HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 154-410Name: Harold W. and Jetta Grieve
Location:
R. A. Watt Construction Company
2~01 Amby Place
To Permit: Rezone from R-1 tp R-3
December 10, 1962 Date:
RESOLUTION NO. P. C. 154-410
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
DENYING A ZONE AMENDMENT UPON CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN 30TH
STREET AND GOULD AVENUE IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA
THE PI.ANNING COMMISSION of the City of Hermosa Beacl1 does resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, there was filed with this Commission, under the provisions ot
Ordinance N. S. 154, application for zone amendment by Harold W. and Jetta Grieve
and R. A. Watt Construction Company affecting property located between 30th Street
and Gould Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway and Ardmore Avenue; and
WHEREAS~ the Planning Cormnission of the City of Hermosa Beach did on December 10,
1962, conduct a duly advertised public hearing to consider this application to
perm.it rezoning from R-1 to R-3 that property described as follows:
Parcel 1: Tract No. 1594, 1.40 aore or less acres commencing South
89° 551 30" East 198.61' from northwest corner of Lot A, thence
South 89° 551 30" East 185.33', thence South o0 09' West 65.16',
thence South 28° 551 2011 East 11~.87', thence South 89° 55' 30"
East 11.761, thence South o0 09' West 195.49', thence North
82° 47' 39~r West 105.601, thence North 28° SS' 2011 West 30Y. 771,
thence North o0 09' East 81.421 to beginn:irg fart of Lot A.
Parcel 2: Tract 1594, 1.60 more or less acres commencing at the northwest
corner g.t Lot A, thence South 8Y0 551 30" East 198.611, thence
South O 0091 West 81.42', thence South 28° 551 20" East 30~. 771, thence S
South 61 04' 40" to southwest line of said lot, thence northwest
thereon to beginning part of Lot A.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, in view of the findings at said hearing, the
Planning Commission does hereby deny this zone amendment, for the reasons that it
has not been demonstrated that there is a necessity for more R-3 property within
this area; it has not been shown that there is any hardship or that the public welt'are
requires this; in addition to which, the present zone of R-1 is well established in
this area, and it does not seem right to make this change; and there has been no
substantial evidence presented that the property involved is more suitable for the
purpose proposed than for the purpose it is already zoned for.
The forego1ng resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a regular meeting
held on December 10, 1~62, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
I hereby
Planning
10th day
Comm. Black, Hamilton, Johnson, Noble, Viault and Chairman Hales.
None.
None.
by the
on the