HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution _5044- Case 6.485 VARr
RESOLUTION NO. 5044
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA FOR A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE
REQUIRE FRONT SETBACK FROM TWENTY FIVE (25) FEET
TO FOURTEEN (14) FEET AND TO CREATE AN IRREGULAR
PARKING SPACE, LOCATED AT 1800 SOUTH SUNRISE WAY,
ROCK 7, ZONE R-1 A, SECTION 25.
WHEREAS, Leslie Wheeler ("Applicant") has filed an application with the City on behalf of the
Smoketree Inn pursuant to Section 94.06.00 of the Zoning Ordinance for a variance to reduce
the required front yard setback from twenty five (25) feet to fourteen (14) feet and to create a
substandard parking space, located at 1800 South Sunrise Way, Zone R-1 A, Section 25; and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to
consider Case No. 6.485 was given in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on December 14, 2005, a public hearing on the application for architectural
approval was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project is considered a "project" pursuant to the terms
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the project has been determined
Categorically Exempt pursuant to Section 15303(e) (Accessory Structures) of the
Guidelines.
of the
to be
CEQA
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 Section 94.06.00(B) of the Zoning Code, the Planning Commission
makes the following findings for a variance:
1) Because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Code would
deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and
under identical zone classification.
The applicant has identified the lot as substandard and therefore constitutes a "special
circumstance" for granting a setback variance. Staff notes that the minimum lot in the
R-1-A zone is 20,000 square feet. The existing lot has an area of 18640 square feet,
below the standards of the zone due to the lot having two corners rounded to provide a
turning area for the street intersections. This lack of area would deprive the property of
1,360 square feet of potentially build -able space. The proposed variance would free an
area of approximately 1300 square feet (the ten of reduced setback multiplied by the lot
width). The amount of substandard area is roughly comparable to the amount to be
gained be the granting of the variance.
The existing non -conforming structure already encroaches into the setback and has a
legal non -conforming status. Section 94.05.03(A) of the Zoning Code stipulates that
non -conforming structures are to be permitted to continue "provided that, any addition,
alteration or enlargement thereto shall comply with all provisions of the zoning code".
Since the current single -car carport is within the setback, an enlargement would violate
the allowances of its legal non -conforming status.
Staff is concerned that the action which now necessitates the variance, was the
construction of the house and that the current inconvenience is not a function of the
"size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings" of the property. Because the
Zoning Code presents the build -able area of the lot as a percentage, simply because the
lot is substandard does not make it any more or less able to be built upon than any other
lot with the same requirement. While the subject structure is placed in a manner
inconvenient for further expansion of the home, the inconvenience is not rooted in the
characteristics of the lot, only in the construction of the building.
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 situation.
The project would result in a single family dwelling having a floor area of 3,525 square
feet. This is a land use and building size permitted in the zone. Granting the variance
request would not result in any special privilege not enjoyed by other properties in the R-
1-A zone.
3) 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 the property is situated.
Due to the rural and spacious layout of the Smoketree Ranch area, the proposed '
variance will not affect the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
4) The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the general plan of the city.
The overall project, including the proposed land use is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use map and has no inconsistencies with the goals and policies of the General
Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning
Commission hereby denies Variance 6.485, without prejudice.
ADOPTED this 14«' day of December 14, 2005.
AYES: 5 1 RingleinlRoath/Hutcheson/Cohen/Hochanadel
NOES: 1 1 Marantz
ABSENT: 1 1 Shoenberger
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
PI nin C mi ion Secretary