HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes No 407PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 407
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A RE-
QUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1 12,000 TO
R-2 AND RECOMMENDING A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1-
,12,000 TO R-2-7,000,-S.P. ON APPROXIMATELY 1.5
ACRES SOUTH OF PARK VIEW DRIVE, BETWEEN FAIR -
HAVEN AND SAN JUAN DRIVE. CASE NO. C/Z 10-78
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert,
California, did on October 3, 1978, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing
to consider a request by MILDA BENNETT and KENNETH BARBIER for approval
of a Change of Zone from R-1 12,000 (Single-family Residential, min.
12,000 sq. ft. lot size) to R-2 (Single-family Residential, min. 4,000
sq. ft. lot area per du) on approximately 1.5 acres south of Park View
Drive, between Fairhaven and San Juan Drive, more particularly des-
cribed as:
APN 621-332-001, 002, 003, 004, and 005
WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of
the "City of Palm Desert Environmental Quality Procedure Resolution
No. 78-32," in that the Director of Environmental Services has deter-
mined that the project will not have a significant adverse effect on
the environment and no further environmental documentation will be
required; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering
the testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desir-
ing to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts
and reasons to exist to recommend an alternative Change of Zone:
1. 1The density resulting from the alternative Change of Zone
is deemed necessary or desirably as a transitional buffer
to the adjacent existing uses.
2. The attached applicant's submittal labeled Exhibit A, hereby
pointing out tb•the Commission reasons to justify the granting
of the alternative of R-2-7,000, S.P..
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 consti-
tute the findings of the Commission in this case.
2. That the Planning Comnission does hereby deny the request for a Change
of Zone from R-1-12,000 to R-2 and recommends an alternative of R-2-7,000, S.P. to
the City Council.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm
Desert Planning Commission, held on this 3rd day of October, 1978,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: BERKEY, FLESHMAN, KRYDER, SNYDER
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: KELLY
ATTEST:
PAUL A. WILLIAMS,
Secretary
WALTER SNYISER V e-Chairman
/ks
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 407
Exhibit A
Page 1
APPLICANT'S BASIS FOR REQUEST FOR ZONE CHANGE
To: Palm Desert Planning Commission
Case No.: C/Z 10-78
Applicant: MILDA P. BENNETT AND KENNETH BARBIER
Date: October 3, 1978
The applicant for the proposed change of zone strongly asserts
that the justification for the staff recommendation for denial
of the proposed change of zone is without substantial merit.
Applicant therefore requests that the Planning Commission not
adopt the staff recommendation and permit the zone change to
occur.
I. The land use which would result from the proposed change
of zone would be more compatable with proposed immediately
adjacent uses than the present zoning.
Bordering on one side of the applicant's property is a
large, undeveloped tract of land. The owners of that parcel
of land are in the process of planning a condominium project
which will necessarily result in a use of a higher density
than that of a single-family dwelling. The applicant's
property, if changed to allow for a development of tri-plexes,
would act as a buffer zone between that proposed condominium
development and the single-family units which exist and are
adjacent to applicant's property.
Other higher density uses are being made of other available
land immediately surrounding applicant's property. This
includes construction of other large condominium projects,
as well as a television studio. To the extent that appli-
cant's property and the surrounding property is affected
by these uses and by the increased traffic flow of border-
ing streets, it is clear that the best use of applicant's
property would be that of multiple -family dwellings.
A vacant piece of property which would view applicant's
property on Fairhaven Street would also benefit by appli-
cant's zone change. The owner of that property, Mr. Henry
R. Sottile, has stated that he is in favor of the zone
change and believes that the existing R-1-12,000 zoning
is an unrealistic zone in view of the developments which
are taking place on the surrounding properties. A copy
of the letter from Mr. Sottile to the City of Palm Desert
is attached as Exhibit 1.
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 407
Exhibit A
Page 2
II. Immediately adjacent properties, including single-family
dwellings, would also benefit by the proposed change of
zone.
The proposed change of zone would allow tri-plex units
to be built on five pieces of property. Only rear
walls of single-family dwelling units are abutting this
property and the proposed units would therefore not be
an interference with the view of the existing single-
family units. Further, the entrances to the tri-plexes
would be on Fairhaven Avenue, and not on any streets
upon which single-family dwelling units can or will be
built.
Further, the tri-plexes would act as a buffer -zone between
the single-family units and the high -density condominium
and commercial uses planned and developed in the surround-
ing area.
III. The proposed development would provide for additional housing
for students at College of the Desert.
In contradiction to the assertions of the staff,
the housing officials at College of the Desert have
stated that there is a great need for additional housing
for students which is not met by existing structures. They
have stated to applicant's attorneys that they favor pro-
posals which would provide for additional housing for
college students.
Two-story apartment structures already border single-
family lots in the neighborhood. Applicant's property,
which is on the opposite side of the neighborhood, would
provide a lower -density use of the existing land than
these units, and yet still provide additional housing
for college students.
IV. There is no major problem with water supply or sewer
services.
The applicant has been informed that there is no major
problem with water supply or with sewer services in the
area. Applicant will cooperate with the appropriate
agencies to provide adequate water supply and sewer
services to the project, and in a manner so that neigh-
boring single-family homes would not be adversely affected.
V. The original covenants, conditions and restrictions of
the subdividers permit multi -family dwelling units.
-2-
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 407
Exhibit A
Page 3
Applicant's proposal is well within the bounds of the
proposed subdivider's uses for the property. The
original covenants, conditions and restrictions provided
that multi -unit dwellings would be proper with the sub-
division. A copy of the CC&R's is attached as Exhibit 2.
Further, applicant's parcels are larger in size than
the neighboring single-family unit parcels. If a use
were to be made of the property, other than single-
family homes, it would appear that applicant's parcels
would be the logical site for such use.
VI. The Environmental Impact Report of September 11, 1978
states that there is no significant adverse effect on
the environment.
VII. The proposed change would not require a change in the
Palm Desert General Plan.
Applicant's proposed zone change does not require an
amendment to the General Plan in order for implementation.
Applicant's property exists in an area which includes
medium and high -density uses. While applicant's property
would be of a higher -density use than a single-family
home, it is well within a proper and appropriate use for
the neighborhood and surrounding areas.
Respectfully submitted,
McINTOSH, ZUNDEL & MORROW
A Professional Lqw Corporation
By:
Michael J. Cos4tove
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 407
City of Palm Desert
Exhibit A
Page 4
Mr. and Mrs. Henry R. Sottile
4304 Babcock Avenue, Apt. 101
Studio City, CA 91604
RE: MILDA P. BENNETT REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF ZONE TO
R-2-4000, CASE NO. C/Z 10-78
Gentlemen:
My wife and I own Lot 90 fronting on Park View and Fairhaven
Streets, which is across the street from the five lots for which
Mrs. Bennett is requesting a zone change. I favor the zone change
because R-1-12000 is an unrealistic zone in view of the develop-
ments which are taking place on surrounding properties.
HRS:sp
Very truly yours,
HENRY R. SOTTILE
Exhibit 1
Exhibit A
Page 5
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 407
AOREEMENT OF AMENDMENT OF DECLARATION
OF
• ESTABLISHMENT OP CONDITIONS AND {ESTRICTIOtS
�M. ALL MRN BY THESE PRESENTS:
THAT WHEREAS, tr`e undersigned are tr,c own,::
•eventy-five (75%) percent In area of Palm Deli E;itatee. e e'rc
- OP file in Book 21, Page So, of Map - Riversi,ie C ,,,nty
WHEREAS, there n.ae heretofore ten re cr^_ p ..._ at:o:: of
lishment of Condition? and P,eetri t'nr
Declaration was recorded dlovember 194 n;;.,'
`_ te�� -2 of Official
Records, ?age 229, et ee'rr�' Records of R'v
rsi.ie Co'
WHEREAS, there nave neretcfor ern re ,_, A ,,
tion of,Estatliehment of Cor l „ot
an.i R€-etri�, r:e-
Tract, which Atnendmer.te were f, c;r., Y, :r1 e
reSpeetively, in Book 824, Page t7
et seq., Official Recorde,Rlversicle „ °
WHEREAS, the undere1Rne;;i no toetro to tunr:1
teta311ehment of Cornaitione anz Rr:strirtlo;:r•
NOW, THEREFORE, the unierslgne;i re;: agrr c
merits to said Declaration of ErtatlIehrt nt of Coniltior:d an Rect_•,.
tions and certify and declare that eaia Declaration ci' Estarl'.er,rnent of
Conditions and Reetrictions covering said Tract he and same :
amended to read as follow?:
FIRST:
(a) Lots 1 tc 34 inclusive, 47 to 54 Inclusive and 85 to 90 inclu2ive,
76 to 78 tncluslve. 55. 72 and 84.
ri, O
..9
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO.
oha1. ue_
apa:•t
e,e. Ct
4
76 to 78 in iustve,
Liquor,. . e . . .
dwel;.•.c
(1• ) A:. 1 •
Inc
or rtru.,tur, ...:.:
or on any p'.. t
be wei for any p,:r}.c..n
private d,;ei]1r.r er, a
private g . nve u...y,
building rite
, .n':t Ph,
tl.at of
Exhibit A
Page 6
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 407
Exhibit A
Page 7
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 407
, ' •
e y ;
t
Exhibit A
Page 8
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 407
4•0
Each and all of the foregoing c...Jelliatons oni restni•:ti,e,
terminate on the let day of January,j1iAt t,m• tim- ,r teemi
nation, covenants enail be automatically extenobd fbr
of ten (IC)) year unless by vote uf a majority
lotIt le agreed to change eaH covenants in whole or 1pat,
. PROVIDED that lb:t. parties H: rebi or 0n7.- bf nem,
or assigns, shall vioate o!, 7ttor4)1 to T•
herein, it shall 1.,c, lawful for any other pere, ur per21
real Property a 1 tua teci ,t Vr, u,r,rn-01 ,,i•
any proceedingat law or lrequity against
lating or attempting to vlom Jny rac
him or them from so doin.7 on tC rece
c,e
violation.
PROVIDED, FURTHER, invall,..ailon of o on•. cc " . •
mentor court order snail in NO W1C. „ •
which shall remain In full force and effect.
SEVENTH;
At any time an amendment, cbafli:,
trictions and covenants re, r,rtb lb td,1; :•
mutual written agreement between t hthen dwrIer,, uf :ord
mortgagees under mortgagee %Ili trutec!- un,n oe.sn un tnc)
less than eeventy-five (75) perec!-,t in area of c%fi pen y,
executed and placed of record In effic, of ,
Riverside County, Calirornia.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the ,,aid I71.7t.1 T !I;p„, h!11,0
thie 7'16 day of peopsMq,_____, 1961.
5.
WALKE, aoltART ct).
-444difee-
Exhibit A
Page 9