Re: “Hawkins Takes ‘Overbuilding’ Gripe to Council Tonight”
So-called mansionization projects that some mid-town residents claim are damaging the face of Culver City, will continue into the foreseeable future.
While Carlson Park neighbors are organizing, and have called a community meeting for 7 Sunday evening at the Vets Auditorium, protestors failed to win even a hint of relief at last evening’s City Council meeting.
By a 3 to 2 count, the Council stood against interfering with residents who pursue elaboration of their properties.
Mayor Mehaul O’Leary, Vice Mayor Andy Weissman and untitled Jeff Cooper said no to a moratorium.
Meghan Sahli-Wells favored a halt, and Jim Clarke appeared to support such a move, but less stoutly than his colleague.
How strong, how promising is the nascent protest movement?
Twenty residents spoke on mansionization. Ten from Carlson Park endorsed a moratorium, three from Carlson Park were opposed, as were the other seven residents from other neighborhoods.
The City Council was unanimous in its opinion that maintaining the character of a neighborhood is important and that the planning commission should study and make recommendations for what the Council can/should do in amending the zoning code to restrict the construction of so-called oversized houses. It was felt that it was not necessary to impose a moratorium in the interim.
The majority did not sense urgency.
Finally, what constitutes “oversized?”
There was no consensus. The public did not say. Ms. Sahli-Wells pegged it at more than 3,000 square feet.
The incidents of knockdowns of old homes and replacements with larger structures is relatively rare — 78 in the 15 years since 2000.
Complaints were registered with respect to projects completed or under construction. A moratorium wouldn’t do anything to address that.
If there is a rush of plans submitted to beat the clock in advance of what the Planning Commission will recommend with regard to tougher restrictions on oversized houses, the Council can revisit the issue of a moratorium.
Changing Subject Slightly
Historian/journalist Ross Hawkins has been the loudest complainer about overbuilding to date. Here is the reply he received on May 18 from the city Planning Dept. to a complaint about a neighbor he believed was exceeding building guidelines.
“The permit was issued on March 17, 2015, to construct a 403-square foot, 26-foot high residential accessory structure, which includes a recreation room, laundry room, three-quarters bathroom and storage area, and two single-car carports. This was an amnesty code enforcement case. The original two-car garage on the property had an illegal addition and was converted into a recreation room. The new construction described above includes the complete demolition of the converted garage and illegal addition. The new construction complies with all zoning code requirements,
“At 403 square feet, it is within the 800-square foot allowance for residential accessory structures. Further, the structure is set back 10 feet from the rear property line and four feet from the nearest side property line and 15 feet from the other side of the property line. Although the structure is 26 feet high, there is no second story. The height is due to the 12/12 pitched roof. There are two non-operable windows on the upper level of the structure, only to let light into the recreation room. So there should not be any privacy issues.
“Since this is a new accessory structure, pursuant to our policy, we sent out a courtesy notice of the new construction to the abutting neighbor, including Mr. Hawkins. There are no legal non-conforming issues as the new construction has eliminated the previous non-conforming structure.”
— Thomas Gorham, Deputy Community Development Director/Planning Manager
