HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA 85-6 HEIGHT LIMITS 1986 1•
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Heiaht. The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet or two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure. 24 feet for a oitched roof, except where the preaerty structure is
adiaeent to within 120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be
limited to one story. maximum 18 feet.
25_.20. 110. The maximum building height in anv R-3 district shall he th+rty feet
or two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a Ditched roof. except where the ereeerty structure is adyaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
V
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height. The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet er two eter+es wh+ehever 4s +ess = 22 feet for a flat roof
structure, 24 feet for a pitched roof, except where the ereeerty structure is
adyaeent to within 120 feet of the R-I district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25_20_110. The maximum building height in any R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
er two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a pitched roof, except where the oroeerty structure is adjaeent to within
120 feet of the R-I district the building height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
V
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height. The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet or twe star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure, 24 feet for a oitched roof, except where the Oreeerty' structure is
adyaeent to within 120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25_200110. The maximum building height in any R-3 district shall .be th+rty feet
er two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a pitched roof. except where the ereeerty structure is, adyaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall . be limited. to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 106 Building Height. The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet or two star+es wh+ehever +9 +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure, 24 feet for a pitched roof except where the ereeerty structure is
adyaeent to within 120 feet of the R-I district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25_20_110. The maximum building height in anv R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
or two star+es wh+ehever +9 +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a Ditched roof, except where the eraeerty structure is adiaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
l!
V '
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 1.8. 100 Building Height The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet or two star+es wh+ehever 4-3 +e9s - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure. 24 feet for a Ditched roof, except where the ereeertd structure is
adjaeent to within 120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25.20_110. The maximum building height in any R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
or two star+es wh+ehever +e +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a Ditched roof, except where the ereeerty structure is adyaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
EXHIBIT "A" --
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height The maximum building heiaht in any R-2 district
shall be thirty feet or twe star+es wh+ehever 4s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure_, 24 feet for a Ditched roof, except where the ereeerty structure is
adiaeent to within 120 feet of the R-I district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25.20_110. The maximum building height in any R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
or two ster+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a Ditched roof, except where the ereeerty structure is adyaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the buildina height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
l� c
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Heiaht. The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet er two ster+es wh+ehever +9 +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure. 24 feet for a Ditched roof except where the ereeerty structure is
adyecent to within 120 feet of the R-I district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25`200110. The maximum building height in any R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
or two ster+es wh+ehever +9 +ese - 22 feet for a f.lat_ roof .structure 24 feet
for a Ditched roof, except where the eroeerty structure is ad3aeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height. The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet or two star+es wh+ehever +9 +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure_, 24 feet for a pitched roof, except where the 9reeerty structure is
edieeent to within 120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25.20. 110. The maximum building height in anv R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
or two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a pitched roof. except where the eroserty structure is adjaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
L
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height. The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet or two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure. 24 feet for a Ditched roof, except where the property structure is
adyaeent to within 120 feet of the R-I district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25.20_110. The maximum building height in anv R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
or two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure'. 24 feet
for a pitched roof. except where the ereoerty structure is adyaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
J {
EXHIBIT "A'
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height. The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet or two 9ter+e9 wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure, 24 feet for a pitched roof, except where the ereeerty structure is
adyaeent to within 120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25_20_110. The maximum building height in any R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
or twe star+es wh+eheyer +9 +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a pitched roof. except where the ereeerty structure is adyaeent to within
120 feet of the R-I district the building 'height shall_be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Heiaht The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet er two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure. 24 feet for a Ditched roof except where the Preeerty structure is
edjaeent to within 120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25.20_110. The maximum building height in anv R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
or twe star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a pitched roof, except where the ereeerty structure is adyaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
t•
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet or two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure, 24 feet for a Ditched roof, except where the Proeerty structure Is
adyaeent to within 120 feet of the R-I district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet. ,
25.200110. The maximum building height in any R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
er two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a Ditched roof. except where the eraeerty. structure Is adyaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall. be . Limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet er two star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet .for a flat roof
structure, 24 feet for a Ditched roof, except where the property structure is
ad4aeent to within 120 feet of the R-I district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25.20_110. The maximum building height in any R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
er twe star+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a Ditched roof, except where the ereeerty structure is adyeeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the buildino height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
ORDINANCE NO. 441
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT
TO CHAPTER 25. 100 OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
ZONING ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING STANDARDS OF
DEVELOPMENT FOR TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENTS.
CASE NO. ZOA 85-6
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 24th day of October, 1985, hold a duly noticed public hearing and continued
public hearing on January 9, 1986, to consider the above mentioned request; and
WHEREAS, the planning commission, by Resolution No. 1089, has recommended
approval ; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and. considering all
testimony arguments, if any, of all Interested persons desiring to be heard,
said city council did find the following facts to Justify Its acti6n as
described below:
I . 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.
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, as follows:
I . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the
consideration of the council In this case.
2. That It does hereby approve a zoning ordinance Text Amendment, as
provided in the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A."
3. The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, California, is hereby
directed to publish this ordinance in the Palm Desert Post, a
newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the
City of Palm Desert, California, and shall be in full force and
effective thirty (30) days after its adoption.
i
i
ORDINANCE NO. 441
PASSED., APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Palm Desert City Council this 9th
day of January, 1986, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: BENSON, SNYDER, WILSON, AND KELLY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: JACKSON
ABSTAIN: NONE `
ATTEST:
RICHARD KELLY, Mayor
SHEILA R. GIL AN. City k
City of Palm Desert, Cal rnia
/tm
i
2
ORDINANCE NO. 441
EXHIBIT "A"
Section 25. 100.035 is added:
Section 25. 100.035. Timeshare in permitted zones.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter the following conditions
must be met by any timeshare development In any permitted zone.
I . The density of the project shall not exceed the density permitted in the
zone for residential projects.
2. The timeshare development must comply with all development standards for
residential projects in the Pk zone.
3. The entire development (all units within the project) must be timeshare
units.
4. The project must be a "fee ownership" time share.
5. All maintenance agreements and MR's must be approved by the City of
Palm Desert.
6. The minimum time share unit shall be for one week (7 days) .
7. Project sponsor must post a maintenance bond letter of credit or cash
deposit for the life of the project equivalent to 25% of the annual
maintenance budget for the project, plus reserves for major repair and
replacement.
8. All timeshare units shall be subject to a $150 per week share public
facilities impact mitigation fee.
Section 25.45.035 is added:
Section 25.24.035. Uses permitted by approved conditional use permit.
A. Time-share projects as setforth In chapter 25. 100.
3
ORDINANCE NO. 441
EXHIBIT "A"
Section 25 . 100 . 035 is added :
Section 25 . 100 . 035 . Timeshare in permitted zones .
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter , the
following conditions must be met by any timeshare development in
any permitted zone :
1 . The entire development (all units within the project ) must
be timeshare units .
2 . The project must be a "fee ownership" timeshare .
3 . All maintenance agreements and CCBR ' s must be approved by
the City of Palm Desert .
4 . The minimum timeshare unit shall be for one week ( 7 days ) .
5 . Project sponsor must post a maintenance bond letter of
credit or cash deposit for the life of the project
equivalent to 25% of the annual maintenance budget for the
project , plus reserves for major repair and replacement .
6 . All timeshare units shall be subject to a $ 150 per week
share public facilities impact mitigation fee .
PROOF OF PU. CATION This space is for ounly Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5 C•C.P.) RECEIVED
'86 FEB 3 Pn 1 49
CITY 'CLERKS OFFICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of Riverside
CITY OF PALM DESERT
1 am a citizen of the United States and a
resident of the County aforesaid; I am over
the ageof eighteen years, and not a party to Proof of Publication of
or Interested in the above-entitled matter. I CASE NO . ZOA 85-5 ..
am the principal clerk of the printer of the
DESERT POST •..
......:.......................
............s.................................. CITY,OF,PALM DESERT
LEOAANOTICE
CASE NO ZOA76 Id efore
a newspaper of general circulation, printed NOTIC_�HEREB G ENihe a?b'. 0
Palm Desert C �r"`orld6
25:70.030 ielfltinpho`fie r.hiteciii al c6rtimleslorY
$ T.}eekl SAID'pubikhears —will:be`.. Idan hlirsdey, Febru. 13,
and published ....•- Y • "" 7:00 p.m7fjr :C�ou`ncK hambe aljthe�Pal D �I y
73�5t0 Fred Waring Drive,Palm' a- t
plece_alttinterested_person re 6VIted o?tta
In the City of ..RI�1l9..P.e�g.�.S............. . challen0e the proposed eclI- n�o6rl1'. 6 .. ay I t
County of Riverside, and which news• des o aa��`n o+in kiero asP 6 11 .Fad h
paper has been adjudged a newspaper panning commis57oTo cTy councilf at orsrfid, }h .e lycer
of general circulation by the .Superior C ]'of Pal nCaMlorhia
Court of the County of Riverside, Slate of Pub.O.P. an. 1, eesl
California,under the dateof.lA/.5.., 19 .4u.r
83658
Case Number ................. that the notice,
of which the annexed is a printed copy (set
in type not smaller than nonpareil), has
been published in each regular and entire
issue of said newspaper and not In any
supplement thereof on the following dates,
to-wit:
1/ 31.................................
i ...................
all in the year 19.8.6..
I certify (or declare) under penally of
perjury that the foregoing Is true and
correct.
' P'alm Desert
i Dated at.........................................
r '
31st dayof.J... 198�'.,.
Calilornia,lhis..... aa-
gnat re
FnPcoPlrrof Inlr I,nt form mW br rrcared Iron,
CALIFORNI3UREAUP NC RSERVICE
Legal Advertising Clearing House
120 wool Second St., Los Angeles, Calif. 90012
Telephone: (2131625.2541
PIONfort",n PrdaRlna I Prfarm Pebllydlon
PROOF OF PUBLI+,.,_ TION This space Is for the( ity Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5 C.C.P.) RECEIVED
'86 AN 20 Af9 8 29
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of Riverside
CITY OF PALM DESERT
I am a citizen of the United States and a
resident of the County aforesaid; I am over
the age of eighteen years, and not a party to Proof of Publication of
or interested in the above-entitled matter. I CASE NO. ZOA 85-5
am the principal clerk of the printer of the
DESERT POST ,
......... ................................ ...... .. ..........
•C ••,OF•A Y DESERT
LEa LMOTIC
..............................................:..... CASEN0120
a newspaper of general circulation, printed NOT CE HEREBY EN
Palm�Oeserrt,"�Plarni`.ngy p
25;70.020 and'25:7g0. 30 A .
and published .6B1-Weeh Ky................. SAID public hearin
p:m�iytha Coiincitti amW�Jn`the�I .
Wa""ring OrIveYPalm Desert�Csllrornle tt �� .
In the city of
., teres}e6"persons 're nvited dranen�,d e 4 -
e
..R�1ro..D.es�.�x.......... the.pr�ede�t, ncourt'�''y'of 'e be ip I
County of Riverside, and which news- Iss-besyCo'cr. _ P'B`ei6a a!gearly,�ne cll°'nea`rt
I ttencorr_nob 'v�e. 6 the e
thisoti6e 7or�„� or
paper has been adjudged a newspaper pled 9 o m a;e�. ,7p ritlr o DI
of general circulation by the .Superior a My 0
Court of the County of Riverside, State of P D:. . J.
California, under the dateof.lAL5.., 19 A4,,
83658 ; thatihenotice,
Case Number ....6.....
of which the annexed is a printed copy (set
in type not smaller than nonpareil), has
been published in each regular and entire
issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates,
to-wit: 1/10 MD
all in the year 19.8.6..
I certify (or declare) under penalty of JAN 21 1986
perjury that the foregoing Is true and
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Correct. CITY OF PALM DESERT
Dated at....,,,p81m Desert .
loth Jan .
California,this..........dayof.........
19g6..
Si,nafu �e
Free copies at this Line term may ba arcurre Iron r
CALIFORNIA N E EWSPAPE
NC.R SERVICE
Legal Advertising Clearing House
120.W0111 second St., Los Angeles,Ca41 90012
Telephone: l I
Fire,request n9NEa.Prior mPublication
Will-
PROe2015-5
FPUBLICI&ON This space is for theCo •^ yClerk'sFilingStamo
C.C.P.) I RECEIVED
'66 JM 20 M 8 29
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
County of Riverside
CITY OF PALM DESERT
i am a citizen of the United States and a
resident of the County aforesaid; I am over
the age of eighteen years, and not a party to Proof of Publication of
or interested in the above-entitled matter. I CASE NO . ZOA 85,5 .•••.......•...
am the principal clerk of the printer of the ......... .........•••
DESERT POST ... • .... ....
.........•.s....................................... h OILY OF PALM DIESERTJ= +.�.Ts�:fit•`-dtii� ^.A
. AEO AL NOTICE
0 CSENO.ZOAS"
................................................... , " y .T^=•a. .,»,.
.
a newspaper of general circulation, printed `=NDTICEIS HEREBY OMEN that a Public f:eanng will be held before the
.gyPolm Desert Planning Commission to_cbmalder amen"'19 sections
i•25.70.020 mid25.70_030 Misting 10 the erch0ach"al.coryrdas'w't.,
and published .Bi'c7e e k ly„ SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday.January 21,1986 at 200
p.m.in the Council Chamber In the Palen Desen Ctty Hag.73-510 Fred
.Waring DrNe,Palm Desert.Ca Momie,at which woe and place 80 ire
in the City of ............. herested persons are invited to attend and be heard. 11 you challenge
the proposed aetbne In court.Yon MY be limited to raising only itetee
County of Riverside, and which news- lic hear cr In
this notice.o i espmi0e!k lsed at the�fr 00
edto"1BC"yC0"�`MtO�
paper has been adjudged a newspaper plo I Ia�r vrdoV o.tnar y lin ry
of general circulation by the .Superior r • „Palm Desert P"In C4m°ftsW
Court of the County of Riverside, State of ?ram„ e.D.P..tan to.lge5
California, under the date of.1A1.5.., 19 b4,,
83658 Case Number .......• that the notice,
..........
of which the annexed is a printed copy (set
in type not smaller than nonpareil), has
been published in each regular and entire
issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates,
to-wit: 1/10
....................................................
all in the year 19.8.6_.
I certify (or declare) under penalty of
perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Dated at...,,,,Palm Desert ,.
De
loth . Jan .
California, this..........day of........, 19
ZLf� Si natu/e
Fite coploeal this wank form maybe secured from:
r CALIFORNIA NEWS
ASP NC.RSERVICE
BURLegal Advertising Clearing House
120.weat Second St., Loa Angeles, alit 90012
Telephone: (2131625-2541
Pluu n°u GENERAL
EM.g ALProof
at Puwuuaom
#nriform.
R
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height. The maximum building height in any R-2 district
shall be th+rty feet or two star+es wh+ehever 49 +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof
structure, 24 feet for a Ditched roof, except where the Preeerty structure is
ed4seent to within 120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be
limited to one story, maximum 18 feet.
25.20. 110. The maximum building height in any R-3 district shall be th+rty feet
or twe ster+es wh+ehever +9 +e9s - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet
for a pitched roof, except where the ereeerty structure is adyaeent to within
120 feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be limited to one
story, maximum 18 feet.
CITY OF PALM DESERT \
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
I TO: Honorable Mavor and City Council
II. REQUEST: Zoning ordinance amendment lowering heiaht maximums in the
R-2 and R-3 zones.
111. APPLICANT: CITY OF PALM DESERT
IV. CASE NO: ZOA 85-5
V. DATE: September 12, 1985
VI. CONTENTS:
A. Staff Recommendation
B. Discussion
C. Draft Ordinance No.
D. Plannina Commission minutes involvina Case No. ZOA 85-5
E. Plannina Commission Resolution No. 1073
F. Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 20, 1985
G. Related maps and/or exhibits
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Waive further reading and pass to second reading,.
B. DISCUSSION:
Presently the R-2 and R-3 zones allow a maximum heiqht of 30 feet. The
Proposed amendment would lower this basic limit to 22 feet for a flat
roof and 24 feet for a pitched roof. At the request of the architectural
commission a new section was added which would give the planning
commission discretionary Dower to aDorove buildings up to 30 feet in
height if a detailed line of sight analysis indicates that views and
privacy would not be adversely affected by the additional height.
The proposal also clarifies the impact on height. of R-2 and R-3 properties
adjacent to R- 1 zones. In the past there was some confusion since
"adjacent" was never clearly defined. The proposed amendment requires a
120 foot setback from an R-1 zone for any buildings in excess of 18 feet.
This setback is the minimum 100 foot depth of an R-2 or R-3 lot plus
required 20 foot buildina setback.
Prepared by
Reviewed and Approved byz��ye �l - ---- -- --
City of Palm Desert
Department of Community Development/Planning
Staff Report
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: August 20, 1985
CASE ND: ZOA 85-5
REQUEST: Zoning ordinance amendment lowering height maximums in the R-2
and R-3 zones.
1. DISCUSSION:
The proposed ordinance was presented to the architectural commission on
August 13. While they agreed that the proposed 22 and 24 foot limitation
was adequate, they requested an alternative procedure which provides some
flexibility. An alternative line of sight section has been added under
which the 30 foot maximum may still be approved.
11. RECOMMENDATION:
Approve findings and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. _
recommending to city council approval of ZOA 85-5.
Prepared by� �
Reviewed and Approved by —
/dlg
ORDINANCE NO. _
A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONING ORDIN-
ANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO HEIGHT LIMITATIONS IN
THE R-2 AND R-3 ZONES.
CASE NO: ZOA 85-5
WHEREAS, the City Council of the Citv of Palm Desert. California did on
the 12th day of September. 1985. hold a duly noticed Dublic hearing to consider
amendment to zonina ordinance sections 25. 18. 100 and 25.20. 110 lowering
maximum heights in the R-2 and R-3 zones.
WHEREAS, said amendments have comolied with the requirements of the "City
of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality
Act, Resolution No. 80-89". Since they were previously assessed in connection
with the Palma Village Specific Plan for which a Negative Declaration of
Environmental imoact was approved.
WHEREAS. at said Dublic hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi-
mony and arguments, if any. of all persons desiring to be heard, said city
council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend approval
of a zonina ordinance text amendment:
I
1 . The Droposed amendment is consistent with and implement recommen-
dation of the Palma Village Specific Plan.
NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED by the City Counci I of the City of Palm
Desert. as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the
considerations of the commission in this case.
2. That ZOA 85-5 is approved.
3. The City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert. California, is hereby
directed to publish this ordinance in the Palm Desert Post, a
newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the
City of Palm Desert. California, and shall be in full force and
effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.
I
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
City Council , held on this ___ day of 1985 by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
WALTER H. SNYDER, Mayor
ATTEST:
SHEILA R. GILLIGAN. City Clerk
Citv of Palm Desert, California
/dla
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1073
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONING
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATING TO HEIGHT LIMITA-
TIONS IN THE .R-2_AND\R-3 ZONES.
CASE NO:,- ZOA 85-5
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California
did on the 20th day of August hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider
amendment to zoning ordinance sections 25. 18. 100 and 25.20. 110 lowering
maximum heights in the R-2 and R-3 zones.
WHEREAS, said amendments have complied with the requirements of the "City
of Palm Desert Procedures to Implement the California Environmental Quality
Act, Resolution No. 80-89". Since they were previously assessed in connection
with the Palma Village Specific Plan for which a Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact was approved.
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testi-
mony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said planning
commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to recommend
approval of a zoning ordinance text amendment:
1 . The proposed amendment is consistent with and implement recommen-
dation of the Palma Village Specific Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Palm Desert, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the
considerations of the commission in this case.
2. That it does hereby recommend approval of ZOA 85-5, as provided In
the attached exhibit, labeled Exhibit "A".
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 20th day of August, 1985 by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: DOWNS, ERWOOD, RICHARDS, WOOD 8 CRITES
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
BUFORD CRITES, Chairman
ATTEST:
J t
4 ,
RAMON A. DIAZ, Secretary
L i
/dig
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.1073
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height. Unless the line of sight alternative is requested.
the maximum building height In any R-2 district shall be th+rty feet or two
stares wh#ehever +9 +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet for a
2itched roof, except where the property structure is adjaeent to within 120
feet of the R-1 district the building height shall be limited to 18 feet.
25 .20. 110. Unless the line of sight alternative is requested, the maximum
building height in any R-3 district shall be th+rty feet er two stores
wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet for a pitched
roof, except where the property structure is adjaeent to within 120 feet of the
R-1 district the building height shall be limited to 18 feet.
25. 18. 101 Line of Sight Alternative. With the submission of an accurate line
of sight analysis, the planning commission may approve a maximum height of 30
feet if It finds that privacy and line of sight views of adjacent properties
will not be adversely affected.
25.20. 110 Line of Sight Alternative. With the submission of an accurate line
of sight analysis, the planning commjssjon may approve a maximum height of 30
feet if it finds that privacy and line of sight views of adjacent properties
will not be adversely affected.
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 20, 1985
8. Continued Case No. ZOA 85-5 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant
Request for approval of a zoning ordinanre
amendment lowering height maximums in the R-2
and R-3 zones.
Mr. Drell indicated that the architectural commission had reviewed
the amendment and determined there were no significant problems.
The architectural commission stated that it preferred to have the
option of building up to 30 feet with the provision Of a complete -1
line of sight analysis demonstrating no sight problems.
Commissioner Richards asked if the architectural commission had any
major problems with the line of sight . Mr. Drell replied no and
indicated that this amendment just gives a guideline On which to
rely.
if
ld
vate developers
o ask
for the Commissioner30 feet dheightd maxi uim Oro
'Idilute, t
standards. Mr. Drell
replied no and explained that the commission was compelled to approve
up to 2d feet, but that any height more than that was discretionary
and that the amendment placed the burden upon the applicant.
Chairman Crites suggested the addition nr either two story or 30
feet to explain the intent of the amendment. He reminded the
commission that the city council was conrerned about the clearness
of intent. He suggested the insertion of. "Under no circumstances
is this intended to allow three story development."
Commissioner Richards felt that number of stories should be
eliminated. If line of sight allowed for more than two story it
should be allowed. He indicated that planning commission's duty was
not to determine what was inside a building, but to make judgement
on the exterior - height.
Chairman Crites indicated that he would orobably vote against the
amendment without the addendum.
Mr. Drell recalled a project that had come before the commission
that met all the reauirements except for the number of stories and
was denied. He Indicated that this amendment would allow flexibility
in unusual circumstances. He noted that the intent of the ordinance
was to protect the line of sight and privary.
3
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 20, 1985
Commissioner Erwood inquired as to if this would make every applicant
ask for the maximum 30 feet , subiect to planning commission
discretion. Mr. Drell replied no. on the nasis that the amendment
refers basically to R-2 and R-3 zones and that a line of sight would
be difficult to achieve because of the size of the lots.
Commissioner Richards explained that to achieve line of sight, 75-100
foot setbacks would be required, which would be difficult to achieve.
Commissioner Richards felt that sender some circumstances a larger
project might warrant more than one or two stories ( i .e. projects on
Cook and Fred Waring where there would be adequate setbacks for
determining line of sight, especially where abutting a golf course)
and the amendment would not prohibit a better use of land.
Commissioner Wood spoke regarding Commissioner He
that concern
about all applicants asking for maximum height. e
it
would not be economically feasible for a builder to add the extra
feet in height if it was not essential . He also spoke regarding
Chairman Crites' concern regarding height. He explained that while
most people were against three story, the height would not be higher
than maximum 30 feet. Commissioner Wood also indicated that he had
some concerns regarding the basis for determining height and
requested clarification as to whether staff was talking about the
basis of elevation at original grade, f: ! , slab, or flooring. Mr.
Dre 1 1 stated that it i measured n he roof an indicated i at d that ii t was less
'n , highest;ned grade to
of building to any point
severe. He stated that the ordinance nrohibits more than three
feet of fill located in the general plan orovisions on height.
Chairman Crites opened the public testimony and asked if anyone
wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed amendment.
MR. SANDY BAUM, 454300 Deep Canyon. asked for clarification
regarding measuring from curb and oeing changed to finished
grade by the Palma Village plan. Commissioner Downs replied
that it has been that way since the flood control regulations.
Mr. Baum expressed concern regarding wall height around
developments ( i .e. Vintage at Portola) and stated that the six
feet on top of the grade prohibits views from within.
Commissioner Richards felt that Mr. Baum expressed good observations
regarding Vintage. He thought that the original intent of the
ordinance was to protect views and that in the case of the proposed
amendment it would help eliminate grey areas for developers.
4
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 20, 1985
Mr. Baum asked what the height limit was in regard to S.P. zone
and asked that One Qliail Place oe usen as an example.
Commissioner Woon noted that there was confusion about measuring
height from the top of Curbs and suggested getting a notice out on
this. Mr. Drell indicated that height has always been measured from
finished grade.
Chairman Crites closeo the public testimony and requested further
comment or a motion.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Erwood,
approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0.
Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Erwood,
adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1073, recommending
approval of ZOA 85-5 to city council . Carried 5-0.
CHAIRMAN CRITES REOPENED DISCUSSION REGARDING ITEM #A AT THIS POINT.
Mr. Folkers indicated that the changes to the street width kept the
project within conformance with the condi - .nns.
Chairman Crites asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION to this project . There being no one, the public testimony
was closed.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards,
approving the findings as presented by st:arf. Carried 5-0.
Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded oy Commissioner Richards,
adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1074, approving PP 85-20,
subject to conditions. Carried 5-0.
Case No. CUP 85-4 - EXTENDED LEARNING TECHNIQMS, Applicant
Request for approval of a conditional use permit
and negative declaration of environmental impact
to allow construction and operation of a private
school (k through 12th grade, 528 students max. )
(preschool , 170 children max. ) In the PR-5 zone
located on 4. 75 acres on the south side of
5
o- MINUTES
i PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 20, 1985
B. Continued Case ZOA 85-5 CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant
Request for approval of a zoning ordinance
amendment lowering height maximums in the R-2
and R-3 zones.
Mr. Drell indicated that the architectural commission had reviewed
the amendment and determined there were no significant problems.
The architectural commission stated that it preferred to have the
option of building up to 30 feet with the provision of a complete
line of sight analysis demonstrating no sight problems.
Commissioner Richards asked if the architectural commission had any
major problems with the line of sight. Mr. Drell replied no and
indicated that this amendment just gives a guideline on which to
rely.
Commissioner Erwood asked if this would motivate developers to ask
for the 30 feet height maximum or dilute standards. Mr. Ore II
replied no and explained that the commission was compelled to approve
up to 24 feet, but that any height more than that was discretionary
and that the amendment placed the burden upon the applicant.
Chairman Crites suggested the addition of either two story or 30
feet to explain the intent of the amendment. He reminded the
commission that the city council was concerned about the clearness
of intent. He suggested the insertion of, "Under no circumstances
is this intended to allow three story development."
Commissioner Richards felt that number of stories should be
eliminated. If line of sight allowed for more than two story it
should be allowed. He indicated that planning commission's duty was
not to determine what was inside a building, but to make judgement
on the exterior - height.
Chairman Crites indicated that he would probably vote against the
amendment without the addendum.
Mr. Drell recalled a project that had come before the commission
that met all the requirements except for the number of stories and
was denied. He indicated that this amendment would allow flexibility
in unusual circumstances. He noted that the intent of the ordinance
was to protect the line of sight and privacy.
3
A
MINUTES
► PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 20, 1985
Commissioner Erwood inquired as to if this would make every applicant
ask for the maximum 30 feet, subject to planning commission
discretion. Mr. Drell replied no, on the basis that the amendment
refers basically to R-2 and R-3 zones and that a line of sight would
be difficult to achieve because of the size of the lots.
Commissioner Richards explained that to achieve line of sight, 75-100
foot setbacks would be required, which would be difficult to achieve.
I
Commissioner Richards felt that under some circumstances a larger
project might warrant more than one or two stories (i .e. projects on
Cook and Fred Waring where there would be adequate setbacks for
determining line of sight, especially where abutting a golf course)
and the amendment would not prohibit a better use of land.
Commissioner Wood spoke regarding Commissioner Erwood's concern
about all applicants asking for maximum height. He noted that it
would not be economically feasible for a builder to add the extra
feet in height if it was not essential . He also spoke regarding
Chairman Crites' concern regarding height. He explained that while
most people were against three story, the height would not be higher
than maximum 30 feet. Commissioner Wood also indicated that he had
some concerns regarding the basis for determining height and
requested clarification as to whether staff was talking about the
basis of elevation at original grade, fill , slab, or flooring. Mr.
Drell stated that it is measured from finished grade to highest point
of building to any point on the roof and indicated that it was less
severe. He stated that the ordinance prohibits more than three
feet of fill located in the general plan provisions on height.
Chairman Crites opened the public testimony and asked if anyone
wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposed amendment.
MR. SANDY BAUM, 45-800 Deep Canyon, asked for clarification
regarding measuring from curb and being changed to finished
grade by the Palma Village plan. Commissioner Downs replied
that it has been that way since the flood control regulations.
Mr. Baum expressed concern regarding wall height around
developments ( i .e. Vintage at Portola) and stated that the six
feet on top of the grade prohibits views from within.
Commissioner Richards felt that Mr. Baum expressed good observations
regarding Vintage. He thought that the original intent of the
ordinance was to protect views and that in the case of the proposed
amendment it would help eliminate grey areas for developers.
4
C
MINUTES
PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 20, 1985
j
i
i
Mr. Baum asked what the height limit was in regard to S.P. zone
and asked that One Quail Place be used as an example.
Commissioner Wood noted that there was confusion about measuring
height from the top of curbs and suggested getting a notice out on
this. Mr. Drell indicated that height has always been measured from
finished grade.
Chairman Crites closed the public testimony and requested further
comment or a motion.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Erwood,
approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0.
Moved by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Erwood,
adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1073, recommending
approval of ZOA 85-5 to city council . Carried 5-0.
CHAIRMAN CRITES REOPENED DISCUSSION REGARDING ITEM #A AT THIS POINT.
Mr. Fo I kers indicated that the changes to the street w i dth kept the
project within conformance with the conditions.
Chairman Crites asked if anyone present wished to speak in FAVOR or
OPPOSITION to this project. There being no one, the public testimony
was closed.
Action:
Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards,
approving the findings as presented by staff. Carried 5-0.
Moved by Commissioner Wood, seconded by Commissioner Richards,
adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1074, approving PP 85-20,
subject to conditions. Carried 5-0.
C. Case No. CUP 85-4 - EXTENDED LEARNING TECHNIQUES, Applicant
Request for approval of a conditional use permit
and negative declaration of environmental impact
to allow construction and operation of a private
school (k through 12th grade, 528 students max. )
(preschool , 170 children max. ) in the PR-5 zone
located on 4. 75 acres on the south side of
5
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25. 18. 100 Building Height. Unless the line of siaht alternative is requested,
the maximum building height in any R-2 district shall be th4rty feet or two
stor+es wh+ehever 49 4es9 - 22 feet for a flat roof structure, 24 feet for a
pitched_roof, except where the orooerta structure is adjeeent to within 120
feet of the R-I district the buildina height shall be limited to 18 feet.
25.20. 110. Unless the line of sight alternative is requested, the maximum
buildina heiaht in anv R-3 district shall be tb4rty feet or two star+es _
wh+ehever +s 4ess - 22 feet _for a flat roof structure_24 feet for a pitched
roof, exceot where the orooerty structure is edjaeent to within 120 feet of the
R- 1 district the buildina heiaht shall be limited to 18 feet.
25. I8. 101 Line of Sight Alternative. With the submission of an accurate line
of slant analysis._the olannina _commission magr_ aoorove a maximum_heiaht of 30
feet if it _finds that oriyacv and line of sight views of adjacent properties
will not be adverselvaffected_
25.20. 110 Line of Sight .Alternative__ with the submission of an accurate line
of sight analvsis. the olanning__ commissjon_nqy approve a maximum height of 30
feet If t f i nds that or i vacv__and _ 1_i ng of s i ght v i ews of adjacent prooert i es
wi I 1 not be adversely_. affected_
EXHIBIT "A"
Amend to read:
25 18. 100 Building Height. UnIgss. the line of sight alternative is requested,
the maximum building height In any R-2 district shall be th+rty feet or two
ster+es wh+ehever +s +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure, 24 feet for a
pitched roof, except where the property structure is adjaeent to within 120
feet of the R-lidistrict the building height shall be limited to 18 feet.
25.20. 110. , Unless the line of sight alternative is requested,' the maximum
building heighit--in any R=3—district shall be th+rty feet or two stor+es
wh+ehever 49 +ess - 22 feet for a flat roof structure 24 feet for a pitched
roof, except where the property structure is adjaeent to within 120 feet of the
R-1 district the building height shall be limited to 18 feet.
I 25. 18. 101 Line of Sight Alternative. With the submission of an accurate line
of sight analysis the planning commission may approve a maximum height of 30
feet if It finds that privacy and line of sight views of adjacent properties
a will not be adversely affected.
25.20. 110 Line of Sight Alternative. With the submission of an accurate line
of sight analysis the planning commission may approve a maximum height of 30
_feet if it finds that privacy and line of sight views of adjacent properties
will not be adversely affected.
r.:-•
Y