Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout22185 - RESOLUTIONS - 3/12/2008 RESOLUTION NO. 22185 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND DENYING A PROPOSED TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE BY STEVEN VAN, CASE NOS. 3.2999 SFR AND 7.1215 AMM, WHEREAS, Steven J. Van ("Applicant") has filed an application with the City pursuant to Section 94,04.00 of the Palm Springs Zoning Code for a single-family dwelling unit located at 350 El Portal, Zone R-1-13, Section 27; and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2007, the City Council directed the applicant to revise the project design to address privacy issues, conduct a neighborhood outreach and submit the revised project to AAC and the Planning Commission for review, and WHEREAS, on November 13, 2007, the Architectural Advisory Committee reviewed the redesign of the project, and by a vote of 5-2, recommended approval to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2007, a public meeting on the application for architectural approval was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on March 5, 2008, a public meeting on the application for architectural approval 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: 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. Resolution No. 22185 Page 2 Section 2: Pursuant to the requirements of Section 94.04.00(E) and Section 94.06.01(A)(8) of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance, in accordance with the guidelines established in Section 94.04.00(D), the Planning Commission has reviewed 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. The Administrative Minor Modification meets all the requirements of General Plan Policy 3.4.4. There are no Specific Plans associated with this parcel, and the manner of the modification is specifically allowed by Section 94.04.01(8) of the Palm Springs Zoning Code. 2. The neighboring properties will not be adversely affected as a result of the approval or conditional approval of the minor modification. Due to site topography of the neighboring residential properties, the height, mass and scale of the proposed project do not fit the well established character of the neighborhood. As a result, the neighboring properties will be adversely affected by the proposed dwelling. 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 construction will be built to the Uniform Building Code, 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 warranted due to topography of the site which has an undulating surface with slopes of 10% or more. 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: Resolution No. 22185 Page 3 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 Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance. The structure is centrally massed with a secondary garage located in the rear of the property, and the primary garage facing the primary street. The recreation area is located to the north eastern corner of the parcel. 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 single-family residences, with a mix of one and two stories. The size and mass of surrounding residences are smaller than the proposed project. The project does not create a harmonious relationship with the surrounding properties within the context of the immediate area. The proposed pad does not compliment the neighborhood's historic development patterns for massing and second stories, thus presenting an overwhelming fagade to the street. The proposed project is excessive in height, size and mass, and does not follow the historic development of the neighborhood. 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 building is proposed on a hillside lot that minimally qualifies based on pre- graded topography, allowing for the most discretion in building height to a maximum height of 30 feet. The project proposes a height of 26 feet. The yards meet or exceed minimum requirements and a masonry wall will conceal any 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, The building configuration uses the available space to create a large central mass. Door and window architectural features and overhangs are designed in a Mediterranean style. The proposed color palette is muted and reflects colors found in the mountains and desert vegetation. Resolution No. 22185 Page 4 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 site contains a number of mature trees and plants that will be removed. The majority of the specimen trees will be preserved and relocated throughout the proposed landscape. The landscape design proposes drought tolerant trees, shrubs and groundcover with an emitter irrigation system. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the City Council hereby denies Case No. 3.2999 — SFR and 7.1215 AMM. ADOPTED this 12th day of March, 200_ David H. Ready onager ATTEST: roes Thompson, City Cler 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. 22185 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 12th day of March, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Councilmember Hutcheson, Mayor Pro Tern Foat, and Mayor Pougnet. NOES: Councilmember Mills, and Councilmember Weigel. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. es Thompson, City Clerk 03�2� ity of Palm Springs, California I _�