Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff ReportREQUEST: SUBMITTED BY: APPLICANT: CASE NO: DATE: I. CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT Approval of a variance to allow the reduction of a required minimum side yard setback from five feet to zero feet to allow construction of a golf cart shed located on property line for an existing single family home located at 46-020 Burroweed Lane. Kevin Swartz Assistant Planner Michael and Marianne Toia 46-020 Burroweed Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 VAR 08-261 September 2, 2008 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Approval of staff's recommendation will approve a variance for a golf cart shed within the required five foot side yard setback located on property line that is consistent with the single-family homes on Burroweed Lane. II. BACKGROUND: A. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The project is located at 46-020 Burroweed Lane, north of Grapevine Street, and west of Portola Avenue. The property, totaling 6,900 square feet is a relatively flat rectangular shape lot and is surrounded by residentially zoned properties. The property is zoned R2, 8,000 which has a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet. The minimum front yard is 15 feet, minimum rear yard is 20 feet, minimum side yard is 14 feet combined, with no side less than 5 feet, and the minimum side yard is 10 feet. The applicant has a 6,900 square foot lot which is smaller than the minimum standards, and is located on a corner increasing his side yard setbacks. The subject property was built in 1975 part of a 13 lot subdivision. Some of the homes were built prior to 1973 under the County of Riverside. Many of the homes were built directly on property line and share a common wall, consistent to the request by the applicant. STAFF REPORT VAR 08-261 September 2, 2008 Page 2 of 7 When the applicant purchased the home there was a dilapidated existing carport structure with an aluminum roof that extended from the garage to the common wall with a nine foot wooden gate. In January 2006 the applicant tore down the carport and received a permit from the City of Palm Desert for a gate enclosure that connected to the existing structure and common wall with a 4' x 8' header. The gate enclosure was built per the building code. After the permit closed the applicant proceeded to enclose the structure by adding a roof and garage door converting it into a structure, without obtaining the proper permits. The proposed structure has currently been built without permits for approximately two years. In April 2008 staff received a complaint by the neighbor when she cut down a tree and saw that metal flashing and a drain gutter were overlapping the common wall. As part of the variance, staff requested the applicant to submit a land survey by a licensed surveyor to verify the exact location of the shared property line. There were two surveys done. The first survey indicated that the lot line between Lots 1 and 2 (with the applicants Lot being lot 1 on tract No. 3862) is at/on the north face of the existing masonry wall. Upon reviewing the survey, staff found the survey incomplete due to insufficient information, and the owner of Lot 2 also questioned the survey. The applicant and the surveyor worked with city staff, obtaining the proper information such as tie -sheets that the surveyor needed in order to complete the survey. The second survey the surveyor found all monuments needed to complete the survey. The survey indicated that the property line is at the center of the existing masonry wall. Staff reviewed the survey and found it complete. B. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: North: R-1, 20,000 / Single Family South: R-2, 8,000 / Single Family East: R-2, 8,000 / Shadow Mountain Resort, Single Family West: R-2, 8,000 / Single Family C. MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 25.78.010-A (VARIANCE) Variances from the terms of the zoning ordinance shall be granted only due to special circumstances applicable to the property including when the size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, or the strict application of the title deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by STAFF REPORT VAR 08-261 September 2, 2008 Page 3 of 7 other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. Any variance or adjustment granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the property is situated. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subject property is zoned R2 which states that the minimum side yard shall be 14 feet combined, each of which shall not be less then five feet. The applicant currently has 10 feet on the north side and five feet on the south side. The structure is located on property line, therefore the applicant is requesting a variance to build within the required side yard setback. A. BUILDING DESCRIPTION: The proposed golf cart shed is 9 feet x 25 feet with a 6 foot wide garage door. The structure measures 8 feet to the highest point, and slopes down to 7 feet 8 inches. The structure is attached to the existing home and flush to the common wall. If the variance is granted a condition of approval has been placed on the project requiring the applicant to obtain all required permits. Another condition has been placed on the project that all materials overlapping the common wall must be removed and placed within the applicant's property. B. ARCHITECTURE: The project will incorporate a Modern architectural style utilizing tile roof, earth -toned colors to match existing home. Surface finishes consist of smooth plaster and stucco. At its meeting of March 11, 2008 the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the project. The Commission generally supported the concept and offered comments. The Commission approved the project on aesthetic merit subject to: sloping the roof back; minimizing the raising of the roof to a max of 1 '/" to get slope; redoing and cleaning up the entire flashing on perimeter of the structure; and not going over property line; and continuing the tile on roof. The project was approved on a 4-0-0-2 vote, with Commissioners DeLuna and Hanson absent. STAFF REPORT VAR 08-261 September 2, 2008 Page 4 of 7 IV. ANALYSIS: Zoning Ordinance Section 25.18.070 requires side yard setbacks in the R-2 zone to be a minimum of 14 feet combined, "...each of which shall be not less than five feet." The applicant is requesting a variance to build a golf cart shed within the required setback of five feet. A. LOT SIZE: The property is zoned R2, 8,000 which has a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet. The applicant has a 6,900 square foot lot which is smaller than the minimum standards, and is located on a corner increasing his side yard setbacks. Other homes along Burroweed Lane have similar lot sizes, and have structures built to property line sharing a common wall, which is consistent with the applicant's request. B. LAND USE COMPATIBILITY: The proposed golf cart barn is located in an R-2, 8,000 zone. The proposed project is surrounded by residentially zoned properties. Many of the homes located on Burroweed Lane were built under the County of Riverside and were constructed to property line sharing a common wall and do not have a setback on one side of their home. The applicant is requesting approval of a built structure within the five foot setback and it has been shown that the proposed use is compatible with the other residential uses in the surrounding area. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE: A. That the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the ordinance codified in this title. The applicant has communicated to staff that if the variance is not granted, the resulting practical difficulty and unnecessary physical hardship would be costly to demolish and would have a negative impact to the property value. Although the subject property is zoned R-2, 8,000 the applicant's lot only contains 6,900 square feet and is smaller than the minimum standards and is located on a corner. The lot of the applicant's property poses a practical difficulty and physical hardship to the applicant being able to accomplish the proposed addition unless a variance is granted to reduce a required minimum 5-foot side yard setback to allow construction on property line. Given that the homes located on STAFF REPORT VAR 08-261 September 2, 2008 Page 5 of 7 Burroweed Lane were built over 30 years ago and some of the homes are built to a common wall, the applicant's proposed expansion would be consistent with the existing neighborhood. B. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. The property is a 6,900 square foot lot as compared to most other single family residential lots in the surrounding zone which have a minimum size of 8,000 square feet and for which the R-2 zone development standards were written. In addition, the applicant's home and many other similar older homes on similar size lots on Burroweed Lane were constructed under Riverside County Zoning Ordinance development standards which resulted in the construction of shared common walls. Staff agrees with the applicant's justification that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that do not already exist with regards to many other properties located on Burroweed Lane. C. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant states that the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the required 5-foot side yard setback would deprive him of the ability to expand his home to property line since other homes on Burroweed Lane are built to property line, and are consistent to the applicants request for a golf cart barn. Additionally, as was stated previously, the applicant's home and other similar older homes on similar 6,900 square foot size lots were constructed under Riverside County Zoning Ordinance development standards which resulted in the construction of homes built to property line sharing a common wall. Therefore, the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity and zone. In order to grant a variance, Municipal Code Section 25.78.070 requires that four findings be affirmed. D. That the granting of the variance or adjustment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed golf cart barn would enhance and improve the value and aesthetics of homes in his neighborhood. The proposed expansion would not be detrimental or materially injurious to the neighborhood since 95% of the neighbors are supporting the golf cart shed. The golf cart shed STAFF REPORT VAR 08-261 September 2, 2008 Page 6 of 7 would not be supported by structures on the adjacent property, and would not drain onto neighboring parcel. Therefore, the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. V. CONCLUSION: The request for a variance to construct a golf cart shed within the required five foot side yard setback is consistent with the neighborhood. The design and layout of the proposed project will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of the existing neighborhood. The architecture is a style that will enhance the surrounding neighborhood. It can be concluded that the proposed use would be a favorable addition to the vicinity. VI. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project is a Class 32, Categorical Exemption for the purpose of CEQA and no further review is necessary. VII. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt the findings and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. , approving Case No. VAR 08-261, subject to conditions attached. STAFF REPORT VAR 08-261 September 2, 2008 Page 7 of 7 VIII. ATTACHMENTS: A. B. C. D. E. F. Draft Resolution Legal Notice Comments from other departments Architectural Review Commission Notice of Action and Minutes Plans and Exhibits Correspondence Submitted By: Kevin Swartz Assistant Planner Approval: Homer Croy ACM, Development Services Department Head: Lauri Aylaian Director, Community Development PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AND APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A GOLF CART SHED WITHIN THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK LOCATED ON PROPERTY LINE LOCATED AT 46-020 BURROWEED LANE. CASE NOS. VAR 08-261 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 2nd of September, 2008, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of Michael & Mariane Toia for the above mentioned project; 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," in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is a Class 32 categorical exemption; 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 approval of said request: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE: A. That the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the ordinance codified in this title. The applicant has communicated to staff that if the variance is not granted, the resulting practical difficulty and unnecessary physical hardship would be costly to demolish and would have a negative impact to the property value. Although the subject property is zoned R-2, 8,000 the applicant's lot only contains 6,900 square feet and is smaller than the minimum standards and located on a corner. The lot of the applicant's property poses a practical difficulty and physical hardship to the applicant being able to accomplish the proposed addition unless a variance is granted to reduce a required minimum 5-foot side yard setback to allow construction on property line. Given that the homes located on Burroweed Lane were built over 30 years ago and some of the homes are built to a common wall, the applicant's proposed expansion would be consistent with the existing neighborhood. B. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. The property is a 6,900 square foot lot as compared to most other single family residential lots in the surrounding zone which have a minimum size of 8,000 square feet and for which the R-2 zone development standards were written. In addition, the applicant's home and many other similar older homes on similar size lots on Burroweed Lane were constructed under Riverside County Zoning Ordinance development standards which resulted in the construction of shared common walls. Staff agrees with the applicant's justification that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that do not already exist with regards to many other properties located on Burroweed Lane. C. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant states that the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the required 5-foot side yard setback would deprive him of the ability to expand his home to property line since other homes on Burroweed Lane are built to property line, and are consistent to the applicants request for a golf cart barn. Additionally, as was stated previously, the applicant's home and other similar older homes on similar 6,900 square foot size lots were constructed under Riverside County Zoning Ordinance development standards which resulted in the construction of homes built to property line sharing a common wall. Therefore, the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity and zone. In order to grant a variance, Municipal Code Section 25.78.070 requires that four findings be affirmed. D. That the granting of the variance or adjustment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed golf cart barn would enhance and improve the value and aesthetics of homes in his neighborhood. The proposed expansion would not be detrimental or materially injurious to the neighborhood since 95% of the neighbors are supporting the golf cart shed. The golf cart shed would not be supported by structures on the adjacent property, and would not drain onto the neighboring parcel. Therefore, the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 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 commission in this case. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2. That approval of Variance 08-261, are hereby granted to the Planning Commission, subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 2nd day of September 2008, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: LAURI AYLAIAN, Secretary Palm Desert Planning Commission VAN G. TANNER, Chairperson 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NOs. VAR 08-261 Department of Community Development: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the department of community development/planning, as modified by the following conditions. 2. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 3. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the department of building and safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 5. All materials overlapping or attached to the common wall must be removed. Building and Safety Department: 1. Project must conform to the current State of California Codes adopted at the time of plan check submittal. The following are the codes enforced at this time: 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (Based on 2006 IBC) 2007 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (Based on 2006 UMC) 2007 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (Based on 2006 UPC) 2007 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (Based on 2005 NEC) 2007 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 2007 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2. All contractors and subcontractors shall have a current City of Palm Desert Business License prior to permit issuance per Palm desert Municipal Code, Title 5. 3. All contractors and/or owner -builders must submit a valid Certificate of Worker's Compensation Insurance coverage prior to the issuance of a building permit per California Labor Code, Section 3700. 4. Illegal additions/alterations must submit 2 copies of as -built plans and pay an investigation fee. An inspector will verify if the structure can be permitted and may require corrective action. The applicant then must resubmit 2 sets of plans incorporating the inspector's correction items. The plan will reviewed by a plan checker for compliance. Further corrections may be required at this time and then must be addressed by the applicant. When the construction plans are approved then a permit may be issued and subsequent inspections to follow. 5 CITY Of PEERI DESERT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL:760 346-0611 FAX: 760 341-7098 in fo@palm-dews. org CITY OF PALM DESERT LEGAL NOTICE CASE NO. VAR 08-261 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held before the Palm Desert Planning Commission to consider a request by Michael and Marianne Toia for approval of a variance to construct a golf cart shed located within the required setback located at 46- 020 Burroweed Lane. City of Palm Desert Ma ;trn fRON ) ST 111111111jpm�poo I 1 _A_ . F10OLENECKLN, — �C T 8— -0— PINYON sr 1 1 I I I I II I I f 11 —'GRAPEVINE S Tli ^RAPEVINE ST \\\\\ WILLOW ST -- 1[ .L_If I BURSERA WAY I "-J---1I - 1111 lUIfJI \ I% CIRC LEIOR � /J Li R Cq 0 5T°SEtN_ SAID public hearing will be held on Tuesday, September 2, 2008, 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 conceming 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 (or city council) at, or prior to, the public hearing. PUBLISH: Desert Sun Lauri Aylaian, Secretary August 22, 2008 Palm Desert Planning Commission INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Department of Community Development/Planning Attention: Kevin Swartz FROM: Phil Joy, Associate Transportation Planner SUBJECT: CUP 8-261 Toia Golf Cart Shed DATE: June 30, 2008 The Public Works Department has no comments on this project. Phnt/2/t Joy CITY OF PALM DESERT BUILDING & SAFETY DEPARTMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM To: Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner From: Sam Szymanski, Plan Check Manager Date: July 16th, 2008 Subject: CUP 08-261 46020 Burroweed Ln I have reviewed the information provided and have the following comments: 1. Project must conform to the current State of California Codes adopted at the time of plan check submittal. The following are the codes enforced at this time: 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (Based on 2006 IBC) 2007 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (Based on 2006 UMC) 2007 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (Based on 2006 UPC) 2007 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (Based on 2005 NEC) 2007 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 2007 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE 2. All contractors and subcontractors shall have a current City of Palm Desert Business License prior to permit issuance per Palm desert Municipal Code, Title 5. 3. All contractors and/or owner -builders must submit a valid Certificate of Worker's Compensation Insurance coverage prior to the issuance of a building permit per California Labor Code, Section 3700. 4. Illegal additions/alterations must submit 2 copies of as -built plans and pay an investigation fee. An inspector will verify if the structure can be permitted and may require corrective action. The applicant then must resubmit 2 sets of plans incorporating the inspector's correction items. The plan will reviewed by a plan checker for compliance. Further corrections may be required at this time and then must be addressed by the applicant. When the construction plans are approved then a permit may be issued and subsequent inspections to follow. G'\Planning\Kevin Swartz\Word\Var 08-261 Toia\Building Conditions doc CITY Of PHLffl DESERT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-0611 FAX: 760 341-7098 info@palm-desert.org April 8, 2008 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION (REVISED) CASE NO: MISC 08-40 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MICHAEL AND MARIANNE TOIA, 46-020 Burroweed Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of golf cart barn structure for its aesthetic blending with the existing home and surrounding community. LOCATION: 46-020 Burroweed Lane ZONE: R-2 8000 (4) Upon reviewing the plans and presentations submitted by staff and by the applicant, the Architectural Review Commission to approve project on aesthetic merit subject to: 1) sloping roof back; minimize the raising of the roof to a max of 1 %" to get slope; 2) redoing and cleaning up entire flashing on perimeter of structure; not going over property line; 3) obtaining land surveyor for property line location; and, 4) continuing the tile on roof. Date of Action: March 11, 2008 Vote: Motion carried 4-0-0-2, with Commissioners DeLuna and Hanson absent. (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. Any amendments to this approved plan would need to be re -submitted to Commission for approval.) STAFF COMMENTS: It is your responsibility to submit the plans approved by the Architectural Review Commission to the Department of Building and Safety. mmt lICV(.10 P MI CITY Of PiLffl DESEPT 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346-0611 FAX: 760 341-7098 info@palm-deserr.org March 11, 2008 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION ACTION CASE NO: MISC 08-40 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MICHAEL AND MARIANNE TOIA, 46-020 Burroweed Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of golf cart bam structure for its aesthetic blending with the existing home and surrounding community. LOCATION: 46-020 Burroweed Lane ZONE: R-2 8000 (4) Upon reviewing the plans and presentations submitted by staff and by the applicant, the Architectural Review Commission to approve project on aesthetic merit subject to: 1) sloping roof back avoiding raising roof anymore to get slope; 2) redoing and cleaning up entire flashing on perimeter of structure, not going over property line and obtaining land surveyor for property line location; and, 3) continuing the tile on roof. Date of Action: March 11, 2008 Vote: Motion carried 4-0-0-2, with Commissioners DeLuna and Hanson absent. (An appeal of the above action may be made in writing to the City Clerk of the City of Palm Desert within fifteen (15) days of the date of the decision. Any amendments to this approved plan would need to be re -submitted to Commission for approval.) STAFF COMMENTS: It is your responsibility to submit the plans approved by the Architectural Review Commission to the Department of Building and Safety. CONTINUED CASES: In order to be placed on the next meeting's agenda, new or revised plans must be submitted no later than 9:00 a.m. the Monday eight days prior to the next meeting. ca, nimo a norm +w ARCHITECTURAL RtVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 2008 A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: MISC 08-40 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): MICHAEL AND MARIANNE TOIA, 46-020 Burroweed Lane, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of golf cart barn structure for its aesthetic blending with the existing home and surrounding community. LOCATION: 46-020 Burroweed Lane ZONE: R-2 8000 (4) Mr. Swartz presented current photos of Ms. Suzanne Pride's side of wall and asked Mr. Toia to present his comments. Mr. Michael Toia, applicant, presented current photos and summarized his structure. He indicated that he has taken some action to remedy some of the concerns of the Commission. At the previous meeting there was some concern regarding the undesirable appearance of the exposed metal flashing on the top of the front wall of both the garage and the golf cart barn. He explained that both the garage and the golf cart barn's front walls were originally trimmed two years ago and the top edges were trimmed with 90 degree terra cotta etched tiles in order to match those already existing on the pitched portion of his roof. The motion detection light has been replaced with a light fixture that matches the other light fixtures on the home. The original plan drawing of the height of the front wall in relation to the common wall called for them to be alike, but when they began to construct the wall they intended to incorporate a 4 foot by 12 foot beam which protruded from the existing garage. To maintain a consistent roofline of the golf barn parallel with the existing garage line, it became aesthetically necessary to accommodate the extra height. This was addressed with the field inspector and incorporated prior to his approval for building final signoff. Mr. Toia removed the downspout in the gutter located at the common wall. The gutter previously located at the common wall will be moved to the edge of the main garage structure. This will catch and divert 90 percent of the rainwater from the pitched roof of the house and flat roof of the two car garage. The remaining eight feet of roof section over the golf cart barn would then be re -foamed to divert the water away G'Pianroguar:ne Judyo.Vcrd Fdes\ARC Minutesk2008WR08O311 dcc Page 2 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 2008 from the common wall and toward the center of the golf cart barn to a downspout in the back of the yard. The PVC pipe addressed by Ms. Pride was used for seasonal winterizing of the swamp cooler, when brought to his attention he removed it in December. In a letter dated February 11, 2008, Ms. Pride stated that she wanted the flashing removed that overlaps onto her side of the common wall. He presented photos of the flashing dated January 2008 and photos taken this morning. The January photos show that the flashing was secured tightly to the wall; somehow in the meantime it was pried loose. He would be glad to comply with the removal of the balance of the flashing which overlaps down her side of the wall immediately. In order to improve the aesthetics as viewed from her side of the common wall, he plans to finish this edge of the structure with the same 90 degree terra cotta etch tile as consistent with the entire home. This look will also be consistent with the tile edged roof of Ms. Pride's home. In reference to the allegations that he Tied to the City when requesting a permit for a gate enclosure, he pointed out that the terminology "gate enclosure" was chosen by the permit specialist assisting them at the Building and Safety desk. At that time, he made a full disclosure as to their ultimate goal. The cart barn has now been complete for over two years without a single compliant. Commissioner Gregory stated that it was clear to him that this was an unfortunate forum for a neighborly mess. This Commission is an aesthetic review Commission and so hearing all this information is something that should be saved for Planning Commission or City Council. He asked Mr. Toia if that made sense to save time and aggravation. He understands that there are issues here that go way beyond the aesthetics, but the Commission's major task is to look at the aesthetics. Mr. Toia understood, but asked if he could have a little more time to complete his comments. Commissioner Gregory approved. Mr. Toia pointed out that Ms. Pride had constructed a gazebo less than two feet from their wall and the common wall of the golf course. When he checked with the City he found that no permits had been filed. He reminded the Commission that at the previous meeting he had distributed pictures of many of the properties on Burroweed Lane that also have their garages built directly on the property line and as such are consistent with their look and blending. Of the approximate 30 homes on their cul-de-sac more GAPianr.,ng\arose Judy\Word FJes`ARC Minutes \2008\AR080311.doc Page 3 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 2008 than 70 percent of them have either a zero setback between the structures or only a single 48-inch setback between the two adjoining buildings. A double 48-inch setback is clearly not the standard. Ms. Debbie Harris -Sherman, Attomey for Ms. Pride, introduced herself to the Commission. Commissioner Gregory stated that this was not a courtroom or a public forum where she would be addressing issues that he thought she would be discussing. He stated that this Commission was an aesthetic review Commission only. Ms. Sherman stated that she was aware of the purpose of the hearing and the purpose of the Commission. Ms. Sherman stated that she had submitted a written package that included photos that were taken from Ms. Pride's property on February 22, 2008 to give them an idea of what the view was from her yard. She stated that they were not contesting that the neighbors thought it looked good from the front view. What they were contesting was the encroachment, the use of common wall to attach the structure, the drainage issues, and all of the health and safety code violations and building code violations which need to be determined and remediated. Aesthetic blending with the community is only one factor to be considered in the general plan when making determinations of this type. She understood that approval or denial is completely discretionary and that the Commission has the ability to be flexible. She agreed that the accusations of sabotage and personal grievances in this forum are inappropriate and that it is something that would be taken up in court and not something that the City will make a determination on. They are aware of that and they are not trying to use this forum for these types of private concerns, but only to express their concerns in regards to the project that the Commission has before them for approval right now. She stated that when you have party wall issues there is difficulty in getting a title policy when a transfer of property occurs and that is something that they want to be very careful of. Ms. Pride's property value and the ability to freely transfer her property should not be taken from her because of a structure that was built without the benefit of the process. She indicated that she didn't see where a survey had ever been done of the property and she thought it would be obviously a threshold issue to be determined. She stated that there are declarations of covenants and restrictions recorded against this property from 1969. She has confirmed through a preliminary title report and discussions with Dave Erwin, City Attorney that the restrictions are G \Plann,ng\Janne JudylWord F,ies'ARC Minutes 12008WR080311_doc Page 4 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 2008 still in effect. The preliminary title report shows that there are easements on Ms. Pride's property and assuming on Mr. Toia's property which are of record but have not been mapped because these are old easements that far pre -date the city charter and all done under the county's rules and auspicious. Something that should be considered in forming their determination is the fact that the wall and the structure attached to it might make the title unmarketable when the applicant goes to sell it. If the Commission decides to approve this structure, they would request that they attach stringent conditions to this approval. If this wall is not built in such a way as to be able to withstand the weight of that structure, we have a big problem since there is only four feet between the wall and the applicant's bedroom. They are respectfully requesting that the Commission consider the written documentation, the photographic evidence, and the oral arguments, and deny the application for approval. Commissioner Gregory asked if there was anything bearing on the wall. Mr. Toia stated that it was an inner wall. Commissioner Van Vliet stated that he originally objected to it for numerous reasons. He thought it was too high above the adjacent wall and he didn't like the way it looked from Ms. Pride's house. He went out and looked at in detail and felt that it could be rectified and if it was cleaned up substantially then he would support it. He made suggestions on what had to be done: slope the roof back away from the property line so there are no drains that go on to the neighbors property; do not raise the structure any higher; re -do the entire flashing making it nice and clean coming straight down against the wall; no capping over the wall; and not going over the property line. Commissioner Vuksic stated that the tile is a significant enhancement along the edges and suggested that he continue the tile on the height element. He mentioned that aesthetically it was acceptable. Commissioner Gregory stated that Commissioner Lambell came in after the meeting and listened to the recorded minutes. He asked for her comments. G'.Piannung\.arir.e JuaytVVord FiesVARC Minutes\20C6WR08031 t doc Page 5 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 2008 Commissioner Lambell stated that there were four major issues that she was concerned with: the flashing on the common wall; the downspout drainpipe; the lighting; height of the common wall; and the height of the interior wall for the golf cart barn. Mr. Toia has dwelt with the issues of the lighting and the downspout and she agreed that the tile across the top is far superior to just the metal flashing that was there before. Aesthetically it will stand up longer than anything else. The height of the wall adjacent to the common wall is an issue that is not the Commission's concern. She stated that this group was an aesthetic commission and that all they were caring about is what it looks like and how it looks in the neighborhood. She mentioned that she drove by to take a look and stated that Mr. Toia has made a vast improvement to what it was before. She stated that she will support what has been done and what will be done according to the conditions. Commissioner Gregory stated that he hasn't changed his decision since the prior meeting. Mr. Bagato stated that a lot of the issues that the attorney has brought up are issues that will be addressed further. The general plan issue and health and safety issues are identified in the variances and the Planning Commission report. He stated that those issues are not being ignored and that the Commission will place conditions on Mr. Toia's approval and require a survey because we need to know what is going on with the wall. However, this forum doesn't address those issues; Planning Commission and the City Council will. Commissioner Vuksic made a motion to approve the project on its aesthetic merit with the following conditions: sloping roof back avoiding raising the roof anymore to get that slope; redoing and cleaning up entire flashing on perimeter of structure, not going over property line; obtaining a land surveyor for property line location, and continuing the tile on roof. Ms. Sherman stated that it was important to bear in mind that the roofing exceeds the height of the common wall so if the roof is made higher it will create more of a problem. She requested that the Commission keep the applicant's rights and property rights under the City code in mind when approving the request. Commissioner Gregory stated that this Commission is a subjective review group, not objective. G \Piannrg\Jan r.e Judy\Wcrd Fues'ARC Minutes\20C8`,AR080311 doc Page 6 of 14 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES Action: MARCH 11, 2008 Mr. Toia stated that the common wall is already a foot and a half over code. The city code is six feet and the wall is already seven and a half feet. The Commission and the applicant discussed the code and the grade height of the wall. It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner Lambell, to approve the project based on aesthetic merit subject to: 1) sloping roof back; minimize the raising of the roof to a max of 1 1/2" to get slope; 2) redoing and cleaning up entire flashing on perimeter of structure; not going over property line; 3) obtaining land surveyor for property line location; and, 4) continuing the tile on roof. Motion carried 4-0-0-2, with Commissioners DeLuna and Hanson absent. 2. CASE NO: SA 08-78 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): KEVIN PARKER/SWAIN SIGN, INC., 1384 East Fifth Street, Ontario, CA 91764 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of reface on two existing wall signs, install new three foot fascia on two existing gas pump canopies, and install four 33-inch circle logo's on new canopy fascias: 76 Gas Station. LOCATION: 73-801 Highway 111 ZONE: C-1 SP Mr. Bagato stated that this was a request to reface two new existing walls signs and installing a three foot fascia on two existing gas pump canopies. They initially proposed to replace the pole signs, but staff informed them that the code states that if you change something that no longer meets the code they would have to come down. The applicant has decided not to make any changes to the poles at this time. Mr. Swartz stated that they wouldn't be redoing the poles at this time, so they will not be coming down. He stated that Sign C and D were fading. One says "Auto Care" and one says "Quality PROclean Gasolines", but they will reface both of the signs with "Auto Care". Commissioner Vuksic stated that it was the same basic sign. Mr. Kevin Parker, representative, indicated that those CAPiann,rg\Jar r e Judy\Word FIes'ARC Mmutes'2008'AR080311 doc Page 7 of 14 City of Palm Desert / Department of Community Development VARIANCE APPLICATION 73-510 Fred Waring Drive • Palm Desert • California • 92260 • (760) 346-0611 • Fax (760) 776-6417 Applicant: MICA ' 114A g-/ A,J A TQ / Telephone: (le()) ,({-+ - Mailing Address: 4`(002.0 U Qk' �i� e �? iU A0-P Fax number: ( Ar e City: PM-0-1 cp-eC. L ice-1 State: CA Zip: q22 &Email: l''l Zr ta/ A �v i:� 12-'I141�- Property Owner: Mailing Address: City: Representative: Mailing Address: City: / Please send correspondence to (check one): V Applicant / A vie Telephone: tuber: State: Zip: Email: Telephone: ax number. State: Zip: Email: Property Owner Representative Project Address(s): AS A.- Existing Zoning: General Plan Designation: Pro ect Re uest: R fgR)t/, L ©F PRQTIJJ LY Pg.R4 1 "fin vLP c,9 /z7 ORAN Al 11 7 I N Sr7- AJ1t_ �EJ ve . t H� C cIfC ENT K ��fJ�� 5 �, C.S / � �, r � IL/44S ULJ) ijb Ickr�lfiLGs z.b Y� aLA _ � yee �i <I-0X Whit-ft 14 WI) !it WOu.1.3 Ail (Ii 7 � f} WW2) RLu/,L% / U >A A uuJVi J•,✓�2, C. RODi (SE& i+-7ri r+Ed%s ,P 1 '74014 Property Owner Authorization: The undersigned states that they are the owner(s) of the property described and herein give authorization for the filing of the application. Signature lei «tif71''_ ST0/A; Print Name (,/20/oe Date 1 ' Applicant / Representative Signature: By signing this application I certify that the information provided is accurate. I understand that the City might not approve what I am applying for and/or might require conditions of approval. Signature OFFICE USE ONLY PROJECT NO: VAR ACCEPTED BY: Print Name Date DATE: City of Palm Desert Variance Application I. PURPOSE: A variance from the terms of the zoning ordinance may be granted oh when, because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the ordinance would deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other property In the vicinity and under identical zoning classification state law prohibits the granting of a use variance. I1. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: 1. Complete application form filled out with required signatures 2. $2,915.00 Deposit Application Fee. Costs to process the application will be charged against the deposit until the development case is closed. Payment for any charges incurred in excess of the initial deposit will be required prior to final action. If the deposit amount exceeds the accumulated costs at the time of the final action on subject application, the excess deposit shall be refunded to the applicant. 3. An accurate scale drawing of a site plan, floor plan, and elevations indicating: III. PROCEDURE: 1. Submit a complete application with all sets of required plans and appropriate fee to the Department of Community Development for staff review. Staff will review the application and determine if it is complete within 30 days from the date the project is submitted. The application will not be processed if it is deemed incomplete. After the application is deemed complete, the project is circulated to other City departments and local agencies for comments and conditions. 2. If necessary, Application is presented to the Architectural Review Commission for preliminary review of the site plan, elevations, floor plan, landscaping and color material samples. 3. Staff will prepare a written staff report and the project is scheduled for Planning Commission (meetings held on the 181 and 3id Tuesdays of each month) and a legal notice is published and mailed to adjacent property owners/tenants 10-21 days before the meeting, advertising the public hearing, approximately 6 to 8 weeks after the project submittal. There is a 15-day appeal from the day of a decision taken by the Planning Commission. If the project is appealed or called up for review, it wilt be scheduled for a public hearing with the City Council (meetings held on the 2nd and 4th Thursdays of each month). Staff will prepare a written report and a legal notice is published and mailed to adjacent property owners/tenants 10-21 days before the meeting. This process is approximately 2 to 4 weeks after the Planning Commission decision and approximately 8 to 12 weeks after the project has been submitted. 4. If the project presented to the Architectural Review Commission then it will return to the Commission for final approval of construction drawings. IV. APPLICATION CHECKLIST: APPLICATIONS WILL BE REJECTED IF ANY APPLICABLE EXHIBITS ARE NOT RECEIVED. • 10 complete sets of preliminary drawings (typically 24"x36") as described in Section VII of this application, folded to a maximum size of 81/2"x13" (scaled, 11"x17" size plans may be substituted if appropriate). A complete set of drawings include: • Site Plan • Architectural Elevations • Floor Plans • Roof Plan One (1) full size colored site plan and elevations Digital files on CD or other electronic format of all plans • Two (2) copies of a typed listing of surrounding property owners. Two (2) sets of typed, self-adhesive mailing labels for adjacent property owners within 300' of the project. 2 City of Palm Desert Variance Application One (1) set of Assessor's Parcel Map(s) illustrating the subject property and the surrounding property within 300 feet. Draw boundary of subject property and 300 foot radius in red. Complete Supporting Data questions is Section IV V. SUPPORTING DATA: 1. A variance from Section(s) of the City's Municipal Code to permit a: 2. • What particular difficulties or unnecessary phvsica( hardships inconsistent with the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance would result if the varian were not granted? IeE��(/�u SL i� As 3TA ESENT S'ri2U -r q1 y L� _3 dLD AN ! SSU a7 4 K�Qs lit a r6E (PELis we i 10 144ife N M A?l Ui! 'MWAc r Tv &M. Ma P-TV VAL/E . 3. • What exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions property that does not apply genera o other properties in the same zone? ,. 3�`�7L/Ii vsg17.77pippiL)g-te7M- Oi2DrN�4RY 4. • To what �rextent �would the strict gorr literalinterpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation deprive g oa Iiripkly Dbkt DUwi ersg p ( el-fi41! Sagre2� ad1 EL-gweit,Wcfkl277.14Z A /. ghE5 (EE i N S 13-1 77M14 13- 5 5. • To what extent would the granting of this adjustment be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, • s . • • Y rially i 'urioys�to pro, rties or im • rive ents i N 577 e vicin 0 P �II yl -IV nr if 2IL L/ 1LY- :r... 1 zg ' 3 . Aet�4.:r.T�h- ,ZU I a• AZ • IN #1E12S, Ac WELL AS .LE7rE Oral PPOR- i FR4i4 .fi'E �,Q.S •ctsee h'ncK. Ct1xas�cH6. • Proposed use of the site (project for which the form is led; escnbe t e tal undertaking, not just the eur nD pacatiort alp al te4X sought): CA-gri 7. Gross Project Site Area: 8. Net Project Site Area: 9. Existing use of the project site: 10. Existing use on adjacent properties: (Example: North, Shopping Center; South, Single Family Dwellings; East, Vacant. etc.) 3 City of Palm Desert , Variance Application North: South: East West: 11. Site topography (describe): VI. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION: Al The applicant shall provide the Department of Community Development with two (2) copies of adjacent property owners and their addresses for all parcels within 300 feet of the proposed conditional use. The two (2) lists shall be typed on self-adhesive mailing address labels. The lists shall also include the owner of the property under consideration. These property owner names may be obtained in one of the two following manners: o Contact a title company and request they that fumish you with a list of names and mailing labels, for which there will probably be a fee for the list. o You may obtain them yourself in the following manner: • Secure from the County Assessor's Office parcel maps covering your application and all lands within at least 300 feet. • Indicate the area of your request by a red outline on the parcel maps. Delineate, in red, all property within 300 feet of the area of your request. • From the parcel map, make a list of book, page, block number, and parcel number within the above 300-foot area. • Using the Visual Numerical Index File, which is to be found in the Assessor's Office, place the name and address for each parcel opposite the number described in No. 4 above. • Sign Affidavit attesting to name list. • Return this list with your application to the Department of Community Development. VII. EXHIBIT REQUIREMENTS CHECKLIST: APPLICATIONS MAY BE REJECTED IF ALL PLANS DO NOT INCLUDE AT LEAST THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: APPLICANTS ARE STRONGLY URGED TO CONTACT STAFF IN THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION. A. SITE PLAN: APPLICANTS ARE STRONGLY URGED TO CONTACT STAFF IN THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT VERY EARLY IN THE PLANNING PROCESS AND PRIOR TO SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION. Name, address, and phone number of property owner, applicant, engineer and architect Scale, not less than 1"=30' North Arrow Vicinity map including project address/location Fully dimensioned subject parcel boundaries Abutting streets and right-of-ways, dimensioned (consult with Department of Public Works) Existing/proposed street(s) and width(s) including: centerline, median islands, parkway width, and sidewalk(s) dimensions 4 City of Palm Desert Variance Application Access and driveway dimensions Location and dimensions of all existing and proposed easements All utility Tine locations (gas, electric, cable, water and sewer) ADA Ramps, Paths and Path of travel All existing and proposed structures All building setbacks from property lines Building dimensions (include roof overhangs) Location, elevations and height of proposed walls and fences Location of trash enclosures Parking layout with dimensions of stalls, aisle widths, walkways and surface type Map Legend including: Gross and net acreage of parcel(s) Gross and net floor area of structure(s) and type of use Required and proposed number of parking spaces (including handicap) Lot coverage (percentage of land covered by building(s)) Landscape percentage in and adjacent to the parking area B. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS: MEV tOU94 Show height of new structures from Finished Grade to highest part of the structure, the roof parapets, and kueHIWED each floor. AN D Show screening for all roof -mounted equipment 1 PPRot/E D Proposed signage/awning location (if signage will be on the building after it is built) g`t Tilt_ Colored Elevations, rendering and/or perspectives (separate sheet) A• R•c• C. FLOOR PLANS: Dimensions of interior rooms Label all rooms Dimensions of all exterior components D. ROOF PLAN: Indicate top of parapet heights Location of roof mounted equipment Location of ladder for roof access 5 r City of Palm Desert Variance Application (SAMPLE) Assessors Map 00-12 1 IT 16 15 14 NOTE: 13 SUBJECT PARCEL 12 ff 10 9 9 22 THE SUBJECT PARCEL ANO THE THREE HLN1RED FOOT PERIMETER LINE ARE TO BE OUTLINED IN RED. 6 City of Palm Desert Variance Application STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF PALM DESERT ) OWNER AND/OR OWNER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT AFFIDAVIT 1, (we), N11.C.b4AEL- T- -ro/A being duly sworn depose and declare to the best of _ ( y knowledge that the (my/our) foregoing is true and correct under the penalty of perjury: EXECUTED AT: PALIA DES E 12-T CA U c• / (CITY) / (STATE) V DATE: /2.0 /O' (MONTH $ (DAY) (YEAR) APPLICANT, OWNER AND/OR OWNER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT: M IC44,EL S- -rr /A (Print Name) )1).t-est-ti4 (Signature %ow 1314QRau)OEc Lk*$ (Mailing Address) PAS Desk-r , CA . °I2.2Co0 (City, State and Zip) CtbO) 3(1 — 4 12_ (Area Code) Telephone Number 7 ?KOPEQT'1 E fZVE`� 5URI/4-Y FOR THE L ocAT/G/V OF RR°PER rY L /NE BETW.E.E'V 4 ors / A,1/D 2 cF TRAcr/V0 .9862 Ate/. B. /// -/6 'C/TY of F'FIL/✓I DESERT" / RON/4/OOD STRET" Fes/ .v.a.9 4' 4/41' •9.5 "E kr1 - B.�0.69`rv! - 9/7• 6/"M. - Fd2 'J - _S se-, v LI = 89° 30 ',2 " Qi V vh 4= 9 0 ° FG 2 M FaUAll, gr /.R kt Q Af0TAG L0r I W o 12;i41 , 4/0/Prf/ FACE OF /144.7 50NR Y wA' L may' h - , Pr Fd, , /� AVoa° #5/00"E rc J,vo 4 /. p o Q - ` � �l TA Cr 640 4.61 79 90 j 0 2§` ,tort �dr Vor To 5'CAL. ,E /. E 5TA6L / 5//ED THE CENT/FL /NE Or' /RONLt/OOO .s7 EE T ,/jfTfrVI EN T/rv0 Fo UNO 34 " /. P. . woi'vN ON PA [. A4 a 5E R T /A// T NO 7 AND TRAcT /Vo .986 2 2. TA% /SHED 7WE CE,VTER4.//VE OF uRR/NEED L ANE B p,4OPORT/0A/AL D/5T,NCE ,5 ' 4/VO TU,4N,E0 RECQ. 'D ANG L .E A/od/E!/ER /%VE pt/E/i2,4-- L/NA6L4 TO F/NI9 RE CORDED /J//O/t//JMENT5 On/ ,BURRO ; VEE© 4. A/4'E TO 571857'4NT/ATE THE Z. C4 T/4N OF-- L. D T ,C. /AJE /N Q UE 577 OA/. 7 f/E co/MPL.ErLD 5/RVfY /ND/c,47 5 THE 4 0T ./A/E Q� TGs/,E,EN LOTS / ArVD 2 ON TRACT /k/ O 386 /5 AT/OiV THE ,VO X/57-//Va MF15ONRY kV,474./- 1'/TCH .ENC/A/EER5 /A/C. P,O_B03( 4''5.5 PA441,4DESE_R7 CA. 9.Z6/: 76D -3645 -76 6 7 C,ORNER RECORD ..xr V t, ,q_ifyn 49 es 44 */- 41,-k-to/vide' gitiLowtiootcncyliy, 04, elf 0 5,ot CORNER TYRE Ai% COORDINAYES (Options?) Garrix.1 a 60i.PC9vetorst ::er-.2," : :3 GOntaC4 N Molnar ' PrOpOrIV X E I wichi Od-oa icw 4, NA .7 ri hAnio 1 04010 04 Srw, 141.410.1.ti-r 8, 200e, NAM) I IYXJ4 Eler veri (*can pima 20E; woes Ij it-lcdiie Sc. Trip , i+9e. & Nerd*, of FlArCh0, totc.v. 1.1-es 1.414-gc 0 ing.ligud 0 Corner — Ler as fol-nd 0 Fated *A %anode. Estabisroc EJ Rersuibimihed Robuil 0 lealtiricotion and type 04 comer found E?dcr Wogi to lifp*011ty Of PrOMIiige OCI to etitaDWI the Ct.IttOt C. Fel fie isi /. No 7-‘77 - reffe04/......e12,„i7/7...7.4" A/o 3a.42 _Z. .5:s.A145.1 ser cross Oil R le?". 4 • Ai .9,441•Ail Adh.s. 7s3e .A/0 Refer'', <It fc, / pls. -.4-1I CoSy rhy A04.1p.az2—eed-Affred A.S2 0 - 7Ye oe P/24 A Sir 1i.c.4 /257/ ip7 Cor4 - /12Ji;mie"..._ A desettptiCo Of ON prlystuil conViCt1 Or 'ke moevierweeras toind and alL siliK of reset: AL I. ibleptelitLetz A- orris /Pr ivood clieid_didavi _..._ SURVEYORS STATEMENT This Comm Reco0 was peepared by MS7 Of 1.06f-t cny erection in cc With 1114, LAO SatvAyO13 /74/ 4/5 r 8. 20 08 COUNTY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT This Corner Record ream mogreici And &VICO County Suntcyor's Comment PAT* I dl 2 Z. 0 C,4 07' IRA i Al 3,16 2 /R4Al14/13 L? ..s-r/ . 'r ti1B9e1/41 Vi ,,e 7/74' .3',s.f 0 /744e.044R ego. c 'R .1/ 7. h'`R R +30.6 9M 1 917.63M 4 + ,;. 5.M.H kkc o- ♦y N. 7 :.5. a 1 , /Pt', `' nt•r`Ab4 r/J scc/// L /N! /. oT / 23' ',� AJ 899 /5 %0'z '<1 //0 rE PRGPZRTY L //v4" if., AT rN.4 re. Ai of EX/sT/NG tt/AZ.. L . I K0NWUUL) -.. 5 I-TF rum — ' LAND SCFI?�D FARE! ul11 Y itiOgrit Q 7 ■ 21 i 0. b C; :Ic73 rci a 2t ` e RtaQ (LEviq77Q/ X.lS7'//V4 S Ti�uC��F -9' gotJvA o O .15 —_ . -FLOOR PLPt4- TO Y m 11 ‘11 Pge-C)(AS CI 44,1 oN BLacg w�►[..�- 1< ----- 2.c; - f(cor PL,A?%I.- %PLtAoo RooF S4SQP#4CE 2 Xaio 3-catse FRAM061 2 i..d1/41-t�s F-LL1-/go A.oGip /Ara oa 16" cer47eRL.)Ae 1 /�Zr( FOAM 20, Le 1>4E.Q. P49?e 2 ?( FR-Airk1 c%CL o iJ gb'' ca)J -Tee_ a eJG f Z i z AALAD i W vEAv LEp4Eg 3'LA I IE L iME?An.. .32)1s -r 1'ti► e.�C,�G-lL� -- r d 4a L. 3 1, 2)(Co 010ls-r oPa to°' CE+3.---ciz 1~+i3e .-.� 4®? V I Ems/ 2XG F/Re BL0c I<c Z"O+ C.1S 2 !W '14 S' The pre-existing carport was more than 25 years old. It consisted of a nine foot wooden gate with an aluminum roof structure that extended from the garage to the common wall. The gate was very heavy and difficult to open and close. It was quite an eye sore, was subject to the elements and posed a security/ vandelism issue. ao6va 15 THL bUILJ /P/6 PERMIT 14TNNOK/,HC) THE FRONT WALL. R---zis-nd4 "<"44 C--rc e (7\ E-50 t,ik-s A- L,L, This is our golf Cart Barn. Consistent with other homes and garages on our street, it is built directly on the property line. There still remains more than a four foot set -back from the common wall to the neighboring home. These 2 homes are located 46190 & 46240 Burroweed Lane. The garage on the left is built on the lot -line. The total space between the structures is approximately 4 feet. These 2 homes are located at 46250 & 46280 Burroweed. The garage on the left is built on the lot -line. The total space between the structures is approximately 4 feet. These 2 homes are located at 46080 & 46100 Burroweed. The right garage is built on the lot -line. The total space between structures is approximately 4 feet. 6 -if There are several homes located on Burroweed where a zero set back occurs with both units. Petition in favor of the Toia golf cart barn To: The City of Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission Regarding: In the matter of the Toia golf cart barn located at 46020 Burroweed Lane, Palm Desert, California 92260 Statement: We are the neighbors of Michael and Marianne Toia and have witnessed the transformation and beautification of their property over the passed few years. We believe that their improvements have been tastefully and professionally designed to compliment their own home and that of the community. We are specifically aware of the golf cart barn constructed two years ago and located adjacent to the main garage. It is a very attractive addition, integrated with the existing structure so as to appear part of the original design. Consistent with many other homes in the neighborhood, it is built on the property line. We urge the Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission to approve this structure. Signed in concurrence: Signature Print Name Address -t)r' S-3A) ',cLU-e-cI L,;' . _ fri, ! c( / b(e. 4 t,-,?,;) 8„t_,, ,a c,_, Ly, C= z-z 4 7 .- ' 64:4: ilev ?v cc 'f) lam, 9 ci ( ,r'L_ � rep. k fzi-,,,,, LAi.: a5L..) Au\-rv,,:)ee 0 LLcr e, c26,c, T?-/d C7 Al. / ife /er-- -6 33 3 4 Afer, w z. c L_n-/ • 9 , c " -A-N '-- 1 IKi,"& 9Z a3 6 ' eotci .J L/J` Y), D..E,, F 1' t-t(i'L g S P 4 eecl (AI qzz ) Du Old f )C_LI 't=7 %`/?o BiA't v c(22 E-C; Petition in favor of the Toia golf cart barn To: The City of Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission Regarding: In the matter of the Toia golf cart barn located at 46020 Burroweed Lane, Palm Desert, California 92260 Statement: We are the neighbors of Michael and Marianne Toia and have witnessed the transformation and beautification of their property over the passed few years. We beiieve that their improvements have been tastefully and professionally designed to compliment their own home and that of the community. We are specifically aware of the golf cart barn constructed two years ago and located adjacent to the main garage. It is a very attractive addition, integrated with the existing structure so as to appear part of the original design. Consistent with many other homes in the neighborhood, it is built on the property line. We urge the Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission to approve this structure, Signed in concurrence: Signature Print Name Address / (.; r 4r(S) ...:ray-= (; , / is a 6 0 ;St- C t: 2 C 7.r ,.v t /'/ l 1 /G vk°. i Tr l C I__.7 b 4 14-14 f.. ,. lr\ to-1 ictieiZU i i''i +t a4 1--Y1•i1 "fl'ti L 1-6; , %. 5- %a ,4,?.(7/:.�'t f . V24c�61 ) .-jeil; Y4�1I•tC-ia .✓r^ ,04.1' ‘) r 4-- 4. n'"n • G-l-A�'q ' 77ni7v>r_-716• y/r<Grs—as4 � ' 4-46- � s ''t-� �, C%< ` 1\_1I�e.W �J ! V it k , )L (Y.4; f.: ,..,:- FC /3i 1-ti•2--) 3 k i l�r-^ %' . /T •-/ rr , ems.-/L 4 . _ ..% :''.1 .i61 c, v.. ' cam..' c: - i /. ' Petition in favor of the Toia golf cart barn To: The City of Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission Regarding: In the matter of the Toia golf cart barn located at 46020 Burroweed Lane, Palm Desert, California 92260 Statement: We are the neighbors of Michael and Marianne Toia and have witnessed the transformation and beautification of their property over the passed few years. We believe that their improvements have been tastefully and professionally designed to compliment their own home and that of the community. We are specifically aware of the golf cart barn constructed two years ago and located adjacent to the main garage. It is a very attractive addition, integrated with the existing structure so as to appear part of the original design. Consistent with many other homes in the neighborhood, it is built on the property line. We urge the Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission to approve this structure. Signed in concurrence: Signature Print Name Address s4 (h i> t .t 7 q 4 `f I __ Div 0 0 c� a /I, �t� f f / 73 of4)4 0? i - ' 3 - 0.5,,,,wae, , f'I� (4 u oaRT E'er. Ll 44.D I b5 -)ARait Lt.; f ✓� /- k 4. - t� o jj,, ALP e„ f-. ,/ PP b4/-6. a Et) ilJ L 1.5ci (Ji JPP 1,. p Mary Helen Kelly & Kathleen Kelly 46-100 Burroweed Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 January 10, 2008 To Whom it May Concern: We are two of the co -owners at 46-100 Burroweed Lane, and we are writing to express our experience of the property located at 46-020 Burroweed Lane, currently owned by Michael Toia. This property is at the corner of Burroweed and Ironwood, essentially acting as point -of -entry to our block, which ends in a cul de sac. It's appearance is very defining for the block. For multiple years, prior owners of the home at 46-020 let it fall into complete disrepair. The home was an obvious blight. The yard was wild, and the home was not receiving needed maintenance. The backyard pool became green from neglect, and it was visible from Ironwood to those walking by. This made the home unsafe as well as unsightly. The current owners have completely renovated and relandscaped, making the corner highly attractive. It now is a good match for the very upscale home on the other side of Ironwood. All of the work has been done tastefully, with desert landscaping and coordinated architecture. We have noticed the new golf -cart garage adjacent to the main garage. It is a very attractive addition, integrated with the existing structure so as to appear part of the original design. Consistent with many other homes in the neighborhood, it is built against the plot line. The work done on 46-020 is a very, very welcome improvement to the appearance of our neighborhood and an asset to home values. We applaud the current owners for their effort. Sincerely, i Mary I4e1n Kelly �t u�9117 Kathleen Kelly C January 12, 2008 To whom it may concern: Mr. and Mrs. Toia of 46020 Burroweed Lane, Palm Desert are neighbors of my mother's. My mother has lived in the house across the street for many years and has watched their house be occupied by a few different owners. Over the years they have become friends and while my mother has become quite ill and I take care of her, I'd like to take this opportunity to express the things she has said and I have noticed about that property. Being a retired real estate broker she always took an interest in the upgrading of any home in that neighborhood in the interest of property values. The previous owners attempted some cosmetic improvements that while well intentioned I'm sure, came out Iooking less than professional, incomplete, and esthetically unpleasing, much to the dismay of my mother each time. Since the Toias have owned the house there has been a complete transformation to say the Least. The house now has become one of the few in the area or on this street, to look as well cared for or as complete. The curb appeal has improved 100% and all the improvements have blended well. It has come to our attention that there is an issue specifically with the appearance of the small garage area where they keep their golf cart. We believe that their improvements are tastefully and professionally designed to complement their own house and that of the neighborhood. at their been to mother and myself and Looking across the street home has an enjoyment my� _ should be lefr as is. Mr. and Mrs. Toia are friendly neighbors who are well Iiked. They have shown themselves to be responsible homeowners interested not only in the upkeep and beautification of their own home, but helpful and responsible to the neighborhood as a whole. Please feel free to contact me personally regarding this matter if you would like any further comments at 346-4466. Sincerely, 4 Us s✓; — _ Deborah White for Lois Bradstreet 46055 Burroweed Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 346-4466 FROM: Richard & Judith Matza 46-415 Burroweed Ln. Palm Desert, CA 92260 DATE: January 10, 2008 TO: City of Palm Desert To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to you concerning the matter of the golf -cart garage for Michael and Marianne Toia, 46-020 Burroweed Ln, I have watched the Toia property over the last two years and I have noted that it has been consistently improved over that period of time. Mr. and Mrs. Toia have improved the house inside and outside, the landscape and the curb appeal. Their improvements have not only benefited them, they have also benefited the neighborhood by the enhanced appearance of the property. The golf -cart garage was constructed in a tasteful manner and with care and diligence. It fits the design of the house and is consistent in design and placement with similar properties on Burroweed Lane and surrounding streets. I understand there is a complaint about the golf -cart garage, and it seem to me that if there is an objection to the cart garage, it should have been raised earlier, while golf -cart garage was under construction. It is very odd that a complaint should arise more than two years later. I urge you to consider the good intent of the Toia's and to permit the golf -cart garage as is. It will be a shame and an injustice to impose a restriction after more than two years later. There seems to be no objection from others in the neighborhood to the golf cart Garae. Thank you for your kind consideration regarding this matter. Sincerely yours, 141(Aid Richard Matza 760-341-5659 January 10, 2008 City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA.92260 To whom it may concern, I am a neighbor of Michael and Marianne Toia and over the past few years have observed the exterior beautification process that has taken place at their residence. While at the same time they have improved the appearance of their home, they have also contributed to overall appearance of the immediate community. I am specifically aware of the golf cart barn in question and would like to be on record that I believe it was tastefully constructed to blend in well with the architecture of the home and surrounding area. I support any efforts on the part of the city to approve and allow this cart barn to continue to exist in its preset form. Stan Smith 73-526 Ironwood Street Palm Desert, Ca.92260 (760) 346-4335 January 8, 2008 City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: 46020 Burroweed Lane To Whom It May Concern: My name is Rose VanHook and I am a resident of Palm Desert. My home is located at 46240 Burroweed Lane, which I have owned for several years. 1 met Mike and Marianne Toia a few years ago and have watched the incredible work that has been done to improve and beautify their home, Not only has it bccn completed in a professional manner, but also with taste and class. Their labor of love has added value to the entire neighborhood. 1 strongly support the accomplishments of Mr. and Mrs. Toia, and hope the City of Palm Desert will recognize the same. I can be contactd for any further discussion at, (310 350-5920). Sincerely, Rose VanHook 46240 Burroweed Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 10) 1 /11 /08 To Whom It May Concern: Michael and Marianne Toia have made many changes to their home which have improved the appearance of their home and helped to beautify the neighborhood. The two most striking are the conversion to water saving desert landscaping and the replacement of a tacky looking lean-to attached to their garage with a garage extension which looks original to the house. As part of the neighborhood we thank them for the improvements. We are aware of the dispute initiated by their neighbor and ask that the city approves the garage extension. Respectfully, Michael and Paula Peters 46160 Burroweed Lane Palm Desert. CA 92260 760-568-9097 • Bill and Barbara Yates 46060 Burroweed Ln Palm Desert, CA 92260 City of Palm Desert January 8, 2008 To Whom It May Concern: We are neighbors of Michael and Marianne Toia and live on Burroweed Lane in Palm Desert. In order to access our property, we must pass the Toia residence whenever we ingress or egress. We have witnessed the beautification process of the Toia residence over the past two years. During that time, Michael and Marianne Toia have done a marvelo-us job remodeling their home, making a once eyesore property into one of the loveliest homes in the neighborhood. We have seen the transformation process and we have personal knowledge of the golf bam on the south side of their property. The golf barn is very tastefully constructed and blends with the Toia's home and all the other homes in the neighborhood. It is constructed of high quality materials and both the exterior and interior of the golfbarn are esthetically appealing to anyone who views the structure. Michael and Marianne were very meticulous in planning and constructing their golf barn and were very conscientious in making sure that it would fit in with other structures in the neighborhood. Please feel free to contact us, if you have any further questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Bill and Barbara Yates 46060 Burroweed Lane Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760)-346-6327 Ci ofPalm Desert .132117ding PennitS Dept. 73-510 Fred Waring Dr Patin Desert, GA. 92260 RE: Michael Tajo., GolfGoifCart Storage addtion, To Whom it may concern, Jan. 11, 2008 One of the things 1 have enjoyed about this wonderful city of Palm Desert, and the way they have done so much to enhance the level of enj oyable living, for those of us that are lucky enough to live here, is their desire to have each individual do, 14,has they can, to bring their property up to a beautffill I for one, think the Toia family has done a great deal, in the past ftw years, to do just that. The addition of the golfcart storage area has made fE T,4os.slble to re1170Ve one more automobile from the street I have 110 oi?jection to the golf -cart storage area, in./ct I applaud their hard work. Wish we had more people like the Tbias. Sincerely, M. T. Miller 73495 Ironwood St Palm Desert, CA. 92260 (7 GO) 7 24; og. a D.