HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution _6124- Case 3.2049- MAARESOLUTION NO. 6124
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING CASE NO. 3.2049 — MAA TO ALLOW
CONSTRUCTION OF A 563 SQUARE FOOT REAR YARD
DECK ADDITION TO A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 262 CRESTVIEW
DRIVE, ZONE R-1-C, SECTION 27.
WHEREAS, Tom Donahue ("Applicant") has filed an application with the City pursuant
to Section 94.04.00 of the Zoning Ordinance for a 563 square foot rear yard deck
addition to a single-family dwelling located at 262 Crestview Drive, Zone R-1-C, Section
27; and
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2010, the Architectural Advisory Committee met and voted
to recommend approval of the project to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2010, a public meeting 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 of the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and has been determined to be
Categorically Exempt as a Class III exemption (single-family residence) pursuant to
Section 15303(a) of the CEQA Guidelines; 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 the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines,
the proposed project is Categorically Exempt under Section 15303(a) (New Single-
family residence).
Section 2: Pursuant to Section 94.04.00 of the Palm Springs Zoning Code, the
Planning Commission finds:
1. Site layout, orientation, location of structures and relationship to one another and
to open spaces and topography. Definition of pedestrian and vehicular areas,-
i.e., sidewalks as distinct from parking areas,
Access to the proposed project is designed according to the requirements of the
Uniform Building Code, and within the development standards of the City of
Planning Commission Resolution No. 6124
Case 3.2049— MAA
Palm Springs Zoning Code.
March 10, 2010
Page 2 of 3
2. Harmonious relationship with existing and proposed adjoining developments and
in the context of the immediate neighborhood community, avoiding both
excessive variety and monotonous repetition, but allowing similarity of style, if
warranted;
The surrounding properties are zoned for single-family hillside residences. Most
of the adjacent houses have multiple terraces and decks at various elevations.
The project creates visual harmony within the neighborhood through a
consistency in land use.
3. Maximum height, area, setbacks and overall mass, as well as parts of any
structure (buildings, walls, screens towers or signs) and effective concealment of
all mechanical equipment;
All heights are lower than the maximum building height of eighteen feet. The
proposed deck will be 16.3 feet in height from the rear property retaining wall to
the top of the proposed deck. The deck rear yard set -back will be 17 feet. The
eastern side yard set -back will be 10 feet and the west side yard set -back to be 7
feet which is in line with the existing house.
4. Building design, materials and colors to be sympathetic with desert surroundings;
AND
5. Harmony of materials, colors and composition of those elements of a structure,
including overhangs, roofs, and substructures which are visible simultaneously,
AND
6. Consistency of composition and treatment,
7. Location and type of planting, with regard for desert climate conditions.
Preservation of specimen and landmark trees upon a site, with proper irrigation
to insure maintenance of all plant materials;
The addition of the rear yard deck meets all of the above findings and will be
harmonious in design and be consistent with surrounding properties to include
proposed landscape material. +
Manning Commission Resolution No, 6124
Case 3.2049— MAA
March 10, 2010
Page 3 of 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning
Commission hereby approves Case No. 3.2049 — MAA.
ADOPTED this 101h day of March, 2010.
AYES: 6, Donenfeld, Scott, Hudson, Munger, Conrad and Caffery
NOES: None
ABSENT: 1, Chair Cohen
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:
'CP_ .►'�
1 - • • • Services
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
m
w
Lol