HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 02-111
2
3
4
s
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2s
26
27
28
29
RESOLUTION P.C. 02-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA APPROVING
THE EXPANSION AND REMODEL OF A
NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE, INCLUDING
CONVERTING THE NONCONFORMING DUPLEX USE TO A
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, RESULTING IN A GREATER
THAN 30% STRUCTURAL REMOVAL OF EXISTING
LINEAR FEET OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND A GREATER
THAN 50% INCREASE IN VALUATION WHILE
MAINTAINING NONCONFORMING FRONT, SIDE AND
REAR YARDS AT 2222 MONTEREY BOULEVARD
The Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as
follows:
Section 1. An application was filed by Kathleen Briscoe and Steve Plenge, owners of real
property located at 2222 Monterey Boulevard, requesting a greater than 30% structural removal of
existing linear feet of exterior walls and a greater than 50% expansion and remodel to an existing
nonconforming structure in order to expand and remodel the first and second floors, and convert
the existing nonconforming duplex use into a single family dwelling pursuant to Chapter 17.52
of the Zoning Ordinance
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a hearing to consider the application on
February 19, 2002, at which testimony and evidence, both written and oral, were 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 a 1,576 square foot expansion and converting a duplex to a
single-family dwelling, resulting in a 52.4% structural removal of existing linear feet of the
exterior walls and an increase of valuation of 98.8% while maintaining nonconforming
front and side yards.
Section 4. Based on the foregoing factual findings, the Planning Commission makes the
following findings:
1. The existing nonconforming yards to be maintained are not significant or unusual in regards
to compatibility with neighboring properties;
2. The scale of the proposed expansion is reasonable, and is consistent with planning and
zoning requirements for the R-1 zone and does not warrant requiring the current
nonconforming conditions to be brought into conformance;
3. Approval of the expansion and remodel is consistent with the intent and goals of Chapter
17.52 of the Zoning Ordinance;
1
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2s
26
27
2s
29
4. The project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to CEQA guidelines, Section 15301 e(2) with the
finding that the project is in an area with available services and not in an environmentally
sensitive area.
Section 5. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves a greater
than 50% expansion, subject to the following conditions of approval:
1. The project shall be consistent with submitted plans. Modifications to the plan
which do not involve any further expansion shall be reviewed :and may be approved
by the Community Development Director.
2. The driveway slope shall be no greater than the 12.5% maximum allowable.
3. Any new lot perimeter fences and walls shall comply with current maximum height
requirements for front, rear and side yards.
4. Prior to final zoning approval a deed restriction shall be recorded stating that the
use of the property shall be one single family dwelling unit with one kitchen.
5. Prior to issuance of building permits for demolition and construction, the contractor
shall verify the structural integrity of the proposed walls to be retained with a
structural inspection approved by the Community Development Director, with
details incorporated on construction drawings. This may require further additional
structural pest inspections anal/or an inspection by a structural engineer.
6. Upon issuance of building permits the project shall proceed in compliance with the
scope of work outlined on the plans and any further demolition or construction
contrary to said plans will result in project delays in order for the City to review
project modifications, and may require new plan submittals and Planning
Commission review to proceed with construction work.
Section 6. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedures 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 clays after the final decision by the City Council.
AYES: Hoffinan, Pizer, Perrotti, Tucker, and Kersenboom
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 02-11 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 February 19, 2002.
�"6
Sam Perrotti, Chairman_ Sol Blumenfeld, G" �cr -ary
Date
N 0l-$