HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-a - Additional Materials Received -LAW OFFICES OIL
PHILLIP A. CASE
E-MAIL: PHILLIPQPACATTORN>rY.COM
7'LLEPHONR (949) 760 -6933
FAX (949) 640 -0847
August t5, 2012
Newport Beach'Zoning Administrator
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport,Beach, CA 92661
Re:
J-DIND DGLIVCRE,D
Cuse No. Pending
Dear Sir or Madam Administrates.:
Zoning Administrator Hearing: 08 -15 -12
Item No. 2: Additional Material Received
PA2012 -083
First and foremost, I believe this hearing should be wholly or partially continued for the
following reasons: We only received notice of the hearing last week b infol'matioit sent to my Dacl's
office (explained later) as opposed to our home located at., north and
adjacent to the subject property with a view over said property from our higher elevation. Because
of the delayed notice, I am unaware of what the specific issues are and also and more importantly,
I have never been given sufficient opportunity to look at the reconstruction plans.
History: in or about April or MayI 1 11 -Wasked me to allow surveyors onto
my property so as to make evaluations regarding .a home remodel. At that time, I expressed that I
very notch wanted to be kept in the loop so that I could provide my input before too notch money
was spent and that suchan argument would NOT be the partial basis for altowing,the reconstruction.
In or about June, our Home Owner's Association ( "HOA ") became a legitimate HOA, for the first
.time requiring that annual fees be paid b the Shore Cliff's Home Owners. I was distraught and
dismayed.tiathen.I found.that one set of� reconstruction plans had.already been approved by the
H.DA architectural committee without any notice, participation or luiowledge to me. I am informed
and believed thatlowas recently serving on the IIOA architectural committee, Anyhow, I sent
an email to 0011 June 2, 2012, expressing my concern. Thereafter,.the HOA assured tine that they
will keep me involved and. that "I DON'T NEED TO EXPRESS ANY CONCERN OR OPINION
UNTIL THE STICKS GO UP." Thereafter,.I again expressed my concern toln, via text message
that I be kept. in the loop but that I would head the advice of the HOA. I hereby set forth to any and
all concerned that I have been asking for involvement in this remodel sense I became aware of it's
conception and that any argument bye that Inc has invested time and money to this project as a
reason for it's being accepted by any governing body should fall on deaf ears. My statements loft
regarding my involvement were made to prevent that actuality, yet I have been and remain;
completely OUT OF THE LOOP, No property will be more affected by this remodel than mitre, and
z0nlny.0t: ap8
Page 2 of 3
to date, l have received absolutely no Information whatsoever regarding the scope of the remodel,
despite several requests and demands. In fact, it seems the HOA, entirely led me astray when they
informed me it was customary for me to only become involved "after the sticks go up." Now, at the
last minute, I '1111 reading notices of issue preclusion.
This home his been in my Family since 1980, inasmuch as I maintain the property and
expenses, it has been placed in trust to. me and lily siblings but providing nnc with an option to
purchase upon my Father's<lennise. Notwithstanding, my Father hasgiven full authorityand retained
my services to act as h'is attorney on this matter, thus, for these reasons, I ann presenting my argument
in the first person. My rather only received notice of this hearing last week at his office. My wife
also recently took notice from the signs posted on= property. Whereas there is mention of
ISSUE PRECLUSION it) the notice documents, I wholly object to this sanction as I have not been
given proper notice and /or any sufficient time to investigate this matter. I consider this to be both
a procedural and substantive violation of lily due process rights.
If this hearing.shall not be coatimied,.l fully object to any and all variances being issued for
the reasons stated above and, including but not limited to, the following-
First, Iann not exactly sure .ofwhat the full scope.of this hearing entails,wrecently
sent tine a text message, however, from what I understand this variance is a request to proceed with
a Major Remodel which would increase (lie size of his [ionic by 36% but said remodel is being
limited to 10% because the. garage is less than 20. by 20 feet. At this point, [ am constrained to set
forth that this code section was not arbitrary or capricious but was put in place to )rotect adjacent
homeowners from loss of use and enjoyient of their property. I understand thatais making the
case that this is simply a matter of inches, but this variance. for the so called "natter of inches" could
have. a major impact on his project and the view and use and enjoyment that I seek to protect;
2. I very much understand that this might cause to create a new plan that, does not.
violate THIS code but mightfilrther try to obstruct Iny view !!!:and and enjoyment of my property.
Notwithstanding, as his request for a variance ultimately seeks to increase the size of his living space
by an enormous 36 %, I am constrained to object to file issuance of a variance for all conceivable
reasons, stated and unstated;
3. Inasmuch as I have a four car garage on my property which is a two story home, I
don't believe that it is reasonable for a to be given a variance, especially when you consider the
extent of the substantial remodel which I. call only imagine is to build out the entirety of his THIRD
STORY. At this time, I don't-believe he uses his small two car garage for anything but storage and
parks only one of his vehicles on his relatively small driveway. The other is parked in the street; and
4. With all this added living space. (36%) and such a small garage, future homeowners
of his property must likewise be considered inasmuch as dozens of drivers could be forced to share
this inadequate garage space that clearly does not have enough garage storage, car space and /or even
z0hiRg ai.wl)(I
Page 3 of 3
driveway space. The bottom line is that HIS GARAGE IS CLEARLY NOT OF ADEQUATE SIZE.
For all of tl}ese reasons and those stated at the eventual hearing of this matter, we respectfully
request that you deny fmrequest for a variance in accordance with the Newport Beach Zoning
Laws.
Any and all correspondence to me should be mailed to:
Phillip. A. Case
330 Morning Canyon Rd.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Very truly yours,
PHILLIP A. CASE, Esq.
Attorney for the firm
PAC:1k.r
cc: hand deliverc(l)
ShoreclifFs Conmaunity Association (faxed with Notice of Public Hearing).
Zoning-0 lsyd