Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/28/1937OCTOBER 28, 1937. THE NEWPORT BEACH CITY PLANNING COMMISSION met in regular session in the Council Chambers; • City Hall, Newport Beach California, Thursday, October 28, 1937 at 7:30 P.M. Chairr;an Hopkins presided. Meeting was called to order by the Chairman. ROLL CALL: Present -- Hopkins, Seager, Mrs. Williams, Briggs, Schnitker, Patterson and Whitson. Absent -- Thompson and Findlay. Mr. Sampson representing Mr. Tilton attended. Chairman Hopkins stated that Mr. Tilton was unable to attend due to his many duties as con- sultant. He will be able to attend more regularly later in the year. SPECIAL BUSINESS Secretary Seager called the attention of the Commission to a regular form which he recommended that the Commission adopt in referring recommend- ations to the City Council and read the form which follows: 111';HEREAS, heretofore and in accordance with. Ordinance #440 of the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California, there was filed.by a petiticn for a permissible variance of regulations and for a conditional permit as pro- vided for by said ordinance, accompanied by the fee as required and it appearing to the Newport Beach City Planning Commission that all fees have been paid and that all notices required to bd given have been given as required by law, and it further appearing that in addition to t be notice required by law a notice of the hearing was given to all persons owning property in the block in which the variance is requested, and it further appearing that said application was accompanied by complete plots, plans and descri- ption of the property involved and the proposed use, with ground plans and elevations of all proposed buildings, and evidence having been submitted to the Planning Co *- mission satisfactor • to it of the ability and intention of the appli- cant to proceed with the construction work in accordance with said plans within six months from the date of consideration, and the Planning Commission having posted said application and all mans, plans and other accompanying matter in its office for public inspection for a period of more than one week and having given _notice of a public hearing by one publication in the New- port News, a legal newspaper circulating in the particular section of the City affected by the application and the said hearing having been set for the day of ,193 at 7:30 P -M. in the Council Mambers o the City Hall, Newport Beach, California, and at said time the matter was called for hearing and no one appeared to contest or object to the same,(or said object- ions or and protests were deemed and were dec- lared by the Planning Commission to be in- sufficient and denied) and at said time and at said hearing the applicant having presented a statement and adequate evidence as required.by the Commission: NOW, THEREFORE, the Commission finds the facts to be as .follows, to -wit: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the property referred to in the application; 2. That the granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoy- ment of substantial property rights, 3, That the granting of such application will not materially affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood, and will not be mater- ially detrimental to the public welfare, nor injurious to property or improvements, in the neighborhood. 4..That the Planning Commission finds that detriment or injury to the neighborhood will not result from the issuance of the permit as applied for. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the application of for variance be approved in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 3 of Section XI of Ordinance 440, and that a per cent variant and reduction in regulations affecting yard requirements be,:and the same is hereby approved for the applicant, for property situated in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, upon Lot ,Block ,Section. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this'.:recommend- • ation, including this complete report of its findings and recommendations be transmitted to the City Council for approval and 6rdorsement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that to secure sub - stantially the objectives of the regulation or provision to which this variance is granted, and to provide adequately for the maintenance of • the integrity and character of the district in which such conditional permit is granted, that the granting of this permit and the variance effected thereby shall apply only to the pre- sent one family residence to be erected on said lot. BE IT FURTHE.a RESOLVED that when approved by the City Council a copy of this resolution shall be provided to the Building Inspector. Respectfully submitted By order of the Chairman Secretary, NEWMIT BEACH CITY PLANNING 001,21ISSION Secretary Seager moved that this form be adopted .and used as the prescribed form in presenting ap- plications for variance to the City Council. • Seconded by Whitson. Patterson asked if the intent was to have a legal form, said it might vary, but approved of it.if it met with the approval of the City Attorney. The Chair ruled that it would be adopted subject to the approval of the Attorney, also subject to such variation as is necessary to suit the indiv- idual case. Motion carried. MINUTES Chairman asked if the Commission wished the minutes read as all had received conies of them. 7aitson moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that they be approved subject to the corrections indicated. Seconded by Patters Motion carried. CORRESPONDENCE Secretary read replies he had made to letters .. received from Lir. Heyler and lar. Harvey. lir. Patterson suggested that the maps submitted to the • Commission by I.1r. Harvey should be signed by the members before sending them to the City Council. Hop$ins advised him that the Commission's approv- al was tentative and informal and the maps would come back from the City Council for final action and sipmatures. Secretary read a letter from Kr. Hal ';�'ill Smith which suggested changing the set back line along the East✓Bay to 5ft. to eliminate all the var- iances being asked for; also a letter from Mr. Reed containing a newrsnaper clipping describing unsightly condition of lots in Laguna Beach and calling the attention of the Commission to similiar conditions of.some of the lots adjoining.business properties in idewport Beach. PETITIONS A letter from Ur. McFarland was read asking that a 50o variance on the rear set back be added to his application for front and side yard var- iances as an amendment. Hopkins asked if the property owners had been notified of this request. Secretary said they had not, he had not thought it necessary as this was an amendment to the other application. Patterson said "it was another var- iance and therefore should be handled in the usual manner. Seeger thought it unfair to ask Yr. Mc Farland to pay for this variance as he had al- ready paid for the others. Upon examination of the plot plan it was found that the rear yard variance was shown thereon. Sampson read from Ordinance 440 on.the charges set for variances and gave the opinion that as the Commission fix- es the charges for variances they could also wave the charge. Patterson suggested that T.tcFarland might get wavers from the surrounding property owners on the rear yard variance and go ahead with the construction of the other.buildiags at his own risk. McFarland stated that he would rather have the other variances put through and make regular application for the rear yard variance at the.next ;t;eeting. He withdrew the application for amendment. APPLICATION FOR VA$IANCM Application of Kathryn Holman for 5D,! front and 50;`o side yard variance on Lot 35, Tract 742, was read. Chairman inquired of the Secretary if this ap- plication had been properly advertized, the draw- ings posted, and notices of hearing posted.. They had. LU ss Holman was not present. Chairman asked • if there was anyone objecting to these variances. no one objected. Plot and plans of the building were examined by the members of the Commission. Patterson thought the co.uaission should have more information about the buildings on the surround- ing property. Chairman thought it wrong to go ahead without the Droner information. Whitson stated that when the block was vacant the applic- ation for front variance should be turned down and then a proper set back could be established • as the houses were built. 1,r. Smith, stated that the lot is small and he doubted if anything could be built on it if the variances were not granted. tor. Sampson's advise to the commission was that the set back lavrs are established for a purpose; because the machinery to vary these laws is set up does not give the commission sufficient reason to use them. The front, side and rear set back is to provide sufficient light and air and �.,,rhen you have a block with only two houses built, it is an opportunity to get a good set back and the commis- sion should proceed with caution in granting var- iances. Ten per cent of the lot depth should be allowed for set back. It is up to the person applying for a variance to come before the com- mission and prove the 3 points mentioned in the Ordinance. Also it should become a practice of the commission that some member of the commission view the property with those things in mind. Patterson moved that the application of 'iss Holman be laid on the table. Seconded by Mrs. - . dilliams. 11:otion carried. Secretary Seager stated that he appreciated Sampson's advise but that in his opinion the Planning Commission was created to serve the in- terests of the property owners rather than to serve the nords of an ordinance. APPLICATION FOR VARINICE Application of Kathryn Zahn, owner of Lot 24, Tract 742, for a 50o front yard variance was read. Chairman asked the Secretary if the application had been properly advertized and the maps and notices nosted. They had. Mrs. Zahn was not present ;;r.Smith Representing firs.Zahn stated that several of the houses in the block had a 5 ft set back. No one appeared to protest the variance. After examination of the plot and plans by the Commission Briggs moved that the Commission recommend to the City Council using the prescribed form, that a 50o front yard variance be allowed. Seconded by Whitson. Lotion carried. So ordered by the • Chairman. VARIANCE RECON31DIRM Building Inspector Nelson.appeared and took his place at this point in the proceedure, thus making available needed information relative to the Yathry. Holman application which had been tabled. 3chnitker moved that the petition of Kathryn Holman be taken from the table. Seconded by • 3eager. Iaotion carried. On advise from Building Inspector Nelson that there is another house in the block with a 5 ft. set back and after examination of.the plans, the general opinion was that the variance could be granted. dhitson moved tha.t.the request of Kathryn Holman for variances be granted and recommended to the City Council using the prescribed form. ;seconded by 3chnitker. Lotion carried. So ordered by the Chairman. APPLICATION FO' VARIANCE Application of 1".rs. H.R.aobertson, owner of Lot 21, Tract 742, for a front yard variance was read and the.maps submitted for examination. The plot showed that they were asking for a 1000 variance. Lir. Harvey, representing ldr.Y_irby the builder for Mrs.Robertson, said that they had drawn the plot that way In hope of getting a 10% variance. He understood that the City was con- sidering abandoning 10 ft. of their right -of -way on the East Bay to the property owners, and if this went into effect a 100" variance would be a reason- able request. Patterson stated that in his opinion the City would not abandon any of the property. the notices sent out to the surrounding property owners stated that a 506 variance was requested. The notices given in the -,paper mere for a 50 °6 variance. The Chair ruled that the request was not in order. 3eager asked if a 50'j variance would be acceptable to the owner. Harvey said they wanted as much as they could get. None of the members of the Commission seemed to favor a 100o variance. L.r.Harvey altered the plot plan to a 50�L variance. He said that a 50o variance would line the house up with other houses in the block,. Briggs moved that a 50?o front yard variance be granted to LSrs.Robertson and recommended to the Council using the prescribed form. Seconded by 3chnitker. Lotion carried. So ordered by the Chairman. • UIIF INI13HI:D BUIDMTE33 Second Hearing on AILEITDING ORDINANCE 44.0 in regard to Lido Isle. Chairman Hopkins asked if there was any further discussion on the matter. A Lr.Anes spoke for Lr. 'ilson and stated tnat he viould appreciate action on this matter as he wants • to start his building right away. Schnitker moved that recommendation be sent to the City Council using t)Ce prescribed form that Ordinance 440 be amended in accordance with the application of The Lido Isle Commi2hity Association, dated September , 1937. Seconded by Patterson. Motion carried. So ordered by the Chairman. Second Hearing on REZONING OF LOTS 1 and 2, BLOCK 7, SLCTION 1, RE- SUBDIVISION OF BALBOA ISLAND. BrIF7s asked why the change could not be back to 1-2 instead of to R -3, as 11 -3 makes spot zoning. Hopkins stated that the application called for 13 -3 and that R -3 only could be considered now and that even this was a case of going from the less desirable 0-1 to a more desirable 11 -3. Schnitker w in favor of changing to 11 -2. Whitson stated that the owner of Lots 1 and 2, and communicated with him and said that if they zoned them R -3 he would not fight the change, but that if they zoned them • R -2, he would. Mrs. Villiams moved that the Commission proceed to close the hearing and recommend to the City Council using the prescribed form that Lots 1 and 2, Block 7, Section 1, Re- subdivision of Balboa Island, be rezoned to R -3, in accordance with the action of the Planning Commission of August 25, 1937. Seconded by Seager. Motion carried. So ordered by the Chairman. 00a:dITTEE REP03T3 Chairman Hopkins said that he had appointed a opecial Planning Commission Committee to work on the 3 mile. Zone problem, consisting of Dr. Seager, Chairman, Schnitker, and Findlay. Chairman asked if there was any report from the Architectural Committee. There was none. NEW BUSINESS Mrs. Williams asked if any building restrict- ions had been placed upon the new tract being opened on Bay Shores. She thought much could be done in a new tract toward making it attractive if the ordinance was strictly adhered to. Patterson stated that the tract had already been laid out and that ;Fr. Tilton had been the consult- ant and that a former Planning Commissioner had approved the development. • Secretary deager moved that all of the variances granted by this present Planning Commission and submitted to the City Council in the short form be re- submitted to the Council using the prescrib- ed form which was adopted tonight. Seconded by Schnitker. Motion carried. Seager said that this was to correct any mistake this Commission may have made. Whitson brought up the subject of the...trees missing on Highway 101 and suggested that the Secretary contact the Highway Commission and.see what could be done toward replacing them. Seager stated that they had already been contacted and that he had been assured that they would be replaced. The matter of Kr. Heed's letter was introduced and the opinion of the Commission was that it was a police matter. Schnitker moved that the Sec- retary turn the matter over to the proper author- ities. 'Seconded by Briggs. Potion carried. The matter referred to in LIr.Smith's letter concerning a uniform set back of 5 ft. all around the East Bay was brought up for consideration. The Chairman suggested that a committee of 2 be appointed to go into the matter and also go before the Council and get their opinion as to what they wish to do. Patterson so moved. Seconded by Seager. Lotion carried. The Secretary moved that the Chairman appoint a committee, the number to be left to the dis- cretion of the Chairman, to be known as "The Variance Committee ", to go over the ground on which variances are requested and to whom the secretary may refer the applications for investigation. This committee to work with the Building Inspector. L"s. Sampson said that he was very much in favor of such a committee and that their report to the Commission on the conditions involved in the • requests for variance would be very valuable in making their decisions. Motion seconded by Patterson. Motion carried. GOOD OF THE CITY Chairman Hopkins thought it would be a good idea to have the Special Planning Committee work with the Chamber of Commerce Committee whose chairman is Paul Palmer and whose duties are to consolid- ate and crystalize the ideas of the whole commun- ity in the matter of Public Improvements. It was pointed out that the purposes back of this movement are most worthy in that the public must be in the frame of mind and ready to endorse a particular movement looking toward public improv- ment before it can be possible for much improve- ment to be executed. Therefore, realizing that the execution of planning can go only as fast as the public is willing to go, the Commission must cooperate and see the opportunity present- ed to it b% this movement. The Chairman complemented Idr. Palmer and his committee upon the work they are doing. AD JOURIMLIIM T On motion of Schnitker, the meeting adjourned. Re ectfully submitted Hoe.glzn ;r. sEAC ; Secretar . NEWPORT BEACH CITY PLANNING:COMMISSION 0