Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution _4838- Case 6.468 VARRESOLUTION NO.4838 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CASE NO. 6.468 FOR A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE AND CARPORT WITHIN THREE (3) FEET ON THE SOUTHERN INTERIOR PROPERTY LINE OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCEAT360 PABLO DRIVE, ZONE R-1-A, SECTION 15. WHEREAS, John Wessman, (the "Applicant") filed an application with the City pursuant to section 94.06.00 of the Zoning Ordinance for a variance to the side yard setback at single-family residence located at 360 Pablo Drive, Zone R-1-A, Section 15; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider an application for Variance 6.468 was issued in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on April 9, 2003, the public hearing on the application for Variance 6.468 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 that this project is categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Guidelines (CEQA). Section 2: Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 94.06.00. B, the Planning Commission finds that: 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification The subject property is substandard with respect to both minimum lot size, minimum lot width and minimum lot area required for the zone (R-1 A) within which the property is located. Other than the proposed garage and carport this property does not have covered parking nor is there opportunity to provide this parking elsewhere on the site. The proposed addition of covered parking is a right enjoyed by adjacent property owners. Therefore, special circumstances are applicable to the subject property that justify variance to the strict application of the Zoning Code. 2. 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 subject property is situated. This variance has been conditioned to ensure that all other applicable codes and requirements will be met, and to ensure that this variance may be utilized only for the garage and carport proposed. This will allow the applicant to provide covered parking for the residence, which is consistent with covered or enclosed parking typically provided for by single-family residential properties. The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the same vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. At such time that the applicant gains City Council approval of the vacation of a five (5) foot utility easement located on the south side of the property (Lot 20) as shown on the map of Tahquitz Park No. 2, Map Book 19, Page 2, records of San Diego County, Califomia, August 1 S, 1936, as conditioned by Planning staff, the granting of this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare or injurious to property and improvement to the same vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. The granting of such variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. At such time that the applicant gains approval by the City Council for vacation of an existing utility easement on the subject property that would impact the proposed construction of a garage and carport, the granting of this variance would not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves Variance 6.468, subject to the conditions set forth in the attached Exhibit A. ADOPTED this 9th day of April, 2003. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Matthews, Marantz, Conrad, Grence, Shoenberger Klatchko, Caffery Chairman of the Planning CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA Secreta fheT Planning Commission