HomeMy WebLinkAbout1966-09-07MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS
Council Chambers, City Hall
Huntington Beach, California
Wednesday, September `], 1966
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: John Mandrell, Sam Ferguson,
Kenneth Reynolds
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
AREA VARIANCE NO. 66-53
Applicant: Donald McCann
To allow an enclosed patio roof
to encroach to within 8' of the rear property line in
deviation of the required 10' setback and to allow said
patio to encroach into the required 900 sq. ft. of open
space. Located on the south side of Spinnaker Drive,
approximately 130' west of Brookhurst Street and legally
described as Lot 54, Tract 5939-
The hearing was opened to the
audience.
Mr. Joseph Carter, representing
the applicant, explained the reasons for the request.
He stated that when he originally inquired about obtaining
the building permit, a 5 foot setback was required for a
partially enclosed patio. On the basis of this information,
he proceeded to purchase the necessary equipment. Since
that time, the ordinance pertaining to rear yard setbacks
was changed to 10 feet.
There being no other comment,
the hearing was closed to the audience.
Board discussion followed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY MANDRELL
AND SECONDED BY FERGUSON TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 66-53
FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON:
1. The applicant acted in good faith in checking the
ordinance prior to obtaining his permit.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Mandrell, Ferguson, Reynolds
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
AREA VARIANCE NO. 66-52
Applicant: R. M. Galloway & Associates
To allow 49.58' frontage on a
commercial lot in deviation of the variance requesting
50' frontage. Located on the east side of Brookhurst
Street, 200' north of Atlanta Avenue and legally described
as Lot 9 of Tract 6248.
Ron Martin, representing the
applicant, explained the reasons for the request.
There being no further comment,
the hearing was closed to the audience.
Board discussion followed. It
was noted by the Board that a reduction of the 50 foot
lot width by 5 inches would not be detrimental to this
particular piece of property.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY FERGUSON
AND SECONDED BY MANDRELL TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 66-52
FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. The reduction of the lot width is, not significant
enough to be detrimental to this property.
2. The lot lines were shown on original variance.
3. The C2 zone does not establish any minimum lot size
or frontage.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Mandrell, Ferguson, Reynolds.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
AREA VARIANCE NO. 66-54
Applicant: Lina Keramefs
To allow a detached accessory
building to be constructed 3 feet from the side property
line in deviation to the required 5' setback and to allow
a 712" separation from the main building in deviation to
the required 10 feet. Located on the west side of Goodwin t
Lane, approximately 400' north of Ellis Avenue, and legally
described as Lot 7 of Tract 4027..
There was no one present
to speak for or against the matter.
It was noted by the Board
that this case should be continued so the applicant
could modify his plot plan showing full dimensions of
the structure and also fill his application out completely.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY REYNOLDS
AND SECONDED BY :MANDRELL TO CONTINUE'AREA VARIANCE NO.
66-54 TO SEPTEMBER 14, 1966 FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED REASONS.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Mandrell, Ferguson, Reynolds.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
AREA VARIANCE NO. 66-55
Applicant: Fashion Homes
To allow roof overhangs to
encroach into the 30" setback required for architectural
features. Located on the west side of Brookhurst Street,
South of Atlanta Avenue and legally described as Lots 7,
13.,1 16, 17, 221 24, 30, 32, 34, 36, 37, 39, 41, 50, 52,
53,' 56, 68, 70, 74, 75, 79, 81, 83, 88, 92, 93 of Tract 6068.
The hearing was opened to
the.audience.
Carl Schmidt, representing
the applicant, addressed the Board and explained the
reasons for the request. He stated that the homes were
already under construction and it would present a hardship
-2- 9/7/66
H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
Minutes: Wednesday, September 7, 1966
Page No. 3.
on them to cut back the roof overhangs.
There being no further comment,
the hearing was closed to the audience.
Board discussion followed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY MANDRELL
AND SECONDED BY FERGUSON TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO.
66-55 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. Since the homes are under construction, the require-
ment to reduce the overhangs at this time would
create an undue hardship on the builder and the
homebuyer as well as effect the esthetic appearance
of the houses.
2. There is a 5 foot separation between facias of
adjoining buildings.
3. Extension of overhang does not exceed length of 8 feet.
4. The error was not corrected through Plan Check at the
time permits were issued.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES: Mandrell, Ferguson, Reynolds.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS
THE MEETING ADJOURNED.
K. A. Reynolds kairman
n K. Mandrell
(Secretary l
-3- 9/7/66