The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About22316 - RESOLUTIONS - 7/30/2008 RESOLUTION NO. 22316 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL BY FELIX BARTHELEMY AND RICHARD SAVING AND UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE CASE N0. 3.3216 SFR, WHEREAS, Felix Barthelemy and Richard Saving ("Appellant") have filed an appeal, pursuant to Chapter 2.05 of the Municipal Code, to the Planning Commission's decision to approve a 4,000 square foot single family residence located on a hillside lot at 844 Panorama Road, Zone R-1-A, Section 3; and WHEREAS, on April 7, 2008, the Architectural Advisory Committee met and voted to recommend approval of the new single family residence to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on May 14, 2008, a public meeting on the application for architectural approval was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on May 28, 2008, a public meeting on the application for architectural approval was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on May 28, 2008, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved the proposed 4,000 square foot single family residence; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2008, the appellant filed a request with the City Clerk to appeal the Planning Commission's action; and WHEREAS, on July 9, 2008, a public meeting on the appeal was held by the City Council 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 City Council 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 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Resolution 22316 Page 2 SECTION 1. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the project is Categorically Exempt, Class III, per Section 15303(a), new construction of a single-family residence in a residential zone. SECTION 2. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 94.04.00(E) and Section 94.06.01(A)(8) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code, the City Council finds the following: The required findings for the Administrative Minor Modification (Section 94.06.01(A)(8) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code) are as follows: 1. The requested minor modification is consistent with the General Plan, applicable Specific Plan(s) and overall objectives of the zoning ordinance. There is no General Plan Policy that would be adversely affected by this modification nor are their any specific plans associated with this property. The Palm Springs Zoning Code, Section 94.06.01(A)(8), specifically allows the modification of building height to a maximum height of thirty feet. 2. The neighboring properties will not be adversely affected as a result of the approval or conditional approval of the minor modification. There will be no structures built within the setback that will affect neighboring properties; residences on hillside lots are allowed a maximum height of 30 feet; and the proposed height of the project is similar to maximum heights seen in the adjacent properties. Therefore, it is concluded that there is no adverse effect to the surrounding properties. 3. The approval or conditional approval of the minor modification will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working on the site or in the vicinity. All building and renovations will be built to the Uniform Building Code, and Palm Springs Zoning Code as modified by this Administrative Minor Modification, and Fire Code. 4. The approval of the minor modification is justified by environmental features, site conditions, location of existing improvements, or historic development patterns of the property or neighborhood. The modification is necessary due to the location of the subject property within a hillside neighborhood. The nature of the Administrative Minor Modification is specifically addressed in the Palm Springs Zoning Code. The development is in harmony with the current standards of the neighborhood, and is in keeping with historical development patterns of the neighborhood. Resolution 22316 Page 3 ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL: The Palm Springs Zoning Code Section 94.04.00(D)(1 9) provides guidelines for the architectural review of development projects conformance is evaluated, based on consideration of the following: 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; The proposed building is located on the very northwest portion of the property. The proposed residence is approximately 81 feet from the west property's dwelling, 210 feet from the north property's dwelling, 150 feet to the east property's dwelling, and 129 feet from the street centerline. This location is not central to the overall size of the site; however, the neighborhood generally has dwellings that are not centrally located. The building occupies approximately 8.5%, leaving a large amount of open spaces. 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 developed with single-family residences. The project creates a visual harmony within the neighborhood, through use of desert colors and modern contemporary architectural style. 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; The maximum height of the proposed project is 21.5 feet measured from the average grade of the street plus 18 inches. Pursuant to Section 94.06.01(A)(8) of PSZC, hillside properties have a maximum allowable height of 30 feet but require an approval of an Administrative Minor Modification maximum height allowed. The proposed building height would be compatible with the heights found in other hillside residences and with the existing topography. Retaining walls are used throughout to allow construction on a boulder-strewn terrain- 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 Resolution 22316 Page 4 6. Consistency of composition and treatment, The proposed residence is styled as contemporary architecture consisting of two integrated buildings, pool, and retaining walls. An enclosed bridge connects the two main buildings. The proposed structure incorporates a modern influence with simple lines and flat roof. The exterior of the house and walls consist of smooth trowel plaster and CMU block finishes. 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 vacant site contains a scattering of vegetation and boulders. There are no specimen trees to preserve. The landscape plan proposes water-efficient trees and some shrubbery which are located in a manner that conforms to the topography of the site. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby denies the appeal and upholds the Planning Commission's decision to approve Case No. 3.3216 — SFR, subject to those conditions set forth in Exhibit A of Planning Commission Resolution 7132 and the following condition: 1. The parcel identified by Assessor's Parcel No. 504-211-004 shall not be subdivided after the construction of the single family residence (City of Palm Springs Planning Dept. Case No. 3.3216) has been constructed, in accordance with the City Council denial of the appeal of the Planning Commission approval of Case No. 3.3216, on July 30, 2008. ADOPTED this 30th day of July, 2008. David H. y Manager ATTEST: ?Mes2Th� ompson, City Clerk Resolution 22316 Page 5 CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS ) I, JAMES THOMPSON, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that Resolution No. 22316 is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at an adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on the 30th day of July, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmember Hutcheson, Councilmember Mills, and Councilmember Weigel. NOES: Mayor Pro Tern Foat. ABSENT: Mayor Pougnet. ABSTAIN: None. J es Thompson, City Clerk ity of Palm Springs, CaliforniabB/Zel.rx'5