HomeMy WebLinkAboutC. Case No. ZOA 09-253 - CITY OF PALM DESERT, Applicant CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
REQUEST: Recommendation to the City Council to approve a clarification to
Palm Desert Municipal Code Chapter 25.112, Exceptions Based on
Unconstitutional Takings.
SUBMITTED BY: Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development
APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert
CASE NO: ZOA 09-253
DATE: June 16, 2009
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Approval of the staff recommendation will send to the City Council a
recommendation to add clarifying language to Chapter 25.112 of the existing
municipal code. This chapter governs the granting of exceptions when a
property owner asserts that a strict application of the code would result in taking
their property without just compensation.
II. BACKGROUND:
In 2005, the City Council enacted Ordinance 1104, which is intended to protect a
property owner's rights against a governmental "taking" of their property.
Chapter 25.112, Exceptions Based on Unconstitutional Takings, ensures that a
property owner can receive an exception from the zoning ordinance if a strict
application of the ordinance would remove all economic value from the property.
The language of the chapter spells out the process by which such an exception
would be granted. To date, no application for such an exception has been fully
processed, or even advanced to the stage wherein a public hearing is held
before the Planning Commission.
An application for two exceptions (one for size restrictions and one for the
prohibition against building on hillside ridgelines) was recently submitted and is
now being studied by staff.
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 09-253
June 16, 2009
Page 2 of 3
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed project seeks to clarify language in the existing municipal code. As
such, the proposed project would add the following sentence to Section
25.112.020 of the municipal code:
E. The Planning Commission, upon granting an exception pursuant to
this section, may limit the scope of the exception or impose conditions to
achieve to the extent reasonably feasible the objectives of the standard or
standards to which an exception is being granted, but without constituting a
taking of property without just compensation.
IV. ANALYSIS:
The City has received and is now processing an application for exemptions from
the size restrictions and the prohibition against building on a ridgeline. This
application is being evaluated and processed consistent with the requirements of
Chapter 25.112 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. The chapter in question is
now being applied for the first time since its adoption in 2005. While reviewing
the application described above, the City Attorney has recommended that a
clarification be made to Chapter 25.112 to explicitly describe the ability of the
Planning Commission to condition any exemptions that they approve. This
ability is implicit in the current code, but the recommended language could ward
off potential uncertainties in future applications.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
This project is an administrative activity of a governmental body and is not a
physical change to the environment and, therefore, is exempt from CEQA. The
Director of Community Development has determined that no further
environmental review is necessary.
VI. RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt the findings and adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. , recommending to City Council approval of
Case No. ZOA 09-253.
G:\Planning\Tonya Monroe\word tiles\PC Staff Reports VOA 09-253 Unconstitutional Takings.doc
Staff Report
Case No. ZOA 09-253
June 16, 2009
Page 3 of 3
VII. ATTACHMENTS:
A. Draft Resolution
B. Legal Notice
C. Memo dated June 1, 2009 from City Attorney David J. Erwin to Lauri Aylaian
D. Section 25.112 Exceptions Based on Unconstitutional Takings
Submitted by:
Lauri Aylaian
Director of Community Development
Approv I:
mer Croy
ACM for Devel ent Services
G:\Planning\Tonya Monroe\word files\PC Staff Reports\ZOA 09-253 Unconstitutional Takings.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE MODIFICATION CLARIFYING
LANGUAGE IN SECTION 25.112, EXCEPTIONS BASED ON
UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAKINGS.
CASE NO. ZOA 09-253
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did
on the 16th day of June, 2009, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request
by the CITY OF PALM DESERT for approval of the above noted; 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. 06-78, the Director of Community Development has determined that the
proposed clarification of the Zoning Ordinance is not a project as defined under CEQA
and no further environmental review is necessary, 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 recommending
approval of said request to the City Council:
1. That the Planning Commission, in order to mitigate potential
environmental impacts, may want to place conditions on a project when
granting of an exception based upon unconstitutional taking; and
2. Though the power to condition any approval is inherent in the various
approval processes in the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 25.112 of the Palm
Desert Municipal Code does not explicitly permit the Planning
Commission to place such conditions; and
3. That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not negatively
impact the public health, safety or general welfare.
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 Planning Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
approval of Case No. ZOA 09-253.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
Planning Commission, held on this 16st day of June, 2009, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
VAN G. TANNER, Chairperson
ATTEST:
LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary
Palm Desert Planning Commission
G:\Planning\Tonya Monroe\word files\PC Resolutions\ZOA 09-253.doc
2
CITY Of Phil]] DESERT
•
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
II LI
``' TEL:760 346-0611
�t �r/", FAX:760 341-7098
...:,
'r•i�`-- info@palm-desert.org
CITY OF PALM DESERT
LEGAL NOTICE
CASE NO. ZOA 09-253
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
TO CHAPTER 25.112 EXCEPTIONS BASED ON UNCONSTITUTIONAL
TAKINGS ADDING SECTION 25.112.020 E. STATING:
"THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UPON GRANTING AN EXCEPTION
PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, MAY IMPOSE CONDITIONS TO
ACHIEVE TO THE EXTENT REASONABLY FEASIBLE THE
OBJECTIVES OF THE STANDARD OR STANDARDS TO WHICH AN
EXCEPTION IS BEING GRANTED, BUT WITHOUT CONSTITUTING A
TAKING OF PROPERTY WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION."
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The purpose of Palm Desert Municipal Code Section 25.112 is to ensure that the
application of the standards contained in Title 25 Zoning, including the environmental
review and mitigation process required by the California Environmental Quality Act as
implemented by Chapter 25.88 (Environmental Impact Reports), to parcels within the
city do not create a taking of private property prohibited by federal or state
Constitutions.
Section 25.112.020 outlines the requirements and procedure for the application and
hearing process. The City of Palm Desert Community Development Department is
proposing a Zoning Ordinance Amendment that will add a subsection E to Section
25.112.020 stating that"The Planning Commission, upon granting an exception pursuant
to this section, may impose conditions to achieve to the extent reasonably feasible the
objectives of the standard or standards to which an exception is being granted, but
without constituting a taking of property without just compensation."
PROJECT LOCATION: City wide, City of Palm Desert
PUBLIC HEARING:
SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 16, 2009 at 6:00 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 at, or prior to,the public hearing.
PUBLISH: Desert Sun Lauri Aylaian, Secretary
June 6, 2009 Palm Desert Planning Commission
MEMORANDUM
To: Lauri Aylaian, Director of CLIENT-MATTER No.: 72500.00788
Community Development
FROM: David J. Erwin, City Attorney
DATE: June 1, 2009
RE: Amendment of Chapter 25.112 (Exceptions Based on Unconstitutional
Takings)
As you know, pursuant to chapter 25, 1,122 property owners may apply to the Planning
Commission for an exception to the standards of Title 25 (Zoning) if they believe that the application
of those standards would result in an unconstitutional taking of their property. Mr. Nelson has recently
applied pursuant to that chapter for an exception to the prohibition of ridgeline development and pad
and building size restrictions.
If the Planning Commission were to grant the requested exceptions, it would likely want to
place conditions on the approval that would effectuate the purpose of the exempted standards to the
extent possible without resulting in a taking. In my opinion, the ability to condition approval is
implicit in all approvals by the Planning Commission. However, Chapter 25.112 is silent on that issue.
Given the likely controversial nature of exception requests, I believe that it would be better to amend
Chapter 25.112 to make explicit the Planning Commission's ability to impose conditions on the
approval.
Consequently, I request that staff initiate a zoning amendment to amend Section 25.112.020 by
adding:
"E. The planning commission, upon granting an exception pursuant to this section, may
impose conditions to achieve to the extent reasonably feasible the objectives of the standard or
standards to which an exception is being granted, but without constituting a taking of property without
just compensation. "
Robert W. Hargreaves, Deputy City Attorney
BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
RWH:dm
RM PU B\RH ARGR EA V ES\307827.1
0 25.112.010
Chapter 25.112 h. Reduced profits if the exception is not granted,
including the assumptions underlying the estimates.
EXCEPTIONS BASED ON UNCONSTITUTIONAL 3. Additional Information. Such additional informa-
TAKINGS. tion as the city may request in order to take action on the
request.The applicant shall cooperate with city requests for
Sections: financial information regarding the property.Confidential
0 25.112.010 Purpose. business information provided by an applicant to the city
25.112.020 Application and hearing. shall remain confidential consistent with the requirements
of the Public Records Act(Government Code Section 6250
PI 25.112.010 Purpose. et seq.).
The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that the applica- 4. Consultants and Experts. The name, address and
tion of the standards contained in Title 25 Zoning, includ- occupation of each consultant and expert providing infor-
ing the environmental review and mitigation process re- mation or in any way assisting in the preparation of the
I quired by the California Environmental Quality Act as im- application.
plemented by Chapter 25.88 (Environmental Impact Re- C. In acting upon an application, the planning corn-
ports),to parcels within the city do not create a taking of mission shall consider, among other matters, each of the
iiprivate property prohibited by federal or state Constitu- following:
tions.(Ord. 1104§ 1 (part),2005) 1. Present use of the property and duration of that use,
including:
25.112.020 Application and hearing. a. Each general plan designation and zoning classifi-
A. Any applicant that contends that the application of cation applied to the property,and
the standards of Title 25, including the environmental re- b. Each use to which the property was put;
view and mitigation process required by the California En- 2. Fair market value of the property before the restric-
I vironmental Quality Act as implemented by Chapter 25.88 tion that is the subject of the exception application im-
(Environmental Impact Reports),will result in a taking of posed;
property without just compensation in violation of the fed- 3. Alternate uses that are available for the property;
eral or state Constitutions may apply for an exception to and
IIIIIthese standards pursuant to this section. 4. The fair market value of the property if the excep-
B. The applicant shall provide information that sets tion is denied.
forth the basis upon which the applicant believes that the D. The planning commission shall make its decision
I exception is necessary to provide the property with eco-
nomically based on the evidence presented to it.The decision shall be
viable use. This information shall include each in writing with specific findings on the economic impact of
of the following: the application of the restriction for which the exception is
111 1. Basis for Application. requested.(Ord. 1104§ 1 (part),2005)
a. Date of acquisition of the property;
b. Purchase price of the property;and
II c. An explanation of how the exception is necessary
to provide the property with an economically viable use.
2. Economic Data.
a. Current market value of the property;
II b. Dates and amounts of invested capital following
acquisition of the property;
c. Description and amount of each assessment im-
IIIposed upon the property for public improvements;
d. Existing activities for the property;
e. Planned activities for the property, including the
timing for development;
f. Market value claimed if the exception is denied;
g. Portion of the property retaining economic use if
the exception is not granted;and
I
484-7 (Palm Desert Supp.No.I I,8-07)
I
I