HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA_Minutes_1970_04_27MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS HELD IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CllY HALL, HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APRIL 27, 1970 MEETING CALLEO TO ORDER AT 7:35 P.M. ROLL CALL: All present• Corrm. Richard Williams, L.E. Ostermann, Chairman Reeves, and Building Director, Bud M. Trott AGENDA ITEM l: A motion was made by Chairman Reeves, seconded by Comm. Ostermann to approve the minutes of the March 23, 1970 meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM 2: Secretary of the Board, Richard Williams, read an application for a variance as follows: "Application for variance by Warren H. Hi1 i tscher at 1145 6th Street; South ½ of Lot 8, Tract 5209, in the City of Hermosa Beach, California. Zone R-2. Applicant plans to relocate garage on rear property line and westerly side-yard. Garage will be attached to a single family residence in lieu of main-taining 6 ft. between main house and accessory building." Public hearing opened at 7:36 p.m. Mr. Warren Militscher, owner, came forward and identified himself. He said that when the lot was divided, the property I ine went right through the garage leaving 7 ft. of the garage on his neighbor's property. The neighbor requested that it be moved, but he has nowhere to move it without getting a variance. Mr. Militscher stated that Instead of moving the garage ONTO the property line as the application states, he would natl prefer moving it 1½ ft, AWAY from the property 1 ine. Mr. Wallace Bournoville, 1139 6th Street, applicant's neighbor on the west, spoke in favor of the variance as written. He said a narrow area between the garage wall and the property line would, in all probability, accumulate debris. For that reason, he would prefer the garage moved on the property line instead of 1½ ft. away from it. Mr. Bournoville also inquired who would maintain the wall if the garage is on the property line. He was told that the OW'ner, Mr. Hilitscher, would maintain it. Mr.sournoville also inquired as to who would have maintenance rights on a wall separating the two properties. He said he didn't know which side of the property the wall is on at the present time. Hr. Trott told him that the property will have to be surveyed and he will find out at that time who owns the wall. Whoever turns out to be the ONner of the wall will have the respon-sibility of maintaining it, After further questions and discussion, public hearing was closed at 7:52 p.m.
MINUTES OF B.Z.A. MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1970 PAGE 2 A motion was made by Comm. Ostermann, seconded by Comm. Williams, that the request for a variance be granted as written. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Comm. Ostermann, Williams, Chairma~ Reeves. NOES: None A motion was made by Convn. Ostermann, seconded by Chairman Reeves, to adopt B.Z.A. Resolution N.S. 154-17 granting the variance as written, that is, the garage will be moved onto the property line as originally requested. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Convn. Ostermann, Williams, Chairman Reeves. NOES: None AGENDA ITEM 3: Secretary Williams read an application for a variance as follows: "App I i cation for a variance by Douglas Sniffen, tenant at 662½ Longf e 11 ow; Lot 92, Southern Calif. Convention Hall and Marine View.Park Tract, Hermosa Beach, California. Zone R-1. In order to erect a 6' high fence in front yard setback of 101 in lieu of required maximum height of 31 permitted in setback." Building Director, Bud Trott, read letters protesting the variance from Louise G. Foster, 660 Longfellow, Lucy c. and Jesse A. Perez, 642 25th Street, and Mr. and Mrs. W.H. Jones, 637 6th Street, Manhattan Beach. Building Director, Bud Trott, read the analysis of the variance as wri'tten by City Planner, Bob Crawford. The analysis reconvnended denial of the variance for reasons as set forth., • Public hearing opened at 7:58 p.m. Applicant, Douglas Sniffen, came forward and identified himself as the tenant at 662½ Longfellow. He stated that when he built the fence, he thought that building permits were required only for buildings, not for fences. He said the house he occupies and one other, were the only houses on the street without back yards. He stated that he built the fence because his l•year old daughter needed a place to play in safety. He said there had been a misunderstanding in his conversations with the Building Department. Chairman Reeves invited anyone who wished to speak for the variance to come forward. No one came. Chairman then invited anyone who wished to speak against the variance to come forward. Mr. Bill Foster, owner of the property at 660 Longfellow, came forward. Mr. Foster said he was protesting for both his wife and himself. He stated
MINUTES OF B.Z.A. MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1970 PAGE 3 that he felt the variance should be denied for the fol lowing reasons: I-The fence was built without a permit. 2-The fence is in violation of the Building Code. 3-Other people have ~een turned down on 4' fences and he can see no reason why Mr. Sniffen should be the privileged exception. 4-He said the fence cuts off the view from that direction and feels that the fence should be cut down to 31• Public hearing closed at 8:17 p.m. A motion was made by Chairman Reeves, seconded by Conrn. Ostermann, to grant the variance. Motion failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: None NOES: Corm. Ostermann, Williams, Chairman Reeves A motion was made by Chairman Reeves to adopt B.Z.A. Resolution N.S. 154-18 DENYING the variance. Motion carried by the follo,,ling vote: AYES: Coorn. Ostermann, Williams, Chairman Reeves. NOES: None. Building Director, Bud Trott, advised Mr. Sniffen that he could appeal the decision to the City Council In writing within ten days. AGENDA ITEM 4: Secretary Williams read a request for extension of variance. 11Request for extension of variance from Walter Harris on property located at 237 16th Street. Applicant received variance July 21, 1969 to construct 2 units. Due to difficulties in financing, he would like an extension of I year.11 Public hearing opened at 8:22 p.m. No one appeared for or against the extension. A motion was made by Chairman Reeves. seconded by Comm. Williams, to grant the extension as requested, Extension effective as of April 27, 1970, for I year. Motion carried by the follo.-1ing vote: AYES: Comm. Osterman, Williams, Chairman Reeves NOES: None A motion to adjourn to the next regular scheduled meeting of May 11, 1970 was made by Comm. Williams, seconded by Chairman Reeves, and carried unanimously. Chairman