification of use proposed for the subject site. Co oner Glover concurred with the foregoing statement. All Ayes otion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. s s s Request to appeal the denial of Approval In Conceot 2805-89. Item z for the construction of a duplex Q properly located at 309 East AIC 2805-B5 Edeewater Avenue in the R 1 District on the Balboa Peninsula sustained Mr. Timothy Randall, Attorney, representing Louis Sands IV, property owner, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Denial of Randall indicated that subsequent to filing the appeal of the Approval denial of Approval in Concept 2805-89, Mr. Sands is no longer requesting a duplex on the subject location; however, Mr. Randall requested that Mr. Sands be allowed to develop a single family structure in accordance with the R-3 development standards. Commissioner Pers6n referred to the staff report which states that "any further development must be done under the R-1 standards", which is a statement of fact, and the Planning Commission shall only consider the appeal of the denial of the Approval in Concept. Commissioner Pers6n explained that Mr. Sands had the opportunity to develop a single family structure under the R-3 development standards until December 13, 1989. In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. Randall replied that new plans were not submitted for Approval -18- COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES ROLL CALL Motion All Ayes Motion All Ayes CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Commissioner Debay referred to the staff report wherein it is stated that Mr. Sands received an extension to submit plans for a single family structure meeting he R-3 development standards to February 14, 1990, and that Mr. Sands continued to refuse to design a conforming structure. Mr. Randall explained that Mr. Sands was in the process of examining whether a duplex would be allowable during that time. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, replied that the Planning. Commission would not be required to make a finding to sustain the denial of an Approval in Concept. Motion was made to sustain the denial of Approval 2805-89 for he construction of a duplex at3l 09E.Edgewater Avenue. Commissioner Pers6n supported the motion on the basis that the R-3 density standard has remained on the and Mr. Sands was given ample opportunity pto since 5 constructa duplex. Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Amendment No. 700 Request to consider possible revisions to Viand Title 20.of the Newport Beach Municipa a related to Report of Residential Building R made and voted on to set this item for public on April 5, 1990. MOTION CARRIED. -19- s s s INDEX Item 3 A700 set for PH 4-5-90 COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUTES w CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX of the subject property will not be striped for about six mop Commissioner Edwards, Chairman Pomeroy, and Mr.,.,W6b discussed the feasibility of moving the power pole. Commissioner Pers6n commented that the P g Commission should not encourage situations that wo slow down the traffic inasmuch as the City is atte g to improve vehicular Motion * circulation by widening Irvin venue. Motion was made to support staffs decision t quire a minimum driveway width of 24 feet in conjunctio . the intensification of use proposed for the subject site. Co oner Glover concurred with the foregoing statement. All Ayes otion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. ss. Request to =eal the denial of Approval In Concept 2805-89. Item 2 for the construction of a duplex on properly located at 309 East AIC 2805-BE Edeewater Avenue in the R 1 District on the Balboa Peninsula sustained Mr. Timothy Randall, Attorney, representing Louis Sands IV, property owner, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Denial of Randall indicated that subsequent to filing the appeal of the Approval denial of Approval in Concept 2805-89, Mr. Sands is no longer requesting a duplex on the subject location; however, Mr. Randall requested that Mr. Sands be allowed to develop a single family structure in accordance with the R-3 development standards. Commissioner Pers6n referred to the staff report which states that "any further development must be done under the R-1 standards", which is a statement of fact, and the Planning Commission shall only consider the appeal of the denial of the Approval in Concept. Commissioner Pers6n explained that Mr. Sands had the opportunity to develop a single family structure under the R-3 development standards until December 13, 1989. In response to a question posed by Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. Randall replied that new plans were not submitted for Approval -18= COMMISSIONERS February 22, 1990MINUT ES ROLL CALL Motion All Ayes Motion All Ayes CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Commissioner Debay referred to the staff report wherein it is stated that Mr. Sands received an extension to submit plans for a single family structure meeting the R-3 development standards to February 14, 199% and that Mr. Sands continued to refuse to design a conforming structure. Mr. Randall explainedeth at Mr. Sands was in the process of examining a duplex would be allowable during that time. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Edwards, Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, replied that the Planning Commission would not be required to make a finding to sustain the denial of an Approval in Concept. Motion was made to sustain the denial of Approval in Concept 2805-89 for the construction of a duplex at 309 E. Edgewater Avenue. Commissioner Pers6n supported the motion on the basis that the and Mr. Sandss was given ample oppohas remained on rtunitypt ty since construc95a duplex. Motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. AmendmentNo. 70D Request to consider possible revisions to e?�and Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal a related to Report of Residential Building Rec made and voted on to set this item for public on April 5, 1990. MOTION CARRIED. s s s -19- INDEX Item 3 A700 set for PH 4-5-90 Planning Commission Meeting February 22, 1990 Discussion Item No. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: Request to appeal the denial of Approval in Concept 2805-89, for the construction of a duplex on property located at 309 East Edgewater Avenue. LOCATION: 309 EAST EDGEWATER AVENUE, NEWPORT BEACH ZONE: APPLICANT: OWNER: APPLICATION R-1 LOUIS SANDS, IV LOUIS SANDS, IV This is a request by Louis Sands, IV to appeal the denial of Approval in Concept 2805- 89, for the construction of a duplex at 309 E. Edgewater Ave. Appeal procedures are contained in Chapter 20.85 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Sueeested Action Hold hearing, close hearing; if desired sustain the denial of Approval in Concept 2805- 89 for the construction of a duplex at 309 E. Edgewater Ave. Discussion The property is located at 309 E. Edgewater Avenue, in Central Balboa between Fernando Street and Coronado Street. The lot size measures approximately 2,190 sq. ft. (30'x 68'x 29'x 78'). Bayward of the property across East Edgewater Avenue is a small piece of land also owned by the applicant. This property is considered a separate lot because it is separated from the main lot by public right of way (E. Edgewater Ave.). Since this area is a separate lot, this parcel is not included as part of the "property" for determining density or when analyzed in this report. This is consistent with the way the City has always treated this area. The property is currently, developed with two dwelling units. The only permit history the City has on file is a Building Permit for remodel work done in April 1948. At that time two units would have been permitted on this site since the R-3 zone permitted one unit per 1,000 square feet of land prior to 1959. The land area requirement for the R-3 zone changed from 1,000 sq. ft. of land per dwelling unit to 1,200 sq. ft. of land per dwelling r� TO: Planning Commission - 2 unit in 1959 by Ordinance No. 901. The R-3 density standard has remained unchanged since 1959. Under ,the R-3 standard, the applicarit would have been permitted to build one dwelling unit on the property. As part of the amendments to the General Plan approved ,on October 24, 1988, the City Council changed the land use designation of the property from multi -family residential to single family detached (Resolution 88-100). The change in the land use designation occurred because the lot size limits development to one dwelling unit under the R-3 zoning standards. In order to make the zoning consistent with the land use designations, the City Council rezoned the property from R-3 to R-1 as part of Amendment 692. As part of the ordinance for this Amendment, "the City shall not refuse to issue building permits, on the basis of zoning inconsistency, with respect to any project for which plans bad been submitted to the Building Department or Planning Department for building permit or approval in concept prior to the effective date of the ordinance, and provided further that the applicant diligently processes the plans and provides the Building and Planning Departments with all necessary information preliminary to the issuance of a building permit or approval in concept. Prior to the effective date of Amendment 692, December 13, 1989, the applicant submitted plans for AIC 2805-89. The AIC proposed the demolition of a nonconforming duplex and the construction of a new duplex. The AIC was denied for two reasons. First, since the lot size is approximately 2,190 sq. ft., and the R-3 zone requires 1,200 sq. ft. of land per dwelling unit, the lot is not large enough to develop more than one dwelling unit. Second, the General Plan Land Use Designation is Single Family Detached which does not permit the development of more than one dwelling unit. In cases where the zoning and land use designations are inconsistent, the density is determined by the land use designation and the development standards are determined by the zone. Therefore, more than one unit could not be permitted on a lot designated single family. The following chart shows how 309 E. Edgewater Avenue could have been developed from 1959 to the present. 1 0 1 Zoning R-3 Permitted # of units 10422/88 - 12113/89 12113189 - R-3 R-1 District A residential zoning correction sheet was issued to the applicant on January 8, 1990. The correction sheet states that only one dwelling unit is allowed on the lot. After a telephone conversation on January 9, 1990 explaining the reasons for the denial of the AIC, the applicant requested a written explanation for the denial. A letter was sent to the applicant on January 15, 1990 (attached) explaining why two dwelling units could not be built on the property. The deadline for designing .and submitting plans for a single family structure meeting the R-3 standards was extended to February 14, 1990. The applicant continued to refuse to design a conforming structure, and continued to question TO: Planning Commission - 3 staffs interpretation through his attorney, Mr. Randall, in a telephone conversation on February 2, 1990. Following that telephone conversation, Mr. Randall sent a letter (attached) to the City on February 2, 1990, requesting to appear before the Planning Commission to appeal the denial of AIC 2805-89. CONCLUSION: Adoption of the ordinance rezoning the property to R-1 included the provision that the City would not refuse the issuance of building permits on the basis of zoning inconsistency, provided that the plans for building permit or approval in concept were submitted prior to the effective date of the ordinance. Also included in this provision is the requirement that the applicant diligently process the plans and provide the City with all necessary information prior to the issuance of building permits or approval in concept. However, because the plans submitted for approval under the R-3 development standards were not in accordance with the number of units permitted by the R-3 zone or the General Plan Land Use designation and since the applicant refused to diligently pursue the correction of those plans by eliminating the second unit, the time provision has elapsed for this application. Any further development must be done under the R-1 standards. PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By eter Carlson Assistant Planner SANDSSR Attachments: 1. Letter to Ed Sands, January 15, 1990 2. Letter from Mr. Timothy Randall, February 2, 1990 JPN-,V-":N bH1 14:1n W:btW U=Nr`trnt im mJ'.4v4 re4.7 Nu. rrx. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA92659-1768 PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 January 15, 1990 Mr. Edward Sands 309 Edgewater Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject, 309 Edgewater, Newport Beach, CA, Dear Mr. Sands: The plans submitted for AIC 2805-89 propose the demolition of an existing duplex and the construction of a new two unit structure. This AIC has not been approved because your request to build two new dwelling units is inconsistent with the General Plan, the Local Coastal Program and the zoning of your property. On October 24, 1988, the City Council amended the Land Use and' Circulation Elements of the General Plan. In the process of revising these Elements, the adequacy of the transportation system to accommodate both existing and future development was examined. As a result, various densities and intensities of development were established throughout the City. The land use designations of various residential properties located on the Balboa Peninsula and in West Newport were changed. The changes in land use designations were based on a block by block evaluation of lot size. Within each block, the predominant lot size was used to determine the appropriate land use designation. According to the City's records, the subject property is an irregularly shaped lot measuring approximately 2190 sq.ft.(3(Yx 68'x 29'x 78') and is currently developed with two dwelling units. The previous zoning of the property was R-3 which requires 1200 sq.R. of land area per dwelling unit. This 1200 aq.ft. land area development standard has boon a requirement since 1959. Because of the small lot size, only one dwelling unit would have been permitted under the R 3 zoning classification. Therefore, the land use designation of your property was changed to single family detached. Land use decisions are legally required to be consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinances. Therefore, on November 13, 1989, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 89-34 to amend the zoning classifications for those properties redesignated on October 24, 1988. As part of this Ordinance, your property was rezoned from R-3 to R-1. Approval in Concept No. 2805-89 is ready to be returned to you. The primary correction is that two dwelling units are not permitted. The existing two unit building is legal 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach 3RN-2d-'90 SRT 12.16 ID:694 ULENe RE TEL NO;49417243 #2b1 PW Mr. Edward Sands January 15, 1990 Page two nonconforming and may remain that way until it is voluntarily torn down. However, should the building be demolished, it may be replaced by only one dwelling unit. Because the AIC was submitted prior to. December 13, 1989, the City will allow the construction of a single family dwelling built to R-3 development standards as long as no discretionary approval is required. In order to take advantage of the R-3 development standards, new plans must be submitted for AIC before February 14, 1990, and the building permits must be obtained expeditiously. If you have any questions regarding the AIC, please contact Genia Ka2nocha, Assistant Planner, at 644-3200. Should you have any additional questions regarding the rezoning, please do not hesitate to call me at the above phone number. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By eter Car a Assistant Planner F\PC\SANDIE1 xc: Genia Kazni LAW OFFICES OF MESERVE, MUMMER,'MUMPER,'g H.UGHES LOS ANGELES OFFICE I8500 VON HARMAN AVENUE EDWIN A. MESERVE 35n. FLOOR 14003.1055) 333 SOUTH HOPE STREET SUITE 500 SHIRLEY E. MESERVP LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90071 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 9271S IIB09.19591 TELEPHONE 12131620-0300 POST OFFICE BOX 19591 HEWLINOS TELECOPIER (213) 625.1930 9001PER IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92713 CLIFPORO E. oHes IISDhl 1511 TELEPHONE 17141 474•B99S —0 35384-001 TELECOPIER M41 975 105� OUR REE No. February 2, 1990 Planning Commission BY"MESSENGER CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 RE: 309 Edgewater, Newport Beach, California Commissioners: This firm represents Louis Sands IV, owner of the above - referenced property (the "Property"), with regard to the processing of approvals for the construction of a duplex on the Property. I hereby request an appeal to the Planning Commission of the decision of the Planning Department to disapprove the plans submitted for AIC2805-89 as evidenced by that certain letter from Peter Carlson, Assistant Planner, to Mr. Edward Sands, dated January 15., 1990, a copy of which is attached hereto for your reference. The basis of this appeal will be that the subject parcel, together with an adjacent parcel owned by Mr. Sands, contains sufficient area to qualify for approval for the construction of a duplex under the criteria estab- lished under the previous R-3 zoning. Please note that plans for the new construction were timely submitted prior to the effective date of Ordinance 89-34 by the Newport Beach City Council on November 13, 1989 (i.e., December 13, 1989). I further request that a hearing date be set so that my client will have the opportunity to present his position on this matter to you. RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FEB 21990AM pM 718191101HI12111213141516 N. r MESERVE. MUMPER8 HUGHE5 Planning Commission February 2, 1990 Page 2 Please contact me at the address indicated above as to the time and date in the hearing set to review this matter. Your consideration is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, �- Z(�" Timothy L. Randall Y of MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES TLR:sdm 1281t1471s cc: Louis Sands IV Mr. Edgar L. Sands, AIA, Sands Associates Architects Peter Carlson, City of Newport Beach Enclosure LAW OFFICES OF MESERVE, MUMPER 8 HUGHES LOS ANGELES OFFICE 18500 VON KARMAN AVENUE EoWIN A. MESERVE 351. FLOOR SUITE 600 0603-1955) 333 SOUTH HOPE STREET SHIRLEY E. MESERVE LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90071 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92715 (1999-19s9) TELEPHONE 12131 620-0300 POST OFFICE BOX 19591 HEWLINGS MUMPER TELECOPIER: (213) 625.1930 (1989-19661 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92713 CLIFFORO E. HUGHES 0694-19e1) TELEPHONE (714) 474-8995 35384-001 TELECOPIER 1714) 975-1055 OUR REF. NO. February 2, 1990 Planning Commission BY MESSENGER CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 RE: 309 Edgewater, Newport Beach, California Commissioners: This firm represents Louis Sands IV, owner of the above - referenced property (the "Property"), with regard to the processing of approvals for the construction of a duplex on the Property. I hereby request an appeal to the Planning Commission of the decision of the Planning Department to disapprove the plans submitted for AIC2805-89 as evidenced by that certain letter from Peter Carlson, Assistant Planner, to Mr. Edward Sands, dated January 15, 1990, a copy of which is attached hereto for your reference. The basis of this appeal will be that the subject parcel, together with an adjacent parcel owned by Mr. Sands, contains sufficient area to qualify for approval for the construction of a duplex under the criteria estab- lished under the previous R-3 zoning. Please note that plans for the new construction were timely submitted prior to the effective date of Ordinance 89-34 by the Newport Beach City Council on November 13, 1989 (i.e., December 13, 1989). I further request that a hearing date be set so that my client will have the opportunity to present his position on this matter to you. RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FEB 21990 AM PM 718,9110,11112111213141516 It MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES Planning Commission February 2, 1990 Page 2 Please contact me at the address indicated above as to the time and date in the hearing set to review this matter. Your consideration is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, Timothy L. Randall Y of MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES TLR:sdm 1281t147ls cc: Louis Sands IV Mr. Edgar L. Sands, AIA, Sands Associates Architects Peter Carlson, City of Newport Beach Enclosure V • � JAW20-190 SAT 12:15 ID:684-B+EYRE TEL No:494-17243 #251 P02 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768. NEWPORT BEACH. CA 92659-1768 PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 January 15, 1990 Mr. Edward Sands 309 Edgewater Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: 309 Edgewater, Newport Beach, CA Dear Mr. Sands: The plans submitted for AIC 2805-89 propose the demolition of an existing duplex and the construction of a new two unit structure. This AIC has not been approved because your request to build two new dwelling units is inconsistent with the General Plan, the Local Coastal Program and the zoning of your property. On October 24, 1988, the City Council amended the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan. In the process of revising these Elements, the adequacy of the transportation system to accommodate both existing and future development was examined. As a result, various densities and intensities of development were established throughout the City. The land use designations of various residential properties located on the Balboa Peninsula and in West Newport were changed. The changes in land use designations were based on a block by block evaluation of lot size. Within each block, the predominant lot size was used to determine the appropriate land use designation. According to the City's records, the subject property is an irregularly shaped lot measuring approximately 2190 sq.ft.(30'x 68'x 29'x 78') and is currently developed with two dwelling units. The previous zoning of the property was R-3 which requires 1200 sq.R. of land area per dwelling,unit. This 1200 sq.ft. land area development standard has boon a requirement since 1959. Because of the small lot size, only one dwelling unit would have been permitted under the R-3 zoning classification. Therefore, the land use designation of your property was changed to single family detached. Land use decisions are legally required to be consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinances. Therefore, on November 13, 19899 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 89-34 to amend the zoning classifications for those properties redesignated on October 24, 1988. As part of this Ordinance, your property was rezoned from R-3 to R-1. Approval in Concept No. 2805-89 is ready to be returned to you. The primary correction is that two dwelling units are not permitted. The existing two unit building is legal 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach JRN-20-199 SAT 12:16 ID:684 a-e+EYRE TEL N0:494-7243 #251 P03 Mr. Edward Sands January 15, 1990 Page two nonconforming and may remain that way until it is voluntarily torn down. However, should the building be demolished, it may be replaced by only one dwelling unit. Because the AIC was submitted prior to. December 13, 1989, the City will allow the construction of a single family dwelling built to R-3 development standards as long as no discretionary approval is required. In order to take advantage of the R-3 development standards, new plans must be submitted for AIC before February 14, 1990, and the building permits must be obtained expeditiously. If you have any questions regarding the A1C, please contact Genia Kaznocba, Assistant Planner, at 644.3200• Should you have any additional questions regarding the rezoning, please do not hesitate to call me at the above phone number. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMET JAMES D, HEWICKER, ] By eter Car n Assistant Planner F\PC\SANDiE72 xc: Genia Kaznocba, Ass CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659-1768 PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 January 15, 1990 Mr. Edward Sands 6c� !� n ne r 3�- 09dgewate h� Newport Beach; C-A--92663 ZApwet sr3jp,-14 cp Subject: 309 Edgewater, Newport Beach, CA Dear Mr. Sands: The plans submitted for AIC 2805-89 propose the demolition of an existing duplex and the construction of a new two unit structure. This AIC has not been approved because your request to build two new dwelling units is inconsistent with the General Plan, the Local Coastal Program and the zoning of your property. On October 24, 1988, the City Council amended the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan. In the process of revising these Elements, the adequacy of the transportation system to accommodate both existing and future development was examined. As a result, various densities and intensities of development were established throughout the City. The land use designations of various residential properties located on the Balboa Peninsula and in West Newport were changed. The changes in land use designations were based on a block by block evaluation of lot size. Within each block, the predominant lot size was used to determine the appropriate land use designation. According to the City's records, the subject property is an irregularly shaped lot measuring approximately 2190 sq.ft.(30'x 68'x 29'x 78') and is currently developed with two dwelling units. The previous zoning of the property was R-3 which requires 1200 sq.ft. of land area per dwelling unit. This 1200 sq.ft. land area development standard has been a requirement since 1959. Because of the small lot size, only one dwelling unit would have been permitted under the R-3 zoning classification. Therefore, the land use designation of your property was changed to single family detached. Land use decisions are legally required to be consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinances. Therefore, on November 13, 1989, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 89-34 to amend the zoning classifications for those properties redesignated on October 24, 1988. As part of this Ordinance, your property was rezoned from R-3 to R-1. Approval in Concept No. 2805-89 is ready to be returned to you. The primary correction is that two dwelling units are not permitted. The existing two unit building is legal 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach Mr. Edward Sands January 15, 1990 Page two nonconforming and may remain that way until it is voluntarily torn down. However, should the building be demolished, it may be replaced by only one dwelling unit. Because the AIC was submitted prior to. December 13, 1989, the City will allow the construction of a single family dwelling built to R-3 development standards as long as no discretionary approval is required. In order to take advantage of the R-3 development standards, new plans must be submitted for AIC before February 14, 1990, and the building permits must be obtained expeditiously. If you have any questions regarding the AIC, please contact Genia Kaznocha, Assistant Planner, at 644-3200. Should you have any additional questions regarding the rezoning, please do not hesitate to call me at the above phone number. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By eter Carlson Assistant Planner F\PC\SANDLET2 xc: Genia Kaznocha, Assistant Planner DATE 4 / r/ TIME FOR ! `-' WHILE YOU WERE OUT M OF PHONE No. I 7 �(' ��✓ EXr. TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL RETURNED YOUR CALL WILL CALL AGAIN CAME IN TO SEE YOU URGENT BY cc continuous coating corporation five twenty west grove avenue, orange, calif. 92665 (714) 637-4643 �R.vd�z � / RTrNy �� Eo �sitwpsi ?deg lr�� n i 12 cn2 r per,' i Ciasu2feGQ eL _ �Dv�'(Q _ /�l• ira,�iv9i1 �Cv�<iev. `JP�,vfbi2ui. Gsr(b __`r_ FiGr'e�`Icc�'u+; - Vrek Ale A pu r � (hG,,�/+�/.�_ """-•��, i��/e p/,,,,i Gf)f- �j,e- - �!/`0� IN Continuous Coil Electro-Zinc Coating Line ,'lI For further information regareing coatings, specifications, contact ye (1� Steel Service Center, Steel MITI; or write our Sales Department, or pia collect cell to: (714) 637-4643. LAW OFFICES OF MESERVE, MUMPER F3 HUGHES I8500 VON KARMAN AVENUE SUITE 600 POST OFFICE BOX 19S91 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92713 n � Mr. Peter Carlson Assistant Planner CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Department P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 3 LAW OFFICES OF MESERVE, MUMPER 9 HUGHES LOS ANGELES OFFICL 16500 VON KARMAN AVENUE EOWIN A. MESERVE 357" FLOOR 11863.1255) 333 $ONT11 HOPE SUITE BOO SHIRLEY E. MESERVE LOS ANOCLCS, CALIFORNIA NIA 90071 IRVIN E, CALIFORNIA 92715 I1e69-1969) TELCPHONCC (213) 620.0300 POST OFFICE BOX 19591 HCWLINOS MUMPER TELCCOPICR: (213) 625-1WO 11880.10681 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92713 CLIFFO RO E. HuaHEs TELEPHONE (714) 474-8995 089w1980 35384-001 TELECOPIER (714) 975-1066 OUR REF. NO. February 2, 1990 Planning Commission BY MESSUMR CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 RE: 309 Edgewater, Newport Beach, California Commissioners: This firm represents Louis Sands IV, owner of the above - referenced property (the "Property"), with regard to the processing of approvals for the construction of a duplex on the Property. I hereby request an appeal to the Planning.Commission of the decision of the Planning Department to disapprove the plans submitted for AIC2805-89 as evidenced by that certain letter from Peter Carlson, Assistant Planner, to Mr. Edward Sands, dated January 15, 1990, a copy of which is attached hereto for your reference. The basis of this appeal will be that the subject parcel, together with an adjacent parcel owned by Mr. Sands, contains sufficient area to qualify for approval for the construction of a duplex under the criteria estab- lished under the previous R-3 zoning. Please note that plans for the new construction were timely submitted prior to the effective date of Ordinance 89-34 by the Newport Beach City Council on November 13, 1989 (i.e., December 13, 1989). I further request that a hearing date be set so that my client will have the opportunity to present his position on this matter to you. RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AM FEB 51990 �t8t9t�tut�t1t213t4t� 6 W, MESERVE. MUMPER8 HUGHE5 Planning Commission February 2, 1990 Page 2 Please contact me at the address indicated above as to the time and date in the hearing set to review this matter. Your consideration is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, 'z(47" Timothy L. Randall Y of MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES TLR:sdm 1281t147ls cc: Louis Sands IV Mr. Edgar L. Sands, AIA, Sands Associates Architects Peter Carlson, City of Newport Beach Enclosure JA14-20-190 SAT 12:15 ID:684 a-EREYFE TEL NO:494-'7243 #251 P02 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768. NEWPORT BEACH. CA 92659.1768 PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644.3225 January 15, 1990 Mr. Edward Sands 309 Edgewater Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: 309 Edgewater, Newport Beach, CA Dear Mr. Sands: The plans submitted for AIC 2805-89 propose the demolition of an existing duplex and the construction of a new two unit structure. This AIC has not been approved because your request to build two new dwelling units is inconsistent with the General Plan, the Local Coastal Program and the zoning of your property. On October 24, 1988, the City Council amended the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan. In the process of revising these Elements, the adequacy of the transportation system to accommodate both existing and future development was examined. As a result, various densities and intensities of development were established throughout the City. The land use designations of various residential properties located on the Balboa Peninsula and in West Newport were changed. The changes in land use designations were based on a block by block evaluation of lot size. Within each block, the predominant lot size was used to determine the appropriate land use designation. According to the City's records, the subject property is an irregularly shaped lot measuring approximately 2190 sq.ft.(30'x 68'x 29'x 78) and is currently developed with two dwelling units. The previous zoning of the property was R-3 which requires 1200 sq.ft. of land area per dwelling unit. This 1200 sq.ft. land area development standard has been a requirement since 1959. Because of the small lot size, only one dwelling unit would have been permitted under the R-3 zoning classification. Therefore, the land use designation of your property was changed to single family detached. Land use decisions are legally required to be consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinances. Therefore, on November 13, 19899 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 89-34 to amend the zoning classifications for those properties redesignated on October 24, 1988. As part of this Ordinance, your property was rezoned from R-3 to R-1. Approval in Concept No. 2805-89 is ready to be returned to you. The primary correction is that two dwelling units are not permitted. The existing two unit building is legal 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach JPN-20-190 SAT 12.16 ID:684 aM+EYRE TEL NO:494-M43 #251 P03- Mr. Edward Sands January 15. 1990 Page two nonconforming and may remain that way until it is voluntarily torn down. However, should the building be demolished, it may be replaced by only one dwelling unit. Because the AIC was submitted prior to, December 13, 1989, the City will allow the construction of a single family dwelling built to R-3 development standards as long as no discretionary approval is required. In order to take advantage of the R-3 development standards, new plans must be submitted for AIC before February 14, 1990, and the building permits must be obtained expeditiously. If you have any questions regarding the AIC, please contact Genia Kaznocha, Assistant Planner, at 64�44.3200. Should you have any additional questions regarding the rezoning, please do not hesitate to call me at the above phone number. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By eter Car a Assistant Planner F\PC\SANDIE72 xe: Genia Kaznocha, Assistant Planner 20.85.010 PLANNING AND ZONING i Chapter 20.85 APPEALS2 :G Sections: 20.85.010 Appeal Procedure. 20.85.010 Appeal Procedure. A. AUTHORITY Ol Planning Commission shall have the power to hear ant on the enforcement or interpretation of the provisions B. APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL. In case an apl with the action of the Planning Commission on his•; twenty-one (21) days appeal in writing to the City Cou C. NOTICE TO COMMISSION. Notice shall be. Commission of such appeal and the Planning Com1r report to the City Council setting forth the reason fo. Commission or shall be represented at the Council Mt matter is heard. t D. RENDERING OF DECISION. The City Cc decision within thirty (30) days after the filing of-suc (part), 1976). w�nil w 4W T v i'; if7f i iix':al I:CJ.s l+q; 2. Use permit appeal — See Chapter 27.80. Variance appeal — See Chapter 20.82. Appeal on amendments — See Chapter 20.84. (Newport Beach 11-88) 468-60b DATE JAN G /..(/�i�g,,G/ TIME FOR - WHILE YOU WERE OUT TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL RETURNED YOUR CALL WILL CALL AGAIN CAME IN TO SEE YOU URGENT MESSAGE- i s/,i By- LJ Je� Ao cv- „ RESIDENTIAL ZONING CORRECTIONS Telephone: (714) 644-3200 Plan Check Nc- v-• By:Dana Aslami. Associate Planner v•Genia Kaznoc a Assistant Planner By:Scot Ferris. Assistant Planner By: ��T/i) Address: Date; I %' Corrections Required: Legal Description: Lot 1 �_ Block Section Tract d PT Verify legal description with Public Works Covenant required. Please have owner's signature notarized on the attached document and return to me. yy Lot Size I-X15IX U Zone ( a Number of Units 4 �C�GUry So Buildable Area Maximum Structural Area (Area including exterior walls, stairway(s) on one level and required parking). x buildable area. Proposed Structural Area: x buildable area. Provide tissue overlay of calculations verifying proposed square footage. Open Space Area cu.ft. (Volume of space equal to buildable width x height limit x six). This area must be at least six feet in an direction (61x 61x 6'), and open on at least two sides, or one side and one end. Required Setbacks Front Rear Right Side Left Side Note: The following are not permitted to encroach into required setback: Balconies Decks Other Remarks: Height Limitation Fireplaces Bay/Garden Windows Measured from natural grade to mid -point of roof. Code allows an additional 5'-0” to the ridge height. Allowable mid -point Allowable ridge height Dimension all elevations from natural grade to: mid-point(s) of roof plane(s) Remarks: ridge(s) of roof plane(s) Label natural grade and finished grade on all elevations. Distance between buildings Maximum Coverage Number of Stories Required Parking: clear inside minimum 9'-4" x 19' single space 17'-61, x 19' two spaces 8' x 16' third/fourth spaces(s) Label clear inside dimensions of provided parking spaces Is demolition proposed? Number of units to be demolished Fairshare Contribution San Joaquin hills Transportation Corridor Fee Park Dedication Fee SPECIAL APPROVAL REQUIRED THROUGH: Modifications Committee. Indicate Modification Approval No. on plans. Modification required for Planning Gomm Use Permit �\ Variance ` - a ezue"GO( Resubdivision/Tract Site Plan Review Other Public Works: Easement/Encroachment Permit Subdivision Engineer Traffic Engineer Approval of Landscape Plans BuildingDepartment: Grading Engineer Parks Department: Approval of Landscape Plans Coastal Approval RequiiedRequired: Approval In Concept (AIC) No. (Note: File 3 sets of plans: site, floor, and elevations) Coastal development Permit No. Categorical Exclusion No. (C.E.O.) (Note: Building permits may be issued 10 days of C.E.O.) Waiver # Exempt, Because Miscellaneous following issuance 1, Provide floor plan(s), fully dimensioned, showing all room uses. 2. Provide plot plan, fully dimensioned, showing: location of all buildings, and distance to property lines. distance from face of curb to front property line (verify with Public Works) second and third floor footprints (if applicable) all projections (i.e. fireplaces, bay windows), label distance(s) to PL(s) 3. Chimney (and chimney caps etc.) heights permitted only as required by U.B.C. or manufacturer specifications. 4. Pools, spas, walls, fences, patio covers and other freestanding structures require separate reviews and permits. 5. Association Approval (Advisory). Issuance of a Building Permit by the City does not relieve applicant of legal requirement to observe covenants, conditions and restrictions which may be recorded against the property or to obtain community association approval of plans. Planning Commission Meeting February 22 1990 Discussion Item No. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: Request to appeal the denial of Approval in Concept 2805-89, for the construction of a duplex on property located at 309 East Edgewater Avenue. LOCATION: 309 EAST EDGEWATER AVENUE, NEWPORT BEACH ZONE: APPLICANT: OWNER: APPLICATION R-1 LOUIS SANDS, IV LOUIS SANDS, IV This is a request by Louis Sands, IV to appeal the denial of Approval in Concept 2805- 89, for the construction of a duplex at 309 E. Edgewater Ave. Appeal procedures are contained in Chapter 20.85 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Suggested Action Hold hearing, close hearing; if desired sustain the denial of Approval in Concept 2805- 89 for the construction of a duplex at 309 E. Edgewater Ave. Discussion The property is located at 309 E. Edgewater Avenue, in Central Balboa between Fernando Street and Coronado Street. The lot size measures approximately 2,190 sq. ft. (30'x 68'x 29'x 78'). Bayward of the property across East Edgewater Avenue is a small piece of land also owned by the applicant. This property is considered a separate lot because it is separated from the main lot by public right of way (E. Edgewater Ave.). Since this area is a separate lot, this parcel is not included as part of the "property" for determining density or when analyzed in this report. This is consistent with the way the City has always treated this area. The property is currently developed with two dwelling units. The only permit history the City has on file is a Building Permit for remodel work done in April 1948. At that time two units would have been permitted on this site since the R-3 zone permitted one unit per 1,000 square feet of land prior to 1959. The land area requirement for the R-3 zone changed from 1,000 sq. ft. of land per dwelling unit to 1,200 sq. ft. of land per dwelling TO: Planning Commission - 2 unit in 1959 by Ordinance No. 901. The R-3 density, standard has remained unchanged' since 1959. Under the R-3 standard, the applicant would have been permitted to build one dwelling unit on the property. As part of the amendments to the General Plan approved on October 24, 1988, the City Council changed the land use designation of the property from multi -family residential to single family detached (Resolution 88-100). The change in the land use designation occurred because the lot size limits development to one dwelling unit under the R-3 zoning standards. In order to make the zoning consistent with the land use designations, the City Council rezoned the property from R-3 to R-1 as part of Amendment 692. As part of the ordinance for this Amendment, "the City shall not refuse to issue 'building permits, on the basis of zoning inconsistency, with respect to any project for which plans had been submitted' to the Building Department or Planning Department for building permit or approval in concept prior to the effective date of the ordinance, and provided further that the applicant diligently processes the plans and provides the Building and Planning Departments with all necessary information preliminary to the issuance of a building permit or approval in concept. Prior to the 'effective date of Amendment 692, December 13, 1989, the applicant submitted plans for AIC 2805-89. The AIC proposed the demolition of a nonconforming duplex and the construction of a new duplex. The AIC was denied for two reasons. First, since the lot size is approximately 2,190 sq. ft., and the R-3 zone requires 1,200 sq. ft. of land per dwelling unit, the lot is not large enough to develop more than one dwelling unit. Second, the General Plan Land Use Designation is Single Family Detached which does not permit the development of more than one dwelling unit. In cases where the zoning and land use designations are inconsistent, the density is determined by the land use designation and the development standards are determined by the zone. Therefore, more than one unit could not be permitted on a lot designated single family. 'The following chart shows bow 309 E. Edgewater Avenue could have been developed from 1959 to the present. 1959 - 10/22/88 10/22/88 - 12/13/89 12 13 - Zoning R-3 R-3 R-1 District Permitted # of units A residential zoning correction sheet was issued to the applicant on January 8, 1990. The correction sheet states that only one. dwelling unit is allowed on the lot. After a telephone conversation on January 9, 1990 explaining the reasons for the denial of the AIC, the applicant requested a written explanation for the denial. A letter was sent to the applicant on January 15, 1990 (attached) explaining why two dwelling units could not be built on the property. The deadline for designing and submitting plans for a single family structure meeting the R-3 standards was extended to February 14, 1990. The applicant continued to refuse to design a conforming structure, and continued to question TO: Planning Commission - 3 staffs interpretation through his attorney, Mr. Randall, in a telephone conversation on February 2, 1990. Following that telephone conversation, Mr. Randall sent a letter (attached) to the City on February 2, 1990, requesting to appear before the Planning Commission to appeal the denial of AIC 2805-89. CONCLUSION: Adoption of the ordinance rezoning the property to R-1 included the provision that the City would not refuse the issuance of building permits on the basis of zoning inconsistency, provided that the plans for building permit or approval in concept were submitted prior to the effective date of the ordinance. Also included in this provision is the requirement that the applicant diligently process the plans and provide the City with all necessary information prior to the issuance of building permits or approval in concept. However, because the plans submitted for approval under the R-3 development standards were not in accordance with the number of units permitted by the R-3 zone or the General Plan Land Use designation and since the applicant refused to diligently pursue the correction of those plans by eliminating the second unit, the time provision has elapsed for this application. Any further development must be done under the R-1 standards. PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By eter Carlson Assistant Planner SANDSSR AttachmA^*� 1. Lew 2. Lette JPN-ea-'.:U bHJ le*.= LV;bb4 la_GV` IrM ItL ru;4z4 re4J 4C 4 .'r l CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768. NEWPORT BEACH. CA OZ659.1768 PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 January 15, 1990 Mr. Edward Sands 309 Edgewater Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: 309 Edgewater, Newport Beach, CA Dear Mr. Sands: The plans submitted for AIC 2805-89 propose the demolition of an existing duplex and the construction of a new two unit structure. This AIC has not been approved because your request to build two new dwelling units is Inconsistent with the General Plan, the Local Coastal Program and the zoning of your property. On October 24, 1988, the CIty Council amended the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan. In the process of revising these Elements, the adequacy of the transportation system to accommodate both existing and future development was examined. As a result, various densities and intensities of development were established throughout the City. The land use designations of various residential properties located on the Balboa Peninsula and in West Newport were changed. 'lice changes in land use designations were based on a block by block evaluation of lot size. Within each block, the predominant lot size was used to determine the appropriate land use designation. According to the City's records, the subject property Is an irregularly shaped lot measuring approximately 2190 sq ft.(3Vx 68'x 29 x 78') and is currently developed with two dwelling units. The previous zoning of the property was R-3 which requires 1200 sq.ft. of land area per dwelling unit. This 1200 sq.ft. land area development standard has boon a requirement since 1959. Because of the small lot size, bnly one dwelling unit would have been permitted under the R 3 zoning classification. Therefore, the land use designation of your property was changed to single family detached. Land use decisions are legally required to be consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinances. Therefore, on November 13, 19890 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 89-34 to amend the zoning classifications for those properties redesignated on October 24, 1988. As part of this Ordinance, your property was rezoned from R-3 to R-1. Approval in Concept No. 2805-89 is ready to be returned to you. The primary correction is that two dwelling units are not permitted. The existing two unit building is legal 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach JHf F-2h-' 90 SAT 12:16 I D: 6&1 f3.EI4`E TEL hA: 494-4243 it251 F W - - Mr. Edward Sands January 15, 1990 Page two nonconforming and may remain that way until it is voluntarily torn down. However, should the building be demolished, it may be replaced by only one dwelling unit. Because the AIC was submitted prior to. December 13, 1989, the City will allow the construction of a single family dwelling built to R-3 development standards as long as no discretionary approval is required. In order to take advantage of the R-3 development standards, new plans must be submitted for AIC before February 14, 1990, and the building permits must be obtained expeditiously. If you have any questions regarding the AIC, please contact Genia Kaznocha, Assistant Planner, at 644-3200. Should you have any additional questions regarding the rezoning, please do not hesitate to call me at the above phone number. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By eter Car a Assistant Planner F\PC\SANDLM xe: Genia Kaznocba, Assistant Planner r LAW OFFICES OF MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES LOS ANOCLES OFFICE 18SOO VON AARMAN AVENUE EOWIN A. MESERVE 11003.12551 351. FLOOR SUITE 500 333-SOOTH HOPE STREET SHIRLEY E. MESERVE LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90071 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92715 110e9-19501 TELEPHONE (213) 920-0300 POST OFFICE BO% 19591 HCWLINOS MUMPER TELCCOPIER 1213) 82S-1930 (IBO9-19OW IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92713 CLIFFORD E. HUGHES I169IBflY190(l011 TELEPHONE (7141 474.0995 35384-001 T ELECO PIER (714) 975 106q OUR Rep. No. February 2, 1990 'Planning Commission BY NESSENSER CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 RE: 309 Edgewater, Newport Beach, California Commissioners: This firm represents Louis Sands IV, owner of the above - referenced property (the "Property"), with regard to the processing of approvals for the construction of a duplex on the Property. I hereby request an appeal to the Planning Commission of the decision of the Planning Department to disapprove the plans submitted for AIC2805-89 as evidenced by that certain letter from Peter Carlson, Assistant Planner, to Mr. Edward Sands, dated January 15, 1990, a copy of which is attached hereto for your reference. The basis of this appeal will be that the subject parcel, together with an adjacent parcel owned by Mr. Sands, contains sufficient area to qualify for approval for the construction of a duplex under the criteria estab- lished under the previous R=3 zoning. Please note that plans for the new construction were timely submitted prior to the effective date of Ordinance 89-34 by the Newport Beach City Council on November 13, 1989 (i.e., December 13, 1989). I further request that a hearing date be set so that my client will have the opportunity to present his position on this matter to you. RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FEB 21990 AM PM 718191101U112111213141SIS k 0 1 Y MCSERVE, MUMPER G HUGHES Planning Commission February 2, 1990 Page 2 Please contact me at the address indicated above as to the time and date in the hearing set to review this matter. Your consideration is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, Z �%� �- �� at'�.� Timothy L. Randall of MESERVE, MUMPER & HUGHES TLR:sdm 1281t147ls cc: Louis Sands IV Mr. Edgar L. Sands, AIA, Sands Associates Architects Peter Carlson, City of Newport Beach Enclosure