Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_1955_11_21f.URJ.t.IQ H.EA.Rl.N.Q ON THE PROPOSED REZONING of the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH November 21$ 1955 Present: Commissioners Black, Fisherg Hansman$ Mill0r l,l Viaul·t, Chairman Dennie, and Mayor Edwards Kay Kaliaka. Planning Consultant E. !I. Ji L I. Q li .E. A R I. li !l November 21, 1955 Chairman Dennie announced that this was the time and place for the s~cond public hearing befoTe the Pl~.nning Commission on the adop~ion of the proposed ne~ zoning map and ordinanceo He presented affidavits o:r. publication :from the South Bay Daily Breeze and Hermosa Bea.ch Review!, to be received and filed and made a part of these records. '.l.'he following written pro-c.ests were received and made a pari o:f these records at this time: 1. Petition. of M.L .. Lichtenst,ad-t protesting proposed zoning of 1900 block on Pacific Coast Highway be-·tween 19th and 20th Streets to C. 2. Letter £ram Mrs. John Kline requesting remoning of 1900 block on Monterey, Blvd. betueen 19th and 20·th Streets from prop,:s ed R-1 to R-2. 3. Letter from R.G.Thompson protesting adoption of the proposed map and ordinance in general, &.nd protes1;ing in pazvGicular proposed zoning of R-1 on Lot 18, Block 30~ First Addition to Hermosa Beach. The Chairman then declared the public hearing open and requested any persons present who desired ~o address the Commission on this matter ( to do so at this time. Mrs. M.LoLichtenstadt Mrso Lichtenstadt protests the proposed ~oning 1829 -19th S;tx;eflt of the bleck on Paei:fic Coast Highway bet.ween 19th and 20'ch Streets (east side) to C. She has filed written protest with Commission and Council suggesting this be m&de R-3 with a c potential ins·cead of straight C. This verbal protest is in support of her tr~itten protest. E.J.Branch 1a21 ,Mop,t.,arey Bl v1i& Mr. Branch uished to protes't the proposed zoning of his lo~, Lot 18, Block 30, First Addition to Hermosa Beach as R-l, stating he had hoped to bu:i.J.d an ~-unit building on this lot and that it is entirely surrounded ,rlth C and multiple units. He feels it \'!Ould be entirely undesireable as a family dwelling site, bo~h because or its size and because or the proximity to C and multiple zoning. Mrs. John J. Kline 1200 Jonte;mJLBl.:m.,.,, Mrs. Kline referred to her previou~ reques~ to change the zoning in the 1900 block on Monterey to R-2 in.stead of ~he proposed R-1, presenting a personal s'!ll'Vey of the home owners in this block, contain-ing signatures of those t'il'ho would favoT such a changeu R .. G.Thompson Mr .. Thompson stated that he had submitted a 140 Pier Avenue written protest to several aspects of the pro-1>0sed ordinance and ma:p and uould like to add to that protest at this-time .. f He said ·the map should be marked so that most of the public ~ould be able to tell just whi~ it m~ans, instead of its being misleading. particululy in regard to the R-3 designation. ( Public Hearing November 21, 1955 Page Two i~w. Thomspon t1en·~ on to explain that most persons m~hing to know tbe zoning of a particular lot would not be aware or the finer point.a of the ordinance gove~ning the use of the lot, but would only look at the indicated zone and assume that ii could be used that way. He suggested marking those lots Rk2 which could in no tiise be used as R-Jg thus making the marking more realistic. O. Baumg&--·~ner lQJl -ktb st~ by single owners. He protested the proposed zoning of lots in his area R-1. Requested R-2 for this a~ea because of the large size of parcels owned HGwrd Jackson He asked if ~hare was some way to clarify this 3-217 M'iPDil'4:Gan A1re. problem 0£ tha R-.3 designation on the map, uhen ·t:;he lot could actually only be used R-1 because of the required lot area provisions in the ordinance. Comm. Fisher suggested that perhaps the legend on the map could contain such an indication. Mr. Thompson asked. ~hether or not i·~ was customary :for a Plsnning Consultant to recommend rezoni.P..g in a City, rrhere such rezoning uould be approximately 75% different from the pr0sent use or the land. Mr. Kalicka pointed out th~t because of the small size of the lots in this City and a large number of o·ther Cities in California, some concessions had to be made, but tha.t the State Housing Act. at present prohibits overloading the land to the extent i.hat i·t:; is being done in this City. Mrs. Barbara Guild 1g20 Strang tiple zoning in the mit rooming houses. Mrs. Guild stat;ed that she was concerned wiJGh making sure the Hor~h Strand area remained R-1. but also wished to pr.otest so much mul-City as a whole~ especially R-) which would per-Mr. Kalicka ansr1ered her protest by sayi_ng tha:t rooming houses can only have 10 persons li·11ing in them anyhow II and 3 uni ts might easily-house tha~ number of persons. He further pointed out that at present. rooming houses ara allo~ed in all residential zones. Robert English 2203 Hermosa Av:emie three units anyhow. Mr. English wished to help clarity this question by saying that on the average, the R-3 lots are too smal.l to pemit the construction of Mrs. Kline suggested that the taeak spot in the zoning was in indi-cating R-.3 when the lot couldn•ii possibly be used tor more than R-1 or R-2. Comm. Viault pointed out ~hat ii the zoning were made only R-2, ever.y time approperty o~er acquired enough square ~oota.ge to erect a multiple duelling he would have to come before the Planning Commission. U and we would have the chicken pox type of map which we have at present. John Shaw 231 -16i;h $:tree.t, He requested that his property be la:tt as an M zone0 because the properties to the south and east of him are so designated. ( }'\f ~::-.::~i ~ .~J :~:,.~_:_ j__ :1~ November 21, 1955 Page Three Mr, Branch asked if' Mr. Kallcka has ever attempted to prescribe new zoning tor a City which was 95% built up. Mr. Ka.1icka answered by stating tha·(; a Planning Consultant is not usually called in until the damage is done .. Mrs. Wintera Mrs. Winters commended the work or the Planning 6k,2 -7tl) ru~~t. Commission and Consultl:1.nt in attempting to produce a workable map and ordinance. She asked if Lots 13 tu'!d lb,. of llr. Dougharty9s T~et mould :remain R-2 and not be made Co She was informed that no ree1uest £or C zoning had been received by t,he r;ommisaion. -George He,lbert 665 -6ii,n_S;t;a-,11.t. Mr. Halbert asked what means could be used to prohibi~ ~he using of R-2 lots £or C purposes .. He ~--as i.nformed tha"G the procedure would be to protest to the City Council and the Building Depe.rtmen~, who ha~e the job of' enforci11g t;he C:lty Ordinances. Matthew Moor~ He asked whether or not a lot can automatically $0{¾ Strand~~ bu zoned Commercial if it is adjacen·t to Pacific toast Highway frontage p~opezrty and is purchased after tJ?.; proposed ordinance and map is in ef.£ec·t.. He was inf o:rmed that i~ could not be au·tnmatieally so zoned, Mri"• Kline asked that her two lots, Lots 10 and 11, Tract Mo. 22.3 be ,y.,ned C because of the proximity to South Shore Motores and their supposed future need 0£ parking spaee. Ruby Haley 239.232 -21st S,t,._ Owner of Lots 20 and 210 Hermosa View Tract NoGl She reques·c.ed th&.t ~ owing to ·the unusual depth of her lots and the o·tber 3 lots in 'that block, they be considered £or C zoning instead of' the proposed R-1 ui~h C potential. She felt they could be usod more efficiently in that manner than for single family eons·truction o Mre Kalieka explained at this ~ime ~hat the purpose of all designations on the map is to indicate the ultimate desired use of the land, t1hether or not i·t can be so used at present a That is also the intent of the potential c1assificat1on, which is applied to Mrs. Haley's property. Mrs. Wintere asked how many units could possibly be built in an R-) zone ii' 2 lo·ts were acc,uired. Mr. Kalicka pointed out tha.t the ordin-ance would probably allow no more than 6 units on 2 lots when all requirements for parking, yard area.,, etc. are met. Mrs. Kline asked whether or not parking .facilities were required ·by ordinance in a C zone. Mr. Kalieka said there was no such provision in the final draft ot this ordinance, but that there had originally been that provision. The parking provisions had been dropped from the final draft uben the Commission had been inTormed ~ha~ off-street parking plans were being discussed. G Chairman Dennie asked it tbere was anyone else who vlshed to speak, and there being nc othe~ persons present who cared to addNse the Commission, be declared the public hearing closed .. He explained that upon recommendation from the Commission_. the map and ordinance would be presented to tbe Council for its action, and that they could re-commend further changes by referring it back to the Commissiono ( u Public HeQl..ring November 21. 1955 Page Four The Commission then took the fo1lowing action on those requests presented at this meeting: Lota 10 and 1111 !mc:tr No. 223 CoD.D'll. Black moved that these 1ots be zoned C because of tbe proximity to C zonL~g and be-cause t1'..is zoning t-1ould more :nearly make a uni -£o?'m depth of Commercial in that area. The motion was seconded by Comm. Fisher,. and the motion carried by the follo'lrlng vote: Ayes: Cown .. BlackD Fisher, Haneman and Mi11er Noes: Comm. Viault, Cb.aiY-man Dennie and Mayor Edwards Wly approx. 250' of Comm~ Viaul~ moved that tht~ property, bordered 1o·~s 8:, 911 lOi, Block by Ardmore .A.venue a.11d 16th S'Greets and by lfir(t 8111 Second Addition to Priamos9 property on the east be zoned R-1 mth HBrmosa .. .1$a,ch a M pcr·centia.1 'to conf'orm with the M zoning on 2 sides11 yet pToviding an area of eontrc,l between the M zona and the residential zoning in this area. The motion was seconded by Ccmm. Miller and carried unanimously .. It was the consensus of the Commission that the legend on the map be wirtten to include an explanation ot R-3 in relation to lot size re-quirements. Adoption of land use Catlim .. Miller moved that the Commission recommend .map11 ordinance and the adoption o:r tbe proposed land use map and front yaz;d ~eQ:u.~szoning ordinance and front yard requirements map to the City Council as amended a~ this meeting. The motion was seconded by Comm. Haneman and carried 'l!lil&nimously .. ADJOURfflNT It was moved by Comm. Black and seconded by Comm6 Fisher that the meeting be adjourned. The meeting adjourned unanimously at 10:20 P.M ..