HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 03-075RESOLUTION NO. 03-75
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN APPEAL AND
REVERSING PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF CUP 02-14 TO
ALLOW A SECOND UNIT AT 44-574 PORTOLA AVENUE
CASE NO. CUP 02-14
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 10th
and 24th days of April, 2003, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an appeal by
Douglass and Kathleen Kopp and a call-up by Palm Desert City Council Member
Buford Crites regarding Planning Commission approval of CUP 02-14 to allow an
attached 810 square foot second unit 44-574 Portola Avenue; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the
following facts and reasons to justify approving the appeal and reversing the
Planning Commission's approval of CUP 02-14:
1. The second unit fails to comply with City ordinances:
a. No covered parking is proposed to replace the existing garage that
will be converted into living space for the proposed second unit, in violation of
Section 25.58.300;
b. The proposed conversion of the 420 sq. ft. garage constitutes an
increase of more than 10% in the existing living area (Section 25.21.040[C]);
c. The proposed second unit and two -car carport results in a 40.21% lot
coverage, which exceeds R-1 zone's base maximum lot coverage of 35%
(Section 25.16.050[G]). Architectural Review Commission has not approved
an exception to that limitation.
d. The proposed second unit is not incorporated into the existing living
unit (Section 25.21.040[B]) (connection by trellis does not constitute
incorporation"); and
e. The proposed carport is a "garage -like" structure, not a "gazebo -like"
structure eligible for set -back reduction under Section 25.56.280.
Consequently, the carport does not comply with set -back requirements of
Section 25.16.050.
RMPUB\RWH\216704
RESOLUTION NO. 03-75
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED 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 City Council in this case.
2. That the appeal of the Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use
Permit 02-14 is hereby affirmed and the Conditional Use Permit is denied
without prejudice for an 810 square foot attached second unit and a
detached two -car carport.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert
City Council, held on this 22nd day of May, 2003, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: CRITES, FERGUSON, KELLY, SPIEGEL, and BENSON
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ATTEST:
RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA
N M. BENSON, MAYOR
2