HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-08-25MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS
Room B-6 - Civic Center
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1982 - 1:30 P.M.
BOARD MEMBERS
PRESENT:
Spencer, Kelly, Vogelsang, Smith, Evans
STAFF MEMBER
PRESENT:
Cooper
MINUTES:
ON MOTION BY
SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS,
THE MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF
JULY 21 and
28, 1982, WERE APPROVED AS
TRANSCRIBED,
BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
Spencer,
Kelly, Vogelsang,
Smith, Evans
NOES:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-49
To permit: 1) room addition to encroach 7-1/2 feet into the required
ten (10) foot rear yard setback and 2) fifty (50) square ft. reduction
of the required recreational -open space.
HEARD IN CONJUNCTION WITH
USE PERMIT NO. 82-28
To permit an addition to a single family home with non -conforming
yards.
Applicant for both requests is Mr. Edward Key. Property is located
at 902 Pecan.
Chairman Kelly stated -that both requests are categorically exempt,
Class. 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970.
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
August 25, 1982
Page Two
The public hearing, for both applications, was opened.
Mr. Willidm Angell, Architectural Consultant for Mr. Key, addressed
the Board. He stated that their proposal will allow for an additional
bedroom, bath, den and closet to Mr. Key's existing home built in
1929. They�are'also proposingito extend the existing kitchen and
dining facilities to accommodate their family size. Mr. Angell
was under the impression when he designed the addition, that the
rear yard`setback,for�this•particular area was at seven and one-
half (7-1/2) feet. Acting Secretary Spencer informed the applicant
that in the Townlot Area, rear yards for all main buildings shall
have a minimum`setback"of ten (10) feet, except when a lot abuts
an alley the minimum setback may be reduced to seven and one-half
(7-1/2) feet. He further stated that garage setbacks, when access
is taken' fromaw alley -in •the Townlot: Area, , shall i be ; at, seven
and one-half (7-1/2) feet.
Mr. Angell stated= that he ;also understood. that,,you can extend a
building within the limits of existing setbacks upon approval of a
Use Permit. He was informed that was correct. The proposed closet
is encroaching into;the-applicant;'s,existing,rear,yard setback. He
stated that when you are working with a 50+ft. x 62 ft. lot, it's
very difficult to accommodate three bedrooms, two baths, and a den
on a ground floor. The reduction of fifty (50) square feet of rec-
reational open space, created by the proposed den addition, was
discussed. The alternative for recreational open space, utilizing
the front area by, constructing,a fence over 42 inches in height,
was suggested. After discussion, it was felt by some of the Board
Members that a fence, located in the front yard setback, would
possibly allow for stacking of. automobiles or create more on -
street parking. The den was considered as a trade-off for the
recreational area.
The public hearing was closed for both applications.
It was felt by the Board Members that the proposed addition along
the existing setback line was compatible with the surrounding area.
It was determined by the Board that the applicant's lot has a
unique configuration in that most of the lots in the Townlot
Area are very narrow and are at least 115 feet in depth - double
the length of Mr. Key's lot. It was noted that the applicant's
plan meets the Code requirements for open space area, open space
dimensions, and lot coverage.
Board Member Smith motioned the imposed Conditions of Approval,
with an additional condition that a fence be provided in the
front yard setback allowing for recreational open space area.
The motion lacked for a second. Considerable Board discussion
ensued on the additional condition for recreational open space
area.
-2- BZA 8/25/82
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
August 25, 1982
Page Three
ON MOTION BY VOGELSANG AND SECOND BY KELLY, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
NO. 82-49, HEARD IN CONJUNCTION WITH USE PERMIT NO. 82-28, WAS
APPROVED WITH REASONS, FINDINGS, AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING
FOR BOTH APPLICATIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTES:
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-49 (heard in conjunction with U.P. No. 82-28)
FINDINGS AND REASONS:
1. The granting of this Conditional Exception will not constitute
a grant of a special.privilege inconsistent upon other
properties in the vicinity as the lot in question is unique
in shape and not taken into consideration at the time the
Townlot Specific Plan was being enacted.
2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject
property including size, shape and location, in that the lot
is not a standard 25 foot by 115 foot but is more of a square
configuration (roughly 50 foot by 62 foot), the strict
application of the Townlot Specific Plan would deprive the
subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in
the vicinity.
3. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order
to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property
rights.
4. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in
the same zone classifications.
5. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
1. The conceptual plot plan and elevations received August 2,
1982, shall be the approved layout, subject to the follow-
ing:
a. A determination shall be made by the building official
if requested addition exceeds one-third (1/3) value of
existing building. If so, corner right-of-way dedication
shall be made to.Public Works requirements.
In its approval action,-the.Board of Zoning Adjustments considered
the following issues relating to the conceptual plan:
- Lot area;
- Lot width and lot depth;
-3- BZA 8/25/82
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
August 25, 1982
Page Four
- Type of use and its relation to property and improvements
in the immediate vicinity;
- Past administrative action regarding this property.
AYES: Spencer, Vogelsang, Kelly
NOES: Evans, Smith
ABSTAIN: None
USE PERMIT NO. 82-28 (Heard in conjunction with C.E. No. 82-49)
FINDINGS:
1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will
not be detrimental to:
a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity;
b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use
or building.
2. The granting of a use permit will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
3. The proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan of
Land Use.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
1. The conceptual plot plan and elevations received August 2,
1982, shall be the approved layout, subject to the follow-
ing:
a. A determination shall be made by the building official
if requested addition exceeds one-third (1/3) value
of existing building. If so, corner right-of-way
dedication shall be made to Public Works requirements.
In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered
the following issues relating to the conceptual plan:
- Lot area;
- Lot width and lot depth;
- Type of use and its relation to property and improvements
in the immediate vicinity;
- Past administrative action regarding this property.
AYES: Spencer, Vogelsang, Kelly, Evans, Smith
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
1
-4- BZA 8/25/82
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
August-25, 1982
Page Five
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-53
To permit a reduction in 1) rear yard setback from ten (10) feet
to eight (8) feet, 2) open space dimension.
HEARD IN CONJUNCTION WITH
USE PERMIT NO. 82-29
To permit an addition along existing non -conforming sideyards.
Applicant for both applications is Mr. Rafael H. Galceran. Property
is located at 19011 Hillsboro.
Chairman Kelly introduced the proposal and opened the public hearing.
Mr. Rafael H. Galceran addressed the Board and stated his reasons
for requesting the variances. He said his property is located at
the end of a dead-end cul-de-sac causing his lot shape to be
irregular. He mentioned that the curve of the public walkway in
his front yard area, due to being located on a cul-de-sac, has
placed his home further back on his lot than neighboring homes.
The placement of his home in correlation with the sidewalk, drive-
way, and street, leaves his front yard area unsuitable for building.
He mentioned that his neighbors could accommodate his proposed
addition without seeking a zoning exception. He mentioned that the
Code classifies his property as a corner lot, even though no inter-
section exists, requiring that he have a ten (10) foot exterior
sideyard when his neighbors are only required to have a five (5)
foot exterior sideyard.
Mr. Galceran said he feels his existing floor plan lends itself
perfectly for the proposed addition, without really compromising
the open area. His rear yard will still total 1,339 sq.'ft. including
one open area of 21' x 34-1/2' (726 sq. ft.) and another area of
14-1/2' x 42' (613 sq. ft.). He said most of their leisure and
recreational activities take place in his front yard.
The public hearing was closed, for both applications, by Chairman
Kelly.
Upon review of the applicant's plan, the Board Members felt that
the proposed addition, although short 5.5 ft. in an open space
dimension, would still leave a reasonable size recreational area
in his rear yard. It was felt that if the proposed bedroom were
cut down from thirteen (13) feet to eleven (11) feet in depth,
allowing for a reasonable size bedroom, a two (2) foot encroachment
into the applicant's rear yard setback would not be necessary.
It was the concensus of all the Board Members that the proposed
addition, less the two (2) foot encroachment into the applicant's
rear yard, to be located within five and one-half (5-1/2) feet of
an existing six (6) foot high arterial (Garfield Avenue) highway
-5- BZA 8/25/82
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
August 25, 1982
Page Six
separation wall, would be compatible with the surrounding area.
ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY SPENCER,- CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
NO, 82-53 AND'USE PERMIT NO. 82-29 WERE APPROVED WITH'REASONS,
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS OUTLINED BELOW, BY
VOTES AS FOLLOWS:
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-53
REASONS FOR DENIAL OF REQUESTED TWO FOOT REDUCTION IN REAR YARD SETBACK:
1. Said encroachment was found'to constitute a grant of special
privilege by not keeping within'the integrity,of neighboring
residential properties.
2. Proposed addition can be redesigned as to accommodate all of
applicant's present and future needs.
REASONS AND FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF OPEN SPACE DIMENSION
1. Base zoning districts (R=1)-open`space regulation' -requires
subject parcel to provide a minimum open space area of nine
hundred (900) square feet within the rear two-thirds (2/3).
Also, these regulations require that a minimum dimension
be provided for said open space of twenty (20) feet. Subject
proposal would leave an area of approximately'1,170 square
feet within the rear two-thirds (2/3) with an area of
approximately 725 square feet meeting the dimensional require-
ments and an adjoining area of approximately 445 square feet
having the dimension of 14'.5'feet, short 5.5 feet, but still
leaving a reasonable size recreational area.
2. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not constitute
a grant of a special privilege inconsistent upon other
properties in the vicinity and under identical zone
classifications.
3. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject
property, including size, shape, and location, the strict
application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive
the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties
in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications.
4. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order
to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property
rights.
5. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property
in the same zone classifications.
6. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely
-6- BZA 8/25/82
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
August 25, 1982
Page Seven
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
1. The conceptual plot plan received August 12, 1982,
shall be the approved layout, subject to the following:
a. A revised site plan shall be submitted to the Secretary
of the Board showing revision to rear yard setback.
If such plan complies with the modifications outlined
by the Board, said plan shall be approved and made a
permanent part of the administrative file.
AYES: Smith, Spencer, Kelly, Evans
NOES: Vogelsang
ABSTAIN: None
USE PERMIT NO. 82-29 (HEARD IN CONJUNCTION WITH C.E. NO. 82-53)
REASON AND FINDINGS:
1. Base zoning districts (R-1) open space regulation requires
subject parcel to provide a minimum open space area of nine
hundred (900) square feet within the rear two-thirds (2/3).
Also, these regulations require that a minimum dimension
be provided for said open space of twenty (20) feet. Subject
proposal would leave an area of approximately 1,170 square
feet within the rear two-thirds (2/3) with an area of
approximately 725 square feet meeting the dimensional require-
ments and an adjoining area of approximately 445 square feet
having the dimension of 14.5 feet, short 5.5 feet, but still
leaving a reasonable sized recreational area.
2. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will
not be detrimental to:
a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity;
b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use
or building.
3. The granting of a use permit will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
4. The proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan
of Land Use.
-7- BZA 8/25/82
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
August 25, 1982
Page Eight
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS:
1. The conceptual plot plan received August 12, 1982,
shall be the approved layout, subject to the following:
a. A revised site plan shall be submitted to the Secretary
of the Board showing revision to rear yard setback.
�If such plan complies with the modifications outlined
by the Board, said plan shall be approved and made a
permanent part of -the administrative..file. , ,
In its approval action on both applications,, the Board:of Zoning
Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the con-
ceptual plan:
- Lot area;
- Lot width and lot -depth;
- Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in
the immediate vicinity;
- Past administrative action regarding•this property.
AYES: Spencer, Smith, Evans, Vogelsang, Kelly
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED.
WesP. Spence , Acting Secretary Zoning djustments
-8- BZA 8/25/82