HUNTINGTON BEACH : 3 Stories Is 1 Too Many, Panel Rules

Scores of neighbors have opposed him. A state appellate court has ruled against him. And now, city planners, too, have weighed in against Emad Ali Hassan, who is on the brink of being forced to knock off 9 feet from his three-story home.

The Planning Commission on Tuesday rejected Hassan’s request to keep all 39 feet of his house overlooking Huntington Harbour, despite the city’s 30-foot height limit in the area.

That sets the stage for the City Council next month to decide whether Hassan must dismantle the top of his multimillion-dollar residence more than six years after it was built at 4471 Los Patos Ave.

Soon after Hassan built the house--with the city’s approval--in 1985, his neighbor, Charles Reince, filed a lawsuit against the city, charging that the home should not have been allowed because it is taller than the zoning code allows.

The city decided the house was legal under a more lenient building code, the only time in recent years that the city has applied that particular code, a city official said. Reince challenged that application of the code and a state appellate court earlier this year agreed that the city had erred. The state Supreme Court declined to hear the case, upholding the appellate decision.

The court ruling sent the issue back into the city’s hands. City staff members recommended that a code variance be granted to allow Hassan to keep his home as it stands.

At Tuesday’s Planning Commission hearing, a host of neighbors joined Reince in denouncing Hassan’s home, which they described as “a huge edifice,” “a monstrous hotel” and “the Taj Mahal.” Reince this week submitted a petition to the city opposing the house, signed by about 120 area residents.

Five of the seven Planning Commission members sided with the opponents, and voted that Hassan should remove the top of his home.

“The appellate court has ruled on this, and either we take that seriously, or we denigrate what we do up here, because it’s been tainted and tarnished by what went on in this process,” Planning Commissioner Susan Newman said.

Commission Chairman Kirk Kirkland was the only member who dissented. “To me, it is particularly abhorrent to make a homeowner rip out the top one-third of his home,” he said. “It was permitted by the city, rightly or wrongly, but it was permitted. Mr. Hassan followed the rules.”

Commissioner Ken Bourguignon abstained from voting, saying that the panel was asked to apply current codes to a home built six years ago. “The grounds for this vote are totally out of line,” he said. “In all the years I’ve sat up here, I’ve never been so frustrated.”

Hassan was similarly frustrated during Tuesday’s testimony, raising his voice and pounding his fist on the speaker’s podium.

“All I wanted to do was build a beautiful house,” Hassan said. “I’ve followed the letter of the law all the way. I’m just a home investor. I never believed the American dream could become a nightmare.”

But Reince, who said an appraiser recently determined that his property value has dropped $50,000 since Hassan’s home was built, blocking his ocean view, contended that the appellate court ruling supports his position. He argued that the city is now obligated to rectify a 6-year-old mistake.

“The judicial route was the only one I had available to me, because the city wouldn’t listen,” Reince said. “The city had gone blind and deaf.”

Reince’s attorney, Jeffrey Richard, added that he believes Hassan’s “only proving point is that his house is built, and nobody has the gumption to do what is right. I hope the city is ready to have the courage to make up for what was done in 1985.”