Skip to main content
Manhattan Beach Logo
File #: 12-0173    Version: 1
Type: Public Hearing - Staff Report Status: Passed
In control: City Council Regular Meeting
On agenda: 9/18/2012 Final action: 9/18/2012
Title: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of a Variance from Building Height Standards to Enclose a Balcony at an Existing Three-Family Residence at 2505 Crest Drive.
Attachments: 1. Attachment 1 - Resolution No. PC 12-05, 2. Attachment 2 - Planning Commission Minutes excerpt, dated 6/13/12, 3. Attachment 3 - Planning Commission Staff Report, dated 6/13/12, 4. Attachment 4 - Applicant Appeal Request, 5. Attachment 5 - Letters of Opposition Received
TO:
Honorable Mayor Powell and Members of the City Council

THROUGH:
David N. Carmany, City Manager

FROM:
Richard Thompson, Community Development Director
Eric Haaland, Associate Planner

SUBJECT: Title
Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of a Variance from Building Height Standards to Enclose a Balcony at an Existing Three-Family Residence at 2505 Crest Drive.
Body
____________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission denying the request.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal implications associated with the recommended action.

DISCUSSION:
A variance is a procedure established by California law and included in the City’s Zoning Ordinance whereby an applicant can request relief from the minimum property development standards.

The Planning Commission, at its regular meeting of June 27, 2012, denied (4-0, 1 absent) a Variance request for an upper addition above the height limit, filling in 53 square feet of deck area. The project includes a remodel of an existing detached rear unit on a three-unit, three-story, beach area property that includes two separate addition areas for which construction had been done without building permits. Both additions occur in the mid-portion of the site within, or near, the existing yard separating the rear unit from the front two-unit building on the property. A lower 159 square-foot addition, separate from the area subject to the Variance, would attach the buildings together by bridging over part of the separation yard, which can be administratively approved with a Minor Exception.

The Planning Commission determined that the proposal did not meet all the findings required to approve a Variance. The Commission did not have concerns for the proposal being detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood, but could not find that the property had special circumstances or conditions that would result in an undue ha...

Click here for full text