Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_69.10.06MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, HERMOSA BEACH, ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1969, AT 8:00 P.M. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 8:03 P.M. BY CHAIRMAN BOICE ROLL CALL - Present: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Noble, Stabler, Chairman Boice Absent: None Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Stabler, to approve the minutes from the regular meeting of September 15, 1969, as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. ZONE CHANGE Z-69-5 Proposed change of zone on property fronting Strand between 18th and 22nd Streets from R-1 to R-2 on lots 1 through 7 of Blocks 19, 20, 21 and 22 of Hermosa Beach tract (continued from meeting of September 15, 1969). The City Planner reminded the Commission that the hearing had been contin- ued to allow opponents of the change to R-2 a chance to state their views. A telegram was received from Margaret Abbott, 323 Monte Vista Avenue, Oakland, a Strand property owner, stating that she favors R-1 for this area. A synopsis of the considerations, received from the opponents of the change, for retaining R-1 on the Strand from 18th to 22nd Streets ,w,as read by the City Planner: 1. majority of property owners within or adjacent to area favor R-1; 2. rising costs would cause minimum quality construction in order to profit; 3. revenue does not usually increase with added density; however, tax burden does increase to maintain City services; 4. area streets do not meet present vehicular needs of residents and trucks; 5. sanitary standards for trash containers are presently not enforced, R-2 would increase but not solve trash problem; - 2 - 6. when R-1 zone is almost fully developed, R-2 tends to en- courage additions to or divisions of structures, rarely improving the area; 7. zone changes tend to reflect desires of short term, profit - oriented owners, agents, and contractors. Their desires should not dominate City Planning; 8. resident owners tend to maintain and improve property and have great involvement in community affairs than absentee owners; 9. due to Strand's prime location, owners who can afford costs eventually own and maintain property; 10. neighborhood already exceeds R-2 medium density population; 11. R-3 areas have greater percentage of old partitioned houses with increased access, parking and trash problems; 12. obligation of Planning Commission is to first present valid reasons for change. In this case, owners have been asked to justify present zoning and Comm. would evaluate our reasons, a negative approach to City Planning. Public hearing opened 8:12 P.M. Mrs. Bowman, 2024 Strand, Hermosa Beach, said that her statements would be in answer to the "Considerations for retaining R-1 on the Strand from 18th to 22nd Streets." They are: according to their votes, the majority of residents favored the change; considerations contradict the last News- letter which mentioned the improving and upgrading of many structures through remodeling; narrow streets, trash problems, etc. are prevalent throughout town rather than just on the Strand; many cities have been renovated and now they are choice real estate sites; most residents who live in area have been there for years, therefore, resent term "short term, profit -oriented owners"; neighborhood is designated for R-2, so how can it exceed R-2 medium density; and most opposition is based on ground- less fears. Mrs. Kelsey, 1942 Strand, Hermosa Beach, stated that on the Strand between 18t' and 22nd Streets there are 11 singles and 15 multiples. Excluding the Strand in the area west of Hermosa Avenue, east of Beach Drive and from north side of 18t" inclusive to the south side of 22nd Street, there are 22 singles and 40 multiples. The total in area is 33 singles and 55 multiples. Mary Donahugh, 2008 Strand, Hermosa Beach, stated that people in opposition to change are depriving the proponents of the highest and best use of land. Income from land is needed to pay taxes. -3- Charles Lombardo, 1908 Strand, Hermosa Beach, stated that a survey was taken on the 25 residences affected and 11 favored retaining R-1 and 6 favored the change to R-2. Public hearing closed at 8:32 P.M. Comm. Stabler stated that there seems to be some confusion as to whether R-2 means medium density or not. The City Planner stated that medium density does not mean a certain number of units per lot but rather a certain number of units per acre; that the City's R-2 zone is approximately on the high end of the medium density specified in the General Plan. Comm. Collis stated that people compare multiple usage with undesirable areas within the City. In working for the best land usage, maybe the standards should be increased, like more off-street parking. Comm. Stabler felt that those using the term "best and highest use" refer to the economic feasibility of the land. Social, cultural and environmental aspects also affect "the best and highest use" of land. He stated that he has seen other areas in the City "prostituted" when zoned to higher density. He would be in favor of the change if there were some type of "design review." Also, the Comm. should have a strong review of the General Plan. Comm. Armer stated that we are not achieving the best use of the property at this time. He would like to see an incentive to change put before these people, for some properties along the Strand constitute a "slum." He felt that Comm. should change land to R-2; however, he felt the Comm. was jumping the gun unless economic, social and aesthetic standards are set. Chairman Boice stated that he could see no need for more standards because Hermosa Beach is under the Uniform Building Code. Mr. Trott, Building Director, replied that the Code was designed for safety and the zoning regulations are used for light and ventilation rather than building design. Comm. Armer stated that design standards would supplement the Building Code. Chairman Boice felt the Comm. should have a workshop and come to some kind of decision. Comm. Armer asked Mr. Crawford what the Comm. could accomplish in further study. The City Planner replied that the Comm. could study the feasibility of establishing an R-2 Potential rather than a straight R-2 zone. Also, the Comm. could devise a precise plan for these 4 blocks in which the Planning Commission could allow them to eliminate side yards, increase or decrease front yard setbacks and parking requirements, or could establish some type of theme or establishment of the Planned Development zone which would have standards for the zone. The Planning Commission could then change the zone to R-2 Planned Development and anyone could build accord- ing to standards which have been established with presumably the assistance of the property owners. No one would need to come to the City except for - 4 - a Building Permit, unless they did not want to follow the Planned Devel- opment zone standards, in which case they must come before the Planning Commission. Comm. Noble felt that it was not the responsibility of the Planning Com- mission to design buildings. If there was to be a design review board, it would be the responsibility of the City Council to establish one. The City Planner stated that if the City Council approved the Planning Commission's recommendation of an R-2 Potential, then property owners who wish to develop must prepare a precise plan which shows how they intend to develop the lots before building duplexes. The Planning Commission could establish certain minimum guidelines. Then the Comm. could either initiate or allow the property owners to initiate the final zone change to R-2, which allows the Building Director to issue a Building Permit. Charles Lombardo stated that R-2 is progress and we should acknowledge it. However, we are distressed when we see what has happened to the south end of the Strand. Standards should be set by the Comm.; however, he felt they should be set prior to allowing an R-2 zone. Chairman Boice stated that the Planning Commission is headed in the right direction in establishing a set of guidelines for property owners because none of the Comm. wants to see a "piece of junk" on the lots. This set of standards would permit building without coming before the Planning Com- mission. Charles Lombardo asked why not change the area to R-3 or more, rather than just R-2. Chairman Boice replied that because of lot sizes and the price of lots, it would be unfeasible to go higher than R-2. Comm. Himmel stated that the ocean is the major reason for living in Hermosa Beach and that land should be developed more intensely to reflect this desire. He further stated that he favored R-3 Potential but not R-2 Potential. Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Collis, to approve the zone change to R-2 Potential. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Noble, Chairman Boice NOES: Comm. Himmel ABSTAIN: Comm. Stabler Comm. Himmel stated the economics have passed the point where the single family residence is viable for the community. He stated that he feared people would be induced to adding on to existing properties. He further felt that he would be in favor of R-3 Potential if inducements for con- solidation of lots and redevelopment of area were added. Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Armer, to adopt Resolution P.C. 154-754, changing the zone on lots 1 through 7 of Blocks 19, 20, 21 -5- and 22 of Hermosa Beach tract, fronting Strand between 18'U, and 22nd Streets, from R-1 to R-2 Potential. It has been determined that this zoning is the most feasible method of adhering to the Master Plan at this time and that special study sessions will be conducted to establish standards and criteria as to the accept- ability of precise and specific plans for any development in this area and that the Comm. felt that the precise development standards required in the potential zone would tend to enhance the property values. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Noble, Chairman Boice NOES: Comm. Himmel ABSTAIN: Comm. Stabler Comm. Stabler stated that he had a personal financial interest in the property under question and after a great deal of considerations, he felt it c,Yould be a breach of ethical integrity to take a position. Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Collis, to have a special workshop meeting, Monday, October 13, 1969, at 7:30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. ZONE CHARTGE Proposed change of zone on lots 1 through 12, Block 33, lat. Addition to Hermosa Beach tract, fronting Hermosa Avenue between 14th and 16th Streets, from C-2 to R-3 (continued from September 29, 1969). The City Planner stated that it was the Planning Commission's desire to consider the "super block" approach for this area. At this time there is no machinery to utilize, unless Comm. let the area go potential R-3 and required a precise plan. The City intends to widen the sidewalks and land- scape the median but this will be 5-10 years in the future. He further stated that a straight R-3 zone would leave the City without controls other than the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code standards. Public hearing opened at 9:43 P.M. Mr. Howard presented their building plans and elevations indicating a 3 story apartment house with a parking garage entering from 14'�h Street, hip roof with mission tile, interior court and large balconies. Chairman Boice stated, in review, that the developers had agreed to dedicate 5 feet in the rear of the property for future widening of the alley and that the Comm. had recommended that they be allowed to come out from the front yard setback 3 feet on the lower level and to cantilever 2 additional feet on the 2nd and 3rd stories. Chairman Boice asked Mr. Trott if this dedication and moving toward the property line would be detrimental to the development and to the City. Mr. Trott replied that it would not. Mr. Crawford asked Mr. Trott how would it affect corner site clearance. Mr. Trott replied that it would not affect visual clearance. Also, Mr. Trott stated that Mr. Howard has a workable plan: handsome design, good layouts and has more than the required parking spaces. Mr. Trott suggested zoning the developers property R-3 and R-3 Potential for the remainder of the block. Mr. Crawford stated that the Planning Commission could then establish precise plans for the remainder of the block (R-3 Potential) in harmony with Mr. Howard's development, creating the "super block" concept. No one appeared to speak against the proposal. Public hearing closed at 9:58 P.M. Comm. Himmel stated that he was concerned about the parking of the proper- ties inland from Mr. Howard's. Would parking be off the street, off the alley, or what. Chairman Boice stated that other developments would probably have to provide subterranean parking also. Comm. Collis stated that these developers have made a sincere effort to upgrade the area and the Comm. have not as yet established any minimum requirements for the area. Comm. Noble stated that the development fits the feeling of the Comm. for the area and that we should move to establish lots 1 and 2, R-3 and lots 3 through 12, R-3 Potential this evening. Comm. Himmel stated he was impressed with the submitted plans and he is in favor of a change to R-3; however, he relunctantly will go along with the division of the rezoning two lots R-3zone and R-3 Potential for the remaining area. Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Armer, to recommend the zone change for lots 1 and 2, 1st Addition to Hermosa Beach tract to R-3 and also to establish C-2 with R-3 Potential for lots 3 through 12, of Block 33, 1st Addition to Hermosa Beach tract. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Noble, Stabler, Chairman Boice NOES: None Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Armer, to adopt Resolution P.C. 154-753, granting the proposed zone change fronting Hermosa Avenue between i4th and 16t' Streets from C-2 to R-3 for lots 1 and 2, block 339 1st Addition to Hermosa Beach tract; and from C-2 to C-2 with R-3 Potential for lots 3 through 12, Block 33, 1st Addition to Hermosa Beach tract. It has been determined by the Planning Commission that this proposed new zone would be most suitable for the orderly growth for the City of Hermosa -7- Beach, and the potential classification is essential to assure harmonious development of this buffer area. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Noble, Stabler, Chairman Boice NOES: None Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Armer, that a letter be for- warded to the Building Department from the Planning Commission showing that the Planning Commission in their change of zone for lots 1 and 2, block 33, 1st Addition to Hermosa Beach tract, was done under the premise that the precise plans as presented by the applicants will be accomplished in detail prior to filing building plans and that the Comm. suggests the front yard setback requirements be: a 7 foot front yard setback on the 1st level, a 5 foot front yard setback on the 2nd and 3rd levels and -a 5 foot dedication to the City of Hermosa Beach by said applicants on the rear property line for future street purposes; and that they shall be able to encroach to within 1 foot of the new rear property line on the 2nd and 3rd levels. _ AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Noble, Stabler, Chairman Boice NOES: None ZONE CHANGE Z-69-8 Proposed change of zone on lots 31 through 46, Redondo Homes tract, property fronting south side of 24t" Street between Prospect and Harper Avenues from R-1 to R-2 with R-3 Potential; and proposed change of zone on lots 47 through 63, Redondo Homes tract, property fronting the north side of 21st Street between Prospect and Harper Avenues from R-1 to R-1 with R-2 Potential. The City Planner stated that this is a new public hearing for a change of zone initiated by the Planning Commission at the request of property owners. The request is twofold: a change of half the block facing 24t" Street, to R-3, and a change of half the block facing 21st Street, to R-2. The General Plan indicates future public facility for block. If zone is changed, it is placed in a residential category. On the basis of the factors listed in the analysis, any change by the Comm. is premature. He stated that immediately adjacent to the block in question, there is a large tract of R-3 and R-3 Potential property that has not been developed. Mr. Crawford questioned whether there was a need for more R-3 property in this area at this time. Public hearing opened at 10:33 P.M. Glen Clark, 1246 24th Street, Hermosa Beach, stated that across the street from his property there is C-2 property. With his property abutting com- mercial, his property suffers. Mr. Clark favors the change as a protection for his property. S Bob Vitale, 1212 24'�h Street, Hermosa Beach, stated that he is for the change because the potential C-2 property across the street is depreciating the value of his property. He further added that in other areas, where there is a C-2 zone, there is a buffer zone between the commercial and residential. George'Zavislan, 1253 21st Street, Hermosa Beach, asked why not make the entire area R-3 rather than R-2 Potential and R-3 Potential. Comm. Noble replied that the Planning Commission is trying to establish correct buff- ering from residential to commercial areas. Margaret Boatwright, 1211 21st Street, Hermosa Beach, stated that she owns 3 houses there and she favors area to remain R-1. Since the area is fuliy developed R-1, it would be to our best interest to have it remain R-1. She stated that John Seymore, 1233 21st Street, Hermosa Beach, also favors the area to remain R-1. Ken Allen, 1120 24th Street, Hermosa Beach, feels that the change is necessary for area and also to protect the value of his property. Bill LaRue, 1225 21st Street, Hermosa Beach, stated he is opposed to the change, for he likes the area the way it is. Public hearing closed at 10:57 P.M. Comm. Collis stated that the City created a problem by creating more com- mercial property adjacent to residential property and felt there is no need for more commercial on Artesia. Motion made by Comm. Collis, seconded by Comm. Armer, to put area into potential R-2 and R-3 zoning as advertised. Comm. Armer felt Comm. was acting prematurely in desiring a potential R-2 and R-3 when the standards have not been established yet. Comm. Noble stated that it is sound planning to rezone properties that the Commission has studied regarding "potentials" and that it would not be detrimental to the property owners in the area. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Noble, Stabler, Chairman Boice NOES: None Motion made by Comm. Collis, seconded by Comm. Armer, to adopt Resolution P.C. 154-755, changing the zone on lots 31 through 46, Redondo Homes tract, property fronting south side of 24th Street between Prospect and Harper Avenues from R-1 to R-2 with R-3 Potential; and proposed change of zone on lots 47 through 63, Redondo Homes tract, property fronting the north side of 21st Street between Prospect and Harper Avenues from R-1 to R-1 with R-2 Potential. It has been determined by the Planning Commission that a proper and orderly development of area, indicated that a range of higher density residential uses would create a desired buffer between the commercial area and the established single family area. It has been established that no undue hardship will be created on the R-1 areas to the south and that the R-2 and R-3 Potential satisfies with the factors presented by Mr. Crawford in his October 3, 1969, memo and that immediate study sessions will be held for the development standards for multiple zoning. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Noble, Stabler, Chairman Boice NOES: None REFERRAL BY CITY COUNCIL Referral by City Council of Variance V-69-17 for reconsideration and re- commendation. Request by Allan Juckes for a variance from Section 506 of City Zoning Ordinance N.S. 154, as amended, as applied to lot 9, block 117, Shakespeare tract, in an R-2 zone, known as 225 & 229 31st Street, in order to con- struct a duplex on a lot having a total area of 2100 square feet instead of the 2400 square feet required by ordinance. Comm. Noble stated that Mr. Trott and himself had discussed the possibility of allowing the developer to build a 25 foot garage with a 20 foot parking strip abutting it; allow a 0 foot front yard setback; and allow him to canterlever if he wishes to within 1 foot of the rear property line. Comm. Himmel asked if tandem parking was allowed under the Ordinance for two-family. Mr. Crawford stated that as legal parking no, but as extra parking, the City does not care. Mr. Crawford stated that this type of plan would widen the alley. Comm. Himmel stated that the Planning Commission had rejected the variance because area would be less than 2400 square feet, now with the new idea presented, he is losing approximately 600 square feet more. Comm. Armer stated that he would like an incentive added for the people to combine lots. Mr. Crawford replied that the area is mostly single family residences and that the people there have no incentive for combining. Chairman Boice stated that he was against allowing the variance because of the lack of a decent alley and turning radius. Motion made by Comm. Armer, seconded by Comm. Himmel, to uphold the Planning Commission's prior action. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Stabler, Chairman Boice NOES: Comm. Noble - 10 - Referral is to go back to the City Council and they can either uphold the Planning Commission's ruling or overrule it with a 4-1 vote. Comm. Noble stated that the reason requirement in the R-2 zone is too two units is sufficient. MISCELLANEOUS for his vote was that the land area stringent, for 2400 square feet for Comm. Armer stated that he wished to have someone like Frank Gehry, a design expert, paid by the Comm. to give expert counsel because the Comm. are lay- men needing technical advice in order to get something meaningful out of a meeting. Motion made by Comm. Armer, seconded by Comm. Collis, to extend an invitation to Frank Gehry for two hours of consultation and to spend no more than $100.00 for the two hours. Motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Proposed ordinance amending Article 14 of the City Zoning Ordinance N.S. 154 in order to transfer variance procedures to the Board of Zoning Adjust- ment to be continued to the next meeting, October 20, 1969. Meeting adjourned at 11:36 P.M. Next meeting will be a special meeting on October 13, 1969, at 7:30 P.M. Next regular meeting to be October 20, 1969, at 8:00 P.M. JOE B. NOBLE, SECRETARY