Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-05-23 BBA Regular Meeting Agenda Packet BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF PALM DESERT MEETING AGENDA Thursday, May 23, 2024 8:00 a.m. Administrative Conference Room, City Hall 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 This meeting will be conducted in person. Those wishing to address the Board may provide oral comments at the meeting. Written public comment may be submitted to cityclerk@palmdesert.gov. E-mails received by 4:00 p.m. the day prior to the meeting will be distributed to the Board. Any correspondence received during or after the meeting will be distributed to the Board as soon as practicable and retained for the official record. Emails will not be read aloud except as an ADA accommodation. Pages 1.CALL TO ORDER 2.ROLL CALL 3.NOMINATION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR RECOMMENDATION: Nominate and confirm the Building Board of Appeals Chair and Vice Chair. 3.a APPOINTMENT OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON 5 RECOMMENDATION: Appoint a member of the Building Board of Appeals to serve as the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. 4.NONAGENDA PUBLIC COMMENTS This time has been set aside for the public to address the Building Board of Appeals on issues that are not on the agenda for up to three minutes. Because the Brown Act does not allow the Building Board of Appeals to act on items not listed on the agenda, members may briefly respond or refer the matter to staff for a report and recommendation at a future meeting. 5.APPEAL HEARING The public may comment on individual Appeal Hearing Items within the three- minute time limit. The Applicant or Appellant will be provided up to five minutes to make their presentation. Speakers may utilize one of the options listed on this agenda. 5.a APPEAL OF THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL’S APPLICATION OF THE 2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE, SECTION R310.1 (EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE) 7 RECOMMENDATION: Uphold and confirm the Chief Building Official’s determination that: The 2022 California Residential Code, Section R310.1 (Emergency Escape and Rescue), was applied correctly. 1. The room approved as a den in the original floor plan (circa 1979) cannot be counted as a bedroom because it neither meets the current requirements established by this section nor the original 1973 Uniform Building Code - Sections 1404 and Chapter 33 (1976 UBC is used as closest reference). 2. The recommendation is the single-family residence at 239 Serena Drive cannot use the room labeled as a Den for sleeping purposes as it lacks the required code-compliant emergency egress for escape and rescue. The residence shall continue to be a 2- bedroom residence with a Den as demonstrated by the original building permit. 3. 6.ADJOURNMENT The next Regular Meeting will be held on MONTH/DATE/TIME. Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 2 7.PUBLIC NOTICES Agenda Related Materials: Pursuant to Government Code §54957.5(b)(2) the designated office for inspection of records in connection with this meeting is the Office of the City Clerk, Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert. Staff reports for all agenda items considered in open session, and documents provided to a majority of the legislative bodies are available for public inspection at City Hall and on the City’s website at www.palmdesert.gov. Americans with Disabilities Act: It is the intention of the City of Palm Desert to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all respects. If, as an attendee or a participant at this meeting, or in meetings on a regular basis, you will need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, the City will attempt to accommodate you in every reasonable manner. Please contact the Office of the City Clerk, (760) 346-0611, at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to inform us of your needs and to determine if accommodation is feasible. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda for the Building Board of Appeals was posted on the City Hall bulletin board and City website not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting. /S/ Niamh M. Ortega, CMC Assistant City Clerk Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 3 4 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date Page 1 of 1 CITY OF PALM DESERT BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: May 23, 2024 PREPARED BY: Anthony J. Mejia, City Clerk REQUEST: APPOINTMENT OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON RECOMMENDATION: Appoint a member of the Building Board of Appeals to serve as the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The Building Board of Appeals has not met in over 10 years due to the lack of any appeals. As such, it is necessary to appoint a member of the Board to serve the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. The Chairperson is the Presiding Officer and shall preserve order and decorum at all meetings of the Board, announce the Board’s decision, and decide questions of order. The Chairperson should facilitate the involvement of all members and allow for adequate public participation. In addition, the Chairperson shall confine members in debate on the question under discussion and ensure that members refrain from commenting on or interrupting speakers during public comment. In the absence of the Chairperson, the Vice Chairperson shall act as the Presiding Officer. Given that the Board has not met in many years, it is recommended that the Board consider appointing a Member who also serves on the Planning Commission or Architectural Review Commission due to their experience with public hearing procedures and facilitating public meetings. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. 5 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 6 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date Page 1 of 4 CITY OF PALM DESERT BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: May 23, 2024 PREPARED BY: Jason K. Finley, Chief Building Official REQUEST: APPEAL OF THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL’S APPLICATION OF THE 2022 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE, SECTION R310.1 (EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE) RECOMMENDATION: Uphold and confirm the Chief Building Official’s determination that : 1. The 2022 California Residential Code, Section R310.1 (Emergency Escape and Rescue), was applied correctly. 2. The room approved as a den in the original floor plan (circa 1979) cannot be counted as a bedroom because it neither meets the current requirements established by this section nor the original 1973 Uniform Building Code - Sections 1404 and Chapter 33 (1976 UBC is used as closest reference). 3. The recommendation is the single-family residence at 239 Serena Drive cannot use the room labeled as a Den for sleeping purposes as it lacks the required code -compliant emergency egress for escape and rescue. The residence shall continue to be a 2 -bedroom residence with a Den as demonstrated by the original building permit. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: APPLICANT’S INITIAL REQUEST On February 27, 2024, the Chief Building Official (“CBO”) sent an email (Attachment 1) to Mrs. Carrie Kropfl (“Owner”) clarifying what defines a bedroom, the requirements of a sleeping room (emergency egress and rescue) and altering the living areas into bedrooms. The merits of the CBO’s response identified the adopted 2022 California Residential Code - Section R310.1 for the requirements of a sleeping room. Attached to the email: 1. The original permitted floor plan demonstrates the room labeled as a Den (Attachment 2). 2. An International Conference of Building Officials (“ICBO”) interpretation regarding the egress of atriums (Attachment 3). 3. A document from the developer (Sunrise Company) admonishing the use of the Den as a bedroom, (Attachment 4). On March 25, 2024, a letter of determination (Attachment 5) from the Director of Development Services was provided, outlining the uses of the bedrooms, and living areas as it relates to the Short-Term Rental Program (“STR”). 7 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date City of Palm Desert – Building Board of Appeals May 23, 2024 Page 2 of 4 SHORT-TERM RENTAL (STR) PERMIT HISTORY In November 2021, the Owner purchased a condominium unit at 239 Serna Drive in Palm Desert (“Property”). In January 2022, the Owner applied for and was issued a STR Permit for a three- bedroom unit. In 2023, the Owner renewed their STR Permit for a three-bedroom unit. Beginning in July 2023 the Development Services Department created internal procedures with staff to ensure that the regulations adopted by the City Council were being enforced when applications were submitted, including renewals of STR permits. On January 24, 2024, the Owner applied to renew their permit for a 3-bedroom STR unit. Consistent with new procedures, staff confirmed the number of bedrooms through the Riverside County Assessor and separate property details available to staff from RealQuest and Lawyers Title which showed a 2-bedroom unit for this Property. Staff also reviewed building permit records and there were no building permits for a bedroom addition. On February 1, 2024, the Owner revised their renewal request for a 2 -bedroom STR unit, and staff approved and issued a renewal of STR Permit No. STR2022 -0020. It should also be noted that the Riverside County Assessor (“Assessor”) records for the Property showed the unit as having 2-bedrooms and a den/family room when the renewal application was reviewed. However, on March 4, 2023, at the owner's request, the Assessor changed the property record to reflect 3 bedrooms and with no den/family. These facts are contrary to the Appellant's statement that “Nothing has changed during the decades where the Property was classified as a three-bedroom condo. The city should continue to recognize the Property as a three-bedroom condo and allow the Kropfl's to market and rent it as a three-bedroom.” LETTER OF APPEAL On April 4, 2024, an appeal was filed (Attachment 6) by Mr. Shaun Murphy, of Slovak Brown Empey Murphy & Pinkney LLP (“Appellant”), on behalf of the Owner for the following: 1. Whether the Kropfl's may continue to use the third bedroom (den) for short -term rentals. 2. Whether the Kropfl's may use their code-compliant living room as an additional sleeping room to accommodate two more guests. The matter of Issue No. 2 has been resolved via a public hearing before the City Council on May 9, 2024. The Council upheld the recommendation of the Director of Development Services that a living room was not and could not be used as a bedroom. CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL’S RESPONSE TO APPEAL LETTER – ISSUE NO. 1 The Appellant’s basis for the appeal of the Building Official's determination to apply life and safety standards of the California Residential Code - Section R310.1 is centered on the fact that the original STR permit was issued by staff without verifying the number of bedrooms and now there could be a loss of revenue. 8 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date City of Palm Desert – Building Board of Appeals May 23, 2024 Page 3 of 4 Additionally, the Appellant argues that the Monterey C ountry Club used marketing materials for the property indicating that this floor plan is a 3-bedroom unit (Attachment 7). As a certified building official for the City of Palm Desert, I have the responsibility to enforce the purpose and provisions of this code. The purpose of the California Residential Code, Section R101.3, is to establish minimum requirements to provide a reasonable level of safety, health , and general welfare through affordability, structural strength, means of egress, stability, sanitation, light and ventilation, energy conservation and safety to life and property from fire and other hazards and to provide a reasonable level of safety to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. As part of that duty, I must rely on building plans that were approved based on the Building Code in effect at the time of construction and not on plans that were created to market the sale of the unit or based on the perception of an owner. As it relates to this appeal, the room in question did not meet the life safety requirements in the uniform building code that was in place in 1979 and that is why the room was classified as a “den.” Under the current 2022 California Residential Code (Section R310.1) the room does not meet the life safety requirements for escape and rescue. While the Building Official has the authority to make interpretations or accept alternative methods, this was not the case in the determination made regarding the subject room. The 2022 California Residential Code, Section R310.1 (Attachment 8) requires: “Every sleeping room shall have not less than one operable emergency escape and rescue opening. Where basements conta in one or more sleeping rooms, an emergency escape and rescue opening shall be required in each sleeping room. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall open directly into a public way.” The 2022 California Residential Code, Section 202 defines a Public Way: “Any street, alley or other parcel of land open to the outside air leading to a public street, that has been deeded, dedicated or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for public use and that has a clear width and height of not less than 10 feet (3048 mm).” As you can see in the approved plans provided in Attachment 2, this room does not meet the minimum code requirements for exits and egress and the atrium design is to comply with light and ventilation requirements for a habitable room. 9 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date City of Palm Desert – Building Board of Appeals May 23, 2024 Page 4 of 4 CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION The Building Official conclusion is based on: 1. The original permitted construction plans approved by the City of Palm Desert. 2. The minimum code requirements from the Uniform Building Codes (Attachment 9) 3. The clarifying documentation of ICBO and the Sunrise Company, 4. The current adopted 2022 California Residential Code minimum code -complaint requirements for a sleeping room and escape and rescue, The recommendation is the single-family residence at 239 Serena Drive cannot use the room labeled as a Den for sleeping purposes as it lacks the required code-compliant emergency egress for escape and rescue. The residence shall continue to be a 2-bedroom residence with a Den as demonstrated by the original building permit. LEGAL REVIEW: This report has been reviewed by the City Attorney’s office. ATTACHMENTS: 1. CBO Email - Bedroom Determination from J. Finley (February 27, 2024) 2. Approved Original Monterey Country Club 300 Floor Plan 3. ICBO Atrium Emergency Egress Determination (1979) 4. Letter from Sunrise Company (1981) 5. Director’s Decision Email (March 5, 2024) 6. Appeal of Determination submitted by S. Murphy, Esq. (April 4, 2024) 7. Original Monterey Country Club Sales Floor Plan 8. 2022 California Residential Code – Chapter 3 (Section 310.1) 9. 1976 Uniform Building Code – Exits 10. Draft Resolution Denying the Appeal 11. Draft Resolution Approving the Appeal 10 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date From:Jason Finley To:Carrie Kropfl; Lorena Ritchey Subject:RE: Short-Term Rental Permit 239 Serena Dr, Palm Desert - Bedroom Definition STR2022-0020 Date:Tuesday, February 27, 2024 4:22:00 PM Attachments:Montery CC - Plan 300 Floor Plan.jpg Montery CC - Den Information (1981).pdf Montery CC - Atrium Emergency Egress Letter (1979).tif image001.png image002.png Thank you for your email and information. I apologize for the delay; we are working through correspondence and meetings. I hope this email will suffice and put into writing the Building and Safety Division’s position rather than a phone call. First, let me address a common question in the Short-Term Rental program “Why the change in my permit?” The answer is that when this program was created, it was presumed to address all the requirements. As the program was evaluated, staff observed the need to address and review what applicants were designating as bedrooms. This evaluation came from discovering that many applicants were using areas that were either unpermitted or not qualified to be used as bedrooms (sleeping rooms). As with any program, a shift occurred to examine what areas were used, resulting in some permits being revoked or modified. The red-outlined questions: 1. ATTACHED ARE THE TWO FLOOR PLANS THAT MONTEREY CC HOA PROVIDED ME WHEN I ASKED FOR THE ORIGINAL FLOOR PLANS FOR MY UNIT. BASED ON THESE FLOOR PLANS, MY UNIT IS WHAT THEY CALL THE "ALAHAMBRA PLAN" WHICH WAS BUILT AS A THREE BEDROOM (DUE TO THE CLOSET IN THE 3RD BEDROOM, LOCATION OF THE LINEN CLOSET IN THE HALL AND LOCATION OF THE CLOSET IN THE 2ND BEDROOM). NOTHING HAS BEEN CHANGED IN OUR CONDO. IT MATCHES THE ALAHAMBRA FLOOR PLAN EXACTLY. The information you have attached is not the construction plans but marketing materials used by the Monterey Country Club HOA. I’ve attached an approved City permitted floor plan to your unit from our archives that labeled this room as a den. Also attached is a letter between the developer and our former Chief Building Official (1981) about the concern about using the den as a bedroom. Similarly, a correspondence inquiry was made by an outside agency building official to support this area as a den. The California Building Codes still require this level of emergency egress and rescue, and we are not applying new standards to the Short-Term Rental Program. 2. WHEN I LOOK UP THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE DEFINITION OF A "HABITABLE ROOM" IT STATES: "HABITABLE ROOMS USED FOR SLEEPING SHALL HAVE NATURAL LIGHT BY MEANS OF AT LEAST ONE EXTERIOR WINDOW THAT, IF IT CAN BE OPENED, HAS SCREENING WITH A TIGHT FITTING FRAME. NATURAL VENTILATION SHALL BE PROVIDED BY EXTERIOR OPENINGS THAT CAN BE OPENED, OR IN LIEU OF EXTERIOR OPENINGS A MECHANICAL VENTILATING SYSTEM. " The California Building and the California Residential Code define habitable spaces as “A 11 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date space in a building for living, sleeping, eating, or cooking. Bathrooms, toilet rooms, closets, halls, storage or utility spaces, and similar areas are not considered habitable spaces. Light and ventilation are required for these spaces and can be achieved in several ways. 3. IN ADDITION A "HABITABLE ROOM" IS DEFINED AS "A SPACE FOR LIVING, SLEEPING, EATING OR COOKING" The code’s intent in defining rooms is to apply certain code requirements to specific spaces. When a room is labeled for use as a sleeping room, the emergency egress and rescue aspect of the code is applied. If a room is labeled as a den, office, theater, or media room, these egress and rescue standards are not required. 4. BASED ON THIS CODE, WE CAN SLEEP PEOPLE IN HABITABLE ROOMS. OUR LIVING ROOM AND THIS 3RD BEDROOM ARE HABITABLE ROOMS. SO, IF WE CALL OUR THIRD BEDROOM A "DEN, OFFICE, MEDIA ROOM OR BONUS ROOM" THEN WE CAN SLEEP PEOPLE IN IT AND WE CAN SLEEP PEOPLE IN THE LIVING ROOM. WHICH MEANS OUR CONDO CAN SLEEP 8 PEOPLE (PER YOUR RULE OF 2 PEOPLE PER ROOM). The answer is you cannot sleep people in a habitable room alone. A habitable room used for sleeping purposes requires emergency egress and rescue openings. Where people fall asleep in their own homes is an uncontrollable occurrence. As Chief Building Official, I must apply the code as it states, and deviating from this could put the occupants in jeopardy and the City liable. As I stated at our counter, a front room or living room meets the building code definition of a habitable space. If emergency egress and rescue requirements are achieved, the building code is silent on whether you can sleep there or not. I did say this would come to a Short- Term Rental Program policy decision if these areas (front rooms, living rooms, and similar spaces) would be allowed. That discussion resulted in researching other programs that conclusively excluded front rooms, living rooms, and similar spaces. The City decided to align with other jurisdictions' definitions and not allow it to be counted toward the program. 5. ALSO, I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING BABIES AND TODDLERS WHO SLEEP IN CRIBS AND PACK-N-PLAYS (WE HAVE BOTH). MOST PARENTS WILL HAVE THEIR KIDS SLEEP IN THE ROOM WITH THEM. A LOT OF OUR GUESTS ARE GRANDPARENTS, PARENTS AND THEIR CHILDREN. WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH BABIES AND TODDLERS. SO HOW DO WE ACCOUNT FOR BABIES AND TODDLERS? NOW, UNDER YOUR RULE - THESE PEOPLE WILL NOT RENT OUR SPACE (A 2 BEDROOM THAT SLEEPS 4). WHEN THESE GUESTS GO TO SEARCH ON AIRBNB FOR A PLACE THAT CAN ACCOMODATE 6 PEOPLE, OUR LISTING WILL NOT SHOW UP. THIS IS A LARGE PORTION OF OUR GUESTS. The current Short-Term Rental Ordinance Section 5.10.090(G) Maximum Number of Occupants does not address the inquiry about families with young children. It strictly states the maximum number of overnight guests and residents for a short-term rental unit shall not exceed two persons per bedroom. We are discussing with the Director of Development Services to consider amending this ordinance section to include minors. By providing these documents and responses from our archives, I hope this settles the emergency 12 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date egress and rescue requirements for Monterey Country Club. Thank you. From: Carrie Kropfl <ckropfl@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 9:26 AM To: Lorena Ritchey <lritchey@palmdesert.gov> Cc: Jason Finley <jfinley@palmdesert.gov> Subject: Re: Short-Term Rental Permit 239 Serena Dr, Palm Desert - Bedroom Definition STR2022- 0020 Good morning Lorena and Jason. Thank you for your email below. I spoke with Lorena last night. I understand you are both going to call me this morning and wanted to put my questions down in an email to help with this discussion. I understand you have a job to do, but I am asking ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ Good morning Lorena and Jason. Thank you for your email below. I spoke with Lorena last night. I understand you are both going to call me this morning and wanted to put my questions down in an email to help with this discussion. I understand you have a job to do, but I am asking you to take into consideration the position STR owners are in. We bought specifically in an area that allows STRs. We triple checked (calling the city, the hoa and due diligence) before purchasing to ensure we bought in the right area. We purchased a three bedroom condo (per all of the sales and marketing materials that not only our realtor provided but the onsite property management/sales office at Monterey CC). We were awarded (for the past two years) an STR license from the city for a 3 bedroom. Now, all of a sudden, we are being told we can no longer advertise as a three bedroom or we will lose our license and be fined (and if we don't pay the fine, a lien will be put on our property). Your new rule is taking away a minimum of 30% of our income (that's just based on what we can charge). Some STR owners think this will take away up to 50% of their income because, not only will this affect what we can charge, but how many people will book. These properties are our livelihood. Some STR owners at Monterey CC have been doing this for decades and it is their retirement and ONLY source of income. This is how I support my family. My husband and I bought this property as a retirement plan as well, instead of investing in a 401K. We are good stewards who have followed all the rules, we have 5 star reviews, our guests love the experience we provide, our neighbors appreciate us and all we do to ensure that our guests are 5 star guests who follow the rules. We employ a cleaning staff, gardners, pest control, handymen, plumbers, and more. We send paying customers to Monterey CC to help increase their bottom line. Guests have purchased in Monterey CC after staying at our property because they loved it so much. We pay the city 12% of our income. Our guests spend money at restaurants, boutiques and more. We are upstanding citizens who are doing positive things for the Palm Desert Community. We had planned on retiring here in the next 5 years because we love it so much, but now, your rule will make that impossible. What you are imposing is a 30-50% income reduction for us. In addition, you have just dropped our home 13 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date values throughout Monterey by 20-30%. For round numbers, as an example, let's say that I was projecting to make $100,000 this year in revenue at my property (before you imposed this new rule). Your new rule will cause a $30,000-$50,000 reduction in revenue. Which means, now I have zero profit and will be losing money. We had planned on keeping this property for the next 30+ years and when we died, we planned on passing along this property to our son. Over a 30 year period, these losses will amount to $900,000 - $1,500,000. And, this number does not take into account a rise in rental rates. Also, you have reduced our property value by 20-30% because now we can't sell our property as a 3 bedroom. We estimate our property value to be somewhere around $700,000. This means, you just reduced the value of our property by $140,000 - $210,000. From my understanding there are 1,200 condos within Monterey CC and approximately 900 of these units have rooms attached to an atrium. That's roughly $126,000,000 - $189,000,000 in losses for property owners throughout the community. So with this in mind, following is the email you sent me. My questions are in RED: The extra bedroom(s), and I would presume many at the atriums, are used as auxiliary bedrooms. The technical answer to the question is they do not meet the minimum standards the state has set for a room to be considered a bedroom. Monterey Country Club has had a marketing and real estate history that conflicts with the California Building Code’s minimum requirements for these rooms adjacent to the atriums. Occasionally, we’ve received old marketing advertisements that labeled these rooms as bedrooms. Our archived building records from when Monterey Country Club was first constructed consistently label these rooms “dens.” The anomaly is that there are properties within Monterey Country Club that do have a technically acceptable 3rd bedroom. ATTACHED ARE THE TWO FLOOR PLANS THAT MONTEREY CC HOA PROVIDED ME WHEN I ASKED FOR THE ORIGINAL FLOOR PLANS FOR MY UNIT. BASED ON THESE FLOOR PLANS, MY UNIT IS WHAT THEY CALL THE "ALAHAMBRA PLAN" WHICH WAS BUILT AS A THREE BEDROOM (DUE TO THE CLOSET IN THE 3RD BEDROOM, LOCATION OF THE LINEN CLOSET IN THE HALL AND LOCATION OF THE CLOSET IN THE 2ND BEDROOM). NOTHING HAS BEEN CHANGED IN OUR CONDO. IT MATCHES THE ALAHAMBRA FLOOR PLAN EXACTLY. Now, a den, office, media room, or bonus room is a legal use of space with an atrium. It meets the building code’s definition of a “habitable space.” “Habitable Spaces” (except sleeping rooms) do not require emergency egress and escape design, achieved by a minimum-sized window or door that leads directly to the public way. 14 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date WHEN I LOOK UP THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE DEFINITION OF A "HABITABLE ROOM" IT STATES: "HABITABLE ROOMS USED FOR SLEEPING SHALL HAVE NATURAL LIGHT BY MEANS OF AT LEAST ONE EXTERIOR WINDOW THAT, IF IT CAN BE OPENED, HAS SCREENING WITH A TIGHT FITTING FRAME. NATURAL VENTILATION SHALL BE PROVIDED BY EXTERIOR OPENINGS THAT CAN BE OPENED, OR IN LIEU OF EXTERIOR OPENINGS A MECHANICAL VENTILATING SYSTEM. " IN ADDITION A "HABITABLE ROOM" IS DEFINED AS "A SPACE FOR LIVING, SLEEPING, EATING OR COOKING" BASED ON THIS CODE, WE CAN SLEEP PEOPLE IN HABITABLE ROOMS. OUR LIVING ROOM AND THIS 3RD BEDROOM ARE HABITABLE ROOMS. SO, IF WE CALL OUR THIRD BEDROOM A "DEN, OFFICE, MEDIA ROOM OR BONUS ROOM" THEN WE CAN SLEEP PEOPLE IN IT AND WE CAN SLEEP PEOPLE IN THE LIVING ROOM. WHICH MEANS OUR CONDO CAN SLEEP 8 PEOPLE (PER YOUR RULE OF 2 PEOPLE PER ROOM). CAN YOU CONFIRM THIS? ALSO, I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING BABIES AND TODDLERS WHO SLEEP IN CRIBS AND PACK-N-PLAYS (WE HAVE BOTH). MOST PARENTS WILL HAVE THEIR KIDS SLEEP IN THE ROOM WITH THEM. A LOT OF OUR GUESTS ARE GRANDPARENTS, PARENTS AND THEIR CHILDREN. WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH BABIES AND TODDLERS. SO HOW DO WE ACCOUNT FOR BABIES AND TODDLERS? NOW, UNDER YOUR RULE - THESE PEOPLE WILL NOT RENT OUR SPACE (A 2 BEDROOM THAT SLEEPS 4). WHEN THESE GUESTS GO TO SEARCH ON AIRBNB FOR A PLACE THAT CAN ACCOMODATE 6 PEOPLE, OUR LISTING WILL NOT SHOW UP. THIS IS A LARGE PORTION OF OUR GUESTS. To further add frustration and confusion, a challenge we discovered is that the Country Assessor’s Office has and will change the labeling and listing of a room to a bedroom with a closet. This can conflict with the minimum code requirements if the room does not have egress an escape. AGAIN, OUR 3RD BEDROOM HAS A CLOSET AND MATCHES THE ALAHAMBRA PLAN EXACTLY. Furthermore, when an atrium enclosure permit is reviewed, the rooms adjacent to the atrium can no longer be labeled as bedrooms. A permit will not be issued until the room 15 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date use is corrected. As Chief Building Official, it is my responsibility to ensure these areas are caught in plan review and corrected and are not allowed within the Short-Term Rental Program or any other City of Palm Desert permitting or licensing program until such time the California Building and Residential Codes are amended by the California Building and Standards Commission to revise the technical requirements. ARE YOU APPLYING THESE RULES TO EVERYONE IN MONTEREY CC: SELLERS OF PROPERTIES WITH THIS BEDROOM, LONG-TERM RENTALS WITH THIS BEDROOM? OR ARE YOU ONLY APPLYING THIS RULE TO STR OWNERS? ONE OF THE STR OWNERS RECENTLY WENT TO THE ONSIGHT SALES/RENTAL OFFICE AT MONTEREY CC AND ASKED THEM IF THEY WERE HAVING ISSUES WITH THE CITY FOR ADVERTISING, SELLING AND RENTING OUT OUR PLAN AS A 3 BEDROOM. THE OFFICE CLAIMED THE CITY HAS NEVER CONTACTED THEM ABOUT THIS. IF YOU ARE ONLY APPLYING THIS TO STR OWNERS, ISN'T THIS DISCRIMINATION? I apologize for the length. It's important to provide context as to why these were researched, applied to the technical aspects of the state code, and the determinations made. Should you have any questions, I can be reached at 760-776-6428 and email jfinley@palmdesert.gov. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS: - AREN'T WE GRANDFATHERED IN? FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, YOU CAN'T CHANGE BUILDING CODE TO STRUCTURES THAT WERE BUILT PRIOR TO THE CODE BEING CREATED. WHEN WERE THESE CODES CREATED? FROM MY UNDERSTANDING YOU CAN ONLY ENFORCE CODES WHEN SOMEONE DOES A SIGNIFICANT REMODEL TO A PROPERTY. CAN YOU PROVIDE A COPY OF THESE CODES YOU ARE REFERENCING AND THE DATE THEY WERE ENACTED? - YOU AWARDED US LICENSES FOR A 3 BEDROOM IN THE PAST. THIS SETS A PRECEDENT. OWNERS WHO HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED AN STR PERMIT FOR A 3 BEDROOM SHOULD BE GRANDFATHERED IN. CAN YOU CONFIRM THIS? - WHO HAS TASKED YOU WITH IMPLEMENTING THESE RULES/CODES? WHO IS PUSHING YOU TO DO THIS? HOTELS, MONTEREY HOA, SOMEONE AT MONTEREY CC? - DOES THE STATE HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THE CITY GENERAL PLAN? - CAN YOU PROVIDE PROOF (COPIES OF ORIGINAL DRAWING OR ARCHITECTURAL PROOF) THAT THE UNITS IN QUESTION WERE NOT CONSTRUCTED AS 3 BEDROOMS? - WERE THE DWELLINGS IN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT GRANTED ENTITLEMENT AS A 3RD 16 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date BEDROOM? - IF YOU DON'T CONSIDER THESE 3 BEDROOMS, WHY ARE YOU ALLOWING REALTORS TO SELL THESE AS 3 BEDROOMS? - CAN YOU PROVIDE ME THE CITY CODES THAT STATE WHAT A BEDROOM IS AND THE DATE THIS CODE WAS ENACTED? - WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO DETERMINE IF THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH EACH AND EVERY STR? HOW ARE YOU CONFIRMING THE BEDROOMS AT EVERY STR IN PALM DESERT ARE LIVING UP TO YOUR CODES? WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES/HOA's ARE HAVING THIS ISSUE? - HOW MANY FIRES HAVE THERE BEEN IN THE LAST 5 YEARS IN RESIDENTIAL HOMES IN PALM DESERT? OF THESE RESIDENTIAL HOMES, HOW MANY OF THE FIRES WERE STRs? HOW MANY OF THESE FIRES TOOK PLACE AT CONDO COMMUNITIES? HOW MANY OF THESE FIRES TOOK PLACE AT MONTEREY CC? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. Sincerely, Carrie Kropfl Founder Streetubez www.streetubez.com 949-554-4448 On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 3:41 PM Lorena Ritchey <lritchey@palmdesert.gov> wrote: Good afternoon Carrie, This is in response to your inquiry about what is considered a bedroom. This is the Chief’s Building Official, Jason Finley response, and he has been included in the response as well. The extra bedroom(s), and I would presume many at the atriums, are used as auxiliary bedrooms. The technical answer to the question is they do not meet the minimum standards the state has set for a room to be considered a bedroom. Monterey Country Club has had a marketing and real estate history that conflicts with the California Building Code’s minimum requirements for these rooms adjacent to the atriums. Occasionally, we’ve received old marketing advertisements that labeled these rooms as bedrooms. Our archived building records from when Monterey Country Club was first constructed consistently label these rooms “dens.” The 17 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date anomaly is that there are properties within Monterey Country Club that do have a technically acceptable 3rd bedroom. Now, a den, office, media room, or bonus room is a legal use of space with an atrium. It meets the building code’s definition of a “habitable space.” “Habitable Spaces” (except sleeping rooms) do not require emergency egress and escape design, achieved by a minimum-sized window or door that leads directly to the public way. To further add frustration and confusion, a challenge we discovered is that the Country Assessor’s Office has and will change the labeling and listing of a room to a bedroom with a closet. This can conflict with the minimum code requirements if the room does not have egress an escape. Furthermore, when an atrium enclosure permit is reviewed, the rooms adjacent to the atrium can no longer be labeled as bedrooms. A permit will not be issued until the room use is corrected. As Chief Building Official, it is my responsibility to ensure these areas are caught in plan review and corrected and are not allowed within the Short-Term Rental Program or any other City of Palm Desert permitting or licensing program until such time the California Building and Residential Codes are amended by the California Building and Standards Commission to revise the technical requirements. I apologize for the length. It's important to provide context as to why these were researched, applied to the technical aspects of the state code, and the determinations made. Should you have any questions, I can be reached at 760-776- 6428 and email jfinley@palmdesert.gov. Lorena Ritchey, CCEO Management Analyst City of Palm Desert 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 lritchey@palmdesert.gov | 760.776.6477 | www.palmdesert.gov 18 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 19 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 20 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 21 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 22 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 23 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 24 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 25 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 26 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 27 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 28 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 29 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 30 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 31 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 32 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 33 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 34 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date A T T O R N E Y S SHAUN M. MURPHY, ESQ. PARTNER ADMITTED IN CA, Ml, TX, NY AND THE U.S. SUPREME COURT REPLY TO· 1800 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 T (760) 322-2275 • F (760) 322-2107 murpt,y@sbemp.com April 4, 2024 VIA HAND DELIVERY Anthony Mejia City Clerk City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 RE: Keith Kropfl and Carrie Kropfl appeal of decision from building official related to short-term rental regulations Dear Mr. Mejia: We represent Keith Kropfl and Carrie Kropfl who own the real property within the Monterey Country Club at 239 Serena Drive, Palm Desert (the "Property''). Mr. and Mrs. Kropfl (pronounced Cropful) recently received an adverse decision from Mr. Jason Finley, the City's Building Official (the "CBO''). The CBO made three determinations. Under Section 2.72.010, the Kropfl's appeal the decision on the first and second issues only. A copy of the decision is attached as Exhibit A. ISSUE NO. 1: Whether the Kropfl's may continue to use the third bedroom for short-term rentals. The reasons from the CBO for the denial are in Exhibit A. The Kropfl's intentionally bought a property in an area that allowed short-term rentals. They checked with the city, with the homeowner's association of the Monterey Country Club, and did their own due diligence before purchasing. The sellers had purchased the property in 2016 as a three- bedroom condo. The sellers listed the property in 2021 as a three-bedroom condo, the Monterey Country Club property managemenVsales office provided sales and marketing information showing their floorplan as a three-bedroom condo. The Monterey Country Club homeowner's association provided a floorplan also showing the Property as a three- bedroom condo (with the original builder's, Sunrise Division, logo on it). Their realtor also identified the Property as a three-bedroom condo. The Property has been classified as a Palm Springs, CA T (760) 322-2275 SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP Indian Wells, CA Costa Mesa, CA T (760) 322-9240 T (714) 435-9592 San Diego, CA T (619) 501-4540 www.sbemp.com Princeton, NJ T (609) 955-3393 New York, NY T (212) 829-4399 35 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date Anthony Mejia April 4, 2024 Page2 three-bedroom condo for decades, and the County of Riverside Assessor's Office recognizes it as a three-bedroom condo. After they bought the Property, they applied to the city and the city issued a short- term rental permit for 2022, and again for 2023, for a three-bedroom condo . By issuing the permits, the city recognized the Property as a three-bedroom condo. The Kropfl's recently applied to renew their permits for 2024, and were told -for the first time -that the permit could not be renewed as a three-bedroom rental and could be used only as a two bedroom. The Kropfl's made the City aware that currently, the Monterey Country Club's onsite property management/sales office was continuing to sell and lease their exact floor plan as a three-bedroom condo, the homeowner's association was continuing to pass out floor plans showing it as a three-bedroom condo, and sellers/realtor's within the Monterey Country Club were continuing to list and sell it as a three-bedroom condo. The city responded by saying, "the City does not regulate advertising or private transactions." With actual knowledge, the city is allowing the very same floorplan at issue here to be advertised, leased long-term, and sold as three-bedroom condos. The city's sudden change in position has and will continue to have a significant financial impact on the Kropfl's. The change causes an income loss of at least 30% based on the amount of rent. The change will likely cause greater losses because fewer people will rent the Property if it accommodates only four people instead of six. A 30% reduction in revenue would be between $30,000 to $50,000 yearly. The Property is a principal source of income for the Kropfl's. It is how they support their family. Their Property is highly rated, they make sure their guests follow the rules, and they have received no complaints from either the City or the Association . Their Property combined with other similarly situated properties provide a significant economic benefit to the City. They employ a cleaning staff, gardeners, pest control, handymen, plumbers, and more. They send customers to Monterey Country Club for golf. Past guests have bought property in Monterey Country Club after staying at their property. Each transaction contributes to the Palm Desert economy in addition to the 12% tax they pay to the city. In addition to a loss in revenue, the city's change of position has impaired the Property's value. The change is estimated to cause a loss of value between 20% and 30%. Nothing has changed during the decades where the Property was classified as a three-bedroom condo. The city should continue to recognize the Property as a three- bedroom condo and allow the Kropfl's to market and rent it as a three-bedroom. ISSUE NO. 2: Whether the Kropfl's may use their code compliant living room as an additional sleeping room to accommodate two more guests. The CBO determined they could not use the living room as a bedroom. The basis for the denial is set forth under Issue 2 in Exhibit A 36 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date Anthony Mejia April 4, 2024 Page 3 The CBO admits that the term "bedroom" is not defined in Chapter 5.10 regulating short-term rentals. The CBO interpreted bedroom to mean: a private room intended for sleeping that is separate from other rooms by a door, having a least one window that meets the Emergency Escape and Rescue Opening requirements of the California Building code, has a closet/storage area, and is accessible to a bathroom without crossing into another bedroom. The CBO based his interpretation "in part on the city's ordinance differentiating between on-site and off-site owners. Specifically, §5.10.090(G) ... " The CBO also based his decision on definitions in the American Planning Association, Planners Dictionary, and his profession experience. He did not, however, provide any information from those resources to justify or explain his interpretation. First, the CBO's reliance on § 5.10.090(G) is puzzling because it is irrelevant to defining the term "bedroom." That section merely states the obvious presumption that an on-site owner will be deemed to occupy at least one bedroom. The presumption makes one less bedroom available for rent, but it does not aid the effort to define a "bedroom." Since we have no information about what the Planners Dictionary provides or the CBO's professional experience, there is no basis to evaluate the information on which he purportedly relied. The Kropfl's dispute the CBO's definition of bedroom; particularly, the requirement that it have a door. The CBO cites no provision in the city's Code of Ordinances requiring a bedroom to have a door.1 There are many sources other than the Planners Dictionary that define bedroom with no reference to a door. For example, Merriam-Webster defines bedroom to mean, "a room furnished with a bed and intended primarily for sleeping ." (https://www.merriam- webster.com/dictiona ry/bedroom#dictionary-entry-1 ). No mention of a door. The Cambridge Dictionary defines bedroom to mean, "a room used for sleeping in." (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/bedroom ). No mention of a door. Dictionary.com defines bedroom to mean, "a room furnished and used for sleeping." (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/bedroom ). No mention of a door. And The Britannica Dictionary defines bedroom to mean, "a room used for sleeping." (http s://www.britannica.com/dictlonary/bedroom). No mention of a door. It is apparent that the CBO selected a source to use that would support the conclusion he wanted to reach. In an earlier communication dated February 27, 2024, to Mrs. Krapfl, the CBO explained his interpretation of an acceptable sleeping room. He said, "As I stated at our counter, a front room or living room meets the building code definition of a habitable space. If emergency egress and rescue requirements are achieved, the building code is I wonder how parents would react after learnlng that removing the door to their teenager's bedroom for whatever reason means that the room is no longer a bedroom as determined by the CBO. 37 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date Anthony Mejia April 4, 2024 Page4 silent on whether you can sleep there or not. I did say this would come to a Short-Term Rental Program policy decision if these areas (front rooms, living rooms, and similar spaces) would be allowed. That discussion resulted in researching other programs that conclusively excluded front rooms, living rooms, and similar spaces. The City decided to align with other jurisdictions' definitions and not allow it to be counted toward the program." (Emphasis added.) The CBO admits that the city's Code of Ordinances have no provisions defining an acceptable sleeping room. He also admits "If emergency egress and rescue requirements are achieved, the building code is silent on whether you can sleep [in a living room) or not." He referred to other jurisdictions who specifically adopted regulations governing the use. Rather than amend the Code of Ordinances to conform to what other jurisdictions have done -to specifically address the issue -the city adopted a policy based on what other jurisdictions had implemented. The city is applying a shadow regulation -one that has not gone through the formal procedures to amend the Code of Ordinances -including providing notice to residents. The room that the Kopfl's want to use for more guests is a "room furnished and used for sleeping," or "a room used for sleeping." It has windows that comply with the Emergency Escape and Rescue Opening requirements of the California Building code, has a closet/storage area, and is accessible to a bathroom without crossing into another bedroom. There is nothing in the California Building Code nor is there any provision in the city's Code of Ordinances prohibiting them from using the room as an acceptable sleeping room. The CBO's determination that a door is required for a room to be classified as a bedroom is arbitrary. It should be reversed and the Kopfl's should be allowed to advertise and rent the space as an additional sleeping room . SMM: sv Encl.: Exhibit A Fee Payment Sincerely, SBEMPLLP BY: Shaun M. Murphy 38 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date EXHIBIT A 39 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date March 25, 2024 VIA US MAIL AND EMAIL Ms. Carrie Kropfl 246 West Escalones San Clemente, CA 92672 CITY OJ PAlM D~SIRI 73-510 FRED WAIUNC DRIVE PALM DESERT , CAUFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760•346·0611 INFO@PALMDES!RT.GOV Subject: Monterey Country Club -Den and Bedroom Interpretation Dear Ms. Kropfl: I wanted to provide a formal response to the three questions below that you have raised in connection with using your property in Monterey Country Club and the ability to appeal the determinations we have provided you. Question 1: Can you continua to use the third bedroom, based on the floor plans provided (attached)? No, the third bedroom you reference is considered a den and cannot be used as a bedroom. Mr. Jason Finley, CBO the City's Building Official responded on February 27, 2024 that the information you provided is not the construction plans, but rather marketing materials. Mr. Finley then provided you with a copy of the approved floor plan (attached) that was permitted for your unit from our permitting archives, and the room in question was labeled as a den. Mr. Finley also provide you with a letter dated September 28, 1981 (attached) from the Sunrise Company, the developer to our former Chief Building Official clarifying that "the den Is not Intended to be used for sleeping purposes." Furthermore, Mr. Finley reviewed and concurred with the 2022 California Residential Code (§A310.1 -Emergency Escape and Rescue Opening Required1) which states: Every sleeping room shall have not less than one operable emergency escape and rescue opening. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall open directly into a public way (§R310.1 ). In applying this life, health, and safety requirement for "Den" space(s) adjacent to the atriums of the Monterey Country Club floor layout, it is determined these atriums do not meet the minimum code requirements for a bedroom or sleeping room . They lack direct access to a public way and cannot be used as such. This determination was also based upon documentation from the original developer acknowledging that these areas could only serve as a den. An outside independent building official was also used and concurred (attached) in 1979. 1 Cited California Residential Code Definitions (Sect ion §202): EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE OPENING. An operable exterior window, door, or other similar device that provides a means of escape and access for rescue in the event of an emergency. PUBLIC WAY. Any street, alley, or other parcel ofland open lo the outside air leadi ng to a public street, that has been deeded, dedicated, or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for public use and that has a clear width and height of not less than IO feet (3048 mm). 40 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date C. Krapfl -Interpretations Page 2 of 3 March 25, 2024 Appeal of Building Official's Interpretation Pursuant to Palm Desert Municipal Code (PDMC) Chapter 2.18, the Building Board of Appeals1 a letter of appeal must be submitted requesting an appeal of the Building Official's interpretation. Once the letter is received a hearing will be scheduled with the Building Board of Appeals. If you wish to appeal against Mr. Finley's interpretation, submit to the City Clerk a letter requesting the appeal along with a check in the amount of $276.00. A hearing will be scheduled no sooner than ten days after receiving your request. Question 2: Can you use your llving room as a bedroom to sleep two additional guests for a Short-Term Rental? No, the living room cannot be used as a bedroom. Chapter 5.10 of the PDMC includes the regulations for operating a Short-Term Rental Unit with the City of Palm Desert. §5.10.090(G) establishes that the maximum number of overnight guests shall not exceed two persons per bedroom. §5.10.030 includes definitions, however a definition of "bedroom• is not included. Chapter 2.12 of the PDMC establishes that the Community Development (Development Services) Director shall enforce the standards of the POMC pertaining to the use of land, the erection, construction, reconstruction, moving, conversion, alteration, or addition to any building or structure, which involves the interpretation of those standards. For purposes of the short-term rental regulations, I have interpreted bedroom to mean: a private room Intended for sleeping that is separated from other rooms by a door, having at least one window that meets the Emergency Escape and Rescue Opening requirements of the California Building code, has a closet/storage area, and is accessible to a bathroom without crossing into another bedroom. This interpretation is based in part on the city's ordinance differentiating between on-site and off-site owners. Specifically, §5.10.090(G) establishes that on-site owners shall be deemed to occupy at least one bedroom, which shall diminish the number of bedrooms for overnight guests accordingly. In other words, a one-bedroom unit CANNOT be Issued an On-Site Short Term Rental Permit, because the On-Site Owner must be present and must stay at the property in a bedroom The interpretation was also based on in part on definitions of bedrooms and sleeping rooms contained in the American Planning Association, Planners Dictionary, and my professional experience. Appeal of Director's Interpretation Chapter 2. 72 establishes procedures for appeals to City Council that requires an appellant file a written notice of appeal specifying the specific decision from which the appeal is taken, the specific grounds for the appeal, and the relief or action requested from the City Council. This notice must be submitted to the City Clerk within ten (10) days after receiving this written letter along with a check in the amount of $276.00. Once deemed sufficient, the City Clerk will schedule the appeal for a hearing by the City Council at a regular meeting, but not later than forty-five days after receipt of the notice of appeal. The City Clerk will cause the notice of hearing to be given to the appellant not less than ten days prior to the hearing unless that notice Is waived in writing by the appellant. 41 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date C. Krapfl -Interpretations Page 3 of 3 March 25, 2024 Question 3: Can up to four overnight guests per bedroom be permitted for a Short- Term Rental? No, only two overnight guests are permitted per bedroom. As stated above, PDMC §5.10.090(G) explicitly states that the maximum number of overnight guests shall not exceed two persons per bedroom. This is not a matter of interpretation, but a strict code requirement. As such, there is no right to appeal the decision Is ministerial and does not involve the exercise of administrative discretion or personal judgment (see PDMC §2. 72.01 O(B)) Sincerely, RICHARD D. CANNONE, AICP DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Attachments cc. Todd L. Hileman, City Manager lsra Shah, City Attorney Jason Finley, CBO Building Official 42 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date ALHAMBRA PLAN 300 SQUARE FOOTAGE 1634 Three Bedroom, Two Bath ATIUUM ,..,., u·•· BEOROOM2 ,, ... ' ,,.,. E MASTER ~ BATH ~--- J • PATIO LIVINCROOM S\Ol'IHG CIIUHG " ....... . DININCROOM SI.OPINC Cl,U,-G BEOROOMJ ,,.~, ,,r MASTER BEDROOM 11 • , u·r MIi ; / • MONTEREY COUNTRY CLUB -a SUMISE 1COMPANY RESALE DIVISION 43 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date J I I I I I I I ··L . I I 1· I : ,. • I f I i· ! I ~ _J. .• . ---i---.............. E. . . I ti. i I ' I ·-,L__• • I I I i. 44 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date ,. . .. 7 i:--- ~,11~, . l .• "·-.... !·. ____ ... _._._. -· ... · -· ... " ....... ' _,.,,,..- Febrvary 7 • 197t Daryl Vflby Chtaf Buttd1ng Off1~1•1 City of Modesto Butldtnt ln,pectfon City Ha 1, 801 • 11th Strftt P. O. B01& 142 Modesto, Ca1tfom1a 953~3 RECltV1 D AUG 2 '> 1979 auwaa au..-..,._,.._ tUY al PAI.II 1.U£H1 Subject: tMrgency Egress end Rescue llflldaws • Stcttou 1304 and 1404, 1971 Ull1fora BuUdtng Code Dear Mr, llt11ey: You asked the question tn your lettctr of .January 30, 1979, • ••• are the egress or rescue windows requtred by SoctlDI\S 1304 and 1404 also req1dred exits as defined 1n Chapter 337• The 1ncwer to th1s question 1s "no", as the emergency egr.ss ~nd "scue .rlndows do not coa,ly with the requtre111ents tn Chapter 33. H~ever, the dosfgn exemples whtch you enclosed wtth your letter have probleais •htch are not solved by the answer to your question. Tht tnt.nt of the code fs that wfftdQIIS required by Sections 1304 end 1404 i,. 1v1tlable so that rescue can be effected from tht extertor, or tn the alternative. one may escape f•oan that window to the exterior of the butldtnq wfthaut having to travel through the bu1ld1ng ttself. If these emergency wtndows open onto an fnterfor court or a so-called atrtum, they do not •et the f ntent of ttse code. Wa note from your letter that you 1ndtcated Sntion 1304 was refer.-ed ta by Sectton 1406. Actually, the reference fn Sectton 1406 1s to Section 1306 for yards and courts havtng req11tred windows opentng theretn. It 1s our opinion that the windows required by Secttons 1~04 and 1404 for tme1"9ency eyress and rescue should open to th~ t>ltertor of the but ldfng and not fr.to courts or atrtums. As 45 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date ,I Ci t.t of Palr-l'\~~;-rt t !j-2~'~ Pr i ct l ·: \' ,ur t.anc- Palm D~~~rt ~j~~o ': I '. I Th.iR iii in rilU('i~n~e to Itel'I No. l c.•f. ycHu rlan Check n'>tes --... rt·lating to our conddminiul"ls to >:e ccnstructed at the abc,v& arlcfrnsa~s. • .. -: Sonc of thoi::1• ~tni ts include a ~l•~n, ·•hit.'h. is servml b·: a ~•·pat'ata bathr:-o:n. The room i~ •~\r•.Jr~y (~!"ti fic,S u a "ll,•n" on t.hc pl~m.1. '• 'l'lt•· den if. not intQn1ecl to be u'>·•.I f~r ~l".''.:t ,in~, p\1,poses. H11,,:1ar ro~:,s in o\lr ~ontere~' co .. ,nt ~..-··ti,h -7,:,rM">l~Y. ore t11n,ished .i:1,l ~t.o~n aq -\~ns . ;,l.t ,,:-•"-'' .,d,:-.··1,('o,;;i',ut"t:S ,111,t ,vlvo?rt:i.i;i n11 r-'.ltc1· 1ills dcsc?"il:t,• • ••• ,.,,,>~, ·,:-. ,"'I ':'!,.:n, w, •. ,r,.. !a:->!) i.ir ,_.l ti~ tho ,~ro·,i,.it,r. • •.-1 ;:,:t;t:iC\n 11n2 of tlt6 C '.al i for:, i -1 !l ~•:t l t'h ;\!l•l g-,fcty {:o•~r-H ! "i'( :;. !CI:. ion 12( 4. ·,,e h,,.,,. .1lnol•1t•·•l·:• ne\ ir,tQnt to •aoln••· t~1~•.:<• ser:ti,:,ns, ,,, .,./:f,_1..'.'::,_ le. ~--i. --,_ M11ll:.:-• i~ •. :~-[~\, 'r. ~ '-' • ,.,. rr:-,, . .! • :P•1~ ... ,\ ... l •.;t ,1r: •. •~: t ;, ~ ;•,·,·.;•. ,1.,r,t -., 114 I J18 61'4~ 46 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 47 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 48 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date California Residential Code 2022 R310.1 Emergency Escape and Rescue Opening Required Basements, habitable attics and every sleeping room shall have not less than one operable emergency escape and rescue opening. Where basements contain one or more sleeping rooms, an emergency escape and rescue opening shall be required in each sleeping room. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall open directly into a public way. Exceptions [SFM]: 1. Basements with a ceiling height of less than 80 inches (2032 mm) shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings. 2. Emergency escape and rescue openings are not required from basements or sleeping rooms that have an exit door or exit access door that opens directly into a public way or to a yard, court or exterior egress balcony that opens to a public way. 3. Basements without habitable spaces and having not more than 200 square feet (18.6 m ) in oor area shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings. 4. Storm shelters are not required to comply with this section where the shelter is constructed in accordance with ICC 500. 5. Where the dwelling unit or townhouse unit is equipped with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section R313, sleeping rooms in basements shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings provided that the basement has one of the following: 5.1. One means of egress complying with Section R311 and one emergency escape and rescue opening. 5.2. Two means of egress complying with Section R311. 2 5/10/24, 3:35 PM Chapter 3 Building Planning: Building Planning, California Residential Code 2022 | UpCodes 49 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date R310.1.1 Operational Constraints and Opening Control Devices Emergency escape and rescue openings shall be maintained free of any obstructions other than those allowed by this section and shall be operational from the inside of the room without the use of keys, tools or special knowledge. Window opening control devices and fall prevention devices complying with ASTM F2090 shall be permitted for use on windows serving as a required emergency escape and rescue opening and shall be not more than 70 inches (178 cm) above the nished oor. The release mechanism shall be maintained operable at all times. Such bars, grills, grates or any similar devices shall be equipped with an approved exterior release device for use by the re department only when required by the authority having jurisdiction. Where security bars (burglar bars) are installed on emergency egress and rescue windows or doors, on or after July 1, 2000, such devices shall comply with California Building Standards Code, Part 12, Chapter 12-3 and other applicable provisions of this code. Exported by h t t ps://up .c o d e s that the basement has one of the following: 5.1. One means of egress complying with Section R311 and one emergency escape and rescue opening. 5.2. Two means of egress complying with Section R311. 5/10/24, 3:35 PM Chapter 3 Building Planning: Building Planning, California Residential Code 2022 | UpCodes https://up.codes/viewer-export/california/ca-residential-code-2022/chapter/3/building-planning#R310.1 2/2 50 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 51 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date 52 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIALS’ DETERMINATION THAT DEN AT 239 SERENA DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA CAN NOT BE USED AS A SLEEPING ROOM AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF WHEREAS, On February 27, 2024, the Chief Building Official provided Ms. Carrie Kropfl, Applicant, correspondence that the use of the den at 239 Serena Drive, Palm Desert could not be used as a sleeping room; and WHEREAS, On March 25, 2024, the Development Services Director, in accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code 2.72.020 provided a Written Determination to Ms. Carrie Kropfl, Applicant, that a living room cannot count as a bedroom for purposes of a short-term rental unit and the den could not be used as a sleeping room; and WHEREAS, On April 4, 2024, Mr. Shaun Murphy, Esq., on behalf of the Applicant filed an appeal of the Chief Building Official’s determination that the den at 239 Serena Drive, Palm Desert could not be used as a bedroom for purposes of a short-term rental unit; and WHEREAS, on May 23, 2024, the Building Board of Appeals conducted a hearing to consider the Applicant’s appeal, and duly considered all evidence, testimony of the applicant and interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendation by staff, at said hearing; and WHEREAS, notices of said hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Building Board of Appeals of the City of Palm Desert as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS. That the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution. SECTION 2. FINDINGS. The findings for confirmation and support of the Chief Building Official determination are hereby adopted as follows: 1. 2022 California Residential Code, Section R310.1 establishes the minimum requirements for emergency escape and rescue for a sleeping room. 2. The original permitted and approved construction plans identify the room attached to atrium at 239 Serena Drive, Palm Desert as a “De n” and not a sleeping room. 3. A letter of correspondence from the Interna tional Conference of Building Officials concluding the lack of required emergency egress in rooms attached to atriums cannot considered a bedroom. 53 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date Resolution No. 2024- ____ 4. A letter of correspondence from the original developer admonishing the use of the den as a bedroom. SECTION 3. ACTION. Based on the evidence and testimony presented, and the findings contained in Section 2, the Building Board of Appeals does hereby deny the subject appeal filed by Mr. Shaun Murphy, Esq., and upholds the Chief Building Official’s determination that a Den at 239 Serena Drive, Palm Desert, cannot be used as a sleeping room for purposes of a short-term rental unit. ADOPTED ON ______2024. CHAIR, BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS ATTEST: ANTHONY J. MEJIA CITY CLERK I, Anthony J. Mejia, City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2024-____ is a full, true, and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Building Board of Appeals of the City of Palm Desert on ____________, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSED: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Desert, California, on ___________________, 2024. _________________ ANTHONY J. MEJIA CITY CLERK 54 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE APPEAL FOR 239 SERENA DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE USE OF THE DEN AS A SLEEPING ROOM AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF WHEREAS, On February 27, 2024, the Chief Building Official provided Ms. Carrie Kropfl, Applicant, correspondence that the use of the den at 239 Serena Drive, Palm Desert, could not be used as a sleeping room; and WHEREAS, On March 25, 2024, the Development Services Director, in accordance with Palm Desert Municipal Code 2.72.020 provided as Written Determination to Ms. Carrie Kropfl, Applicant, that a living room cannot count as a bedroom for purposes of a short-term rental unit and the den could not be used as a sleeping room; and WHEREAS, On April 4, 2024, Mr. Shaun Murphy, Esq., on behalf of the Applicant filed an appeal of the Chief Building Official’s determination that the den at 239 Serena Drive, Palm Desert, could not be used as a bedroom for purposes of a short-term rental unit; and WHEREAS, on May 23, 2024, the Building Board of Appeals conducted a hearing to consider the Applicant’s appeal, and duly considered all evidence, testimony of the applicant and interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendation by staff, at said hearing; and WHEREAS, notices of said hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Building Board of Appeals of the City of Palm Desert as follows: SECTION 1. RECITALS. That the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein as substantive findings of this Resolution. SECTION 2. FINDINGS. The findings for confirmation and support of the appellant are hereby adopted as follows: 1. ….. 2. ….. 55 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date Resolution No. 2024- ____ SECTION 3. ACTION. Based on the evidence and testimony presented, and the findings contained in Section 2, the Building Board of Appeals does hereby approve subject appeal filed by Mr. Shaun Murphy, Esq., and confirms that a Den at 239 Serena Drive, Palm Desert, can be used as a sleeping room for purposes of a short-term rental unit. ADOPTED ON ______2024. CHAIR, BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS ATTEST: ANTHONY J. MEJIA CITY CLERK I, Anthony J. Mejia, City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert, hereby certify that Resolution No. 2024-____ is a full, true, and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Building Board of Appeals of the City of Palm Desert on ____________, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RECUSED: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Desert, California, on ___________________, 2024. _________________ ANTHONY J. MEJIA CITY CLERK 56 Building Board of Appeals Meeting Date