Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWetherholt Residence (PA2002-102)CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT .Agenda Item No. 1 November 7, 2002 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: James Campbell, Senior Planner (949) 644 -3210 — Joampbell@ci!y.newport-beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Variance No. 2002 -005 requesting a proposed addition to an existing two - story residential structure. The Variance includes a request to exceed the floor area limit, to exceed the established maximum building height of 24 feet and to provide less than the minimum required open space (PA2002 -102). APPLICANT NAME: Mr. Brion Jeannette representing the property owners Drew and Holly Wetherholt Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the requested Variance subject to the findings and conditions of approval within the attached draft resolution. DISCUSSION: This item was continued from the last meeting due to inadequate noticing. As noted in the supplemental staff report dated October 16, 2002, the applicant has reduced the addition by 36 square feet, provided a second parking space via a basement lift, increased the open space by 192 cubic feet, changed the roof and changed the elevations. These specific changes were made based upon the general direction provided by the Planning Commission at the September 19th meeting with the hope that the changes would prompt project approval. The applicant has alleviated staff's primary objection to the project with the additional parking space. As stated in the previous staff reports, the property is small and triangular in shape. With the application of setbacks and floor area limit standards, the property only supports a modest residence that arguably is not in keeping with community standards for new construction. Therefore, staff believes that findings for approval of the Variance can be made. The findings and conditions of approval are contained in the attached resolution for project approval. Variance No. 2002 -005 November 7, 2002 Page 2 Public Notice: Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city webske. Alternatives: The Commission has the option to direct further modifications to the project. Staff suggests a continuance of sufficient time to allow the architect to redesign the project according to the Commission's specific direction. 2. The Commission can deny the project by making the revised findings for denial attached to this report. Prepared by: Jan s W. Campbel , Senior Planner Attachments: Submitted by: .d, IYIJ Patricia L. Temple/ , Planning Director A. Draft resolution for project approval B. Revised findings for project denial 0 Attachment A RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2002-M FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 217 30t1i STREET (PA2002 -102) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was filed by Brion Jeannette, agent for the property owners, Drew and Holly Wetherholt, with respect to property located at 217 30th Street and described as Lot 5, Block 130, of the Lake Tract, requesting approval of Variance No. 2002 -005 to allow a residential addition to exceed the 2.0 Floor Area Limit, to exceed the established maximum building height of 24 feet and to provide less than the minimum required open space. The subject property is designated Two Family Residential by the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is zoned R -2. Section 2. Public hearings were held on September 19, 2002 and November 7, 2002 in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meetings was given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at these meetings. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds as follows: a) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the land, building or use referred to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land, buildings and/or uses in the same district. The triangular shape of the property and its small size when coupled with the strict application of setbacks and floor area limit standards, the property only supports a modest residence (1,454 square feet that is not in keeping with community standards for new construction. Enlarging the residence with such an unusually shaped and small buildable area necessitates relief from the 24- foot height and open space standards. These facts are not generally applicable to other properties in the same district. b) That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant. Granting the Variance request is necessary to facilitate a three bedroom dwelling that is not dissimilar in area when compared to new construction of nearby properties. c) That the granting of the application is consistent with the purposes of this code and will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district. Planning Commission Resolution No. WrIJ Granting this application is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code which is to Promote the growth of the City of Newport Beach in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare, and to protect the character and social and economic vitality of all districts within the City, and to assure the orderly and beneficial development of such areas. Approval of the application allows for the modest expansion of a nonconforming structure while making it provide required parking. Project approval facilitates redevelopment of a property thereby preserving and enhancing property values and the design is not detrimental to the immediate area as evidenced through neighbor support. Granting of the Variance does not constitute the granting of special privilege as it allows this property owner the ability to have a 1,960 square foot house with a two car garage, which is similar to privileges presently enjoyed by other properties in the identical zoning district. d) That the granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. The property is designated for two family residential use and the granting of the Variance would not increase the density beyond what is planned for the area thereby avoiding additional traffic, parking or demand for other services. Granting the request for the increase in floor area will not be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood as it will result in a structure that is similar to surrounding dwellings with respect to area. The increased height of the residence is tempered by the location of the third level deck and roof design that helps to minimize the impacts of the increased height upon the abutting properties. The increased height of the structure increases the buffer created between the adjacent grocery store loading area and the abutting property to the south. No public views are impacted with the increased height of the residence as no public views through or over the site are present given the location of the site. The reduction in open space is nominal given the open aspect of the neighboring commercial property. The project's non- detrimental impact upon the area is also supported by residents in the area testifying in support of the project. f) The design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property within the proposed development. g) That public improvements may be required of the developer pursuant to Section 20.1.040 of the Municipal Code. h) This project has been reviewed, and it has been determined that it is categorically exempt under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under Class 1 (Existing Facilities). This exemption allows the addition up to 50% of the floor area of the structure before the addition. The addition comprises approximately 49.5% of the existing structure when taking into account the basement level as gross floor area. a Planning Commission Resolution No. 3 of 4 Section 4. Based on the aforementioned findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Variance No. 2002 -005, subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit "A." Section 5. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk or this action is called for review by the City Council in accordance with the provisions of Title 20, Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 7`s DAY OF NOVEMBER 2002. M M Steven Kiser, Chairman Shant Agajanian, Secretary AYES: NOES: EXCUSED: Planning Commission Resolution No. CME11 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Variance No. 2002 -005 The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan, and elevations identified as Exhibit 1 to the October 17, 2002 Supplemental Staff Report to the Planning Commission, with the exception of any revisions required by the following conditions. 2. Variance No. 2002 -005 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.91.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall obtain approval from the California Coastal Commission for the addition to the existing residence as it does not comply with the conditions of the Categorical Exclusion granted by the Coastal Commission in 1977. 4. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City Building and Fire Departments. The construction plans must comply with the most recent City - adopted version of the Uniform Building Code. 5. All improvements shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 6. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 13 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code or other applicable section or chapter, additional street trees shall be provided and existing street trees shall be protected in place during construction of the subject project, unless otherwise approved by the General Services Department and the Public Works Department. 7. Arrangements shall be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of any public improvements, if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 8. The on -site parking and vehicular circulation shall be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 9. The property owner shall provide and maintain 2 off - street parking spaces at all times. The basement level shall be used for the purpose of storing an automobile with a lift system. In no event shall the basement area be converted to storage or used for habitation without an amendment to this permit while providing an alternate means of providing 2 off - street parking spaces for the residence. 10. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 0 Attachment B Findings for Denial Variance No. 2002 -005 Although the subject property is triangular and small, the granting of the application is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant. The applicant presently enjoys the right to use the existing 1,310 sq. ft. residence. This two story, two bedroom, 2 bath home with 1-car garage constitutes a substantial property right. Granting of the Variance is not necessary for the preservation or enjoyment of this existing substantial property right. 2. Granting the request will create a sizable and taller than average residence on a small property to the detriment to the property in the area and the general welfare of the City. The impact of the granting of excess height given the design of the project would increase the mass of structure in close proximity to the sideyards to the detriment of the abutting property owner. The third level is approximately 64% of the buildable area of the lot and this amount of area that would exceed the 24 -foot height limit by approximately 3 feet is excessive. The addition will have a detrimental impact to abutting properties due to its size and height. I\