The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Resolution _4688- Case 6.440RESOLUTION NO. 4688 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A VARIANCE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED REAR AND SIDE YARD BUILDING SETBACKS FROM FIFTEEN (15) AND 10 (TEN) FEET RESPECTIVELY TO (3)THREE FEET FOR THE REAR YARD AND ALLOWING THE EXISTING 3 (THREE) FOOT INTERIOR SIDE YARD IN ORDER TO LEGALIZE THE EXISTING NON -CONFORMING BUILDING SETBACKS OF A GUEST HOUSE, AS WELL AS TO ALLOW FOR THE EXISTING GARAGE, PATIO / TRELLIS COVER AND PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO REMAIN WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE DEFICIENT BUILDING SETBACKS, LOCATED AT 1062 BUENA VISTA DRIVE, R-1-C ZONE, SECTION 11. WHEREAS, Richard and Francessca Harrison (The "applicants") have filed an application with the City of Palm Springs pursuant to Section 9406.00 of the Zoning Ordinance for a request to reduce the required side and rear yards from 10 (ten) feet and 15 (fifteen) respectively to allow the existing 3 (three) foot setback for the side yard and require a 3 (three) foot rear yard in order to legalize the existing non -conforming building setbacks of an existing guest house, as well as to allow for the existing garage, patio / trellis cover and primary residential structure to remain with their respective deficient building setbacks; located at 1062 Buena Vista Drive, R- I -C Zone District, Section 11; and WHEREAS, the proposed variance is necessary based on the existing building setbacks which are not in compliance with current zoning standards of the City of Palm Springs. The applicant seeks to legalize the current non -conforming building setbacks on the site through the variance process; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider the applicant's application for a variance was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on April 26, 2000, a public hearing on the application for the variance was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including but not limited to the staff report and all written and oral testimony presented. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS; Section 1. Pursuant to CEQA, the Planning Commission finds as follows: The project is categorically exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to Section 15303 (New Small Construction) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 2. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65906, the Planning Commission finds that: a. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. The subject parcel is substandard relative to lot width, depth and area. Also, the subject structures are existing and constitute pre-existing, non -conforming buildings with regard to certain building setbacks. There are several properties in the immediate vicinity which also have existing structures that do not meet minimum building setbacks at the side and rear property lines. b. Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated 0 The existing building setbacks constitute a pre-existing, non -conforming situation. The setback variance is for the purpose of legalizing the existing setback nonconformity. Therefore, this request does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to property and improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The requested reduction in the side and rear yard setbacks does not present a conflict to adjacent residential uses. Therefore, the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to property and improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located. d. The granting of such variance will not affect the General Plan for the City The granting of this variance will not affect the General Plan for the City. The variance request has been analyzed in relation to the City of Palm Springs General Plan and has been found to be consistent with the goals, policies and objectives in the General Plan document. O NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission approves the variance request to authorize the following specific items: a. The guest house shall be reconstructed so as to have a 3 foot setback from the north property line with no windows or openings of any kind on the north side. The existing 3 foot side yard setback is allowed and approved. b. The existing garage is approved with the requirement that any existing gas line connections be removed. c. The carport ;` patio cover structure is approved with a 3 foot setback from the west property line. d. The existing 8 foot rear yard setback of the primary dwelling unit 1 house is approved. Said approval is subject to those conditions as set forth in attached Exhibit A, which are to be satisfied prior to the actual effective date of this variance approval. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the property owner shall submit plans and specifications within 60 days of the adoption date of this resolution and complete all reconstruction and repairs within 120 days of the issuance of permits. Failure to do so shall render this Resolution null and void. ADOPTED This 26th day of April, 2000. AYES: Fontana, Raya, Matthews, Jurasky NOES: Mills, Caffery, Klatchko ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Planning Commission Chairman Panning C ission Secretary �TYyu APPROVED 8Y CI-TY Date _,..._— a RESOLUTION NO. 4688 EXHIBIT A �1L�Z�I:M11[��Ei[IIY�i:Zil��►If.�111:�7: : �lll DATE: APRIL 26, 2000 CASE NO. 6.4401 Variance CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Before final acceptance of the project, all conditions listed below shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the Director of Planning, the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief or their designee, depending on which department recommended the condition. Any agreements, easements or covenants required to be entered into shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney. PLANNING DEPARTMENT: The proposed development of the premises shall conform to all applicable regulations of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code, or any other City Codes, ordinances, and resolutions which supplement the zoning district regulations. Ia. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, it's agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs or it's agents, officers or employees to attach, set aside, void or annul, an approval of the City of Palm Springs, its legislative body, advisory agencies, or administrative officers concerning Case No. 6.440. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs, and the applicant will either undertake defense of the matter and pay the City's associated legal costs or will advance funds to pay for defense of the matter by the City Attorney. If the City of Palm Springs fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Palm Springs. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City retains the right to settle or abandon 0 the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City shall waive the indemnification herein, except, the city's decision to settle or abandon a matter following an adverse judgement or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein. 2. The appeal period for the variance application is fifteen (15) calendar days from the date of project approval. Permits will not be issued until the appeal period has concluded. 3. No structural or aesthetic changes to the existing structures shall be undertaken without appropriate review and approval by the City. The variance herein granted is only to legalize the existing non -conforming building setbacks of the existing structures located on the subject parcel. 4. The approval of this variance shall not constitute an approval to expand or modify the existing building structures in any way. 5. The carport i patio cover structure is approved with a 3 foot setback from the west property line. 6. The guest house at the rear of the property shall be re -constructed with a 3 foot building setback to the rear property line. The existing 3 foot building setback to the side property line ig approved. There shall be no windows or openings to the north property line. 7. The guest house shall not be used for rental purposes, nor shall it contain kitchen facilities. 8. The garage structure which is currently being used for storage purposes shall have any gas lines connections removed. 9. The applicant shall submit necessary plans specifications, drawings and engineering documents as deemed necessary by the City to allow for review and issuance of appropriate permits for all structures described herein. N EO