Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDirection Relocate Barrier Gate on Mountain View - B. SweatCITY OF PALM DESERT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT REQUEST: PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF ON THE REQUEST TO RELOCATE THE BARRIER GATE ON MOUNTAIN VIEW SUBMITTED BY: Mark Greenwood, P.E., Director of Public Works APPLICANT: Ms. Barbara C. Sweat 79290 Paseo Del Rey La Quinta, CA 92253 NOTIFICATIONS: Mr. Tanyo Ravicz 77890 Mountain View Palm Desert, CA 92211 DATE: April 28, 2011 CONTENTS: Vicinity Map Letter from Ms. Barbara Sweat Aerial Exhibit of Barrier Gate Recommendation By Minute Motion, provide direction to staff on the request to relocate the barrier gate on Mountain View. Background Ms. Barbara C. Sweat is in the process of building a single family house at 77877 Mountain View. There is an existing barrier gate on Mountain View, which is located west of Washington Street, that aligns with the eastern property line of Ms. Sweat's lot. Ms. Sweat is requesting the relocation of the south side of the barrier gate to allow her driveway access to each side of this barrier gate. Mr. Tanyo Ravicz resides at 77890 Mountain View, directly north and across the street from Ms. Sweat's lot. Mr. Ravicz's lot is positioned further east than Ms. Sweat's and has access to Mountain View on each side of the barrier. Exhibit 1 shows the location of the barrier gate in relation to the properties owned by Ms. Sweat and Mr. Ravicz. Staff Report Request for Direction on Request to Relocate the Barrier Gate on Mountain View April 28, 2011 Page 2 of 2 Ms. Sweat requested the City's permission to relocate the barrier gate. Staff placed several conditions on Ms. Sweat in order to have the barrier relocated. The conditions included: the barrier will be relocated at no cost to the City, the method of relocating the barrier will be approved by City staff, the work will be done by a qualified contractor, an encroachment permit is required to perform the work, and that Mr. Ravicz agree to the barrier relocation. Ms. Sweat has agreed to all of the conditions, but has been unable to obtain consent from Mr. Ravicz. Ms. Sweat has presented Mr. Ravicz with two different alternatives for relocating the barrier gate. The two options are shown on Exhibit 2. In both cases, Mr. Ravicz has been opposed to the barrier gate relocation. Therefore, staff is requesting direction from the City Council to either grant or deny Ms. Sweat's request to relocate the barrier gate on Mountain View. Fiscal Analysis There is no fiscal impact to the City if the barrier gate is relocated. Ms. Sweat has agreed to pay all costs associated with the relocation. Submitted By: Department M rk S. Diercks, P.E. Mark Green ood, P.E. Transportation Engineer Director of ublic Works Approved By: AIM. Wohlmuth Manager GAPubWorks\Staff Reports\2011 Vipol 28\05 Direction on Mountain View Gate\SR Direction on Relocation of Barrier Gate on Mountain View.doc Sl N010W '� o w w Q J Q v a A F— N W ^^ 1..� CJ Lli Of O w F-= SQ Q O ~ � Z Z O F- U_ Q C) > Of W w Q m Q z w o � U m OJ April 8, 2011 To: Mark Dierks Public Works, Palm Desert From. Barbara C. Sweat Owner of Parcel APN 637310031 aka:77977 Mountain View Mailing Address: 79290 Paseo Del Rey La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: City council request on Mtn. View Barrier Dear Mr. Diercks, My name is Barbara Chris Sweat. I own the vacant lot adjacent to the barrier on Mountain View in Palm Desert (APN 637310031 aka: 77877 Mountain View). I have been working with you and with my neighbors, The Raviczs, to get the barrier bordering my property relocated, to allow a driveway access to the Washington side of the barrier. While you and your department have been most helpful, I have been unsuccessful in negotiating with my neighbors to get this done. I feel my neighbors are being unfair about this matter and have voiced concems that are unfounded. Since you have advised me that my only recourse in this matter now, is to bring it up with the city council, I am requesting a hearing from the city council in this regard. Would you please add my request to the city council agenda for their next meeting? Thank you, Barbara Chris Sweat Phone 9 (760) 636-4627 Email: chrissl2@verizon.net MMI ,. 7,�77, r y �7 fir fa¢ 1x r „ . r �E E! F n � L-Al IIUI 1 L GATE RELOCATION OPTIONS t—'C.L ea�ED CITY Ct-.F K'S OFFICE April 21, 2011 Hil 1;7P 22 fl 8: 46 From Barbara Sweat Mailing address: 79290 Paseo Del Rey, La Quinta CA 92253 Phone # 760-636-4627 Email: chrissl2@verizon.net To The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council, My name is Barbara Chris Sweat. I own a vacant 1 acre parcel on Mountain View in Palm Desert (77877 Mountain View). The area is comprised of similar 1 acre lots zoned RE. Most of the lots are already developed. My neighbors to the North, across Mountain View from me, are Tanyo and Martina Ravicz. My lot and the Ravicz's home are both adjacent to a barrier across Mountain View that prevents traffic from using Mountain View as a through street from Warner Trail to Washington. The Ravicz's have a "circular" driveway that straddles both sides of the barrier, enabling them to use either the Washington street side or the Warner Trail side of the barrier, depending on which driveway they choose to use. (See Attachment A.) I am planning to build a house on my lot. I would like to have a driveway arrangement like the Ravicz's that would enable me to access either side of the barrier. Currently my access is totally from the Warner Trail side. In November of last year I asked the Public Works department if I could do this by moving the barrier about 28 feet to the West. (Please note that our properties each have an excess of 140 feet of road frontage). (See attachments B 1 & B2.) Public Works responded that it was possible and they didn't have any objections, but I would have to get my neighbors the Ravicz's to agree to the barrier realignment. They also stated that I would have to pay for the relocation of the barrier, and get permits, etc ... to which I agreed. (See attachment C.) I then contacted the Ravicz's but they did not want the barrier relocated because they did not want to have a parking space on the Washington side of the barrier, which would result as a consequence of the move. They seemed to feel that it would encourage people to park next to their property. I then informed Mr. Mark Diercks of the problem. He stated that he could paint the curb in the resulting parkable space red, so people would not park there, put up signage indicating so, whatever the Ravicz's wanted. So I took that solution to the Ravicz's and still they would not agree. Keeping my neighbors fear about having an extra parking space near Washington Street in mind, I submitted a plan (L shaped) to Public Works, to move just my side of the barrier, which would give me the driveway I desire, and allow the Ravicz's to maintain their parking as is. This plan was rejected by Public Works, but they sent me an alternate plan which moves my side of the barrier and results in a diagonal barrier across the street. I was both relieved and impressed that they came up with such a good plan that would satisfy all concerns. (See Attachments D1, D2, D3, D4.) I thought that since Public Works recommended the barrier design, I could go ahead and plan for the realignment as they outlined. So between December of last year and this April, I had all my home plans redesigned to accommodate a longer driveway that would accomplish the realignment. I applied for a permit to build a wall across the front of my property, which was critical for the realignment to work properly, and built the wall. The realignment of the barrier was shown clearly on the permit for the wall. Public Works also told me that I would have to get the approval of the Fire department on the diagonal barrier. I submitted my plans to the Fire department and they approved them, conditional upon placing a Knox lock on the barrier gate to facilitate emergency traffic. The current lock is just a padlock and the gates do not open properly. (See Attachments E1, E2, E3.) Now Public Works has stated that the Ravicz's are objecting to the diagonal barrier, and that I need to ask you to resolve this problem. It is my understanding from talking to Public Works, that the Ravicz's had 3 concerns. 1. They fear that the diagonal boundary will affect delivery services and garbage pickup. I simulated the new barrier with a parked van and video taped the garbage trucks picking up the Ravicz's garbage. No difficulties were observed. As for other deliveries, no other delivery trucks are as large as the garbage trucks, except for perhaps tractor trailer rigs, and if they were delivering to the Ravicz's, the drivers could certainly coordinate the use the Ravicz's own circular driveway, or coordinate to have the barrier unlocked for that momentary purpose. It should be noted that my plan will include a Knox lock on this barrier for emergency traffic and such an egress does not currently exist. 2. The Ravicz's fear that the diagonal barrier will look strange. The barrier is currently bent and painted with graffiti. During the realignment, I would arrange to have the barrier restored to its original appearance. If they are concerned about the look of a diagonal barrier, I would gladly go back to the original plan of relocating both sides to maintain a direct line across the road, with your permission. In reality, any barrier across the road appears strange, but the traffic calming it produces is worth it, and I am not requesting a removal of the barrier. The work of building the wall and landscaping the front of my property will add additional beauty to offset the difference of the diagonal. 3. Their last concern is that moving the barrier will limit the turning space at the barrier thus forcing vehicles to turn around in their (Warner Trail side) driveway apron. They haven't thought this one through correctly. It is true that the only driveway currently by the barrier is their driveway, but when the grading for the realignment is done, I will also have a driveway where one did not exist, which will be more likely to be used for turnarounds, since it will be on the approach side of the road. Numerous traffic studies have shown that drivers backing in reverse will aim the rear of their vehicle towards an opening on their right so that they can then pull forward and circle to the left in the proper direction. There will also still be about 50 to 60 feet of length available for a normal turnaround past their driveway, plus the 38 feet of road width which is ample for any vehicles. (See attachment F). 2 I have spent considerable effort and money in this barrier realignment, and have tried to address my neighbors concerns. I feel the Ravicz's are being unjustly intractable in this endeavor and that their voiced concerns are unfounded. So I am asking you to help me resolve this matter by allowing the barrier realignment to continue in whichever form you feel most appropriate. The benefit of having access from my property to Washington Street is invaluable to me. It would allow access to Washington Street where there is an existing stop light that facilitates entry in either north or south directions. This light is only 315 feet from my driveway, and is a convenience the Ravicz's already enjoy. Currently one has to travel 1.3 miles to otherwise get back to Washington Street. Time wise that is 4 minutes currently versus 10 seconds (with the realignment). All existing fire and medical facilities are on Washington Street. Part of the Fire Department approval was that I put a Knox Lock on the barrier to allow emergency access. The 3 minutes and 50 seconds of time saved per trip could greatly increase my, as well as my neighbor's chances of surviving an emergency. In summary my plan will increase safety and security for the entire neighborhood. The updating of the barrier will be an architectural benefit to everyone. In addition, in our current state of energy crises my plan will save needless costs. I estimate I will be traveling to Washington Street and points thereon, an average of 3 times a day. That adds up to almost 8 miles for 3 round trips versus less than half of one mile with the proposed barrier realignment. Having driveway access to Washington street will save time, energy and lessen my traffic through the Mountain View neighborhood. Sincerely, Ms. Barbara Chris Sweat CC City Council Members, City Clerk, City Mayor, Public Works 3 r 0 A TTA C H M CAJ� A 77 A cH PiE ti.T Q ';�C csvql-�-o To: M ��O�,j 1 � 2Q1Q Mark Greenwood, P.E. Director of Public Works, Palm Desert ';axoolo From: Barbara C. Sweat Owner of Parcel APN 637310031 aka:77877 Mountain View Ave. Mailing Address: 79290 Paseo Del Rey La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Barrier Relocate at Mountain View Ave. Greetings Mr. Greenwood, My name is Barbara Chris Sweat. I own the vacant lot adjacent to the barrier on Mountain View Avenue in Palm Desert (APN 637310031 aka: 77877 Mountain View Ave.). I am planning to build a home on this property and would like to know if I could relocate the barrier about 25 feet to the west. This would allow access from my driveway to Washington Street in the same manner that exists for my neighbors directly across the street from me. I spoke to Mr. Mark Diercks last week about this item. He informed me that you might be able to guide me in this process. I have enclosed a sketch of the area of topic and the intended change. Will you please let me know if this is possible, and if so, how do I go about getting permission? Thank you so much, Barbara Chris Sweat Phone # (760) 636-4627 Email: chriss@dc.rr.com dc.rr.com AT-7 Ac. H wt(=ZrVT 131 A IMcNM61UT 62 if A c tt PO E. /U7-- 6 --� rrli-cH-MACti,— c LEI T 0 1 P 0 1 M 9 1 ?3--5io FRLD WAR1Nc Datvc PALm DLsr.Rr, CnLHORNln 92260-2578 TEL: 760 346—o6i i PAX: -760 30-7o98 info(d palm-deserrorg December 3, 2010 Ms. Barbara C. Sweat 79290 Paseo Del Rey La Quinta, CA 92253 Subject: Barrier Relocation at Mountain View Dear Ms. Sweat: l wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter to Mr. Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works, regarding the relocation of the existing barrier on Mountain View we received on November 16, 2010. The Public Works Department will grant the relocation of the barrier contingent on the following requirements: • Provide proof to the City that the property owner at 77890 Mountain View agrees with the barrier relocation. • The barrier will be relocated at no cost to the City. • The relocation work will be completed by a qualified contractor. • The contractor shall provide a sketch/diagram to the City showing how the barrier will be relocated and reconstructed. City approval of the sketch/diagram will be required prior to issuance of an Encroachment Permit. • The contractor shall apply for an Encroachment Permit. Approval of the Encroachment Permit is contingent on payment of all associated fees, possession of a valid City Business License, and proof that all insurance requirements are met. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly at (760) 776-6493. Sincer ly, 3. Diercks. P.E. ----Zvonation Enaineer cc: MarK Vreenwood, P.E., Director of Public Works Bo Chen, P.E., City Engineer GAPubWorks\Mark Diercks\word data\Letters\t.rt to Bwweat - Mt View Barrier Relocation.docx TtA-C-N 446-+V T` e Chris /177 4Ctf WE<V'7- O Page 1 of 1 From: <mdiercks@cityofpalmdesert.org> To: <chriss@dc.rr.com> Cc:<mgreenwood@cityofpalmdesert.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 5:16 PM Attach: Mt View Barrier - New Gate.pdf Subject: RE: Mountain View Barrier Questions Hi Ms. Sweat: I spoke with the Director of Public Works about you proposed improvements and he was not in favor of your plan. However, I have come up with a compromise that may satisfy all involved. The Director will approve an angled gate, as shown in the attached PDF exhibit. This would require relocating only one of the median islands and the island on Mr. Ravicz side would remain in place. Please note that the relocation of the gate will not be allowed until construction on your new house is almost complete. We do not want to have a situation where the gate is relocated but vehicles can go around using your property. In answer to your question below, relocating the median island and painting red curb on Mr. Ravicz side of the street will have little effect on people picking up their children. Most would ignore the red curb because they are short term parkers. The red curb would only deter people from parking over -night. Also, to my knowledge, Mountain View does not have any parking restrictions. Being a public street, anyone is allowed to park and wait to pick up their children from school. Please contact me directly if you have any other questions or concerns. Mark S. Diercks, P.E. Transportation Engineer City of Palm Desert Office: (760) 776-6450 Direct: (760) 776-6493 Mobil: (760) 902-8881 From: Chris [mailto:chriss@dc.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 1:13 PM To: Diercks, Mark Subject: Mountain View Barrier Questions Hi Mr. Diercks, I spoke to Tanyo Ravicz once again about relocating our barrier and asked him specifically if he and his wife would consider moving it if the curb were painted red. He pointed out that people who are picking up their children from school already park on both sides of the barrier and that they were not supposed to do this, so what good would a red curb do? So the question I have is: Is there anything according to city code that prohibits parents from parking and/or waiting to pick up their children? The streets are not marked with any prohibitions, so I just wanted some clarification on this matter. It seems that Mrs. Ravicz mentioned that when her child went to school that the school counseled parents not to park along residential roads, but I don't think that was here in Palm Desert. Thank you for any clarification you can give us, Barbara Chris Sweat ,+R CHMEPJ l 0 I 4/21/2011 �I- rt� �iy vu E,L,-� p � .�� � s ` ,. �w. .x�... Page 1 of 2 Chris �4��cNrtt EiV-7 D,3 From: <mdiercks@cityofpalmdesert.org> To: <chriss@dc.rr.com> Cc:<mgreenwood@cityofpalmdesert.org>; <bchen@cityofpalmdesert.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 11:50 AM Attach: Mt View Barrier with New Gate Length. pdf Subject: RE: Mountain View Barrier Questions Hi Ms. Sweat: In answer to your questions: The length of the gate will depend on where the median island on the south side of the street is relocated. As shown on the attached PDF exhibit, moving the island to a location 28 feet west of your property line will result in a 32 foot gate. Decreasing the distance between the relocated island and your property line will shorten the gate. These details will be worked out in the final gate design. I've discussed your block wall proposal with our City Engineer, Bo Chen, and his is not opposed to the idea. Please be aware that you have to pull all necessary permits from the Building and Planning departments before the wall is constructed. Finally, the contractor who performs the work to relocate the gate will still need to obtain an encroachment permit. An encroachment permit from the Public Works Department is required when any work is being done in the public right-of-way. Please contact me directly if you have any other questions or concerns. Mark S. Diercks, P.E. Transportation Engineer City of Palm Desert Office: (760) 776-6450 Direct: (760) 776-6493 Mobil: (760) 902-8881 From: Chris [mailto:chriss@dc.rr.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 6:41 PM To: Diercks, Mark Subject: Re: Mountain View Barrier Questions Hello Mr. Diercks, Thank you so much for working this compromise out! I am fine with the angle, but am wondering how long the gate will have to be to give me a sufficient driveway? The driveways in the area seem to be 14 feet wide. I am also hoping to put up a block wall across the entire front of the lot, in keeping with the neighborhood and was wondering if I could relocate the barrier after the wall is built (but before the house is built) supplementing with a boulder or two as needed to keep traffic out? The other question is: do I still have to apply for the encroachment permit, as stipulated in the original letter from you? Thank you Sincerely, - 4 Tt-,`4 c +1 Au`!�IUT- 33 4/21/2011 Y T3 QV0ykrlj 9 l yy M}ss� R 41A s2vil a Fi A y r :� i O& y h 7 i y,y F M 3 p ! $ Y " y 'm pp gn `� 5 :l tf q r- tl-rvt Eli, i I_-r =1 Palm Desert Fire Department Fire Prevention Bureau In cooperation with Riverside County Fire Department 73710 Fred \'Marine Dr. Suite 102 Palm Desert Ca 92260 760-346-1870 Fay 760-779-1959 March 30, 2011 To: Barbra Sweat Re: Sweat Residence 77-877 Mountain View Palm Desert Ca 92211 Case # Gate-11-062 With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above reference plan check, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with City Municipal codes, appropriate NFPA Standards, CFC, CBC and/or recognized Fire Protection Standards. After reviewing the plans provided to the Fire Marshal Office for the Security Gates to be installed at the above address the Fire Marshal office has Approved the submitted plans with the following conditions. 1) Gate shall he equipped with Knox pad lock system. Any questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Palm Desert Fire Marshals office at 760-346-1870, located at 73710 Fred Waring Suite #102 Palm Desert, Ca 92260 Respectfully, Steven Brooker Fire Marshal By: Neal Stephenson Fire Safety Specialist A IT.A-c H- vet 6 &JT E J ,ta 4 c ff rv, E rvT 6 ,;�, WEST stationary panel _� swinging gate metal panel g�8ft 1 8" metal column `--- Asphalt Berm 8 ft. metal gate C C-t C' I-) va--� ire swinging gate stationary panel 8 ft. metal gate \ metal oanel / \ 'approx. 5 ft " t3" metal column Asphalt Berm --_.-> I MOUNTAIN VIEW C) CoZ yak_ tv-Ms-1 N L �c �C� woc12 Q9�u�c�li'�r- S A- f,gcH me^J i Ea � s = 4' CFO NOW �Gn o > rn 0 + , � z 73 � e> I�- all 41 c_ (U .Lj Me Ate— I,-- .R I , r� 1g�g �a y: r i iks 3� ,r.3 mow"