Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1967_09_18MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION held at the City of Hermosa Beach, California in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 7:30 p.m . on Monday, September 18, 1967. ROLL CALL -Present: Comm. Armer, Stabler, Reeves, Noble, Boice, Hamilton, Chairman Viault; Bud M. Trott, Building and Planning Director Commissioners Armer and Stabler were seated after roll ca 11. ZONE VARIANCE -ORVILLE GERTSCH Continued public hearing of zone variance application by Orvi Ile Gertsch, on property at 1125 9th Street, lot 9 and 10, Block 144, Redondo Villa tract, to maintain new bedroom addition to existing single family residence. Addition to be three feet from garage in lieu of required six feet. Wall next to garage wall to have no openings and to be one hour construction. Mr. Gertsch was present and explained that due to ignorance of the laws, he had inadvertantly created this violation. He stated that he had finished the work ~nd had the addition completed at the time he requested the variance. Mr. Gertsch felt, however, that the addition was not harmful to anyone and there would be no fire hazard involved. There was disaussion by the Commission regarding ingress and egress, as well as the dis:tance of the garage from the rear property line. Comm. Armer stated that he was concerned about how such things occur. Mr. Trott, Building & Planning Director, told the Commission that Mr. Gertsch had extended the addition into the sideyard after lathing inspection, and prior to final inspection. Motion was made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Armer, to grant the request for variance. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Comm. Armer, Noble, Boice, Stabler, Hamilton, Chairman Viault Comm. Reeves None Motion was then made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Armer, to adopt P.C. 154-623, granting the request to maintain the new bedroom addition, because it has been determined by the Planning Commission that this request for variance would not be det­ rimental to the residents of the property nor to the surrounding neighbors. It has also been determined that the necessary fire separation has been applied to each of the structures and that the total 1 iving area requirement has been adhered to. It should be noted, that the violation on this property occurred after lathing inspection (which directly preceeds final inspection), and before final inspection, The violation was caught by the Bui ]ding Department at the time of final inspection. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Page 2 September 18, 1967 GERTSCH CONT: AYES: NOES: Comm. Armer, Noble, Boice, Stabler, Hamilton, Chairman Viault Comm. Reeves ABSENT: None ZONE VARIANCE -HERBERT ROSENKRANTZ Continued public hearing of zone variance application of Herbert Rosenkrantz, on property at 922 -18th Street, lots 11 and 12, block 2, Johnson Newman's Camino Real tract, to consider alternate plan to convert two contiguous lots back into separate lots (building presently encroaching over line separating the lots). The applicant was present to discuss an alternate solution to the original zone variance request which was to convert two contiguous lots back to separate lots by removing 5 inches from existing building, which now encroaches 5 inches into sideyard of the adjoining lot. This would leave a zero sideyard setback in lieu of the required minimum three feet. Original hearing was scheduled on August 14, 1967, continued to the regular meeting of September 11th, adjourned (for lack of a quorom) to September 18th. Mr. Rosenkrantz stated that it was his understanding during the August 14th meeting, that the Commission wished him to come before them with a solution which would leave no one in the future in any danger, and that he arrived at the conclusion that the most feasible action which he could take, would be to remove enough of the building to come within one foot of the property line on lot 11. He proposed an easement on both lot 11 and lot 12, such as the common driveway easements on certain pieces of property. He felt this would insure that no fence could be bui It in this area. Mr. Trott, Building and Planning Director, advised that should the owners of such an easement decide to do so, they could build a fence by mutual consent. Mr. Rosenkrantz said that he intended to improve the house on lot 11 by remodeling and upgrading the appearance, and that his intent was to build a new house on lot 12. He believed that economically, this was the best approach that he could take. At the request of the applicant for suggestions or guide lines from the Commission, Comm. Viault (Chairman) suggested that Mr. Rosenkrantz remove the portion of • the buildingwhich encroaches, back to the three foot setback wh i ch is required, and leave only the fireplace to encroach. Mr. Trott remarked that under present regulations, a fireplace must c1ear the property line by 30 inches. Comm. Viault suggested that the applicant have a draftsman sketch out some ideas along these lines to clarify what might be accomplished. Motion was made by Comm. Reeves that Mr. Rosenkrantz's request for variance be continued to October 9th, at the regular meeting of the Planning Commission, in order that the applicant may 9et professional aid so that he can make a proper presentation to support his request. Motion died for lack of a secqnd. At this point, Mr. Rosenkrantz commented that he anticipated bu!l?i?g·a garage for the house on lot 11, which presently does not have such fac1l 1t1es. Plann i ng Commis sion -Pag e 3 Sept. 18, 1967 ROSENKRANTZ CONT; Motion was made by Comm. S t abler to grant the request, seconded by Comm. Armer, '·a~d the motion f a iled to c arry by the following vote : AYES: NOES: PASS: Comm. Reeves, Hamilton Comm. Arm e r, St abl er , Chairman Viault, Boice (Comm.) Comm. Nobl e, (for the reason, due to similar business interests, he did not wish thi s to be considered a con flict of interests). · ABSENT: None Th~r~ was fufther disco s sion, and Mr. Rosenkr~n t z stat e d that he could place the new house-on lo t 12 in such a po s ition t ha t there would be no pr ob lem wi t h spac e between the buildin~s. Mo t ion was made by Comm. Reeves, t hat Mr. Rosenkrantz be extended the opportunity, i f he SQ desired, ,o make formal presentation of a variance which would bring said proper t y into compliance, and t hat his presentation be ma de at the nex t regular meeting of the Planning C0mmis sion on October 9, 1967, The thoug ht was expressed that if Mr.,Rosenkranti cu t the building back to provide the necessary three foot s etbac k, ·i t wo uld not.be ne ce ssa'.y f or him to come in frorit t.of the Commission. Mo ti on was withdrawn. There was disc ussio n relative to an additi on at the rear of the hou s e on l ot 11, which would be necessary to comply with living are a re~ulations, i f the property were to be cut back.~ Mo tion was mad e by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm . ·8€>ic e , to g ra nt the r e quest provided the following conditions are adhered to: I. The f ireplace be maintained in i ts existing location, and the livin g area that encroaches· i nto t he sideyar~ on lot 11, maintain the 3 ft . sideyard setback. 2. Expansion of t he living area not to exceed 4CY'/o . Further discussion disclosed that t he second stipulation was not necessary, until the applicant deter min-ed how larg'e an addition he wished to construct, • • Motio n fail ed to ~arry by t he foll0wing vote: AYES: NOES: PASS: ABS ENT: Comm. Reeve s, Boice, Hamil to n , Chairman Viaul t Comm. Armer, Stabler Comm, Noble None Th e re W\!ils some quest'i on as to whether the maker of a motion cou 1 d pass.' Motion was then made by Chairman Viault, seconded by Comm. Armer·, to deny the application on the ~~ounds t~~t the moti©n did not carry by t he five vbtes required.: The rno t"lcon and th e seco nd were withdrawn. Planning Commission Page 4 September 18, 1967 ROSENKRANTZ CONT: Motion was made by ~omm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Hamilton, to grant the request for variance provided the applicant remove the living area which encroaches into the sideyard of lot 11, maintaining the 3 ft. sideyard and allowing the applicant to leave the encroaching fireplace. The motion failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: NOES: PASS: Comm. Noble, Boice, Hamilton, Chairman Viault Comm. Armer, Stabler Comm. Reeves Comm. Armer stated that his reason for voting 11 nd 1 was that the request is in conflict with the objectives of the city in the future, and for the reason that the variance does not seem to be warranted on the basis of a hardship of any kind. Motion was then made by Chairman Viault, seconded by Comm. Armer, to adopt P.C. 154-624 denying the application on the grounds that it did not carry the positive five votes necessary to pass. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: PASS: ABSENT: Comm. Armer, Noble, Boice, Stabler, Chairman Viault Comm. Hamilton Comm. Reeves None Comm. Reeves gave his reason for passing as follows: because the confusion of the many motions made by the Commission during the hearing, makes it difficult to make a decision in a clear light. GERMACK, LIGHTFOOT AND MCQUILLIN -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Continued public hearing of conditional use permit to serve beer and wine in conjunction with restaurant at 1248 Hermosa Avenue, lots 6 and 7, block 34, 1st addition to Hermosa Beach. Applicants, Germack, Lightfoot and McQuillin. The applicants were not present to be heard. Motion was made by Comm. Armer, seconded by Comm. Noble, to grant the request. Motion failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: NOES: Comm. Noble Comm. Armer, Reeves, Boice, Stabler, Hamilton, Chairman Viault ABSENT: None Motion to adopt P.C. 154-625 was made by Chairman Viault, seconded by Comm. Armer, to deny the request on the grounds that the applicants had proper notification of the ~eetings (August 14th, September 11th, September 18th) and had failed to appear at any of the three meetings at which this item was introduced, and have,not indicated to the Planning Commission any of their present or future iritentions. Motion carried by unanimous vote. Planning Comm iss io n Page 5 Sep t. I 8, l 96 7 POST AG ENDA ITEMS CHADW I CK GARDENS -SIGN REVIEW Mrs. Chadwick was p resent to s how the Commi s sion picture o f a si gn whi ch was p roposed for th e f lorist sh op whi c h i s to be located at loc a ti on between Gould Ave. and 24th St r e ets, l o ts 3 through 7 , and lo ts 25 through 30, Wal t er Ra nso m Co's Redondo Home tract, Two signs were to be placed on the proper t y. The po le s!gn would be 6 ft. x 10 f t. wi t h an area of 60 s q. ft. S igns to be located on private proper t y, no t enc roa ch ing over a public highway. Pole s ign 26 ft. hi g h above the ex ist ing grade. The re would al s o be a wall sig n approxima tely 30 ft . x 3 ft. high on the fa ce of the bu ilding in fron t , Aft er di scussion, motion was ma de by Comm . Boice, seconded by Comm. Reev es, to g rant t he reques t provided t her e is no flashin g , anima tion o r rotation, and t hat no mo re than th ree colors be us e d. Sign is to be constructed per plans submit t ed . Mot i on c arr ie d by unanimous vot e . l<AAAJ.Ak Comm. Armer men t ioned th at he had spoken to Frank Ge hry, architec t for t he dow ntow n r e de ve lopme nt plan, and th e re had be e n an article in the L.A . T imes about th is ge ntl e men an d what he had a ccomplis hed wit h th e pl a n, and th at he ha d also been interviewed on a l oc al radio st ation . Comm. Armer asked abou t th e condition of a l ot a t 22nd and Hermosa Avenue. Mr . Tr ott ad vi sed tha t a 10 unit apartmen t hou se was about to be built o n this site, and the lo t was being cleaned up accordi ngly . Comm. Armer requ est ed th e Staff sec ur e inf o rmation on underground uti li t i es and copy of agend a fr om Lea g ue of California Ci t ies in r elat ion to thi s. Comm . Noble moved for ad journmen t;, secon ded by Comm. Stabler . ADJOURNMENT -9:55 P.M. Johh Ar mer, Secretary