HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA 02-03 GARAGE SETBACKS 2002 �i
ORDINANCE NO. 1021
I
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 25.16.090.A.2 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, AS IT
RELATES TO SETBACKS FOR GARAGES IN THE R-1 DISTRICT
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 121h day of
September, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm
Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.16.090.A.2, as it relates to garage setbacks; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm Desert
Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 02-60,"
in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is categorically,
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)per Section 15305
(Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance;
2. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the adopted General
Plan and affected specific plans; and
3. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert,
California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Commission in this case.
2. That ZOA 02-03 as delineated in the attached Exhibit "A" is hereby ordained.
r�
ORDINANCE NO. 1021
I
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning i
Commission, held on this 26thday of September 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: BENSON, CRITES, FERGUSON, SPIEGEL, KELLY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
RICHARD S. KELLY, Mayor
ATTEST:
RACH LLE KLASS N, City CIS erk
City of Palm Desert, California
I
i
2
ORDINANCE NO.1021
EXHIBIT "A"
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
Amend Section 25.16:090.A.2 by adding the following
To encourage the rehabilitation of older units and the provision of off-street parking within
garages, on lots with existing homes that are legal non-conforming because they do not
provide a minimum of two covered off-street parking spaces,the required minimum front
setback to a garage door shall be 26 feet measured from street curb face.
a
l
3
.i
s CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
I. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
II. REQUEST: Consideration of a Zoning Ordinance amendment to Chapter 25.16
(R-1 Single Family Residential District) to change the setback for
front-entry garages from 20 feet from garage door to property line to
26 feet from garage door to curb face
III. APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA. 92260
IV. CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
V. DATE: September 12, 2002
VI. CONTENTS:
A. Staff Recommendation
B. Background
C. Analysis
D. Draft Ordinance No. 1021
E. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2145
F. Planning Commission Staff report / Minutes dated August 6, 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------
A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Waive further reading and pass Ordinance No.1021 to second reading approving
Zoning Ordinance Amendment 02-03.
B. BACKGROUND:
At its meeting of August 6, 2002, the Planning Commission voted 4-0, recommending
approval to the City Council of the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment.
Commissioner Jonathan was absent. The amendment was initiated as a result of the
Planning Commission denying (on the same date) Variance No. 02-03 filed by Mr.
Raymond D. Moser. The variance requested a reduction in the garage setback from 20
feet to 10 feet from garage door to property line to allow construction of a two-car, front-
entry garage in the rear yard of a corner lot. Mr. Moser's house was built in 1951 with a
one-car garage, and as in other older areas of Palm Desert,there are no sidewalks in Mr.
ORDINANCE NO. 1021
STAFF REPORT
ZOA 02.03
SEPTEMBER 12, 2002
Mosers's neighborhood on Peppergrass Street and Quailbrush Avenue. Mr. Moser's
property is considered legal non-conforming because it has a one-car garage, and thus
does not meet current off-street parking standards requiring two covered parking spaces
for single family homes.
Although the Planning Commission was empathetic to Mr. Moser's proposal to improve
his property by constructing a new two-car garage to provide secure parking for his
vehicles, the findings for a variance could not be met. Therefore, to facilitate the
improvement of properties in older residential areas, the Planning Commission initiated
the subject zoning ordinance amendment.
The zoning ordinance amendment will compliment Section 25.16.090.0 of the Zoning
Ordinance which allows reduced setbacks for carports as follows:
In order to encourage the rehabilitation of older dwelling units and to provide
shaded parking for vehicles,the architectural review commission may approve well
designed carport structures with a minimum setback of twenty (20) feet to be
measured from the curb face to the front edge of the carport structure.
C. ANALYSIS:
The zoning ordinance amendment will encourage and facilitate garage improvements on
properties with older existing single family homes that are non-conforming because they
have only one covered parking space. Section 25.16.090.A.2 (R-1 Single Family
Residential District) of the Zoning Ordinance is proposed for amending as follows. New .
proposed text is shown in bold lettering.
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 district, the required minimum
front setback to a garage door shall be (20)feet measured from the property line
and for a side entry garage sixteen (16)feet measured from the property line. To
encourage the rehabilitation of older units and the provision of off-street
parking within garages, on lots with existing homes that are legal non-
conforming because they do not provide a minimum of two covered off-
street parking spaces, the required minimum front setback to a garage door
shall be 26 feet measured from street curb face.
The proposed new setback for a front entry garage of 26 feet from curb face was decided by
taking into account that there should be enough space to allow for a 20-foot deep driveway to
2
ORDINANCE NO. 1021
STAFF REPORT
ZOA 02-03
SEPTEMBER 12, 2002
accommodate vehicle parking and still have enough room for a six foot wide sidewalk. The
proposed setback will be sufficient enough so that vehicles parked in the driveway will not stick
out over the sidewalk and impair pedestrian circulation.
III. CEQA REVIEW:
The proposed amendment is a class 5 categorical exemption for the purposes of CEQA
and no further documentation is necessary.
Prepared bye
Francisco J. Urrbina, Associate planner
Reviewed and Approved by--
Philip Drell, Director of Community Development
Reviewed and approved by
Homer Croy, istant City Manager for Development Services
Reviewed and Approved by
Carlos rteg ity Manager
3
ORDINANCE NO. 1021
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 25.16.090.A.2 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, AS IT
RELATES TO SETBACKS FOR GARAGES IN THE R-1 DISTRICT
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 12"day of
September, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm
Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.16.090.A.2, as it relates to garage setbacks; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm Desert
Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 02-60,"
in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is categorically
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)per Section 15305
(Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance;
2. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the adopted General
Plan and affected specific plans; and
3. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert,
California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Commission in this case.
2. That ZOA 02-03 as delineated in the attached Exhibit "A" is hereby ordained.
ORDINANCE NO. 1021
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this_ day of 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICHARD S. KELLY, Mayor
ATTEST:
RACHELLE KLASSEN, City Clerk
City of Palm Desert, California
2
ORDINANCE NO.1021
EXHIBIT "A"
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
Amend Section 25.16.090.A.2 by adding the following
To encourage the rehabilitation of older units and the provision of off-street parking within
garages, on lots with existing homes that are legal non-conforming because they do not
provide a minimum of two covered off-street parking spaces, the required minimum front
setback to a garage door shall be 26 feet measured from street curb face.
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.16
R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 6'"
day of August, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm
Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.16; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm Desert
Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 02-60,"
in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is categorically
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) per Section 15305
(Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance;
2. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the adopted General
Plan and affected specific plans; and
3. That the Zoning. Ordinance amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of a Zoning Ordinance text amendment as provided in the attached
Exhibit A to amend Municipal Code Chapter 25.16.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 6th day of August, 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: CAMPBELL, LOPEZ, TSCHOPP, FINERTY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: JONATHAN
ABSTAIN: NONE
CINDY FINER Chairperson
ST
PHILIP DRELL, ecretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145
EXHIBIT A
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 district,the required minimum front setback to a
garage door shall be (20) feet measured from the property line and for a side entry garage
sixteen (16)feet measured from the property line. To encourage the rehabilitation of older units
and the provision of off-street parking within garages, on lots with existing homes that are legal
non-conforming because they do not provide a minimum of two covered off-street parking
spaces, the required minimum front setback to a garage door shall be 26 feet measured from
street curb face.
3
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: August 6, 2002
CASE NO: ZOA 02-03
REQUEST: Approval to amend Chapter 25.16 of the Zoning Ordinance (R-1 Single
Family Residential District) to change the setback for front-entry garages
from 20 feet from garage door to property line to 26 feet from garage door
to curb face
APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
I. BACKGROUND:
On July 16, 2002, the Planning Commission directed staff to process the above noted
Zoning Ordinance amendment. The amendment was initiated as a result of the Planning
Commission denying (on the same date) Variance No. 02-03 filed by Mr. Raymond D.
Moser. The variance requested a reduction in the garage setback from 20 feet to 10 feet
from garage door to property line to allow construction of a two-car, front-entry garage in
the rear yard of a corner lot. Mr. Moser's house was built in 1951 with a one-car garage,
and as in other older areas of Palm Desert, there are no sidewalks in Mr. Mosers's
neighborhood on Pe er rass Street and Quail brush 9 O brush Avenue. Moser's ro ert
P P Y is
considered legal non-conforming because it has a one-car garage, and thus does not
meet current off-street parking standards requiring two covered parking spaces for single
family homes.
Although the Planning Commission was empathetic to Mr. Moser's proposal to improve
his property by constructing a new two-car garage to provide secure parking for his
vehicles, the findings for a variance could not be met. Therefore, to facilitate the
improvement of properties in older residential areas, the Planning Commission initiated
the subject zoning ordinance amendment. The zoning ordinance amendment will
compliment Section 25.16.090.0 ofthe Zoning Ordinance which allows reduced setbacks
for carports as follows:
In order to encourage the rehabilitation of older dwelling units and to provide
shaded parking forvehicles,the architectural review commission may approve well
designed carport structures with a minimum setback of twenty (20) feet to be
measured from the curb face to the front edge of the carport structure.
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
AUGUST 6, 2002
If. ANALYSIS:
To facilitate garage improvements on properties with existing single family homes;
Section 25.16.090.A.2 of the Zoning Ordinance is proposed for amending as follows. The
new proposed text is shown in bold lettering.
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 district, the required minimum
front setback to a garage door shall be (20) feet measured from the property line
and for a side entry garage sixteen (16)feet measured from the property line. To
encourage the rehabilitation of older units and the provision of off-street
parking within garages, on lots with existing homes that are legal non-
conforming because they do not provide a minimum of two covered off-
street parking spaces, the required minimum front setback to a garage door
shall be 26 feet measured from street curb face.
III. CEQA REVIEW:
The proposed amendment is a class 5 categorical exemption for the purposes of CEQA
and no further documentation is necessary.
IV. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of ZOA 02-03.
IV. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft resolution
B. Legal notice
C. Chapter 25.16
Prepared
ancisco J. U ' a
Associate Pla er
Reviewed and Approved by: n
Philip Drell
Director of Community Development
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.16
R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert,California, did on the 6th
day of August, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm
Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.16; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm Desert
Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 00-24,"
in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is categorically
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)per Section 15305
(Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance;
2. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the adopted General
Plan and affected specific plans; and
3. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of a Zoning Ordinance text amendment as provided in the attached
Exhibit A to amend Municipal Code Chapter 25.16.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 6th day of August, 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CINDY FINERTY, Chairperson
ATTEST:
PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
EXHIBIT A
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 district, the required minimum front setback to a
garage door shall be (20) feet measured from the property line and for a side entry garage
sixteen (16) feet measured from the property line. To encourage the rehabilitation of older
units and the provision of off-street parking within garages, on lots with existing homes
that are legal non-conforming because they do not provide a minimum of two covered off-
street parking spaces, the required minimum front setback to a garage door shall be 26
feet measured from street curb face.
3
c„�
.f!
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
This is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5.C.C.P)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Riverside
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen Proof of Publication of
years,and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter.1 am the principal clerk of a No.2189
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING CITY OF PALM DESERT
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO.NOT 02-03
printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been will ines on to before
e Chapter zDes of Planning
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Irig Ordinance (8-1 sin Is Family Residential Dis-
Superior Courtbf the County of Riverside,State of Irictl.to change the setaacfdor to pint eparlioe
es Prom 20 feet from garagep rty
to 26 feet from garage door to curb face. The
California under the date of March 24, 1958.Case proposed amendment is a Class 5 (Minor Alter-
Number 191236; that the notice,of Which the ahons in Land Use Limitations) categorical ex-
emption for per Section 15305 of CEOA Gvide-
annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller lines and no further documentation is necessary.
than non pariel,has been published in each regular SAID Me
hearingg will be held on Tuesday,Av-
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any SAID
6' 2002, at 7:00 p,m. in the Council &am-
ber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fretl
supplement thereof on the following Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which
dates,(0 wit: time and place all interested persons are invited
July 2�fa tc attend and be heard. Written comments con-
cerning all items covered by this public hearing
------- --___ _ notice shall be accepted up to the date of the
hearing. Information concerning the proposed
project and/or negative declaration is available for
—__ review in the Department of Community Develop-
ment at the above address between the hours of
All in the year 2002 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
If you challenge the proposed actions in court,
I certify(or declare)under penally of perjury that the you may be limited to raising only those issues
you or someone else raised at the public hearing
foregoing is true and correct. described in this notice, or in written correspon-
ta Bence delivered to the planning commission (or
29 city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Dated at Palm Springs,California this-------day PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
July Palml Desert Planning Commission
PUB: July 27, 2002
2002
Signature
25.16.o10
Chapter 25.16 E- Public Pestles and recreational facilities;
Rl SINGLE-FAMILY REMD F- Single-family dwelling per lot;
ENTTAL DISTRICT G. Temporary uses as provided in Chapter 25.64.
Sections; H. Small family day cafe homes.(Ord-742§7, 1994;
25.16.010 Purpose. Ord 128 11 (part), 1976. Ord.94§1 (part).1975:Exhibit
25-16.020 Principal rues and structures A § 25.10-2)
25.16.D30
permitted. 25.16-030 Conditional uses,
Conditional user,
25.16.035 day tare home- The following tares may be permitted subject to a
25 Prohibited
.16.040 Lard u conditional use
ted uses penn°c
25.16.050 Devebpmmt stantards for lots A. Boardinghouses and roomingliotnses;
In q =s than ten thousand s B. Cburches,wavcnm monasteries and other religious
feet institutions;
25.16.060 C- Da n
Devebpmeat standards for lots Y series and nursery schools;
at least tea thousand D. Foe stations.
square feet E. Private rmeaponal facilities
but less than fifteen theursahad tennis and swim clubs;golf such c country dubs,
Square feel txaases,with iocidenal,limited
25.1G070 commercial uses whwb are Development thousand directly related to the standards for lots dir cemmonly associated and
fdlem aad square feet or Primary use;
more. F- Private schools and colleges, ant including art.
2516.080 General development standards bus.aess,Of trade schools or colleges;
applicable to all lots. G- Public educational institutions;
2516.090 Freak rear and side Yard H. Public utility and public service facilities; I
L Commercial
setback a parting lots when -
tioaa duet cep to the sly adjacent
25-IGI00 Roof mounted egrr�meaL a C-1 general commercial mere and consistent with '
2516.110 Private recommendations of an adopted specific plan;
str®murg pools and pool recoequapenL 1. Professional Office
25.16.120 Private teams adjacent to the OP,office professiona parking l Zane and IOU when directly
marts coin and sports with the recommendations of an ennvs�t
K Rental Or
�i�gaa-
Bte dish aa4mas leasing of a single-family dwelling for
25.I6 130 '
25-16.140 Air conditioning equipment ptziods of less than 30 days- (Ord 966 § 1 (Exhibit A),
2000; Ord 909 Exhibit A, 1999: Ord 966 § 2 (Exhibit
25.16.010 Purpose. A)(Part). 1999:Ord.604 §2 (Exhibit A), 1990;Ord-94 ,
It is the intent of the Rf district to, the preser- § l (Part). 1975:Exhibit A § 25.10.3)
vation of residential rcighbodroods characterized by single. 25.16.035 ,family buildings on medium-sized lute and to preserve Large Large family day care homp.
undeve of lopod lands for similar of gY day rare home are teed sub'sYPes residential A of t subject to
deed 1
went by lrermitting a minimum of auxiliary °� a use parrot pursuant b chapter 25.72A of this code nonresidential (Ord dmtial 74
uses- (Ord 866 1.2 (Exhibit A 2§ 8, 1994)
1 (Part). 1975: Exhibit A § 25.10-1�)• 1998: Ord 94 § '
25.16.040 Prohibited habrted uses
25-16.020 Principal uses and structure All uses not specifically Permitted within Sections ,
permitted 25.16.020 and 25.16.030 shall be strictly prohibited within
The following uses and structures shall be Perthe(R1)residential&strict (Ord.866§2(Exhibit A)(part).
in any RI district: °ice 1998: Ord. 94 § 1 (Pan). 1975: Exhibit A § 25.104)
A. Accessory building, user, and/or structures; '
13. Domestic animals; 25.16.050 Development standards for lots less
C. Home basedter businesses, as provided in Chapter than ten thousand square feeL '
25.66; P All development on lots Less than ten thousand square
D. Private greenhouses and horticultural colltttions, followingtas shminimum de On the zoning map shall comply to the �
flower and vegetable gardens; '
367
tem,e tx:<n torte
25.16.050
A. Minimum lot area,eight thousand square feet or F. Minimum street side
larger as determined by the city council and indicated on G- The minimum dwellingfifteen fen;
the zoning map; unit size as specified in
Section 2536-320 shall be increased to fifteen hundred
B. Minimum lot width, seventy feet; square Feet for all kits larger than fifteen
C. Minimum front yard, twenty feet, feet; g thousand squaire
D. Minimum tear yard, fifteen feet; H. Maxi nun building site eovcrgc,"-five percent.
E_ Minimum side Yards,fourteen feet combined,each (Ord 866 12(Exhibit A)(pang 1998:Ord 128 if 1(part).
H of which shall be not less than five feet; 3,1976:Ord.94§ (Pan).1975:Exhibit A§§25.10.7 —
F. Minimum stren side yard, ten feet; 25.10-7.08)
G. Max®um building-site coverage,tlmty-five percent;
IL The minimum dwelling unit size as specified in 25.16.080 General derelopetabit standards Section 2556.320 shall be one thousand square feet on appheahk to am lot:
lots less than ten thousand square fea in size.(Ord S66 The following standards shag apply to all lots in an RI
§2(Eihibit A)(part), 1998: Ord 129 § 1 (part), Ig76: district
Ord 94 11 (part) 1975: Exhibit A 44 25.145—25.10 A- Maximum building beigbt eighteen fed and maxi-
mum one story in height.All homes fifteen feet in height
or more shall be reviewed and
ittettarw
25.16.060 Development standards for lob at review commission prior to a«aPpr�fd ag peirmit!
leas♦ten tLousamd square feet but If the property is within a homeowners association with
ewthan fdteen thousand square a bona fide architectural review proem and the applicant
obtains approval from that architectural review body.the
All development qn IOU at kast ten thousand square riry's architectural review proetss tiny be waived fen but smaller than fiflee n thousand square feet as shown B. Maximum building site coven
oo the zoning soap shall comply to the following develop- districts may
coverage in the R-I zone
meat standards. �' increased m ar®tch as fifty pvtxat subject
A. Minimum lot depth.one hundred feet; b teview and approval by the uchiteenmil review wm u,_
Sion Items to be considered by the mchitectmal review B. Minimum lot widths, ninety tea: commission include,but are not limited in,C- Minimum mart yard, twenty feet and oeighborbood compatibility. buildiing �
D_ Minimum mar
Ii Minimumside yard.twenty =[ C- All Puking and loading shall comply with the
less than eight feet
.d yards,twenty feet eontined,no side provisions of Chapter 2559;
, D. For
F. Minimum strew side yard, fifteen feu- Provisions regarding utilities. sec Sectiou
25.56.090,.
.,� G- Maximum bunt dwelling
Dove-age,thirty-{M iMort M E- AD signs shall be in
H- The minimum dwelling unit sin as specfied in F. All level compliance with 25.66;
Section 25.56.320 shall be increased to one thousand two of development shall comply with the provisions
y� larger a m tin thousand Chapter 25.70 for site plan review the architectural
eg hundred fifty squaw feet for aU kxtr �
review commission review process-(Ord 866 12(Exhibit
square feet but stoaller thin fifteen thousa� (Ord 866 A) (part). 1999: Ord. 94 § 1 (pact). 1975:Exhibit A 44
12(Exhibit A)(pan),1998:Ord 129§§ !(part),2,1976. 25.10-8—25,10-8.05)
Ord 94§ I(part), 1975: Exhibit A §§25-10-6—25.10-
6.08) 2S.16.090 Front,rear and side yard setback
25-16.070 Development standards for lots exeeptlo�
A. Front and/or rear yard setbacks may be reduced
moire by thousand square fat or by up to tw'em d y-five percent of the rcquii setback provid.
ed that the average of each such setback,
All developments on lots fifteen thousand square feet on an individual basis,is not less than the hrimu n e-
o� or more as shown on the zoning map shall comply to the quired for the district(i.e.a fifty foot wide dwelling which
following minimum development standards: chooses;to utilize a tw
A. Minimum lot depth,one hundred twenty-five feet; five feu of its width�provi�treduction
at(estn,twenty._
B. Minimum lot width, ninety feet; five
+ C. Minimum front yard, twenty-five feet; Percent greater than the minimum prescribed setback
t for the remaining twenty-five feet of its width)-D. Minimum rear yard, twenty feet; I. Notwithstanding. the
9.000
E_ Minimum side yard, fifteen feet; preceding, d the to
n feet
v district the minimum rear yard may be reduced to ten feet
(Palm Drnn r-Ol)
368
25.16.04
provided that the average of the tear yard setback complies Z5-16.110 Private swimming pools and pool
GCE with the fifteen foot requirement_ equipment ,
5ET$A'KS�f 2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 District, Private swimming pools shall be permitted on Mmden�the required minimum front setback to a garage door shall lots in accordance with the standards listed below:
be twenty(20)feet measured from the property line and A. The water perimeter of the pool shalt be no dose far a side entry garage sixteen(16) feet measured from than five feet from any tropeny lint unless appropi the property fine. a eering documentation is provided which shows thusj
B_ In addition to the provisions of subsection A of the pool will aeon create a surcharge problem on structurd
this scdion,the required front,tear and side yard setbacks at the property line With appropriate documentation
on an imegWarly shaped lot may be reduced by as much minimum setback may be reduced to two feet from t
as twenty percent upon a showing that property line; 1
1. The lot in question is irregular in shape(i.e-, the B- All swimming pool equipment shall be housed it
lot has significantly less width or depth than the typical a building orbe located behind a screen wall of suffrirn
kit in the subdivision or the lot has mnmc than far boundary height to obscure said pool equipment from public view
fines and the dimensions prevent a home typical of the C. Swimming pool equipment pits shall be Irx:I
neighborhood from bring placed our the lot and a muumum of five feet from any property line Withl
2 The architectural review comminma makes a appropriate strucbxW docuramtation the minimum setbac>t
determination that the reduced setback(s) will net have may be reduced to two feet firm the property line;
a detrimental impact on the neighborhood. D- Swimming Pool equipment shall not be located
C. In order to encourage rehabilitation of older dwelling within a required side yard setback adjacent to a structmd
units and to provide shaded parking for vehicles, the unless it is demonstrated that the noise level at the�op�t�a
architectural review commission may eve well designed line will comply with the noise Ievels of Municipal- Cody
rarpa t structures with a min®um setback of twenty(20) Section 924-03Q(Ord 866§2(Exhibit A)(Irart),1998�
feet to be measured from the curb face to the front edge
of the carPort strucuae_Side-in carport sbuctma may be 25.16.120 Private temas courts and sports ,
approved to a minimum setback of sixteen(16)feet mea- court ,
saved from the curb face to the nearest projection of the private tennis courts/sports courts(courts)are subjec
carport to review and approval by the architectural review commis-
In
approving such setback, the architectural review smn and shall be constructed consistent with the following,
commission shall send a notice to property owner within A. A minimum ten-foot setback shall apply from side
300 feet of the property and make a determination that and rear lot lines,and a minimum twenty-foot setback shall
.the reduced setback will not have a detrimental impact apply from front lot lines;
an the neighborhood,taking into account the opinions of B_ There shall be no morn than one tennis court an�
nearby property owners and any property owners associa one sports court for each residential parcel of land unless
6011M.(Ord.9U 111 (Exhibit A).20D0;Ord 94§ 1(part), a conditional use permit is approved by the planningi
1975: Exhibit A § 25.10-9) commission;
C. private tennis coumtdsports courts shall not be used,
5.16100 Roof mounted n quipment far commercial purposes, and shall be used only by the4
All roof mounted equipment including,but not limited residents and their invited guests;
to,heating.exhaust fans,cooling;solar and antenna shall D. All mmnis courts/sports courts fencing shall not,
be screened to the greatest extent possible so as to preclude exceed ten feet in height as measured firm the elevation
viewing of same from adjacent residences,public ways at the adjacent property Gne,and shall be screened from'
and golf courses(public or private)_ Exception:Satellite public view and adjacent property with a combination of
television antenna thirty-nine inches or less in diameter walls, berms and landscaping;
and other roof mounted equipment such as evaporative E. A landscape and irrigation plan shall be provided'
coolers or solar panels may be visible upon a showing that for review and approval by the architectural review com-
screening of same would:(1)unreasonably delay or prevent mission
installation, maintenance of use;or (2) unreasonably in- F. If the proposal for a private tennis court/sports court)
crease the cost of installation,maintenance or use;or (3) includes the provision of lighting for night play,the own-
preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal. (Ord. er/applicant shall provide fully engineered lighting plan
866 § 2 (Exhibit A) (part), 1998) pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 24.16. Outdoor'
Lighting Requirements;
368-1 palm Derr sots
25.16-120
G. If the tetmis/spotts court is depressed at least four
feet below he existing grade or the fence is no more than
six feet abovc the adjacent grade then the court may be
located to within five feet of the side and rear property
lines.
Note For purposes of this section,"sports touts"are
defined as: A walled or fenced area for playing one of
various games with a ball such as racquet ball,hazed ball,
basketball,badminton and other similar outdoor activities.
IL Design and orientation of sports courts may be
subject to mchitecnrd review wmm6aion review ro instue
mmimmn impacts em adjacent propertiaa. (Ord_ 866§ 2
(Exhibit A) (part), 1999).
25.16.130 Salemte dish antennas.
A satellite receiving dish of more rhea dusty-nine inches
in diameter mutt conform to the following standards:
A. ne receiver shall not be visible from the street
ar be placed on a rooftop in a required ed hoot setback,or
- any other required setback except a rear setback with no
potion of r=civw located within five feet of a property
lint;
B. Height fiom existing or finished adjacent grade,
whwbevw is less,shall not exceed fotatxn fact if within -
twenty feet of a property line or eighteen feet otherwise
(Ord. 866 §2(Exhibit/R) (part). 1998)
25.16.140 Air conditioning equipment_
No air conditioning equipment shall be kiaaed closer
than five feet to any front or side property lie-(Ord 866
§ 2 (Exhibit'A) (part), 1998)
(nb.Dz n r-oq 368-2
a
MINUTES.
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 6 2002
I
would be adequate parking available. She wanted to make sure that the
applicant agreed with Condition No. 4 that only Building No. 3 would be
used for medical use. Mr. Smith concurred that only Building No. 3 was
being considered and approved.
Mr. Katz informed commission and staff that the three buildings
had been given addresses. The address for the first building was
72-630, the large building in the back was 72-650, and the
easterly building was 72-670. He said the resolution should be
changed to reflect 72-670.
Commissioner Campbell stated that she was in favor of the project.
Commissioner Tschopp thought it would work out very well with the
shared parking.
Commissioner Lopez concurred and moved for approval with the change
to the address.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner
Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-
0.
It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner
Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2144, approving
CUP 02-18, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0.
F. Case No. ZOA 02-03 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant
Request for approval to amend Chapter 25.16 of the Zoning
Ordinance (R-1 Single Family Residential District) to change
the setback for front-entry garages from 20 feet from
garage door to property line to 26 feet from garage door to
curb face.
Mr. Urbina informed commission that the proposed Zoning Ordinance
amendment was a result of a variance application the commission
considered last month for Mr. Raymond Moser. He explained that the
16
� s
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 6. 2002
current zoning ordinance allows for carports to be constructed with a 20-
foot setback from face of curb in order to encourage the rehabilitation of
older units in the city.
The proposed zoning ordinance amendment would complement that
existing language by adding to Section 25.16.090, "To encourage the
rehabilitation of older units and the provision of offstreet parking within
garages on lots with existing homes that are legally nonconforming
because they do not provide a minimum of two covered offstreet parking
spaces. The required minimum front setback to a garage door shall be 26
feet measured from street curb face."
In the case of Mr. Raymond Moser, his home was constructed in 1951
with a one-car garage. So it was clear that a house would have to be
nonconforming with respect to covered offstreet parking standards. The
26 feet would allow in those areas with no sidewalks the construction of
a future six-foot wide sidewalk while still allowing for a 20-foot deep
driveway. So a car parked in front of the garage would not block the
future sidewalk or the existing sidewalk.
Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend to the City
Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 02-03.
Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was
no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Finerty asked for
commission comments.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Tschopp, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-
0.
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2145,
recommending to City Council approval of ZOA 02-03. Motion carried 4-
0.
17
.I
it
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 02-03
City Council Presentation Script
By Francisco J. Urbina
Good afternoon City Council members.
My name is Francisco Urbina, Planning Department staff. _
The intent of this zoning ordinance amendment is t make it easier,
se ac , for owners of older single family homes that do not
have covered parking for at least two cars to be able to construct or expand a
garage.
Many older homes in Palm Desert were constructed before the City incorporated
in 1973 and only have a one-car garage or carport. The front property line for
these older homes typically starts 12 feet back from face of street curb.
The current zoning ordinance requires a minimum setback of 20 feet from
property line to garage door. This results in an effective setback of 32 feet from
face of curb to garage door. The proposed zoning ordinance amendment would
reduce this set v i eet to 26 feet from face of curb to garage door.
B s t of of an e ' tin g ome is s a yard ar a
b ifficul or ho ow r to ons uct ga ge ad on one
an still a e m t cur nt z ing ordin c etb k requir e
The reason that a specific measurement of 26 f t setbwW from face of curpto
garage door is being recommended is toa for the parking of vehicles in 0-
foot deep driveway in front of the garage while not allowing these vehicles to
obstruct pedestrian circulation on an existing or future 6-foot-wide future
sidewalk.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council waive further reading and pass
Ordinance No. 1021 approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment 02-03.
This concludes staffs presentation.
RECEIVED
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
PALM DESERT, CA
2002 SEP -5 AH 9: 40
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5.C.C.P) RECEIVED
SEP 0 5 2002
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF PALM DESERT
County of Riverside
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Proof of Publication of
the County aforesaid; 1 am over the age of eighteen
years,and not a party to or interested in the No.2361 CITY OP PALM DESERT
above-entitled matter.1 am the principal clerk of a LEGAL NOTICE
printer of the, DESERT SUN PUBLISHING CASE NO.ZOA 02-03 qq
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearn l
printed and published in the cif of Palm Springs, ' will be held better the Of alm
Desert City
Counc
P n ywill
emend Chapter 25 he of the Z°nl°tg)orto dinance
IR-1 Single Family Residentlal es from 20ange
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been ne setback for tront-entry 9 Ilne to fro
feet from
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the from garage door to proper(v
garsga door to curb face.The prtposed at
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of merit is a Class 5gg(Minor AueratIons in Land Use
'Cal a
California under the date of March 24, 1988.Case of 15305 , Section
tiions cateGuldelnes end tnon njrthe docu-
Number 191236;that the notice,of which the m,rden,n is necessary
annexed is a printed co set in type not smaller SAIL public h°°dnpp win b0 held in Tnumdey
n copy( yn September 12. 2002, at 4:00 pm. In the Council
than non pariel,has been published in each regular II Fred Wa at t a et es De eft.Catlaorn es e�
y pwhich time entl place ell Interested Pe sons ere
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in an Invited to atte1 and be heard.Writtan comments
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: concemm an items cweretl by this pubho hear-
nn g 1 In notica shall be accepted up tof he date a the
h rO Osetl
August 30 hearing. Information cancern!,o the p
proJecl entl/or nee merit of Commun'Iry it, Is
review in the Dep
merit at the above adtlmesM y through Fritlay�
8:00 a.m. entl 5:00 P ro osed actions in COurt,
If you challenge the P P those
hearing
All in the year 2002 you may be hmnetl to ra�sing only tu tichose Issues
ou or someone else reisef I the p
certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the described,in thisor In written dare a_ a
dents dekveretl to caY council et,or p
foregoing is true and correct. public hearing.
301" Prt Pl Oing L.0 Secretary
Dated at Palm Springs,California this day Palm Desert Planning Commission
PUB:August 30.2002
August ---
or —. ,2002
Signature
- CITY 01 P111M 01 1 R I
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760 346—o61 I
FAX: 760 341-7o98
i nfo Cm palm-deserr.orp,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOTICE OF ACTION
Date: August 7, 2002
CITY OF PALM DESERT
Re: :- ZOA 02-03
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken
the following action at its meeting of August 6, 2002:
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 02-03 BY ADOPTION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145. MOTION CARRIED 4-0
(COMMISSIONER JONATHAN WAS ABSENT).
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City. Clerk, City of Palm
Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.
Philip Drell, S cretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
Am
cc: Coachella Valley Water District
Public Works Department
Building & Safety Department
Fire Marshal
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.16
R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California,did on the 6`h
day of August, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm
Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.16; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm Desert
Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 02-60,"
in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is categorically
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)per Section 15305
(Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance;
2. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the adopted General
Plan and affected specific plans; and
3. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of a Zoning Ordinance text amendment as provided in the attached
Exhibit A to amend Municipal Code Chapter 25.16.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 6th day of August, 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: CAMPBELL, LOPEZ, TSCHOPP, FINERTY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: JONATHAN
ABSTAIN: NONE '
CINDY FINER Chairperson
ST:
PHILIP DRELL, ecretary
Desert
Plannin
Palm Dese 9 Commission
2
t,
(T�
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145
EXHIBIT A
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 district,the required minimum front setback to a
garage door shall be (20) feet measured from the property line and for a side entry garage
sixteen (16)feet measured from the property line. To encourage the rehabilitation of older units
and the provision of off-street parking within garages, on lots with existing homes that are legal
non-conforming because they do not provide a minimum of two covered off-street parking
spaces, the required minimum front setback to a garage door shall be 26 feet measured from
street curb face.
3
dA
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 6. 2002
would be adequate parking available. She wanted to make sure that the
applicant agreed with Condition No. 4 that only Building No. 3 would be
used for medical use. Mr. Smith concurred that only Building No. 3 was
being considered and approved.
Mr. Katz informed commission and staff that the three buildings
had been given addresses. The address for the first building was
72-630, the large building in the back was 72-650, and the
easterly building was 72-670. He said the resolution should be
changed to reflect 72-670.
Commissioner Campbell stated that she was in favor of the project.
Commissioner Tschopp thought it would work out very well with the
shared parking.
Commissioner Lopez concurred and moved for approval with the change
to the address.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, :seconded by Commissioner
Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-
0.
It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner
Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2144, approving
CUP 02-18, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0.
F. Case No. ZOA 02-03 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant
Request for approval to amend Chapter 25.16 of the Zoning
Ordinance (R-1 Single Family Residential District) to change
the setback for front-entry garages from 20 feet from
garage door to property line to 26 feet from garage door to
curb face.
Mr. Urbina informed commission that the proposed Zoning Ordinance
amendment was a result of a variance .application the commission
considered last month for Mr. Raymond Moser. He explained that the
16
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 6. 2002
current zoning ordinance allows for carports to be constructed with a 20-
foot setback from face of curb in order to encourage the rehabilitation of
older units in the city.
The proposed zoning ordinance amendment would complement that
existing language by adding to Section 25.16.090, "To encourage the
rehabilitation of older units and the provision of offstreet parking within
garages on lots with existing homes that are legally nonconforming
because they do not provide a minimum of two covered offstreet parking
spaces. The required minimum front setback to a garage door shall be 26
feet measured from street curb face."
In the case of Mr. Raymond Moser, his home was constructed in 1951
with a one-car garage. So it was clear that a house would have to be
nonconforming with respect to covered offstreet parking standards. The
26 feet would allow in those areas with no sidewalks the construction of
.:, a future six-foot wide sidewalk while .still allowing for a 20-foot deep
driveway. So a car parked in front of the garage would not block the
future sidewalk or the existing sidewalk.
Staff recommended that the!Planning Commission recommend to the City
Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 02-03.
Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked if anyone`
wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was
no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Finerty asked for
commission comments.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Tschopp, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-
0.
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2145,
recommending to City Council approval of ZOA 02-03. Motion carried 4-
0.
17
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 6. 2002
would be adequate parking available. She wanted to make sure that the
applicant agreed with Condition No. 4 that only Building No. 3 would be
used for medical use. Mr. Smith concurred that only Building No. 3 was
being considered and approved.
Mr. Katz informed commission and staff that the three buildings
had been given addresses. The address for the first building was
72-630, the large building in the back was 72-650, and the
easterly building was 72-670. He said the resolution should be
changed to reflect 72-670.
Commissioner Campbell stated that she was in favor of the project.
Commissioner Tschopp thought it would work out very well with the
shared parking.
Commissioner Lopez concurred and moved for approval with the change
to the address.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner
Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-
0.
It was moved by Commissioner Lopez, seconded by Commissioner
Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2144, approving
CUP 02-18, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0.
F. Case No. ZOA 02-03 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant
Request for approval to amend Chapter 25.16 of the Zoning
Ordinance (R-1 Single Family Residential District) to change
the setback for front-entry garages from 20 feet from
garage door to property line to 26 feet from garage door to
curb face.
Mr. Urbina informed commission that the proposed Zoning Ordinance
amendment was a result of a variance application the commission
considered last month for Mr. Raymond Moser. He explained that the
16
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 6, 2002
current zoning ordinance allows for carports to be constructed with a 20-
foot setback from face of curb in order to encourage the rehabilitation of
older units in the city.
The proposed zoning ordinance amendment would complement that
existing language by adding to Section 25.16.090, "To encourage the
rehabilitation of older units and the provision of offstreet parking within
garages on lots with existing homes that are legally nonconforming
because they do not provide a minimum of two covered offstreet parking
spaces. The required minimum front setback to a garage door shall be 26
feet measured from street curb face."
In the case of Mr. Raymond Moser, his home was constructed in 1951
with a one-car garage. So it was clear that a house would have to be
nonconforming with respect to covered offstreet parking standards. The
26 feet would allow in those areas with no sidewalks the construction of
a future six-foot wide sidewalk while still allowing for a 20-foot deep
driveway. So a car parked in front of the garage would not block the
future sidewalk or the existing sidewalk.
Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend to the City
Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 02-03.
Chairperson Finerty opened the public hearing and asked if anyone
wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was
no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Finerty asked for
commission comments.
Action:
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Tschopp, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-
0.
It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner
Tschopp, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2145,
recommending to City Council approval of ZOA 02-03. Motion carried 4-
0.
17
IIIV 0r P III M 01 1 R I
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760 346-o6i i
FAX: 760 341-7098
info @palm-desea.ovg
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOTICE OF ACTION
Date: August 7, 2002
CITY OF PALM DESERT
Re: ZOA 02-03
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken
the following action at its meeting of August 6, 2002:
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 02-03 BY ADOPTION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145. MOTION CARRIED 4-0
(COMMISSIONER JONATHAN WAS ABSENT).
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk, City of Palm
Desert, within fifteen (15) days ofthe date of the decision.
Philip Drell, S cretary _" \—V
Palm Desert Planning Commission
/tm
cc: Coachella Valley Water District
Public Works Department
Building & Safety Department
Fire Marshal
N
�,XA XItX OX A[[I(l[41A1[I
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.16
R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 61h
day of August, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm
Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.16; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm Desert
Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 02-60,"
in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is categorically
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)per Section 15305
(Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance;
2. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the adopted General
Plan and affected specific plans; and
3. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of a Zoning Ordinance text amendment as provided in the attached
Exhibit A to amend Municipal Code Chapter 25.16.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 6th day of August, 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: CAMPBELL, LOPEZ, TSCHOPP, FINERTY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: JONATHAN
ABSTAIN: NONE
VCINDY FINER Chairperso-4
ST:
PHILIP DRELL, ecretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2145
EXHIBIT A
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 district,the required minimum front setbackto a
garage door shall be (20) feet measured from the property line and for a side"entry garage
sixteen (16)feet measured from the property line. To encourage the rehabilitation of older units
and the provision of off-street parking within garages, on lots with existing homes that are legal
non-conforming because they do not provide a minimum of two covered off-street parking
spaces, the required minimum front setback to a garage door shall be 26 feet measured from
street curb face.
3
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: August 6, 2002
CASE NO: ZOA 02-03
REQUEST: Approval to amend Chapter 25.16 of the Zoning Ordinance (R-1 Single
Family Residential District) to change the setback for front-entry garages
from 20 feet from garage door to property line to 26 feet from garage door
to curb face
APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
I. BACKGROUND:
On July 16, 2002, the Planning Commission directed staff to process the above noted
Zoning Ordinance amendment. The amendment was initiated as a result of the Planning
Commission denying (on the same date) Variance No. 02-03 filed by Mr. Raymond D.
Moser. The variance requested a reduction in the garage setback from 20 feet to 10 feet
from garage door to property line to allow construction of a two-car, front-entry garage in
the rear yard of a corner lot. Mr. Moser's house was built in 1951 with a one-car garage,
and as in other older areas of Palm Desert, there are no sidewalks in Mr. Mosers's
neighborhood on Peppergrass Street and Quailbrush Avenue. Moser's property is
considered legal non-conforming because it has a one-car garage, and thus does not
meet current off-street parking standards requiring two covered parking spaces for single
family homes.
Although the Planning Commission was empathetic to Mr. Moser's proposal to improve
his property by constructing a new two-car garage to provide secure parking for his
vehicles, the findings for a variance could not be met. Therefore, to facilitate the
improvement of properties in older residential areas, the Planning Commission initiated
the subject zoning ordinance amendment. The zoning ordinance amendment will
compliment Section 25.16.090.0 of the Zoning Ordinance which allows reduced setbacks
for carports as follows:
In order to encourage the rehabilitation of older dwelling units and to provide
shaded parking for vehicles,the architectural review commission may approve well
designed carport structures with a minimum setback of twenty (20) feet to be
measured from the curb face to the front edge of the carport structure.
STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
AUGUST 6, 2002
II. ANALYSIS:
To facilitate garage improvements on properties with existing single family homes,
Section 25.16.090.A.2 of the Zoning Ordinance is proposed for amending as follows. The
new proposed text is shown in bold lettering.
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 district, the required minimum
front setback to a garage door shall be (20) feet measured from the property line
and for a side entry garage sixteen (16)feet measured from the property line. To
encourage the rehabilitation of older units and the provision of off-street
parking within garages, on lots with existing homes that are legal non-
conforming because they do not provide a minimum of two covered off-
street parking spaces, the required minimum front setback to a garage door
shall be 26 feet measured from street curb face.
III. CEQA REVIEW:
The proposed amendment is a class 5 categorical exemption for the purposes of CEQA
and no further documentation is necessary.
IV. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of ZOA 02-03.
IV. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft resolution
B. Legal notice
C. Chapter 25.16
Prepared b(\¢f
anasco J. U a
Associate Pla eerr
Reviewed and Approved by:
Philip brell
Director of Community Development
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.16
R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 61h
day of August, 2002, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an amendment to the Palm
Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 25.16; and
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the"City of Palm Desert
Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 00-24,"
in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is categorically
exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)per Section 15305
(Class 5, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify its recommendation as described below:
1. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance;
2. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment is consistent with the adopted General
Plan and affected specific plans; and
3. That the Zoning Ordinance amendment would better serve the public health,
safety and general welfare than the current regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm
Desert, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of a Zoning Ordinance text amendment as provided in the attached
Exhibit A to amend Municipal Code Chapter 25.16.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning
Commission, held on this 6th day of August, 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CINDY FINERTY, Chairperson
ATTEST:
PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
EXHIBIT A
Section 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback exceptions.
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 district, the required minimum front setback to a
garage door shall be (20) feet measured from the property line and for a side entry garage
sixteen (16) feet measured from the property line. To encourage the rehabilitation of older
units and the provision of off-street parking within garages, on lots with existing homes
that are legal non-conforming because they do not provide a minimum of two covered off-
street parking spaces, the required minimum front setback to a garage door shall be 26
feet measured from street curb face.
3
PAl€ __X';T C I-`
JP: 1,
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5.C.C.P)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Riverside
------—-------------------------------
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Proof of Publication of
the County aforesaid;I am over the age of eighteen -------------
years,and not a party to or interested in the
above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a No.2189
CITY OF PALM DESERT
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING LEGAL NOTICE
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
printed an published in the city of Springs, NOTICE HEREBY-GIVEN that a public hearing
Pitdd P tyf PalmS P g , will IC held
ld before the Palm Desert Planning
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been ICommission to amend Chapter 25.16 of the Zon-
ing is
Ordinance(R-1 SmEle Family Residential D -
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Idol to change the setback far front-entry garag-
es from 20 feet from garage door to props y line
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of to 26 feet from garage door to curb face. The
California under the date Of March 24, 1988.Case proposed amendment is a Class 5-(Minor Alter-
ations in Land Use Limitations) Cate arical ex-
Number 191236;that the notice,of which the =non for per Section 15305 of CEUA Guide-
. Tines and no further documentation is necessary.
annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller SAID ublic hearing will be held on Tuesday,Au-
than non pariel,has been published in each regular gust ' 2002, at 7:00 p.m..in the Council ham-
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in an bet in the Palm Desert Civic Confer,is at
Fred
y Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California, at which
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: time and place all interested persons are invited
co -
PP g to attend and be Heard. Written comments con-
July 27m corning all 'hems covered by this public hearing
notice shall be accepted upto tl of the
------- ----------------- hearing. Information concerning
t prning the proposed
project and/or negative declaration is available for
review in the Department of Community hoursDevelop-
ment——_--__---_ --_____—__ at the abovep.m.address between the hours of
0:00 a.m. and e t proposed
Monday through Friday.
court,
All in the year 211U2 It you challenge the proposed actions a court,
you may be limited to raising only Those issues
I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the you someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, in written pon-
foregoing is true and correct. Bence delivered the planning
nning commission (or
29(h city council) at, or
prior to,the public hearing.
Dated at Palm Springs,California this--------day PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
July PUB: July 27. 2002i
2002
of---^y--/�—/^----------
v�6b
---------'----------'----------
Signature
25.16.010
Chapter 25.16 E. Public parks and recreational facilities;
F. Single-family dwelling per lot;
Rl SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT G. Temporary uses as provided in Chapter 25.64;
H. Small family day care homes.(Ord 742§7, 1994;
Sections: Ord. 128§ I(put),1976:Ord_94§ I(pail),1975:Exhibit
25.16.010 Purpose. A §25.10-2)
25.16.020 Principal uses and structures
permitted 25.16.030 Conditional uses.
25.16.030 Conditional uses. The following uses may be permitted subject to a
25.16.035 Large family day care home. conditional use permit
25.16.040 Prohibited uses. A_ Boardinghouses and mominghouses;
25.16.050 Development standards for lots B. Churches,convents,monasteries and other religious
less than ten thousand square institutions;
feet C. Day nurseries and nursery schools;
25.16.060 Development standards for lots D. Fire stations;
at least ten thousand square feet E. Private reacational facilities such as country clubs,
but less than fifteen thousand tennis and swim clubs,golf courses,with incidental,limited
square feet commercial uses which are commonly associated and
25.16070 Development standards for lots directly related to the primary use;
fifteen thousand square feet or F. Private schools and colleges, not including art,
more. business,or trade schools or colleges; A
25.16.080 General development standards G. Public educational institutions;
applicable to all lots IL Public utility and public service facilities;
2516.090 Freak rear and side yard L Commercial parking lots when directly adjacent '
setback exception& to the C-1 general commercial zone and consistent with
25.16.100 Roof mounted equipment recommendations of an adopted specific plan; 1
25.16.110 Private swimming pools and pool J. Professional office parking lots when directly '
equipment adjacent to the O.P.office professional zone and consistent
25.16.120 Private tennis courts and sports with the recommendations of an adopted specific plan.
comas IC Rental or leasing of a single-family dwelling for '
75.16.130 Satellite dish anteneas, periods of less than 30 days_ (Ord.966 § I (Exhibit A), '
25.16.140 Air conditioning equipment 2000; Ord 909 Exhibit A, 1999: Ord 866 § 2 (Exhibit
A)(part), 1998:Ord.604 §2(Exhibit A), 1990'.Ord.94 ,
25.16.010 Purpose. § 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A § 25.10-3)
It is the intent of the RI district to encourage the preser-
vation of residential neighborhoods characterized by single- 75.16.035 Large family day care home.
family buildings on medium-sized lots and to preserve Large family day care homes are permitted subject to
undeveloped lands for similar types of residential develop- a use permit pursuant to chapter 25.72A of this code.(Ord
ment by permitting a minimum of auxiliary nonresidential 742 § 8, 1994) 1
uses. (Ord 966 § 2 (Exhibit A) (part), 1999: Ord. 94 §
t (part), 1975: Exhibit A §25.10-1) 25.16.040 Prohibited uses.
All uses not specifically permitted within Sections '
25.16.020 Principal uses and structures 25.16.020 and 25.16.030 shall be strictly prohibited within '
permitted. the(Rl)residential district. (Ord.966§2(Exhibit A)(part).
The following uses and structures shall be permitted 1998: Ord. 94 § I (part), 1975:Exhibit A §25.1")
in any R1 district: '
A. Accessory building, uses, and/or structures; 25.16.050 Development standards for lots less
B. Domestic animals; than ten thousand square feet
C. Home based businesses, as provided in Chapter All development on lots less than ten thousand square '
25.66; feet as shown on the zoning map shall comply to the
D. Private greenhouses and horticultural collections, following minimum development standards:
flower and vegetable gardens; '
367 tnso Doren roq
25.16.050
A. Minimum lot area,eight thousand square feet or F. Minimum street side yard, fifteen feet;
larger as determined by the city council and indicated on G. The minimum dwelling unit size as specified in
the zoning map; Section 2556320 shall be increased to fifteen hundred
B. Minimum lot width, seventy feet; square feet for all lots larger than fifteen thousand square
C. Minimum front yard, twenty feet; feet'.
D. Minimum rear yard, fifteen feet; R Maximum building site towage,dirty-five pement-
E. Minimum side yards,fourteen feet combined each (Ord 866§2(Exhibit A)(part), 1998:Ord 128§§1(part),
of which shall be not less than five feet; 3,1976:Ord 94§ I(part),1975:Exhibit A§§25.10-7 —
F. Minimum strew side yard, ten feet; 25.10-7.08)
G. Maximum building site coveratge,thirty-five perc&M
If. The minimum dwelling unit size as specified in 25.16.080 General development standards
Section 255020 shall be one thousand square feet on applicable to all lots
lots less than ten thousand square feet in sin (Ord 866 The following standards shall apply to all lots in an RI
§2(Exhibit A)(part), 1999: Ord. 128 § 1 (part), 1976: district:
Ord 94§ I(pan),1975: Exhibit A §§25.10.5—25.10- A. Maximum building height,eight=feet and maxi-
5.09) mints one story in height.All homes fifteen few in height
or more shall be reviewed and approved by the architectural
25.16.060 Development standards for lob at review commission prior to issuance of building permits.
least ten thousand square feet but If the property is within a homeowners assodatim with
R Masi than fil teen thousand square a bona fide architectural review process and the applicant
feet obtains approval from that architectural review body,the
All development on lots at least ten thousand square city's architectural review process may be waived;
feet bun smaller than fifteen thousand square feet as shown B. Maximum building site coverage in the R-1 zone
y on the zoning map shall comply to the following develop- districts may be increased to as much as fifty per uzm subject
meet standards r to review and approval by the ardutectoal review commis-
A- Minimum lot depth,one hundred feet; Sion Items to be considered by the architectural review
B. Minimum lot widths, ninety feet; commission include,but are not 1®ited to,building setbacks
C. Minimum front yard, twenty feet; and neighborhood compatibility.
D. Minimum rear yard, twenty feet;, C. All parking and loading shall comply with the
E. Minimum side yards,twenty feet combined,no side provisions of Chapter 25.58;
less than eight feet; D. For provisions regarding utilities, see Section
F. Minimum street side yard, fifteen feet; 25.56.090;;
G. Maximum building site coverage,thirty-five percent E. AU sign shall be in compliance with Chapter 25.68;
H. The minimum dwelling unit size as specified in F. All development shall comply with the provisions
m Section 2556.320 shall be increased to one thousand two of Chapter 25.70 for site plan review by the architectural
ID hundred fifty squue few for all lots Iarger than ten thousand review commission review process.(Ord.866§2(Exhibit
square feet but smaller dun fifteen thousand. (Ord 866 A) (part), 1998: Ord. 94 § I (part), 1975:Exhibit A §§
' §2(Exhibit A)(part),1998:Ord 128§§I(part),2,1976: 25.10-8—25.10-9.05)
Ord 94§ 1 (part), 1975: Exhibit A §§25-10-6—25.10-
6.08) 25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback
exceptions.
L. 25.16.070 Development standards for lots A. Front and/or rear yard setbacks may be reduced
fifteen thousand square feet or by up to twenty-five percent of the mgrmed setback provid.
ninm ed that the average of each such setback,when considered
All developments on lots fifteen thousand square few on an individual basis,is not less than the minimum re-
or more as shown on the zoning map shall comply to the quired for the district(i.e.a fifty foot wide dwelling which
following minimum development standards: chooses to utilize a twenty-five reduction for ptrcwtt twenty-
A. Minimum lot depth,one hursdred twenty-five feet; five feet of its width must provide a setback at least twenty-
B. Minimum lot width, ninety feet; five percent greater than the minimum prescribed setback
C. Minimum from yard, twenty-five feet, for the remaining twenty-five feet of its width)_
t" D. Minimum may yard, twenty feet; 1. Notwithstanding the preceding, in the R-1 8,000
E- Minimum side yard, fifteen feet; district the minimum rear yard may be reduced to ten feet
(e.hm Dean 8-01) 368
c-rJ
1
ii
25.16.091
provided that the average of the rear yard setback complies 25.16.110 Private swimming pools and pool +
with the fifteen foot requirement_ equipment. 1
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-I District, Private swunn uhg pools shall be permitted on residen�
the required minimum front setback to a garage door shall lots in accordance with the standards listed below:
be twenty(20) feet measured from the property line and A. The water perimeter of the pool shall be an dose
for a side entry garage sixteen(16) feet measured from than five feet from any property litre unless appropriatl
the property line. engineering documentation is provided which shows thajj
B. In addition to the provisions of subsection A of the pool will not create a surcharge problem on struct3
this section,the required Gout,rear and side yard setbacks at the property lice.With appropriate documentation
on an irregularly shaped lot may be reduced by as much minimum setback may be reduced to two feet from th�
as twenty percent upon a showing that property line;
I. The lot in question is irregular in shape(i.e_, the B. All swimming pool equipment shall be housed it
lot has significantly less width or depth than the typical a building orbs located behind a screen wall of suffrcien
lot in the subdivision or the lot has more than flair boundary height to obscure said pool equipment from public view
Goes and the dimensions prevent a home typical of the C_ Swimming Pool equipment pits shall be locate
neighborhood from being placed on the lot;and a minimum of five feet from any Property line. Wi
2. The architectural review commission makes a appropriate strucaral documentation,the minimum setf>ar�
determination that the reduced setback(s) will not have may be reduced to two feet from the property line;
r detrimental impact on the neighborhood. D. Swimming pool equipment shall not be located'
C. In arch to encourage rehabilitation of older dwelling within a required side yard setback adjacent to a structur l
miu and to provide shaded parking for vehicles, the unless it is demonstrated that the noise level at the prooertaa
architectural review commission may approve well designed line will comply with the noise levels of MuniciIWFC "e�
carport structures with a minimum setback of twenty(20) Section 9.24.030.(Ord 866§2(Exhibit A)(part),19981
feet to be measured from the curb face to the front edge
d the be
structure.Side-in carport structures may be 25.16.120 Private tennis courts and sports
approved to a minimum setback of sixteen(16)feet me-a- courts. '
saved from the curb face to the nearest projection of the Private tennis cmats/sports courts(courts)are subjec
carport to review and approval by the architectural review co nmu-
In approving such setback, the architectural review sum and shall be constructed consistent with the following
commission shall send a notice to property owners within A. A minimum ten-foot setback shall apply from sid1
300 feet of the property and make a determination that and rear lot lines,and a minimum twenty-foot setback shall
the reduced setback will not have a detrimental impact apply from front lot lines; 4
on the neighborhood,taking into account the opinions of B. There shall be no more than one tennis count a
nearby Property owners and any property owners associa- 14
one sports court for each residential parcel of land unless
tioos.(Ord.968§I(Exhibit A).2000;Ord 94§ 1(part), a conditional use permit is approved by the planoin j
1975: Exhibit A § 75.10-9) commission;
C. Private tennis courWsportc courts shall not be used'
25.16.100 Roof mounted equipment for commercial purposes,and shall be used only by tM1
All roof mounted equipment including,but not limited residents and their invited guests;
to,heating,exhaust fans,cooling,solar and antenna shall D_ All tennis courts/sports courts fencing shall not
be screened to the greatest extent possible so as to preclude exceed ten feet in height as measured from the elevationo
viewing of same from adjacent residences,public ways at the adjacent property line,and shall be screened fro
and golf courses(public or private)_ Exception:Satellite public view and adjacent property with a combination of
television antenna thirty-nine inches or less in diameter walls, bums and landscaping;
and other roof mounted equipment such as evaporative E. A landscape and irrigation plan shall be provided'
coolers of solar panels may be visible upon a showing that for review and approval by the architectural review com-
screening of same would:(1)unreasonably delay or prevent mission.
installation, maintenance or use;or (2)unreasonably in- F. If the proposal for a private tennis court/spats court
crease the cost of installation,maintenance or use;or (3) includes the provision of lighting for night play,the own-
preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal. (Ord. er/applicant shall provide fully engineered lighting plan
866 § 2 (Exhibit A) (part), 1998) pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 24.16, Outdoor'
Lighting Requirements;
368-1 (r+wD> sot)
1
25.16-120
G. if the tennis/sports court is depressed at least four
feet below the existing grade or the fence is no more than
six feet above the adjacent grace then the court may be
located to within five feet of the side and rear property
lines.
Now For purposes of this section,"sports cants^are
defined as. A walled or fenced area for playing one of
various games with a ball such as racquet ball,hand bail,
basketball,badminton and other similar outdoor activities-
H. Design and orientation of sports courts may be
sttbjed m architectural review commission review ro insure
minimum impacts on adjacent properties. (Ord 866 §2
(Exhibit A) (part), 1998)•
25.16.130 SateMW dish antennas.
A satellite receiving dish of more than durty-nine inches
in diameter must conform to the following standards:
A The receiver shall not be visible tom the street
or be placed on a rooftop in a required front setback,or
any other required setback except a rear setback with no
Portion of receiver located within five feet of a property
line; '
B. Height Gum existing or finished adjacent grade,
whichever is less,shall not exceed fourtcrn feet if within
twenty feet of a property line or eighteen feet otherwise
(Ord 866 §2(Exlu'bit A) (part), 1998)
25.16.140 Air conditioning equipment No air conditioning equipment shall be located closes - -
4 than five feet to any front or side property line-(Ord 866 '
§ 2(Exhibit A)(part), 1998)
tab-Dmn r-oo 368-2
crrr E E!VED
PALF1 DESERT CA E
2001 JUL 31 AM 8: 45
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5.C.C.P)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Riverside -
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Proof of Publication of Ili
the County aforesaid; 1 am over the age of eighteen ----------
years,and not a party to or interested in the
above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a Fprcp�edamendment
CITY OF PALM DESERT
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING LEGAL NOTICE
COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, casE No.zoA o2-oa
rioted and published in the cif of Palm Springs, IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
P P Y held before the Palm Desert Planning
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been sion to amend Chanter 25.16 of the ton-
inance(R-1 Sin Is Family Residential Dis-
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the change the setback for front-entry 9;rag-
20 feet from gatge door to property line
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of eet from garage tloor to curb face. The
California under the date of March 24, 1988.Case d amendment is a Class 5 (Minor Alter-
ations In Land Use Limitations) cote orical ex-
Number 191236;that the notice,of which the emption for per Section 15305 of C�1A Guide-
lines and no further documentation is necessary.
annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller
SAID ublic headng will be held on Tuesday.Au-
than non pariel,has been published in each regular ust�. 2002, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council hem-
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in an �ier al the Palm Desert Civic Center,73-510 Fred
) Waring Drive, Palm Desert, Califomia, at which
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: lime and place all interested persons are invited
to attend and be heard. Written comments win-
July 27ra coming all items covered by this public hearing
notice shall be accepted up to the date of the i
hearing. Information concerning the proposed
project anctor negative declaration is ovaila le for
review in the Department of Community Develop-
ment at the above address between the hours of
8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
All in the year 2002 If you challenge the proposed actions in court.
you may be I.Mhed to raisin gg only those Issues
1 certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the you or someone else raised at tha public hearing
described in this notice, or In written cronespon-
foregoing is true and correct. deuce delivered to the planning commission (or
291h city wunci0 at,or prior to, the public hearing.
Dated at Palm Springs,California this --dayPHILIP DRELL, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
July PUB:July 27, 2002f
Of 2002
Signature
CIIV 01 P !' ' M DESERT
7 3-5 10 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92 2 60-2 5 7 8
TEL: 760 346—o6i I
FAX: 760 341-7098
info@palm-desert.org
I
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 02-03
i
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning
Commission to amend Chapter 25.16 of the Zoning Ordinance (R-1 Single Family Residential
District) to change the setback for front-entry garages from 20 feet from garage door to
property line to 26 feet from garage door to curb face. The proposed amendment is a Class
5 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) categorical exemption for per Section 15305 of
CEQA Guidelines and no further documentation is necessary.
I
I
I
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, August 6, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California,
at which time and place all interested persons are invited to attend and be heard. Written
comments concerning all items covered by this public hearing notice shall be accepted up to
the date of the hearing. Information concerning the proposed project and /or negative
declaration is available for review in the Department of Community Development at the above
address between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. If you
challenge the proposed actions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the planning commission (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun PHILIP DRELL, Secretary
July 27, 2002 Palm Desert Planning Commission
I
I
CITY 01 P111M 01 1 R T
73-5io FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760 346—o6t t
FAX: 760 341-7098
info@palm-desert.org
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOTICE OF ACTION
Date: July 18, 2002
CITY OF PALM DESERT
Re: REQUEST FOR INITIATION OF A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER
25.16
The Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert has considered your request and taken
the following action at its meeting of July 16, 2002:
PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTED STAFF TO INITIATE A ZONING
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 25.15 (R-1 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) TO CHANGE THE SETBACK FOR FRONT-ENTRY
GARAGES FROM 20 FEET FROM GARAGE DOOR TO PROPERTY LINE TO 26
FEET FROM GARAGE DOOR TO CURB FACE. MOTION CARRIED 4-0.
Any appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk, City of Palm
Desert, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision.
Philip Drell, S retary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
Am
cc: Coachella Valley Water District
Public Works Department
Building & Safety Department
Fire Marshal
oa„ o o nnmo,nvr
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Francisco J. Urbina, Associate Planner
DATE: July 16, 2002
REQUEST: Initiation of an amendment to Chapter 25.16 of the Zoning Ordinance (R-1 Single
Family Residential District)to change the setback for front-entry garages from 20 feet
from garage door to property line to 26 feet from garage door to curb face
I. BACKGROUND:
There are several older residential neighborhoods in the City of Palm Desert that lack two car
garages. Section 25.16.090.0 of the Zoning Ordinance states:
In order to encourage the rehabilitation of older dwelling units and to provide shaded
parking for vehicles, the architectural review commission may approve well designed
carport structures with a minimum setback of twenty(20)feet to be measured from the
curb face to the front edge of the carport structure.
The setback for garages, however, is different: 20 feet from garage to property line. Variance
No. 02-03 was filed by Mr. Raymond D. Moser on May 29, 2002. Mr. Moser's home was built
in 1951 with a one-car garage. Mr. Moser proposed a variance to allow him to construct a
two-car, front-entry garage in the rear yard of a corner lot with a reduction in the garage
setback from 20 feet to 10 feet from garage door to property line. The distance from the
proposed garage to curb face on Quailbrush Avenue is 22 feet. Mr. Moser's property is in an
older subdivision where there are no existing sidewalks. Public Works Department staff has
communicated to Planning staff that the City has no plans at the present time to construct
sidewalks in Mr. Moser's neighborhood. Staff analyzed Mr. Moser's variance request and
determined that the proposal did not meet the criteria for granting a variance because there
are no special or unique characteristics about Mr. Moser's property that do not apply to other
properties in the area.
However, Planning staff thinks that property owners(e.g. Mr. Moser)in older residential areas
with one-car garages should not be hindered from improving their property because of R-1
zone garage setback standards that are restrictive. Therefore, staff is recommending that the
Planning Commission initiate a zoning ordinance amendment to the R-1 zone to change the
setback for front-entry garages from 20 feet from garage door to property line to 26 feet from
garage door to curb face in areas where there are no sidewalks. This proposed setback
would allow the possibility of constructing a future 6-foot wide sidewalk in residential areas
while still allowing vehicles to be parked in the driveway without worry that a vehicle would
overhang onto the sidewalk and block pedestrian circulation. The proposed amendment to
the zoning ordinance would result in a 20-foot deep driveway measured from front-entry
garage door to rear of sidewalk.
II. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission direct staff to initiate a zoning ordinance amendment to
Section 25.21 to allow a 26-foot setback from a front entry garage
ANCISCO J. U - NA
ASSOCIATE PLANNER
Attachments:
A. City of Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 25.21
2
City of Palm Desert
Excerpt from Zoning Ordinance
Regarding Setbacks for Garages
25.16.090 Front, rear and side yard setback
exceptions.
A. Front and/or tear yard setbacks may be reduced
by up to twemy-five pet of the ragtritcd suck provid.
ed that the average of each such setback when considered
on an individual basis,is not less than the minimum me
quired for the district(i.e.a fifty foot wide dwelling which
Chooses to utilize a twenty-five pecoem reduction for twenty-
five feet of its width must provide a setback at least twenty-
five percent greater than the minimum prescribed setback
for the remaining twenty-five feet of its width).
1. Notwithstanding the preceding,in the R-1 8,000
district the minimum rear yard may be reduced to ten feet
provided that the average of the rear yard setback complies
with the fifteen foot requirement.
2. Notwithstanding the preceding in the R-1 District,
—�j the required minimum front setback to a garage door shall
be twenty (20)feet measured from the property lime and
for a side entry garage sixteen(16) feet measured from
the property line.
B. In addition to the provisions of subsection A of
tltis section,the required front,rear and side yard setbacks
on an irregularly shaped lot may be reduced by as much
as twenty percent upon a showing that
1. The lot in question is irregular in shape(i.e., the
lot has significantly less width or depth than the typical,
lot in the subdivision or the lot has more than four boundary
tines and die dimensions prevent a home typical of the
neighborhood from being placed on the lot; and
2. The architectural review commission makes a
determination that the reduced setback(s) will not have
a detrimental impact on the neighborhood.
C In ordc to ateourage tehab ibdm of okks dwelling
units and to provide shaded parking for vehicles, the
arehitmucrlreview may approve well designed
carport structures with a minimum setback of twenty(20)
fen to be measured from the curb face to the from edge
of die carport structum Side-in carport structures may be
approved to a minimum setback of sixteen(16)feet mea-
sured from the curb face to the nearest projection of the
carport
In approving such setback the architectural review
commission shall send a notice to property owners within
300 feet of the property and make a determination that
the reduced setback will rat have a detrimental impact
on the neighborhood,taking into account the opinions of
nearby property owners and any property owners associa-
dons.(Ord.968§ 1 (Exhibit A),2000;Ord.94§ 1(part),
1975: Exhibit A §25.10.9)
Confirmation Report — Memory Send F
Time Jul-24-2002 09:24am
Tel line 7603417090
Name PALM DESERT PUBLIC WORKS DEPT
Job number 315
Date Jul-24 09:23am
To 7784731
Document Pages 003
Start time Jul-24 09:23am
End time Jul-24 09:24am
Pages sent 003
Status OK
Job number 315 *** SEND SUCCESSFUL ***
CITYF PALM DESERT
730-510 Frad Waring Oriva
Palm 0asart, California 92260
Ta l a p h o no: 760-346-061 1
FACSIMILE
pate: July 24, 2002
To: Tha M) n.rt Sun
Attn: �abbla
Fax No.: (760) 778-4731
Phone No.:
No. of Pagers: 3
From: Franclsco J. Urbina, Assoclata Planner
346-0611. ext. 485
MESSAGE RE: ZOA 02-03 8. PP 02-12
P/ease pub/ish the attachBd/age/ nofica.
Chaiga to account numba� C/T 012.
Thank you/
�I