HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/15/1939NOVABER 15, 1939
ROLL CALL:
Commissioners present: Seager, Briggs,- Estus, Patterson.
Commissioners absent: Hopkins, Williams, Findlay,
Whitson, Hodgkinson.
As there was not a quorum present the regular November'
meeting of the NEWPORT BEACH CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
could not be held. However, since a hearing on the ap-
plication of Joseph B. Perks for a 75% front yard setback
variance on Lot 3, Blk 1, Sec 5, Balboa Island had been
advertised for this date, the Secretary announced that any
one present interested in this application would be heard
at this time, in accordance with a custom established in the
past by the commission, and their opinion transmitted to
other members of the co fission at the next regular meeting,
when this matter will be considered formally.
Discussion:
The Assistant Secretary stated that Mr. Eames„ owner of
Lot 2, Blk 1, Sec 5 had telephoned because he was unable to
attend this hearing, to protest a 75% variance. He stated,
however, that he would have no objection to the,grantng
of a 50% variance.
Mr. Beardsley, attorney for Miss Gloria Gertz, owner
of Lot 1, Blk 1. Sec 5, stated that his client strenuously
protests a 75% front yar setback variance. She would be
in accord with Mr. Eames in not objecting to a 50% variance
if the house were not solidly built. Miss Gertz has a sub-
stantial investment in her property and feels that the zon-
ing ordinance was established to protect the values of
property and should be followed as nearly as possible. Ar*
deviation from the restrictions so established tend to de-
value surrounding properly.
-Com. Seeger inquired if Miss Gertz had taken advantage
of the 60% front yard variance granted her when her house
was built.
Miss Gartz replied that she believed that the 60% var-
iance had been used, but it was her opinion that this
variance had been granted. for an open porch which obstructs
the view of other lots very Little.
Com. Seeger stated that the commission must consider `
any portion of the house having a roof over it as a part
of the house and can make no discrimination as to whether
it is open or not.
Mr. Beardsley; stated that Miss Gertz's house is back
4 feet from the lot line. However, this proposed building
on Lot 3, according to t e plans, is solid and there is
more objection to allow, g more than a 50% variance
for this reason.
.:
The development along the Bay front in this neighborhood
is of a high class nature and for the good of all property
owners the setbacks should be uniform. No new building
should be allowed to set farther out than the established
line.
No one was present t speak in favor of the variance.
No further diseussio .
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO 0 INANCE 44.0 - RE: BILL BOARDS.
Secretary read a com unication fromtlr City Council
transmitting to the Plan, ing Commission for<c6neideration
and recommendation a pro osed amendment to Ordinance 440
having to do with Including bill - boards in the list of
uses not pssmtted in R- , R -2, R -3, C -1 and 0-2 zones.
Secretary stated tha this is the first time that this
matter has come to the a tention of the Planning Commission.'
He said he understcod that this matter had come before the
City Council by reason of a petition bearing 150 signatures.
Since there were persons present interested in this proposed
amendment, he suggested hearing anyone mho wished to speak
for or against this amen ment.
Discussion:
Mrs. L. H. Norman of Corona del Mar spoke in favor
of the amendment stating that the business people of Corona'
del Mar started a campaign for public betterment. One of thf
objectives of this campaign wasdoing away with so many
bill boards along the Highway. Many people who would
like to settle in Corona del Mar have objected to the un-
sightliness of the conti uous line of sign boards inthis
locality. However, this is not only a local or personal
thing, It is state wide d is becoming a nation wide
problem upon which many tates are working.
There is nothing personal in this agitation against
so many sign boards. It is not only Corona del 'Mar, but
the whole City of Newport Beach. It is a matter of com-
munity and civic betterment.
Mrs. Richardson, also of Corona del Mar, stated that
the unsightly condition caused by so many sign boards
along the Highway keeps new residents from coming into
Newport Beach and particularly Corona del Mar. She agreed
with the statements of Mri. Norman and expressed. the opinion
that sign boards should Is confined to commercial districts.
Mr. McCavern, representing Poster and gleiser, speaking
in opposition to the amendment stated that there are enough
regulations in Newport Beach covering outdoor advertising
such as license fees and setbacks if they were enforced. `
Many people have sign boards up now who have no license
for thhem.
rIle r.,
Mr. McCavern stated 1hat
there are 20,boards along the
Highway in Corona del Max
not paying license fees.
Via company is not in favor
of further restriction on
bill boards in business 2ones
but are in favor of their being
kept out of residence zones.
This new ordinance proposes to
eliminate our business i
tirely. He stated that he had
asked Attry.'Thompson upon
what precident he had founded
this amendment and Mr. Thompson
had said that he was pioneer-
ing, that no precident for
such a regulation had been estab-
lished. In his opinion this
ordinance was not valid.
Com. Briggs stated that,
in his opinion this amendment
would not help the present
situation, as it would only
make sign boards non -con
arming and would not affect boards
now in existence.
It was Com. Seager's
opinion , without proper study of
the situation, that thislis
not the proper step to take if
it is the 'desire of the City
Council to help the existing
- situation. If the ordinance
is amended as proposed, it will
not eliminate a single bill
board, it will only make them
a non - conforming element.
Com. Briggs did not think
the commission had. sufficient
data on the situation ane
believed that more definite In-
formation should be presented
at the next meeting.
• >
Re
pectfully submitted,