HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution _6136- Case 3.2795 SFR Revision - Rooftop DeckRESOLUTION NO. 6136
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A
REVISION TO CASE NO. 3.2795 SFR, FOR A ROOFTOP
DECK ON A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE TO BE LOCATED AT 587 CAMINO CALIDAD,
ZONE R-1-A, SECTION 22.
WHEREAS, Schultz Family Trust ("Applicant") filed an application with the City pursuant
to Section 94.04.00 and 94.06.01 of the Zoning Code for a rooftop deck for a previously
approved 5,618-square foot single-family residence, including an attached 644 square
foot second unit on a vacant lot located at 587 Camino Calidad, Zone R-1-A, Section
22; and
WHEREAS, on April 12, 2010, the Architectural Advisory Committee recommended
approval of the exterior stairway and rooftop deck; and
WHEREAS, on April 28, 2010, a public hearing meeting on the application for a revision
to allow a rooftop deck 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, minor
architectural changes, including rooftop decks, may be approved based on the following
guidelines:
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,
2. Harmonious relationship with existing and proposed adjoining
developments and in the context of the immediate neighborhood
Planning Commission Resolution of Denial
Case 3.2795 SFR Revision - Rooftop Deck
May 26, 2010
Page 2 of 2
community, avoiding both excessive variety and monotonous
repetition, but allowing similarity of style, if warranted;
3. Maximum height, area, setbacks and overall mass, as well as pans of
any structure (buildings, walls, screens towers or signs) and effective
concealment of all mechanical equipment,
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 topography of the area slopes from southwest to northeast; the proposed rooftop
deck, which is approximately 250 square feet in area, will be located at the southeast
corner of the proposed residence and about ten feet above the residence's finished
floor. Based on the photo -simulations submitted by the applicant, it does appear that
views from the proposed rooftop deck will infringe on the privacy of surrounding
properties. Therefore, the proposed rooftop deck will not have a harmonious
relationship with existing and proposed adjoining developments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning
Commission hereby denies a rooftop deck for the proposed residence to be located at
587 Camino Calidad.
ADOPTED this 261h day of May, 2010.
AYES:
5, Vice Chair Caffery, Hudson, Munger, Donenfeld and Chair Cohen
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
1, Conrad
ABSTAIN:
1, Scott
ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA
Ewinw1k1cp
Director of P149hing Services
X