Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutInfo - PDMC Ch 8.40 - Recreational Vehicles CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT REQUEST: INFORMATIONAL REPORT REGARDING CHAPTER 8.40 "RECREATIONAL VEHICLES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY" OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE SUBMITTED BY: Eric Ceja Associate Planner APPLICANT: City of Palm Desert DATE: January 9, 2014 CONTENTS: Palm Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 8.40 "Recreational Vehicles on Private Property" City Council Minutes from February 11, 2010 Recommendation That the City Council, by Minute Motion, 1) receive and file this informational report regarding recreational vehicles stored on private property, or 2) provide staff alternative direction if not satisfied with the February 2014 enforcement deadline. Backqround In 2009, the City Council directed staff to form a subcommittee and to work with the City's Architectural Review Commission (ARC) to review possible changes to the Recreational Vehicle Ordinance (Chapter 8.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code). This direction was given as a result of dissatisfaction with the visual impact of many RVs stored on residential properties, even when the storage spaces were partially or fully screened using various methods. Staff reviewed surrounding jurisdictions' RV ordinances and worked with both the ARC and a subcommittee to review standards regarding setback requirements, screening requirements, permitting and procedures, and the creation of an exception procedure. Based on the work performed by the ARC and the subcommittee, staff recommended changes to the ordinance including RV placement, screening requirements, the elimination of ARC review and approval, the establishment of a RV permit and its procedures, and a one-year amortization period to allow property owners to obtain new RV storage permits and comply with the new zoning ordinance. Staff Report RV Ordinance Update January 9, 2014 Page 2 of 3 On February 11, 2010, the City Council reviewed staff's recommendations and approved an ordinance amendment to Chapter 8.40. The ordinance was approved at its second reading on February 25, 2010, on a 3-2 vote. Discussion The adopted RV Ordinance set standards for setbacks and screening requirements for the placement of RVs on private property. Per the ordinance, an RV may only be stored in the rear or side yard on private property, and only if it is located behind an opaque screening device. RVs over seven feet in height may be stored on private property if they are 100% screened from view from the public right-of-way and adjacent property owners, and only after neighborhood notification is provided. In no case may an RV be stored in a front yard or street side yard. The adopted RV Ordinance also eliminated the requirement for RV storage to be reviewed and approved by the City's ARC. Instead, the ordinance was amended to establish an RV permit process to be reviewed by City staff. As part of the review process, staff is required to send notification to adjacent property owners of the request for RV storage. If, after 10- days, a hearing is not requested, and if the applicant can comply with the code's setbacks and screening requirements, staff may approve the request for RV storage. Staff may deny a request for RV storage if the applicant can not comply with the code; however, if unusual circumstances are presented the property owner may request that an exception be granted by the City's ARC. Property owners, including those with previously issued RV storage permits, were informed of the new, more stringent requirements. They were directed to either obtain new RV storage permits demonstrating compliance with the new code, or find another place to store their vehicle. Since the adoption of the amended RV ordinance in 2010, 23 property owners have applied for RV permits. Nearly three-quarters (17/23) of those permits were applied for within the first two years of passage of the ordinance. Of the 23 applications only 20 RV permits were issued. Three permits were denied based on the inability to properly screen the RV and complaints from surrounding properties. _ .__ . ........ __. __ �r_. ...... __. _.. .�.. _..� _..� �d . RV Permits by Y�ar � �o , _ __ _ � � . _ __ __ _....._ � , _ _ _ _ � ; � .... ____. .. - _. .. __.. .... ... . . __ ___ _......_... ___ _. � 2 „ � .. __ _ ____�_ �_.._ _— : _ . ___._._ . ..�. _ __.._ ....� f 2CY1C7 �L)11 ZCI�2 2CT13 � _ __. _........... _ _. __... __...._7 G:\Planning\Eric Ceja\Case Files\RV�RV Council Report\City Council Staff Report(RV Informational).doc Staff Report RV Ordinance Update January 9, 2014 Page 3 of 3 As part of the adopted RV Ordinance, the City Council granted a twelve-month grace period to allow property owners to comply with the new code. Property owners with previously issued permits were notified of the code changes and were directed to comply with the new code and obtain new RV storage permits within one year. Of the 20 approved RV permits, five property owners received approval as meeting the new requirements and were "grandfathered" under an existing RV permit. City Code Compliance staff were instrumental in notifying these property owners of the new requirements and withheld citation of non- compliant property owners until the grace period lapsed. However, the initial twelve-month grace period has lapsed and sufficient time has passed for property owners to obtain new RV permits. In addition, applications for RV storage permits have tapered in the past two years. Enforcement of this code section is an important step in the maintenance and improvement of the quality of Palm Desert neighborhoods. Beginning in February, the City's Code Compliance Division will proceed with the enforcement of Chapter 8.40 of the Municipal Code as part of their normal patrolling and code citation process. Warning notices and citations will be provided to those property owners without proper permits for RV storage, unless the City Council directs staff otherwise. Fiscal Analvsis There is no fiscal impact to the City for the enforcement of Chapter 8.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code. Enforcement activities are budgeted annually for the Code Compliance Division and enforcement of the code is part of their routine daily operations. Submitted by: Department Head: . � Eric Ceja Lauri Aylaian Associate ner Director of Community Development CTI`Y COUNCIL 1A�'�TON App val: A�'PROVED DENiED RECEIVED OTHER � � �- L MEET - - o n M. Wohlmuth, City Manager AYES: `� � ��r NOES: ABSENTt ABSTAIN: VERIFIED BY: Qriginal on File with City le k's Office G:\Planning\Eric Ceja\Case Files\RV�RV Council Report\City Council Staff Report(RV Informational).doc ORDINANCE NO. i2o� EXHIBIT A That Title 8, Chapter 8.40 of the Health and Safety Code, is hereby amended as follows: Chapter 8.40 Recreational Vehicles on Private Property Sections: 8.40.010 Purpose of provisions 8.40.020 Definition of recreational vehicles 8.40.030 Definitions regarding land 8.40.040 Measurement of recreational vehicles 8.40.050 Permitted and nonpermitted uses of recreational vehicles 8.40.060 Permit issuance to park recreational vehicles on private property 8.40.070 Exceptions procedure 8.40.080 Temporary parking permit procedure 8.40.090 Permit fees 8.40.100 General conditions 8.40.110 Violation constitutes an infraction 8.40.010 Purpose of provisions. The city council finds recreational vehicles not regulated as to parking and storing on private properry do not enhance the community's appearance and may interfere with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Further, the enhancement and preservation of the appearance of Palm Desert will not be successful unless greater concern is applied to the regulation of such vehicles; and the City Council, in considering the concerns of citizens not owning recreational vehicles have the right of enjoyment of property and protection of property values, knowing that constitutional rights are guaranteed to citizens owning recreation vehicles; therefore, for these reasons, the regulations of this chapter are deemed by the City Council to be necessary. (Ord. 915 § 1 (part), 1999: Ord. 537 § 2 (part), 1988) 8.40.020 Definition of recreational vehicles. "Recreational vehicles" in this chapter means and includes, but is not limited to, the following specific vehicles: A. "Aircraft" is a general term applying to all manner of aircraft, whether impelled by wind or mechanical devices, and which are designed for recreational or vacation use. An aircraft when mounted upon a trailer shall be considered one unit. 6. "Camper" means a separate vehicle designed for human habitation and which can be attached or detached from a pickup truck. When removed from the truck, campers are called "unmounted campers." These campers are sometimes referred to as "truck campers" and "overhead campers." Camper shells on pickup trucks are excluded from this definition. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 12a� C. "Camping trailer" means a type of trailer or trailer coach, the walls of which are so constructed as to be collapsible and made out of either canvas or similar cloth, or some form of rigid material such as fiberglass, plastic or metal. The walls are collapsed while the recreational vehicle is being towed or stored and are raised or unfolded when the vehicle becomes temporary living quarters and is not being moved. D. "Motor home" means a motorized vehicle that has a truck or motor van chassis primarily designed to provide temporary living quarters for travel, camping, recreation and vacation use. E. "Travel trailer" means a trailer without its own motive power, designed as a temporary dwelling for travel, camping, recreation and vacation use. This definition includes fifth wheelers. F. "Utility trailer" means a trailer without its own motive power designed and/or used for the transportation of animals, goods, material, aircraft, watercraft and all manner of motor vehicles. G. "Watercraft" is a general term applying to all manner of watercraft, whether impelled by wind, oars or mechanical devices, and which are designed primarily for recreation or vacation use. A watercraft when mounted upon a trailer shall be considered one unit. (Ord. 915 § 1 (part), 1999: Ord. 537 § 2 (part), 1988) 8.40.030 Definitions regarding land. The definitions regarding lands as applied to this chapter are: A. "Corner lot" means a lot at the intersection of two or more streets. B. "Designated driveway" means a driveway approved by the city for the exclusive use of an occupancy or guest, made of asphalt, concrete or other approved material. C. "Lot line" means boundary lines of a lot. D. "Property line" means boundary lines of a lot. E. "Public right-of-way" means any street, alley, pedestrian walkway, channel or bridge which the public has a right to use. F. "Setback area" means the area between the building line and the property line or, when abutting a street, the ultimate right-of way line. G. "Space not available" means where terrain prohibits parking the vehicle in the side or rear yard or substantial damage to existing large trees will occur if so located in a rear yard. H. Yard, Front. "Front yard" means that part of a lot between the front property line and the front(s) of the principal building on the lot, and extended to both side lot lines. I. Yard, Rear. "Rear yard" means that part of a lot between the rear lot line and the back(s) of the principal building on the lot, and extended on both side lot lines. J. Yard, Side. "Side yard" means that part of a lot not surrounded by a building and not in the front or rear yard. (Ord. 915 § 1 (part), 1999: Ord. 537 § 2 (part), 1988) 8.40.040 Measurement of recreational vehicles. The measurement of a recreational unit shall not exceed eight feet six inches in width and twelve feet in height. The height includes the trailer if a unit is mounted on the 4 ORDINANCE NO. i2o� trailer. The maximum measurements do not include side-mounted mirrors or roof- mounted equipment. Mirrors shall not project more than one foot on either side of a recreational vehicle. Roof-mounted equipment shall not exceed one foot four inches above the roof of the recreational vehicie. (Ord. 915 § 1 (part), 1999: Ord. 537 § 2 (part), 1988) 8.40.050 Permitted and nonpermitted uses of recreational vehicles. It is unlawful for any person to park or store any recreational vehicle on private property in any residential or commercial zone in the city, except in accordance with the following provisions and permit approval: A. Within an enclosed building, conforming to all provisions, restrictions and regulations of the zoning and building codes of the city approved by the Architectural Review Commission; B. In rear and side yards as follows: 1. Recreational vehicles measuring seven feet in height or less may be stored behind a six-foot high opaque screening device. 2. Recreational vehicles measuring seven to twelve feet in height may be stored on the property in accordance with the following provisions: a. The recreational vehicle is completely screened from adjacent property owners and the public right-of-way at time of storage. The requirement to screen 100% of the height of the vehicle shall not apply to the area in front of the access gate, where the maximum height is restricted to six feet. Note: On corner lots, the street side yard shall comply with Section 8.40.050 C front yard and/or street side yard guidelines regarding parking recreational vehicles on private property. b. Not less than 10 days prior to the date on which the decision will be made on the application, the zoning administrator or his or her designee shall give notice of the proposed parking location by mail or delivery to all owners shown on the last equalized assessment roll as owning real property immediately adjacent the exterior boundaries of the property of the proposed parking location. A copy of the notice shall also be sent to the applicant. The notice shall inform its recipient that no hearing shall be held prior to a decision on the application unless requested by the recipient. If a hearing is requested the applicant will be required to submit the necessary copies of original documents to be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission. When a decision is made by the Architectural Review Commission, that decision may be appealed to City Council within the 15 day appeal period. 3. No recreational vehicle shall project beyond the immediately adjacent, vertical plane of the front fa�ade of the house or side fa�ade of the house if located on a street side corner lot. 4. Recreational vehicles shall not block any required emergency ingress or egress (minimum 3')to or from the residence. 5. Opaque screening devices to block the view from adjacent lots and streets shall consist of a solid fence, wall, gate, door, consistently maintained permanent shrubbery/hedge, or a combination thereof to the satisfaction of the City Landscape Department. Landscaping or plantings in movable pots are not 5 ORDINANCE NO. 120� defined as permanent and shall not be included in screening proposals. Said fence, wall, gate or doors must comply with city zoning codes; and 6. Any door or gate providing screening from adjacent lots or streets or other public rights-of-way for any vehicle parked therein, shall be kept closed when not in use. C. In front yards and/or street side yards as follows: 1. When space is not available as defined in subsection G of Section 8.40.030 in either side or rear yard, a permit will not be issued to park a recreationaf vehicle in the front or street side yards. Parking in these locations is prohibited. 8.40.060 Permit issuance to park recreational vehicles on private property. A permit must be obtained in accordance with the following section prior to storing a recreational vehicle on private property. A. The Department of Community Development may approve and issue a permit to park a vehicle in the side or rear yard whether in a designated driveway or other city-approved hard-surfaced area provided that an appropriate fence, wall, gate, door, landscaping or combination thereof is in accordance with subsections A, B or C of Section 8.40.050. B. The owner of the property must submit a site plan of the property illustrating the proposed parking location, photographs illustrating all sides of the recreational vehicle, along with dimensions that identify its width, length, height, and screening as defined in subsections A, B, and C of 8.40.050. Property owners being members of a homeowners association must obtain the association's written approval prior to seeking the city's approval and a permit. C. Replacement of the recreational vehicle with another recreational vehicle will not require the approval and issuance of a new permit unless the replacement recreational vehicle is larger than the recreational vehicle originally permitted pursuant to this section. Any change of the originally approved unit shall require an administrative recertification to ensure compliance with original conditions. If the replacement vehicle is larger in any dimension than the vehicle it replaces, a new application must be filed and approved prior to parking #he vehicle on-site. Permits shall expire upon transfer of ownership. D. Lawfut existing recreational vehicle parking locations and screening devices on private property at the time of adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter, which do not comply with the requirements of this chapter as amended, shall be deemed lawful non-conforming uses, and shall be made to comply, be removed, or demolished upon transfer of ownership of the property, unless located in the front or street side yard. In front and street side yards, a 12 month amortization period will allow the RV owner to find other means of storage. The burden of proof of the approval of these lawful nonconforming parking locations and/or screening devices shall be placed on the property owner. E. The property owner with a lawful non-conforming RV storage location must submit a written request to the Director of Community Development along with the necessary documents as stated in Section 8.40.060B. along with a copy of the current registration of the RV. The director may attach conditions to the approval requiring adequate screening. New property owners 6 ORDINANCE NO. 1207 shall be required to adhere to the current zoning ordinance regarding recreational vehicie storage on private property. F. The granting or denial of a permit pursuant to this subsection shall be supported by the foliowing findings: i. That the proposed location of the recreational vehicle is in�accord with the objectives of this title; ii. That the proposed location of the recreational vehicle and the conditions under which it shall be located or maintained will not be detrimental to the public heaith, safety or welfare or be materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the facility; iii. That the proposed location of the recreational vehicle complies with the goals, objectives and policies of the city's general plan. G. The vehicle must not encroach into the public right-of-way and, unless an exception is granted by the city, the vehicle shall be parked perpendicular to the public right-of-way. H. Unmounted campers and shells, because of the potential hazards they present to persons, must be stored in a rear or side yard or enclosed structure. I. No vehicle shall be so parked as to interfere with a motorist's line of sight when approaching intersections or when exiting a designated driveway. 8.40.070 Exceptions Procedures. Requests for exceptions to the above standards may be brought before the Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission. For an exception to be approved, the Architectural Review Commission must make a finding that unusual circumstances exist which make the literal interpretation and enforcement of the standards impractical or contrary to the purpose of the ordinance codified in this section and that the exception shall not result in damage to adjacent properties. A. RV Exception limitations. i. No RV shatl be granted an exception or permit for storage in the front or street side yard. ii. No exception shall be granted that compromises emergency access. iii. An RV not meeting the height and width requirement shall not be granted an exception iv. Evidence must be submitted illustrating that there is 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. 8.40.080 Temporary parking permit procedure. A. The parking and/or storage of recreational vehicles on private property are prohibited in the city, unless a permit is obtained as provided in subsection B, below. B. Upon receipt of a properly completed application, a parking permit shall be issued to any individual who desires to park a recreational vehicle on a private property in the city for a period of time not to exceed seventy-two consecutive hours. Application for a permit shall be made on a form provided by 7 ORDINANCE NO. 120� the city. If city offices are closed, the application for the permit shall be made on the next day that the city offices are open foilowing the arrival of the applicant's recreational vehicle in the city. C. No permit fee shall be paid for the issuance of any permit or any extension of any permit required by this Section 8.40.080. D. No permit shall be issued for a recreational vehicle parked in a public stree# or blocking a public right-of-way. E. One extension of the permit may be granted, up to a maximum of seventy-two hours. No more than one extension may be granted. F. No more than six permits may be obtained during any calendar year for any one property. (Ord. 519 § 1 (part), 1988) G. No parking permit will be required for the sole purpose of any person loading/unloading, and/or cleaning a recreational vehicle within a consecutive twenty-four hour time period. 8.40.090 Permit fees. The city council shall establish, by resolution, a reasonable permit fee to reimburse the city for staff time spent to process and issue permits under Section 8.40.050. (Ord. 915 § 1 (part), 1999: Ord. 630 § 2, 1991) 8.40.100 General Conditions. A. Where the parking or storing of recreational vehicles is permitted as provided in this chapter, the vehicles shall not be used for living, sleeping or housing purposes. B. No more than one recreation vehicle may be parked or stored in the permissible front yard area with a temporary parking permit. C. A vehicle shall not be permanently connected to a sewer line, water line or electricity except for temporarily charging batteries and to fill the vehicle holding tank with a water line, or other similar temporary purposes. D. A person must comply with Chapter 8.32 of this code pertaining to vehicle repairs. (Ord. 915 §1 (part), 1999: Ord. 537 §2 (part), 1988) 8.40.110 Violation constitutes an infraction. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter is deemed guilty of an infraction in accordance with Chapter 1.12 of this code. In addition, such violators permit, issued pursuant to this chapter, may be revoked by the city council, following a noticed public hearing. (Ord. 915 § 1 (part}, 1999: Ord. 630 § 3, 1991: Ord. 537 § 2 (part), 1988) 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 — � �� standards,he would like to wait and see what they are. He didn't iike second guessing legislatures,particularly having updated State law three years ago, but he greed with Councilman Keily that he didn't see what the rush was to go out and pass samething when the impact was unknown. He agreed with Councilman Spiegel that Draconian was the best adjective for the proposed Ordinance. Councilman Kelly commented that a fence couldn't be put around ocean. Responding to question, Mayor Finerty suggested the m on could be to deny staff's recommendation and go with the current te Code, keep the seven safety measures as they exist naw, and eliminate the three measures recommended by staff. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson added the moti should include directing the City Manager to inform Buiiding and Safe at it had a Ptanning requirement to put fences around pools. Mayor Finerty and Council n Spiegel concurred. Councilman Spiegel mo d to, by Minute Motion: 1) DENY the staff .,,,,, recommendation and retain t current regulations for swimming pooi enclosures and safety devices; 2) direct G' anager to inform the Building 8� Safety Department that . _ there is a Planning requi ent for fences around swimming pools. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and ca � d by a 5-0 vote. Councilman Kelly stated the Council thanked staff for#heir concern. XVI. OLD BUSINESS � A. REQU�ST FOR APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 8.40 - RECREATIONAL VEHICLES (RVs) ON PRIVATE PROPERTY - OF TITLE 8 - HEALTH AND SAFETY- OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE, CLARIFYING STANDARDS FOR SCREENING RVs PARKED ON PRIVATE PROPERTIES. Assistant Planner Missy Grisa stated the Recreational Vehicle (RV) Ordinance amendments were initially brought up by a resident suggestion to the Architectura!Review Commission(ARC)and ultimately it recommended to the City Council to make those modifications due to vague language resulting in varying results. Staff was tasked with researching adjacent city's codes and formed a RV Subcommittee. After several renditions of proposed modifications after community, City staff, ARC, and City Council feedback, "" staff proposed new language to include: the elimination of front yard RV parking; RV on a street side yard must be moved to a location behind the side facade of the residence;eliminate setback dimensions from the property 18 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 line; necessitating 100%screening at the time of storage;temporary parking was now restricted to a 24-hour period for loading, unloading, cleaning and charging a RV; emergency egress and ingress from residences to remain at three feet; a change in noticing requirements; staff approvals versus ARC approvals; and allowance for a strict exception process. Lawful non-conforming uses wilt be made to comply or removed upon transfer of ownership. Current street side yard locations will be given a 12-month amartization period to find other means of storage. Since the writing of this Ordinance,staff had received finro e-mails and two letters,and three of those letters had concerns about the 24-haur period for loading and unlaading, stating if was not sufficient time. Additionally, staff recommended an Application Fee of $168. Currently, there is no fee required, but staff had been spanding an average of four hours on each of these cases. Staff recommended approval of the p�oposed modifications to the RV Ordinance as presented. She offered to answer questions. Councilman Spiegel asked how much time did those that complained about the 24-hour period felt they needed. Ms. Grisa responded they favored the existing 72-hour period. She did address their comments by informing them the City still allowed temporary parking that was aimed primarily at visitors who want to park their RV at someone's home for 72 hours, but it required a temporary permit issued by Code Compliance. However, it's considered a nuisance for them to come to City Hall and obtain a permit to load and unioad as stated in their e-mail. She went on to say the 24hour period for loading and unloading never came up as an issue in the subcommittee meetings as not being enough time;the concern was raised after the Ordinance was written. MS. SUZANNE PRIDE, Burroweed Lane, Palm Desert, CA, stated she originally came to the City because she received a letter in the mail when Mr. Smith was seeking approval for his large bus-size RV. She attended the meeting where Riverside County Fire Chief Cooley was present and stated that large bus-size RVs were extreme fire hazards, because they are like mobile homes and fire moved through them quickly. Quoting from the December 10 Minutes, she said Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson stated a neighbor's life becomes paramount concem because of the ability and configuration of a RV to catch fire. However, at the next City Council meeting of January 14, 2010, Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson spoke nothing of safety, but instead stated, "it seemed that this neighbor almost created this problem and now wants the Appiicant to solve it." She asked the City Council to help its residents understand the difference in one month's time from having safety be paramount one month and punishing a resident the following month for having the house windows face a huge bus.She went on to say she found out that Mr. Smith's RV had been parked for four years without a permit and was now grandfathered in and allowed to keep his RV. 19 MiNUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT ClTY COUNCIL MEETiNG FEBRUARY 11, 2010 On October 8, 2009, Mr. Smith stated the City did not allaw him to have this large bus-size RV on Willow Street where he once lived, but never obtained a permit when he moved to lron Strest. She questioned whether the City ever informed Mr. Smith he needed a permit when he was on Willow Street, because if he was told he couldn't have a RV on one street, why was he allowed to park it on Iron Street without a permit. Additionaliy, at the same meeting, Mr. Erwin stated Mr. Smith's RV would be grandfathered because there were no complaints, which she begged to differ. Once again, she felt the City was looking for a simple solution, but there weren't any. She disptayed a photograph that partially exposed the RV, stating Councilman Kelly believed it was beautifully screened,but she disagreed. She reiterated Mr.Smith's RV had been parked for four years without a pem�tit and was now grandfathered in, and on the other hand, the neighbor who was building the house was being punished because she could have built her garage on the other side. If the neighbor opted to piace the garage next to the RV, then it wou{d have created a larger fire hazard because of the gasoline of the two vehicles next to each other. She couldn't see hvw the City Council would even conceive approving the proposed Ordinance. She noted Councilman Spiegel had stated that if this issue was taken to a vote where only 5%of the �esidents were RV owners, RV owners would lose. She said it was time to take this matter to a vote and gather the necessary signatures or petitions ..... and allow the citizens of Palm Desert to vote. MS. SUZANNE CARNEY, Fairway Lane, Palm Desert, CA, stated she was building a house on Iron Street and had been before the City Council previously to express her concerns about the RV Qrdinance and proposed revisions. She also participated as a community member on the subcommittee charged with drafting and presenting changes to the City Council, and the adverse irnpact of a la�ge RV next to the property iine was not being add�essed. She still had two main cancerns,one was the potential for large fire loads with modem RVs of bus size proportions. The other was the visual impact of a RV that is twice the height of a six-foot side wall, because that visual impact would be constantly present for the neighbor next to a large RV. The focus of the committee was to make the permitting process less subjective for City staff reviewing a request, but the process of enforcing the Code was not addressed. She displayed photographs taken of the neighbor's RV prior to permitting and after four weeks, stating there was absotutely no change. She said the screening and the moving of the RV away from the wall was not done. She said various committee members stated they would not want a RV next to them, but because it's not next to their home, i#didn't matter. She said the majority of the residents in Palm Desert do not own a RV, and the City needed an Ordinance that didn't allow such placement of RVs so that neighbors are adversely impacted. The -�• Ordinance could contain setbacks and/or height restrictions to make permitting less subjective, decrease health and safety issues,and decrease 20 MINUTES REGU�AR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 visuai impact, which would make enfo�cement easier to accomplish. She thanked the Council for the opportuniry to speak to the Council. MR. GENE POE, Buena Circle, Palm Desert, CA, stated he's lived in Palm Desert 45 years and couldn't understand why this issue had to be hatched and re-hatched. He noted RVs were not allowed ta be plugged in and everything had to be tumed off on them, so he couldn't see how a RV could be any worse than a car. He questioned whether RVs will be outlawed completely even though one had lived in Palm Desert for years with one. The City received one or two complaints and caused the City to go through a whole process. However, he liked what the City was proposing and thought the Council did a good job; it was a gaod compromise. He said there are a few complaints, but iYs the same complainer who knew that a RV existed prior to moving next door to it. He was in favor of approving the proposed Orciinance as presented. MR. FRANK TAYLOR, Palm Desert, CA, stated he appreciated the Council reviewing this issue. He said this matter started with addressing RVs parked in front yards and that matter for the most part had been fixed. He felt 90% of the people followed the rules and regulations, but Code Enforcement was stuck with the 10% that didn't and ended up looking like blight. He said it was important the Ordinance was fairto everyone in the City a�d not just one certain area. He recalled Chief Cooley making the comment about the fact that by Building Code a three-foot setback was required, but regarding buildings, the setback needed to be further back because RVs were highly combustible. He said the size of the lots and what type of RV would fit on a !ot was nat addressed at any of the meetings. He said there are very small size lots that bus-size RVs just wouldn't fit, and in the future, there was the potential of having a bus-size RV parked on the side of a house of a 6,000 square-foot lot, which concemed him. He said anything more than 10,000 square-feet would be susceptible to having a large RV, and since the setbacks had been taken away, a 12-foot RV parked behind a six-foot gate would still have six fest sticking out over the tap of the gate. The Ordinance states there is no screening on the gates, so one can have a large RV in front of the gate and still see it from the street.With regard to the grandfather issue,the Ordinance mentions not grandfathering RVs that are parked in the front yard or side street, which he suggested the City should expand to include all RVs and instead requi�e everyone with a RV to obtain a permit and have them reviewed on a case by case basis. He said this matter had been reviewed for eight months, so the 12-month time frame could be shortened to six-months to make those RVs parked in the front yard to become conforming. lastly, he was in favor of the 24-hour period to load and unload a RV. Councilman Spiegel stated he would like to hear from the two Councilmembers that were on the RV Subcommittee. 21 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11� 2010 Counciiman Kelly stated he was one of the Councilmembers on the subcommittee that spent a lot of time discussing this matter. He believed what was being proposed was too strict, but on the other hand,after the hard work and compromises reached by the Committee, it was a good Ordinance co�sidering all the problems it faced. He feit the proposed Ocdinance protected the rights of the property owners, property owners with a RV, and the rest af the citizens. The only area he questioned was the 24-hour period for loading and unloading, because the City encouraged people with RV to use a storage facility, and providing a 24-hour period would be more of an inducement ta use a storage facility and still have enough time to load and unload. Having been a RV owner 10 years ago, he knew it wauld be difficul# to ge# the refrigerator cooling and everything done in the 24-hour period. He pointed out that when a RV was on blocks, it didn't mean it wauld be there for weeks, because RVs have a refrigerator that had ta be leveled before it can be turned on to coo! it off,which was a requirement. He was in favor of the proposed Ordinance with the exception of providing more time to load and unload a RV. Mayor Finerty stated she sat on all the meetings,a�d she was stilt concerned over the safety issue raised by Chief Coo{ey. She be{ieved the most important task of government was public safety. She was also concerned with the visual impact, because the sizes of RVs were getting bigger and ` bigge�. She personally would like to have them all in a storage facility, and it would be in the best interest of the City. She agreed ihat if this issue was ' �� put to a vote, the majority witl vote for permanent storage facilities. The Committee did work on this matter for a long time as Councilman Kelly mentioned,and it had been a lingering issue for more than 25 years,so it will probably never have an ordinance that will please everyone. She would be voting against the proposed Ordinance based on safety and Chief Cooley's comment, because it seemed logicat to her that 9f you coutdn't put a building that close to another building, why a RV with combustible fluid would be allowed. Councilmember Benson stated she thought RVs were supposed to be fully screened, but it was never going to happen. She agreed modern RVs will only get bigger and bigger and people buy them before they obtain a permit to park them by their house. She said other cities had outlawed them and didn't know why Palm Desert had kept fighting this issue for 25 years. She said RVs keep getting bigger and bigger, but they are being parked in smaller and smaller lots, so nothing had improved. She said if people want a RV, it should put in a storage facility. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson noted he sat on one of the subcommittee -� meetings, and it was always trying to strike a balance of fairness between property owners and RV owners. What's interesting is that he heard Chief , Cooley's comments completely differently, particularly the reason why you 22 MINUTES REGUL..AR PALM DESERT CITY C4UNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11� 2010 don't consider a RV a building, because you can't drive a buiiding, but you can drive a RV away and open up the fire lane. The testimony offered about meeting the fire lane was just for one sicle of the house and not both. Additionally, the testimony that should the neighbors in question catch on fire, the fire would most fikely be suppressed from Mr. Smith's back yard because there wouldn't be room to get by the neighbor's house, so he was satisfied with that answer. The other issue about aesthetics, which he mentioned was not relevant, but couldn't help but notice that most of the windows faced directly on this RV that had been there for three years. He said the neighbor was building a beautiful home, which was go�geous, but one of the two neighbors had the remedy to do some tasteful landscaping, perhaps on both sides of the wall, and this whole issue would go away. He also wonde�ed what the neighbor would see if the RV was moved, which would probably be brick and marginally more attractive. However, he didn't want to craft a citywide ordinance around one RV, which was what was happening for the last three meetings. He said the other RV owners the Council heard fram had been reasonable and sensible. The Council started down this trail with front yard RV p�rking and slowly got into side yards. In general, the Council was happy with p�eople that did side yard parking with minimai screening, but then the Ordinance went with more stringent standards, which he agreed with. He also agreed with the comment made about the lot size observation, which will require staff to just say no to lots that are too small. He went by Councilman Kelly's old house whe�e he used to keep his RV and it was more than 100 feet long and some 70 feet deep that three RVs could be parked there and wouid never be seen from the street. So he didn't understand why a one acre property owner should be denied or that the City should place a blanket band just because some 8,000 square-foot property owners are illegalfy wedging their RVs into their side yards. He said staff just needed to get a stiffer back bone to saying no to some af the cases that are not appropriate, but diligently making sure that the appropriate ones are landscaped. He said the proposed Ordinance may not be perfect, but it included input from all the stakeholders and it was a product of a democratic process. If there is a problem with the 24-hour period requirement, the Council can go back and tinker with the Ordinance. He said what was being proposed was a good workable draft Ordinance, which he will support. Councilman Spiegel concurred. He said Code Compliance can be more diligent when it came to RVs, because there were some that stuck out like a sore thumb and get away with it. He agreed with the comment made that a car was just as combustible as a RV, because that was true. He didn't believe that RVs should be eliminated just because a large percentage of peopfe didn't want them, because it would be like eliminating all pools,which will never happen. 23 MlNUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2010 Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and pass Ordinance No. 1207 to second reading,approving amended standards to Chapter 8.40-Recreationai Vehicles . ,. (RVs) on Private Property- of Title 8 - Health and Safety-of the Palm Desert Municipal Code, with staff directed to look at the 24-hour temporary parking issue as the regulation goes forward. Motion was seconded by Ke!!y and car�ied by a 3-2 vote, with Benson and FineRy voting NO. B. lNFORMATIONAL REPORT ON C�MPLETION OF THE MID-VAL.LEY BIKE PATH ALIGNMENT STUDY. Councilman Spiegel moveti to, by Minute Motion, receive and�le the inf ational report. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 5-0 vote. XVtI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. �R[�lNANCE NO. 1202 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE ITY COUNGL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ADDI G CHAPTER 15.06 - "ENERGY CODE" TO THE CITY OF PALM DES T MUNICIPAL CODE, AND REPEALING TITLE 24, SECTION 24.30 T EREOF. Mr. Grance stated the proposed Ordinanc will formally adopt the 2008 California Energy Code. Responding fo q stion, he didn't believe any City � Ordinance would be invalidated by its a ption. Mayor Finerty declared the public hearing o n and invited public testimony on this matter. With no public testimony offered she declared the public hearing closed. Mayor Pro Tem Ferguson rnoved to aive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1202 as presented. Motion was seco ed by Keily and carried by a 5-0 vote. 6. CONSlDERATION OF N APPEAL OF A DECISION BY THE CITY MANAGER AN� PE IT ADMINISTRATOR, REVOKING A MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT P RMIT FOR AC MASSAGE - SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 72 55 FRED WARING DRIVE, SUITE C-16 Massaae E ablishm n P mi N . -46 21 (Lawrence Andrews, Appeliant). Mr. Erwin st ed this was an appeal of a massage establishment permit license. ' recommendation to the Council was to refer the matter to a hearing icer to be selected between the City Manager and himself, after which, tice will be given to the Applicant and Mr. Vodnoy so that they may appe r and be heard. Council an Spiegel maved to, by Minute Motian, directed that the Appeal be . .. referred to a earing Officer to be selected and appointed jointly by the City Manager and City Attorn . Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 5-U vote. 24