Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 03-021 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 RESOLUTION 03-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO APPROVE THE REQUESTED VARIANCE TO SUBDIVISION AND ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW A VARIATION TO THE LOT WIDTH AND AREA OF TWO LOTS, AND TO ALLOW ONE OF THE LOTS TO BE LESS THAN THE PREVAILING LOT SIZE IN THE VICINITY AT 836 BEACH DRIVE LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 8 AND 9, OF BLOCK 9 HERMOSA BEACH TRACT The Planning Commission does hereby resolve and order as follows:.. Section 11. An application was filed by Adam L. Gooch owner of real property located at 836 Beach Drive seeking a Variance from Section 17.12.090 of the Zoning Ordinance and Section 16.08.060 of the Subdivision Ordinance to create two lots less than a minimum of 40 feet wide and less than 4,000 square feet in area, and for one of the two lots to be inconsistent with prevailing lot sizes in the vicinity. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed de novo public hearing to consider the application for the Variance on January 21, 2003, 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 applicant is proposing to re -divide two merged lots so that two single-family dwellings may be developed and sold separately on each lot. 2. The subject lots have frontages of 30-feet each and depths of 95 feet. The lot at the corner of Beach drive tapers to a narrower width at the rear of the property (22.69 feet). 3. The area of the proposed lots are approximately 2,850 and 2,497 square feet. 4. The lot size of the larger lot is typical and consistent with other lots in the original subdivision and in the general vicinity, and the smaller lot while inconsistent with the typical lot size in the immediate area is consistent with other corner lots on Beach Drive in the general surrounding area which also taper to a narrower width at the rear. Section 4. Based on the foregoing factual findings, the Planning Commission makes the following findings pertaining to the application for a Variance from Section 17.12.090 of the 1 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Zoning Ordinance and Section 16.08.060 of the Subdivision Ordinance to have lots less than a minimum of 40 feet wide and less than 4,000 square feet in area: 1. There are exceptional circumstances relating to the property because the lot in its merged condition is only one of four lots within a total of 52 lots within a 300-foot radius in the neighborhood area that have been merged. Therefore, its lot size of 5,253 square feet is an exceptional and unique condition as compared to the other lots whether located on the Strand or on walk streets or neighborhood streets in the area. Of the 31 lots within the neighborhood area located on walk streets or neighborhood streets (8tt', 9' and 10th Streets) 26 have not been merged and contain lot sizes of 2,850 square feet or less. Also, the property is located on the corner of Beach Drive, and if split, has a narrower width along the alley to the rear than the majority of lots in the area. Also, the lot contains sufficient square footage in the R-2 zone to develop up to three units, while prior to the merger; the property could have been developed with one unit per lot, or two units. The merger in 1988, therefore, had the unintended consequence of allowing more intense development of the property, while the intent of the lot merger ordinance to reduce density and the overall intensity of development in the City. This situation is unique and exceptional since the combined square footage of the two lots yields the development potential of three units while, as separate lots, neither lot is large enough to qualify for two units. 2. The Variance is necessary for the enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the vicinity because the owners wish to exercise their property right to subdivide their lot into the two lots from the original tract to create lots similar to other lots in the neighborhood. A majority of the lots in the neighborhood are currently developed with single- family homes on lots of 2,850 square feet or less. The applicant's merged lot is 5,330 square feet, which is nearly twice the size of the prevailing lot sizes. Therefore, the Variance is necessary for the property owner to exercise the right to develop separate single-family projects on the lots from the original tract, which is a right clearly possessed by other properties in the vicinity. 3. The granting of the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the subdivision will create lots which are more consistent with the prevailing lot pattern in the surrounding neighborhood than the current merged lot condition, and subdivision will permit the development of two single-family dwellings consistent with development in the vicinity. 4. The Variance is consistent with the General Plan because the development of two units will result in a density of 16.3 units per acre which is within the range for the Medium Density category of the General Plan (14-25 units per acre) and consistent with prevailing densities in the area. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Section 6. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance to allow a subdivision with lots less than a minimum of 40 feet wide and less than 4,000 square feet in area and one lot with an area not consistent with prevailing lot sizes within the vicinity. VOTE: AYES: Hofftnan,Kersenboom,Perrotti,Pizer,Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 03-2" is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California at their regular meeting of March 18, 2003. Ron Pizer, Chairman qurrufeld, acre ary Date March 18 2003 Varr836beach 3