The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Resolution _6070- Case 6.498- VARRESOLUTION NO.6070 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CALIFORNIA APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A SEVEN FOOT HIGH FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD, LOCATED AT 19251 RUPPERT STREET, ZONE M2, SECTION 15. WHEREAS, Frito Lay ("the applicant") has filed a request for a variance to Zoning Ordinance, Section 93.02.00.E (Fences, Walls and Landscaping — Height Standards) to add three feet of wrought iron fencing to the top of an existing four foot high block wall in the front yard, Zoned M2, Section 15; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider Case No. 6.498, a Variance Application was given in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on February 14, 2007 a public hearing on a request for a variance to Zoning Ordinance Section 93.02.00.E (Fences, Walls and Landscaping) to exceed the maximum allowed height of four and a half feet for fencestWalls in the front yards in the M-2 (Industrial) Zone was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA), of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); the project is categorically exempt from environmental review; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the meeting 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 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, (Existing Facilities), this project is Categorically Exempt from environmental assessment because the addition to the wall is a minor exterior alteration to a private structure. Section 2: Pursuant to the requirements of Section 94.06.00(B), the Planning Commission finds: 9. Because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the Planning Commission Resolution February 14, 2007 6.498 VAR Page 2 of 3 Zoning Code would deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. The property is situated in an industrial area and has relatively close access to the freeway, causing theft and safety disturbances from past trespassers and potential future trespassers to the site. Given the location of existing improvements, conforming to the maximum wall height within the front yard does not adequately deter these acts of trespassing. Furthermore, the twenty -foot setback requirement for a seven foot high barrier would eliminate the nine of the site's current parking spaces and intrude into the loading zone of the warehouse. 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. The subject property is located in the M-2 Zone and is surrounded primarily by vacant lots. While new surrounding development may have an eight foot high wall in rear and side yards for securing property and persons, the subject property's current layout prohibits utilizing the same security with a four and a half foot high wall. Therefore, allowing a seven foot high wall/fence in the front yard would provide a similar level of security as other properties in the area and no special advantage would result. if the existing structure is removed at any time in the future, the Variance is conditioned such that it would become null and void. 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 subject property is situated. The proposal includes landscape enhancements in front of the property line and behind the sidewalk. These enhancements will beautify and soften the wall/fence and not be materially detrimental to the public. 4. The granting of such variance will not adversely affect the general plan of the city. General Plan Policy 3.30.2 states enhanced regulations should be provided where industrial areas abut residential and scenic corridors regarding open spaces, landscaping, controlled access, and parking and loading consistent with Scenic Corridor policies. This site is not located near any residential zones, nor is it abutting any scenic corridors; however, landscaping is being added as enhancement. N Planning Commission Resolution 6.498 VAR February 14, 2007 Page 3 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission APPROVES the request for a variance to Zoning Ordinance, Section 93.02.00.E (Fences, Walls and Landscaping — Height Standards) to add three feet of wrought iron fencing to the top of the existing four foot high block wall in the front yard. ADOPTED this 10 day of February, 2007. AYES: 6 / Caffrey/Cohen/Marantz/Hochanadel/Hutcheson/Scott NOES: None ABSENT: 1 / Ringlein ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA EXHIBIT A Case No. 6.498 - VAR 19251 Ruppert Street February 14, 2007 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 Services, 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. PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS This variance shall become null and void should the existing building (constructed in 1995) be demolished or additional square footage be added to the building. ADMINISTRATIVE 2. 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. 3. The owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Palm Springs, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Palm Springs or its 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 6.498. The City of Palm Springs will promptly notify the applicant of any 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 the matter without the applicant's consent but should it do so, the City N PC Conditions of Approval February 14, 2007 Case No. 6.498 — VAR Page 2 of 2 shall waive the indemnification herein, except, the City's decision to settle or abandon a matter following an adverse judgment or failure to appeal, shall not cause a waiver of the indemnification rights herein. 4. That the property owner(s) and successors and assignees in interest shall maintain and repair the improvements including and without limitation sidewalks, bikeways, parking areas, landscape, irrigation, lighting, signs, walls, and fences between the curb and property line, including sidewalk or bikeway easement areas that extend onto private property, in a first class condition, free from waste and debris, and in accordance with all applicable law, rules, ordinances and regulations of all federal, state, and local bodies and agencies having jurisdiction at the property owner's sole expense. This condition shall be included in the recorded covenant agreement for the property if required by the City. 5. Pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 711.4 a filing fee of $64.00 is required. This project has a de minimus impact on fish and wildlife, and a Certificate of Fee Exemption shall be completed by the City and two copies filed with the County Clerk. This application shall not be final until such fee is paid and the Certificate of Fee Exemption is filed. Fee shall in the form of a money order or cashier's check payable to Riverside County. 6. This project shall be subject to Chapters 2.24 and 3.37 of the Municipal Code regarding public art. The project shall either provide public art or payment of an in lieu fee. In the case of the in -lieu fee, the fee shall be based upon the total building permit valuation as calculated pursuant to the valuation table in the Uniform Building Code, the fee being 112% for commercial projects or 1/4% for residential projects with first $100,000 of total building permit valuation for individual single-family units exempt. Should the public art be located on the project site, said location shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning and Zoning and the Public Arts Commission, and the property owner shall enter into a recorded agreement to maintain the art work and protect the public rights of access and viewing. GENERAL CONDITIONS/CODE REQUIREMENTS 7. A variance approval shall be valid for a period of two (2) years. Extensions of time may be granted by the Planning Commission upon demonstration of good cause. 8. The appeal period for a Variance application is 15 calendar days from the date of Project approval. Permits will not be issued until the appeal period has concluded. M M,