HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/19/193914*
JULY 19. 1939
ROLL CALL
Commissioners present: Briggs. Estus, Findlay,
Patterson.
Coamiseloners absent: Hopkins, Seeger, Williams,
Whitson, Hodgkinson.
As there was not a quorum presents the regular July
meeting of the NEWPORT BUCK CITY PALNNING COMMISSION could
not be held. However, since a hearing had been advertised
for this date upon the matter of the application of Josephine,'
Bevan for a 506, 5 ft. front yard variance on Lot 12, Blk 9,
Sec 1, Balboa Island, and since there were several persons
present to protest the granting of this variance, it was
mutually agreed by members of the commission present that
these protests would be heard and presented as evidence
when the application was formally considered.
By common consent,,Com. Briggs acted as Temporary
Chairman.
Mr. Chas. G. Schweitzer, 121 Opal St.,'owner of the
adjoining lot on the north -of -the proposed building, placed
a formal protest to allowing this variance. He stated that
he had just completed his house in February and was required
to set back 11 feet on account of the bay window in the
front of his house. To allow a building to be placed
within 5 ft. ofthe front property line neat door to him
would devalue his property. The zoning ordinance Stites
that If there are 5 houses on 1 side of the street with a
set -back of lose than 10 ft., then the average set -back may
be computed and thus establish the set -back line for the
other buildings. In this case, however, there are -only 4
houses in the block and out of those 4 houses, only one sets
out more than 5 feet, He felt that the ordinance governing
set -back lines was adopted to enhance the value of property.
4ince there is only one non - conforming house in the block, why
should a precedent be established by granting this variance.
Why not require all future buildings to conform to the es-
tablished 10 ft. set -back. Allowing a 5 ft. set -back: will cut
off his view 4 ft. 6 in. He could not see why he should be
deprived by conforming to the ordinance.
Hr. D. O. Hamaell, representing the owners of Lots 9,
10 and 11 placed a formal protest to the granting of this
variance. He stated that, at the time he sold these lots
he had placed upon them a deed restriction requiring a set -
back of 6 ft, from the street to protect the other lots
�r o 77r r n
adjoining. This before the zoning ordinance, was adopted.
Mr. W. D. Gilmore, owner of Lot 8, placed a formal
protest and stated that he had been required to set back
10 ft. This was done to protect 'Lots 9 and 10. His porch,
which is open, extends 4'feet toward the sidewalk, making
his set- back 6 ft.
are. Bevan, applicant, stated that she saw no reason
for protesting, since the neighborhood is not so highly res-
tricted that it could hurt the value of the surrounding
property. Many of the houses in the immediate neighborhood
are unsightly. She felt that a 5 ft. setback would not harm
anyone. She purchased the property in 1926, prior to the
adoption of the zoning ordinance.
Com. Estus moved that this regular meeting of the
Newport Beach City Planning Commission be continued to
10:30 A. M., July 20, 1939 in the Council Chambers of the
City Hall. at which time formal action upon the variance
application of Josephine Bevan may be "taken. Seconded by
Com. Patterson. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
7K �"
HOWARD R. SEAGER,
Secret