HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1955_03_02 (Rezoning)( H,EARING on the proposed rezoning of the area aast of Ardmore Avenue in the City of Hermosa Beach March 2~ 1955 Present: Commo Black, Dennie~ Fisher, Haneman, Hixson, Miller, and Mayor Edwards Kay Kalicka, Planning Consultant
HE:ARING 0n~1rman Uennie caLled the meeting to order at 7:45 P.M~ and stated that 1~!P fi hearin's is especially to consider those properties east of Ardmore .f\venuen IJ'1r o Kalicka explained the color key on the proposed land use map and pointej out that the pur?ose of the hearing is to obtain the expression of the property owners .. He asked that arguments be held to a minimum be cause the hearing is for opinions and expressions, not to argue about why it is pr•)posed as it is o He said any Commissioner and himself would be g 'i:<d to answor questionso He wen'.,; on to explain that there will be another hearing before the Planning Commission on a rev·ised map and ordinance, coverir.g the entire City, then it will be for111arded to the Council for their action and another hearing .. , He e~plained the reason for the circled areas on the map, saying it indicateE a potential zone, which is an actual committment on the part of the City tha1~ it can be developed as the potential zone indicates, upon the submission of plans, including adequate parking faci4ities to the City for their ap:,roval. This potential zone permits the City to have some means of control ov3r the remaining larger parcels of land in the Cityo Chairman Denn:i.e asked all those who had a question or comment to rise and state their n,1.mes and addresses and the property in which they are interested. Howard Stickney ( ;~34,-33rd Street 11a.nhattall.Jw.&i~ Mro Stickney was interested in Lots 20, 21, 22, Block 81, Second Addition to Hermosa Beacho He asked the reason for the R-3 zoning of this property which is at present zoned C-Jo He also asked if the PQtentiaJ C zoning means he can develop the prcperty for C use, with the approval of the City .. Mro Kalicka said that the R--J development can be carried out without the consent of the City, but plans for Commercial development would have to be submitted to the Council before such development could proceedo The plan. would have to include indications of adequate parking and easy ingress and egress to parking areas, etco Gerald A,, Klein li.15....liQ:r.w.lELllc.a.~ Jule~ Tenenbaum ~~-9-~_Ur:1.uo Mro Klein protested the proposed R-1 zone in the block between 14th and 15th Streets and Ocean Dr.ive and Bonnie Brae~ He requested that it remain R=2e He could. see no purpose fora change at this timeo Most of the area is already built up, some with multi ple dwellings~ He felt that since this is the case, that entire area should be left an R=2 zoneo Dro L& Lo Lindsay io26-2.lst ,t>treet His property is located on Pacific Coast Highway be-tween 8th and 9th Streetso He sa.:ld a portion of it is being proposed as C zone, but wondered about the other lot behing the C zoneo He was informed that the owners of frontage property would have all his lots zoned C, as soon as it was determined who owned which lotso '-....o Mo Theroux 1711 Gol.d~n A;v;enue Mro Theroux spoke for Mrso Homer Harris, 1701 Golden Avenue, Mrso Lo Go Theroux, 1727 Golden Avenue, Hazel Ohrner, 1713 Golden Avenue, and Mrso Nelida Savage, 1130-1140 • 17th Streeto These property owners oppose the proposed rezoning of their lots from R-2 to R=l and asked for an explanation of this change,
i'ub1:tc Het:ring Proposed Rezoning March 2, 1955 Page Two ( since other lots in the nearby area are being left R-2o Mr o Kalicka explained that although the lots have been zoned R-·2 for many years, most of them have been developed in an R-1 manner. He felt that since most of the City had been previously zoned C and multiple zones (about 80%) there is a need for more R-1 zones, and the area east of Valley Drive would be the most appropriate for single family dwellingsb He also men-tioned that accessibility to the property and availability of parking facili ties had much bearing in the proposal of R-1 for this area. The lots on Prospect and 17th Street are proposed as R=2 because they are on a main thoroughfare, and they have not been cut up to qui~e such an extent as in other areaso Mro W., B. Weiss 734 Soo Lursow Aveo Los Angeles Mro Weiss was primarily interested in his property on 2nd Street and Pacific Coast Highway, part of which is proposed as C and part as R-3. He wished an ex planation of this arrangemento Mr~ Kalicka explainec that this would be taken care of, since it is only a matter of establishing the ownership of lots adjoining frontage propertieso Clyde Stewart He wished to have the C zone maintained to its present 144 Pacific Coast Hl'JY~ depth of 200 feet, instead of the area indicated on the proposed mapo He felt that this should continue as C property for the benefit of business on the highway, even if it involves { circulating of petitions to that effect. Ronald Moran 648-9th Street He stated that in the beginning he had been opposed to the hiring or Gordon Whitnall and Associates, but now felt that Mro Kalicka had done a fine job on the entire programo However, he felt that more C zoning should have been indicated on the Highwayo He mentioned that in spite of rezoning the area Ca couple of years ago, it hadn't worked out the way they had intended, to the extent of drawing large business to Hermosa Beach, and this was one reason for de= creasing the C area and leaving only those lots on which business is located at present soned for C usageo He mentioned, however, that some of the lots are propsed as potential C zones~ although they do not appear on the map at present.o Harlow Wiseman 830 Cypress Aveo He asked about his property at 3rd and Pacific Coast Highway being zoned C to a depth of only 509 instead of the present 250'. Mro Moran explained that f,ihen Ocean View Avenue is opened up between 3rd Street and 4th Street, there would be more possibility of developing this area in a C manner .. Mro Wiseman felt that the proposed rezoning would nullify a resolution made be the Council about a year ago to provide off~street par~ing in this areao He added that the Highway Merchants' Association has worked hard and long to accomplish this current C area and felt it should be maintained to its present deptho He said they had been instrumental in urging the City to obtain adequate street lighting on the Highway and this had been a step in Ghe right direction, but that this proposed zoning back to the original 50' or so would definitely be a step the opposite wayn
r Ho So George . 407 so .. CataU.na·, .Redpndo Bea.ch Public Hearing Proposed Rezoning March 2, 1955 Page Three His property is located at 911-l)th Street, Lot 16P Tracy Tract, and he would like to have it remain R=2 or be R-3, but not revert to R-1 • Mro Kalick.::1. pointed out that no attempt bas been made to do anytping to any·· body's propertyo He also pointed out that Hermosa Beach has to be zoned for Her~osa Beach, and not patterned after any other City, whether it be Los AP6eles or Laguna Beach, as had been previously suggested. Ha said the problem involved with allowing C zones to extend up the side &treets is mainly that the already involved parking situation ·would be made even more acu~ee He said the use of potential zones could be made to work in this City as well as any other City, and mentioned that in this way ade· quate parking would be developed along with the development of business, in-stead of just hoping for adequate parking areaso He mentioned that no zoning plan could be made, keeping isolated cases in mind., but has to be for the benefit and. betterment of the entire City.. He said that at present, there is no definite plan as to just what Hermosa Beach is going to become, and that until there is such a plan, this proposal would provide control over larger areas and along more rigid lines than the current map and ordinanceo He felt the Commission should get together with the Highway property owners ,~nd attempt to come to some reasonable, satisfactory conclusion with them /in this mattero Mro Wiseman said that the Highway property ownera had intended to acquire the presently zoned Clots one by one over a period of time, with the purpose in mind of providing ad~quate parking facilities for their businessesa Jerry Stamis 820-9th Stre,et Mr~ Stamis said he had worked hard to get C zoning on the Highway covering his property located on the NE corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Pier Avenue, and now finds most of the C areas moved back to 50'o He protested this dropping or the 200' C depth and requests that it be maintained. Mro Tenenbaum felt that if people are content to erect R-1 dwellings in R-2 zones, it is not necessary to change it to R=l~ The same thing is accomplished if R=l dwellings ate erected~ Mro Flaherty 9/+.3=8th Street Bill Alford 9b.-6-l7th St :ca.et areaso Gordon Fairbairn \.... ill Porter Lan~-He spoke for himself and Mr0 Visa, protesting the re-zoning of his property from R-2 to R~l. Asked why the R-2 zoning in this area is proposed, when it is already built up R-lo Mro Kalicka said the lots are more accessible than lots in some of the other He spoke for himself and Mrs~ Porter, who owns pro~ perty in that area, and Mrso Alberts, who also owns property there~ He said they were protesting the proposed rezoning of a triangular shaped parcel,located between Gould Avenue and Porter Lane to R=J, because the rest of the area is to be R~lo
Pubiic Hearing Proppsed Rezoning Page Four March 2, 1955 ( "'u-o Kalicka explained that because of the unusual grade condi·t.ion of this particular parcel, it would be unsuitab1e for single family dwellings, and that this was the reason .for their proposing R~3 .. Mro Fairbairn said they felt R-2 would be all right, but not R-3, allowing what the ordinance does at present. Mo Lo Lichtenstadt $29-19tb Strew,,,, ~-He said he was representing himself and his wife, Mra and Mrso Graul, and Mrs., Jessie Wheeler, all of whom own property in the vicinity of Rhodes, between 19th Street and 20th 3treet. fronting on Pacific Coast Highway, and all of whom are protesting the proposed C zoning of this areao He said tha~ if this is allowed, any business from bowling alley to saloon can be built o~ these properties, adjoining their properties and could create a nusiance nex-~ to their homeso He cited several sections .of State codes, defining nusitnces ~nd the remedies for such conditions, mentioning the possibility of injunctions and suitso He also said that any action taken by a City in violation of State codes is invalidD He wished to register protests for himself and those property owners whom he represented. Peter Priamos Mro Priamos, owner of Lots 13, 14, 15. Block 81, 1617 Pr!Pi!ic Coast HnaSecond Addition to Hermosa Beach, protested the pro= posed change of zone on his property from C=3 on the west 100' and M-1 on the remainder to all R=Jo He also did not like the use of potential zoningo ' Ar. Lichtenstadt asked what advantage there could be in rezoning a whole block of residences from R to C, especially when they are not old homeso Mro Kalicka said that just because there are now homes existing on these properties is no reason to believe there can never be C development on theme He feeis that eventually the entire lenghth of the Highway will go C, and certainly there will no~ be only these 6 lots left. as R lots. He pointed out the fact that just because he is an outsider does not mean he cannot see some r£ the problems facing Hermosa Beacho He said that when you have a physical ailment. you go to a doctor for treatment, because he has had more training along those lines than your next door neighboro That is just why he has been hired, to help remedy some of the sorry situations existing in Hermosa Beacho He pointed out that the map was not his map, but the map of the entire Commiasion, and that everybody was not in complete agreement as to everything on it, but that it p~trayed to the best of their abilities, what they felt would be a reasonable solution to some of the pro-blemso John Eo Haworth 214-3,bth Street He inquired about the R·~l zoning proposed on the High-way for his property between 30th Street and Gould Avenuee He was informed by Chairman Dennie that a change will be made on this piece of propertyo He then asked about his property at 4th and Ardmore, being changed from M~l to R0•2o He wished to ~ro~est this change. but Chairman Dennie said there was already a change --~oposed for this areao Guss Barks 12;t.7-2p.d StreetL Mro Barks protested the proposed change from C to R-1 of his lots behing those fronting on the Highway, stating that a few years ago, there ~ad b~en quite a l
Pubi i c Bea .. 1.ng PrDposed Rezoning March 2, 1955 Page Five (',battle with the Council to get a 200' depth zoned C=J. Chairman Dennie informed him that if he owns property behind the areas designated C, it will also be changed to Co ~ Donald Cox 2~5-ll.th Btreet He aaked about his property located on Pacific Coast Highway, between Gould Avenue and 30th Street, to a depth of 100'. He asked why it was proposed as R~J. ins-t;ead of thecurrent C-3 e Chairman Dennie informed him that this en·tire s~rip would be changed to CD Mro Barks asked if the whole Pacific Coast Highway could not~11be zoned C to a depth of approximately 200•. Chairman Dennie said this possibility wo :i ~~ aonsidered when other. changes are under consid~rationo ~ Wieeusan read a petition which he is circulating, and asked that anyone pre·sent who would like to sign it please do so and turn it in to the Commis on before leaving the Council Chambers. Mary Sorenson 935-Jrd Street She wished to know how soon she would have to build on her R-2 lot before the proposed R-1 zoning goes into effecto Mr. Kalicka informed her that it would possibly be 3 or 4 months, before any changes would be in effecto John Shaw 731-16:th Street He wished to protest the potential zoning on his pro perty instead of the use of a stated zoneo He would like to have the Commission decide about zoning pro= blems instead of hiring an outsider to do the jobo Roger Wallace 1622 Strand He said he is the owner of Tract No. 9203, running from Pacific Coast Highway to Ardmore Avenue and from 15th Street to 16th Streeto He inquired about the proposed rezoning of this proerty to R-1 with an M potential~ Chairman Dennie informed him that it will be changed to a straigµt M zonee HlX'Ol<1 Joyce l'il5 Proapeet.... Alma Carroll 24-6th Street mitted a petition C zoning on those He protested the proposed rezoning of his property at Campana and 14th Street from R-.-2 to R-1. She owns property at 1256 Gould Avenue and protested the proposed R-1 zoning for the block between Harper Lane and Prospect, fronting on Gould Avenueo She sut~ signed by 6 property owners and l business tenant, requesting lots facing Gould Avenue in this blocko Mro Theroux again asked the reasons for the proposed R-1 zoning of his pro= perty, stating that his lot measures 37' x 43' x 157' and is larger than any of those lots proposed to be zoned R-2 in the vicinity of 17th Street and Propspecto He asked Mro Kalicka about this and requested that his property remain R-2 .. Mro Cox asked for a definition of C zone as it is proposedo with a copy of the proposed ordinance for that definitiono He was presented George Swift 216 Lonefellow survey of the City for He said he is for intelligent City Planning, even j_f his own toes have to stepped on, along witli other peoples' toes .. He felt that Hermosa has needed a quite some timeo He asked about the possibility of
Public Hearing Proposed Rezoning March 2, 1955 Page Six 0m.aking all of the Southern California Convention and Marine Hall Tract zoned for R-2 instead of only the westerly portiono Mro Kalicka said th-~t actually he was not making a comprehensive survey of the City, only a land use and zoning survey. He said a comprehensive survey would include al30 the street situation, parking problems, etc. Mrso Flaherty 943~8th Str~et._ She asked about the possibility of zoning their pro= perty a~2, because they own 1\ lots, or 60' frontage and would·have the ~quare footage necessary to erect 2 unit so >1:·. Kalicka said that was true, but that some areas of the City had to be single family residence areas. She wanted to know why a block completely built up as R-2 should be rezoned R~·lo C.R. Jersey 2l.b.. 1-1. ani;i Prospect Bill Egerer lQ.99'°8;tb Place ~Y Theroux l?U Golden Ave,, He wished to register a p~otes~ against the proposed rezoning of his property from ft-2 to R-=l. He stated that '.'he felt Mre Kalicka should be dismissed because of an inadquate knowledge of Hermosa Beach, She asked how long after the Council adopts this map and ordinance before it is in effecto Chairman Dennie informed her that it would be 30 d&ys0 Mre Flaherty suggested C zoning in a potential .form along Pacific Coast ( Highway on the lot:s 'c behind )the frontage lots to a depth of 200' or 250', ~hus sat~sf'ying the merchants to some extente Roger Johnson 14:05 Strand He wished to have R~J clearly defined as to meaning and amount of log coverage allowed and whether or not rooms can be rented out in this zoneo Mr. Kalicka said if a lot is less than 30' wide~ only 2 units can be built on it, regardless of zoneo As the lots increase in size, more units are allowed in the multiple zones~ He also pointed out that the Commission is considering revising the R=3 zone, making it morelimited in usageo Mro Johnson asked whether or not a hotel could be erected on a 30' x 90' lot~ Mro Kalicka said only 2 units could be built on a lot that s.ize, no matter what it was calledo Mro Flaherty asked why an excess of multiple zoning is considered bad for a Cityo Mro Kalicka answered that it is difficult to make a ~one plan without following some patterno He said that the City is definitely not able~ even economically. to support a wholly R-1 population, and that i~ appears to be turning toward Commercialo He said there are many other problems to be con-sidered before the City actually is on a good ·basis, such as parking, street. conditions. sewers, etc~, but that there must be some area reserved £or single family dwellingso Melvin White l_ _,, .. 215-7th Street-stating that a City in Hermosa Beach at He asked what the objection to leaving everything R~2 would be o Mr .. Kalicka said that he felt he had alread:r answered that question in one way or another, by can definitely be over-developed, and that is the trend present"
lMro McCarty 52 .... 6th Street. Public Hearing Proposed Rezoning March 2, 1955 Page Seven Mr. McCarty asked why, when every portion of the town '!is already pretty well built up, it is suddenly necees ary to rezone the entire Cityo Mr. Swift said that since Mr. Kalicka is an expert in this field, he should be recogriized as such and allowed to give his reasons for proposals .. He asked wr.y there could not be more multiple zoning in view 0£ the fact that the Cov.mercial aspect is the trend in· Hermosa.. Mr .. Kalicka said that the propo1ed rezoning will not do the whole trick, but other problems, before mentioned, also enter into the pictureo C~dllllo Miller explained to the audience that at the time Mr,. Kalicka was hired~ tne Commission felt the main problem was the old.ordinance and the way tt could be misinterpreted to the extent that about every third applicant for a building permit had to have an opinion trom the Planning Commission before it could be iaauede Gordon Whitnall and Associates were hired to make only a new land use map and zoning ordinance, even though the Commission and Council recognize there are many other related problems in need of attention" Alma Carroll asked what happens to businesses operating in proposed business zones, if the map is adoptedo Mrs Kalicka explained that the business then becomes a non-conforming structure and that no structural changes can be made to it. If it should burn down to more than 50%~ it cannot be rebuilt as a non-conforming structure, but otherwise, it would continue to operate as it does now .. ·, -·Mrs. Shelley 2909 Strand She said she had been investigating the protests made by the north Strand residents at the last meeting and found that there were actually only 3 property owners protesting besides ~hose in one particular block on the Strand~ She felt that inadequate notification of hearings· was responsible for the lack or representation from those areas where there is already multiple usage of land., He felt that the ordinance should have been under discussion as well as the map, so that all would know just exactly what restrictions were being placed on their properties, regardless of proposed zoning. He felt that if the ordinance were studied. most of the protests would not be necessary because the lots could not be developed in an R-3 manner, anyhow~ ;E3ob English 101;-14tb Street Mro M .. T. Moore sos Strand He is the owner or a 30' x 80' lot and wished to know whether or not he would be able to erect a second unit on it., Mra Kalicka said he would not be able to do so unless there are at least 3,000 square feet in the loto If the Commission feels it should change these restrictions, he would then be able to do see C. E. Fenner 11220 Soo Broadway I,oe Angeles -..tsage o Mr.. Kali cka to Commercial zone. The lots he owns are Lots 1 and 2, Sc•uthern California Convention and Marine Hall Tracto He asked about the .,,r,ooposed rezoning of these lots from C=J to R=l, ·stating he has opportunity to lease them for business said the whole strip along the Highway will be changed
Public Hearing Proposed Re2oning March 2, 1955 i@;e Eight l . .irs. Flaherty asked if spot zoning would be entirely discontinued when this ordinance and map are adopted. Mr. Kalicka said there is no assurance any-thing will be dj_scontinued, but that the men governing at any said time will still have the power to grant v~riances, etco if they see £it. Mrse Flaherty asked if a zone change would be necessary9 Mr. Kalicka said that in their case, the lot was large enough to warrant the granting of a zone variance to allow 2 units, and that if they applied for one, there wou::l d be a good chai,ce of getting ito The following written protests were re~e~ved by the Planning Commission: Jg Beec)ler and Mary Andersol.J.., Lots 26 and 59, Tract No .. 5650,. protesting b:~f.eej change from C=2 to R=l, .. 1-Ga Fentul.C, Lota land 2, So. C~lif~ Convention and MarineV~ Tra~t, protesting change from C=J to a~2. E!.;cie a,nd_Qarl Knott, Lota 5 and 6, Tract No., 6851, protesting change ~rom R-4 to R~2 .. John E. Haworth, Lot 127 ~ Sout.t:en1 Calif"' Conlro Hall and Marine View Tract, protesting change·from C=3 to R-1; portion of Lot A, Tract No.1594~ protesting change from C=3 to R=l with a potential C zone~ Lots 41,42 Walter Ransom Co .. Vanable Place Tract·, protesting change from M=l to R=J ~ Pet~tion of Alma Wo Carroll, with 6 other signatures, protesting change from R-2 to R=l and asking for change to C=l on Lots 4=30, Walter Ran= som•s Home Tract. Petition of Bo N, Burkhart, with 4 other signatures, protesting change of zone from M-1 to R=J on properties in the area of Ardmore and 4th Sto Petitionsof Harlow Wiseman, with 41 other signatures, protesting changes from various zones to other zones in different areas of the Cityo Chairman Dennie asked if there were others who would like to be heard, and none wished to do so, therefore Comm. Black moved the adjourni.ent of the hearing, with Comm. Fisher seconding the motion, which carried unanimously0 The hearing was adjourned at 10:JO PeMa