Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 11-12 - (623 Monterey)9 *16 RO li E130 9CON115 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A HEIGHT LIMIT EXCEPTION REQUEST TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A ROOF DECK EXCEEDING THE THIRTY (30) FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT IN THE R 3 ZONE LOCATED AT 623 MONTEREY BOULEVARD AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED LOT 4, TRACT NO.864 The Planning Commission does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. An application was filed by Britt Durham, owner of the property located at 623 Monterey Boulevard, seeking a Height Limit Exception (HLE 11-1) to allow construction of a roof deck exceeding the thirty (30) foot height limit in the R-3 zone. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application for the Height Limit Exception (HLE 11-1) request on July 19, 2011, at which testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission. Section 3. Based on the evidence received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission makes the following factual findings: 1. The subject property is zoned R-3, and has developed a 2,315 square foot single family residence, located on the west side of Monterey Boulevard between 6th Street and 8th Street. 2. The unit was constructed in 1913, with a second floor addition and two -car garage added in 1979. The dwelling is nonconforming to open space required adjacent to primary living area, side yard setbacks, garage setback and parking. 3. The proposed project involves an expansion of the existing living room on the second floor by 171 square feet. The property owner also proposes to construct a 600 square foot roof deck to exceed the allowed 30-foot height limit as measured from the top of the roof deck guardrail. As designed, the roof deck guardrail is 34 feet, 2 inches in height where closest to the alley, and 31 feet, 5 inches in height on the east portion of the property that is at higher elevation. The property slopes upward from west to east, at a grade of 8.7 percent. The surrounding properties are also zoned R-3. 4. The applicant is requesting a height limit exception in order to construct a roof deck above the 30-foot height limit with glass rail along the west perimeter and solid walls along the north and south perimeters. Section 4. Based on the factual findings, the Planning Commission makes the following findings pertaining to the application for a height limit exception pursuant to Section 17.16.020(B): 1: An extension above the height limit is not necessary to take advantage of a coastal view over surrounding structures that are already constructed above thirty (30) feet in height. While the height extension may be needed for northwesterly and southwesterly views over adjacent over -height buildings to the north and south, it is not needed for the westerly scenic view. The applicant's survey of adjoining properties to the north and south, 625 Monterey Boulevard and 615 Monterey Boulevard, demonstrates that dwellings on these properties exceed the 30-foot height limit, the rear dwelling at 632-634 Monterey to the northeast was granted a height limit exception for 33 feet, staff interprets that 628-630 Monterey directly east is over 30 feet in height, and it is possible that the rear buildings at 614-620 Monterey are over 30 feet in height. While the adjoining properties and properties to the east are over 30 feet high, the scenic ocean view is primarily west facing and the existing second floor deck currently provides a fairly extensive ocean view to the west. Staff observed properties to the west are mostly two -stories buildings with some three-story dwellings fronting Manhattan Avenue, at lower elevation. Therefore it does not appear to be necessary for the proposed roof deck to exceed the height limit in order to take advantage of scenic views westerly/northwesterly of subject property. Further, the proposed living room expansion projects the second level westward by 9-feet, which should improve northwesterly coastal views. While properties across Bayview Drive alley to the west could be redeveloped to 3-stories or to the maximum allowable height limit of 30-feet, thereby partially obstructing the scenic ocean view that the property currently enjoys from the second floor living room or the lower deck, future development is speculative. Since the required finding speaks to views that are obscured by "surrounding structures which are already constructed above thirty (30) feet in height," potential future development does not provide a basis for this finding. It also appears other options may be available to alter the building to improve views in compliance with the height limit. For example, the 5-foot crawl space between the first floor bedroom and second floor living room, could be modified to allow the height of the building to be reduced, thereby allowing a roof deck to be constructed in compliance with height limits at the same location where the roof deck is proposed. A second option is to relocate the roof deck to the eastern portion of the building where the applicant proposed to replace the existing flat roof on this portion with a gable roof. A roof deck may be constructed above the existing flat roof (with needed repair for water leakage as stated by the applicant) within the 30-foot height envelope which would also avoid the need for a height limit exception. 2. The structural extension above 30 feet may partially obstruct views and access to sunlight and air flow of adjacent properties. The north and south facing portions of the roof deck railing will be solid walls matching existing and future building finishes. Although the top of the proposed deck railing will be shorter in height in comparison to the neighboring buildings the new solid walls may potentially affect sunlight and air flow to adjacent properties' upper level dormer windows (625 Monterey Blvd.) and small side windows (615 Monterey Blvd.). Side walls comprised of open slats, rather than solid walls could provide some relief but then the privacy of the proposed roof deck and the adjacent dwellings would be compromised. The wood frame around the proposed glass railing may also impede a limited portion of the westerly scenic views now enjoyed by properties to the east. Section 5. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby denies the request for a Height Limit Exception (HLE 11-1) pursuant to Section 17.16,020(B). Section 6. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, any legal challenge to the decision of the Planning Commission, after a formal appeal to the City Council, must be made within 90 days after the final decision by the City Council. VOTE: AYES: Comms.Allen,Perrotti,Pizer,Chnm.Darcy NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Comm.Hoffinan CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 11-12 is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, at their regular - eeting l y 19, 2011. E Shawn Darcy, Chairman , <, /X Rd56A<6n, Secretary July 19, 2011 Date f.\b95\cd\pc\201 1\07-19-1 1\623 monterey reso final.doc