Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
5/1/2002 - STAFF REPORTS (12)
DATE: May 1, 2002 TO: City Council FROM: Director of Planning and Building APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL, CASE 6.457 VARIANCE - AN APPLICATION BY RON DALE FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN EXISTING 10 FOOT TALL SHADE STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY LINE IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 253 E. MESQUITE AVENUE, ZONE R-1- C, SECTION 23. APPEAL: The applicant, Ron Dale is appealing the Planning Commission's February 27, 2002 denial of a Variance application (Case No. 6.457) to allow an existing 10 foot tall shade structure on the property line in the southwest corner of the property located at 253 E. Mesquite Avenue, Zone R-1-C, Section 23. The City Council may uphold, override or modify the decision of the Planning Commission. At the conclusion of the public hearing the City Council should provide staff direction, in the form of a motion, so that a resolution can be prepared for consideration at the next City Council meeting. SUMMARY: The applicant and property owner, Ron Dale, is seeking approval for an existing 10 foot tall shade structure on the property line in the southwest corner of his property located at 253 E. Mesquite Avenue. The Planning Commission denied the request based on lack of findings to support the variance application. The Planning Commission denied the application 5-0-1. BACKGROUND: The applicants property originally had been part of the Palo Verde Tract, Section 23, Book 17, Page 40. The lots were subdivided in 1928 into 135 X 60 square foot lots under the County of Riverside. The subject property is approximately 16,200 square feet, with a width of 120 feet and a depth of 135 feet. An existing 3,700 square foot home is located on the property. Also on the property is a pool in the rear yard. The 240 square foot shade structure is located in the southwest corner of the property and is located on the property lines. The subject property is zoned R-1-C. The lot is 16,200 square feet, in which the zoning district requires a minimum of 10,000 square feet. Given the lot width of 120 feet, and the lot depth of 135 feet, the lot exceeds zone requirements for minimum dimensions of 100 feet width and 100 foot depth. The required setback for a side yard is 10 feet and the setback for the rear yard is 15 feet. The existing shade structure is a few inches off of the property line on both rear and side property lines at the posts of the structure, but the roof structure cantilevers over both property line walls by a few inches. The structure is currently 5 feet above the property line wall to the neighbor to the west. The shade structure violates the building code due to the type of construction, and lack of setback to property lines. l� Ron Dale had been informed prior and during construction of this property line shade structure not to finish the shade structure without a variance. This stop work order was given on March 26, 1999 (See attachment), The attached Planning Commission staff report is attached as additional background. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND NOTIFICATION: The subject property is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15302, which states that the replacement of existing facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced is considered categorically exempt from an environmental assessment. All property owners within 400 feet of the subject property were notified. Director of n nning and Building 5.� City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Appeal Letter 3. Planning Commission Staff Report from February 27, 2002 4. Letter from James Henderson August 28, 2001 5. Letter from Klatchko & Klatchko Attorneys at Law, April 26, 2000 6. Letter from Klatchko & Klatchko Attorneys at Law, April 14, 2000 7. Planning Commission Minutes from February 13, 2002 8. Planning Commission Minutes from February 27, 2002 (To be presented) 9. Stop work order from March 26, 1999 l042M VICINITYMAP N.T.S. Q —� SU LU 6 -- DUNES L I UNNY DUNE RD wcc �► � Q- 2� MESQUITE AV Im too MESQI STONEI TER + k 600 MAR E LN cc PALO VERDE AV ONYX DR11 w LN ; o OCOTILLO AV CAMEO DR MORONGO RD o SONORA o yD PALME A-1 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE N0. 6.457 DE CRIPTION APPLICANT Ron Dale To allow an existing shade structure in the southwest comer of a property at 253 E. Mesquite Avenue, Zone R-1-C, Sect. 23 PALM Sp G) City of Palm Springs rc i Office of the City Clerk �In CV 3200 Tahquia Canyon Way • Palm Springs,California 92262 /FO P TEE.(760)323-8204 •TDD:(760)864-9527 March 14, 2002 Mr. Ron Dale 253 E. Mesquite Avenue Palm Springs, CA 92264 Dear Mr. Dale: RE: Appeal of Palm Springs Planning Commission Decision Variance — 253 E. Mesquite Avenue This will acknowledge receipt of your appeal on the above-mentioned Case of Planning Commission decision dated February 27, 2002 of said project and payment of the required fee of$275.00 to cover the appeal. An additional $119.00 will be required to cover the mailing costs ($50.00 fee and $1.00 each parcel). You may remit the check payable to the City of Palm Springs in the return envelope. Your appeal will be set for hearing before the City Council on April 17, 2002 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way. If you wish to provide any written material to the City Council, to be included in its agenda packet prior to the meeting, please furnish 10 copies to me no later than April 11, 2002. PATRICIA A. SANDERS City Clerk cc: Planning Post Office Box 2743 0 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743 '-;• .. TO: City Council S3 City of Palm Springs 2002 FROM: Ron Dale Property Owner < '0. "i,- 253 E. Mesquite Ave. Palm Springs, CA 92264 REF: Request to appeal denial of variance penuit. Dear Council Members, The home at the above address was built in the late 20's or early 30's. I have not been able to trace the exact date yet. I have lived at the above address for nine years. During these nine years I have repaired and upgraded much of the property, as it was much needed. About 2 '/2 years I began cutting down a row of tamarisk trees on the west side of my property. While doing so, a huge limb fell, not exactly where I had intended, and damaged part of the roof, a support beam and cracked the concrete slab of a shade structure that had been located there for many years. After clearing most of the tree debris, I began repairing the shade structure. When the repair was almost complete, the P.S. building department, seeing the structure for the first time, told me that I couldn't have the shade structure, "it wasn't permitted". When Gary Ford of the planning department inspected the structure, he told me that the structure would be fine but that I would need to get a variance from the planning department and then I would have to add stucco to the structure to give it a one hour fire rating. When Doug Evans of the planning department came to see the structure, he told me that although the stricture was in the setbacks, I could probably get a variance because of other permitted structures on rmy east and west neighbors property lines joining my east and west property lines. From then till September of last year I left the structure unfinished—I had plenty of other repair and maintenance projects to concentrate on. In September a long time friend of my wife decided to have her wedding at our place in December. Now, with a new and sudden focus on the shade structure and other adjacent repairs and improvements, I went back to work on the structure and finished the roof repair. In November, after I had finished the roof repair, I received a certified letter from the city threatening me with fines and jail. I was given until the end of December to comply. I had the necessary drawings made and completed the application. On February 13"' I had my first public hearing. During that hearing the planning department testified that there were no pennitted structures near my property and that they could not find the structure in the city's old aerial pictures, therefore they recommended not approving the structure. The head of the planning cornmission didn't participate in the hearing due to conflict of interest. In my testimony to the commission, I described the structure and that it was old when I bought the house. My west side neighbor, who's Mom bought the house at 249 E. Mesquite in 1977 testified that the structure was there in 1977 and was old then. After hearing this testimony and clarifying that ilia plamiing department couldn't be sure the structure was new, the remaining board members agreed to continue the hearing two weeks. They gave the planning department instructions do more research for other pennitted structures near my property and to inspect my shade structure to see if they could determine the age of the structure through wood types or saw carts. On Monday the 25t" of February, two planning department employees carve to my house. When we reached the shade structure in my back yard, the two men and I stood with our hands in our pockets while they told vie how much the planning cornmission doesn't like to approve variances. They made no attempt to inspect the wood and didn't ask to see any of the original roofing material as instructed. They left after about 15 minutes, wishing me good luck. At the second or continued hearing on February 27"', the planning department again stated that they could not find any permits and that most of the aerial pictures were still unclear but they were pretty sure my shade structure didn't appear in 1958. After reiterating that the structure was indeed very old and that I was willing to upgrade the 6trLetlrrc_:to meet CUiTent Code, T aslr_the cniumi0sion to grant the vari lDre. Subsequently, the head of the plaiming commission who had repositioned himself to the audience, gave a scathing dissertation about the questionable mess of my shade stricture and that his client, my back fence neighbor, was terribly inconvenienced and that the commission should not approve my request for variance. Then, my back fence neighbor, of only four years, testified about his lack of view because of my shade structure. He even misstated that his picture#7 was of my yard with no shade structure there. After the hearing, I was given a chance to view the computer-generated pictures and could see the roofline of my shade structure in the right- hand bottom comer. When I read his written description of picture#7, it said "his view IF the structure was not there". I have, since February 27t", found permits for the east side neighbors building or/near the property line and permits showing the building on/near my west neighbors east property line, and permits for a structure ori/near my back neighbors east property line. There are other structures on/near property lines in my neighborhood—I will continue to research for permits. My hearing by the planning commission was grossly inishandled not only due to the planning departments lack of research and misrepresentation but also by the testimony of the head of the planning commission. Thank you for your consideration. Ron Dale Property owner 253 E. Mesquite Ave. Palm Springs, CA 92264 (` O14 /7 DATE: February 27, 2002 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Director of Planning and Building CASE 6.457 VARIANCE - AN APPLICATION BY RON DALE FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN EXISTING 10 FOOT TALL SHADE STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY LINE IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 253 E. MESQUITE AVENUE, ZONE R-1-C, SECTION 23. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission deny the variance application request to allow an existing 10 foot tall shade structure on the property line in the southwest corner of a property at 253 E. Mesquite Avenue, R-1-C zone, section 23. Further research is being conducted. BACKGROUND: In a public hearing on February 13, 2002, the Planning Commission voted to continue the hearing to the meeting of February 27, 2002. In reviewing the permit history for the subject property, staff found that no permits have ever been issued for the shade structure. In reviewing the City of Palm Springs Aerial photograph of 1938 no structure was present. In reviewing an aerial of March 24, 1947, no structure existed on the southwest corner of the property line. The 1958 aerial photograph was reviewed in which it was difficult to distinguish whether a structure existed do to the shadowing of trees. In reviewing aerial photographs taken in 1979, the structure still was not present. In reviewing permit history of adjacent properties, staff found no building permits have been issued for any property line shade structures. Staff continues to research properties in the vicinity for permitted structures on the property line. To be presented The applicants property originally had been part of the Palo Verde Tract, Section 23, Book 17, Page 40. The lots were subdivided in 1928 into 135 X 60 square foot lots under the County of Riverside. The subject property is approximately 16,200 square feet, with a width of 120 feet and a depth of 135 feet. An existing 3,700 square foot home is located on the property. Also on the property is a pool in the rear yard. The 240 square foot shade structure is located in the southwest corner of the property. The subject property is zoned R-1-C. The lot is 16,200 square feet, in which the zoning district requires a minimum of 10,000 square feet. Given the lot width of 120 feet, and the lot depth of 135 feet, the lot exceeds zone requirements for minimum dimensions of 100 feet width and 100 foot depth. The setback for a side yard is 10 feet and the setback for the rear yard is 15 feet. The existing shade structure is a few inches off of the property line on both rear and side property lines at the posts of the structure, but the roof structure cantilevers over both property line walls by a few inches. The structure is / oh/8 currently 5 feet above the property line wall to the neighbor to the west. The shade structure violates building code due to the allowable type of construction on a property line. FINDINGS FOR A VARIANCE In accordance with Section 9406.B of the Zoning Ordinance, the following four findings must be met in order for the Planning Commission to issue a variance. 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. The shade structure was constructed in the past several years without permits or inspections. Prior to construction City staff advised the property owner that the structure would require a variance and not comply with building code. Subsequently, over several years the structure was built. Special circumstances do not exist. The lot is significantly above the standards for R-1-C zoning requirements in lot area, lot width, and lot depth. Additionally, prior to construction the property owner was advised the structure would violate zoning and building code requirements. 2. Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the imitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. The granting of this variance would constitute a special privilege. There is nothing unique about the parcel or the structure which would support this request and justify permitting a shade structure in the required side yard setback of 10 feet, and required rear yard set back of 15 feet. 3. The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the same vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. The granting of the variance would be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the same vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. A structure at the requested setbacks violates the Zoning Ordinance and Uniform Building Code. The Zoning Ordinance and Uniform Building Code identifies the absolute minimum spacing and setbacks that can be obtained while maintaining safety. 1090 4. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The granting of the variance would adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The General Plan policy 6:14:4 states that the City shall "assure that all buildings, new and old, are safe for people and businesses to occupy." As the shade structure violates Uniform Building Code due to proximity to the side and rear property lines, the shade structure can not be considered safe for people to occupy. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND NOTIFICATION: The subject property is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15302, which states that the replacement of existing facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced is considered categorically exempt from an environmental assessment. All property owners within 400 feet of the subject property were notified. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Resolution 3. Letter from James Henderson August 28, 2001 4. Letter from Klatchko & Klatchko Attorneys at Law, April 26, 2000 5. Letter from Klatchko & Klatchko Attorneys at Law, April 14, 2000 lO14a0 RESOLUTION NO. 4775 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DENYING CASE 6.457 TO ALLOW AN EXISTING SHADE STRUCTURE IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PROPERTY AT 253 E. MESQUITE AVENUE, ZONE R-1-C, SECTION 23. WHEREAS, Ron Dale, (the "Applicant')filed an application with the City pursuant to section 9406.00 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow an existing shade structure in the southwest corner of a property at 253 E. Mesquite avenue, Zone R-1-C, Section 23; and WHEIkEAS, notice of a public hearing of the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs to consider an application for Variance 6.457 was issued in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 2002, a public hearing on the application for Variance 6.457 was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 2002, the public hearing for Variance 6.457 was continued to be heard on February 27, 2002; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2002, the public hearing on the application for Variance 6.457 was held by the Planning Commission in accordance with applicable law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the hearing on the project, including but not limited to the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to CEQA, the Planning Commission finds that this project is categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Guidelines (CEQA). Section 2: Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 9406 B, the Planning Commission finds that: 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. The shade structure was constructed in the past several years without permits or inspections. Prior to construction City staff advised the property owner that the structure would require a variance and not comply with building code. Subsequently, over several years the structure was built. Special circumstances do not exist. The lot is significantly above the standards for R-1-C zoning requirements in lot area, lot width, and lot depth. Additionally, prior to construction the property 10 6�W) owner was advised the structure would violate zoning and building code requirements. 2. Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. The granting of this variance would constitute a special privilege. There is nothing unique about the parcel or the structure which would support this request and justify permitting a shade structure; in the required side yard setback of 10 feet, and required rear yard set back of 15 feet. 3. The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the same vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. The granting of the variance would be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the same vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. A structure at the requested setbacks violates the Zoning Ordinance and Uniform Building Code. The Zoning Ordinance and Uniform Building Code identifies the absolute minimum spacing and setbacks that can be obtained while maintaining safety. 4. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The granting of the variance would adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The General Plan policy 6:14:4 states that the City shall "assure that all buildings, new and old, are safe for people and businesses to occupy." As the shade structure violates Uniform Building Code due to proximity to the side and rear property lines, the shade structure cannot be considered safe for people to occupy. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby denies Variance 6.457 ADOPTED this 27'day of February, 2002. AYES: Caffery, Matthews, Shoenberger, Raya, Jurasky NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: Klatchko ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA Rt �G the I Planning Commission Secretary the Planning Commission air I iofto\0114� iiEcEIVED AUG 2 9 2001 BUILDING DMSHM De r e/G ,,f 4 ALATCHKO & KLATCH'ko 1lNDA S'IT:ARNS KLATCfIKO ATTORNEYS AT LAW TELEPHONE (7601 320-79 79 PNILIP s.KLAI'CIIRO PROFESSIONAL PARK. SUITE 3 177 SOUTH CIVIC DRIVE FAX(760) n6Nly P 11LNl SP P.INGS, C:\LIFO RNId 92262 April 26, 2000 Ronald J. Dale Leann E. Dale 253 E. Mesquite Avenue Palm Springs, CA 92264 Re: 253 E. Mesquite Avenue, Palm Springs Dear Mr. and Mrs. Dale: Please be advised that this office represents James Henderson, owner of the property which shares the rear wall with yours. It is our understanding that not only is the wall height not in conformation with City of Palm Springs requirements, but that, and more importantly, you have constructed a structure in an inappropriate location, too close to the property line, and in violation of the City's zoning ordinance. My client finds your conduct objectionable and it is anticipated that the City will pursue it's remedies to obtain compliance with the ordinance. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further, Please contact me at the above address rather then my client, the property owner. Sincerely yours, KL'�1TCHK0 KLATCHKO 4G ;. Philip S. atchko PSK/tah cc: Mr. Henderson Gary Ford, City of Palm Springs Acting Building Official KLATCHKO & KLATCHKO ATTORNEYS AT LAW MDAS14MNSRLATCHKO TELEPHONE(76R/]3P71n PMLIP S.KLATCNRO PRO PARK. SUITE 3 l77 PROFESSIONAL SOUTH CIVIC DRIVE PAX 0601 310-39I9 PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92262 O April 14, 2000 City of Palm Springs Department of Planning& Building Building Division P.O. Box 2743 Palm Springs, CA 92263-2743 Attention: Gary Ford Re: 253 East Mesiluite Avenue Owner of Record: Dale. Ronald I and Leann E. Dear Mr. Ford: Thank you for speaking with me on April 11, 2000, and for providing copies of the Notice of Violation effecting the above-referenced property. As you may recall, I represent James Henderson, owner of the property at 256 East Palo Verde, which shares a rear property line with the above- referenced property. This correspondence will confirm that your office is in the process of evaluating the status of construction activities at the Dale property which has been continuing in haste in the last few days. The activity includes, but is not limited to, the installation of tile on the roof of the patio structure constructed extremely close to their rear property line. I did have the opportunity to review the Dale's representation to your office that they are merely reconstructing an existing structure. Not only is that inconsistent with my client's knowledge of the property, but it is also inconsistent with some physical characteristics. Examination of the fence reveals that there used to be a gate between the two properties. Historically, both properties were a part of a large estate and my client's property actually consists of a portion of what was the former tennis court for the larger estate. The gate in the old wall was actually a gate to the tennis court area. Last year the gate was removed from the fence by the Dale's as a part of their construction work on the fence. The reason that the existence of the gate is inconsistent with the Dale's representations that a patio previously existed in the location which they claim is that such a patio would block access to the gate which had been in existence for so many years. April 14, 2000 lip City of Palm Springs Page 2 As we concluded our telephone conversation, you indicated that once the recording of the Notice of Violation is confirmed that the matter most probably will be forwarded to the City Attorney's office for action. I would appreciate it if you would keep me advised on status and request that the City Attorney provide my office with a courtesy copy of any and all actions or correspondence which are a part of the public record or are otherwise not confidential. I will calendar this matter for further review in thirty (30) days and trust that I will hear some follow-up from the City of Palm Springs prior to that time. Thanking you again for your continued courtesy and cooperation, I am Sincerely yours, KL,A CHKO &KLATCHKO Philip S. Klatchk " PSKUn cc: James Henderson O I I Ate/ CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 13, 2002 1:30 p.m. Council Chamber, City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 ROLL CALL Present this Meeting Present to Date FY 01-02 Excused Absences Philip Klatchko, Chairman X 13 1 Jeffrey Jurasky, V. Chr. X 13 1 Ralph Raya X 13 1 Jon Shoenberger X 13 1 Jon Caffery X 13 1 Mark Matthews X 11 3 STAFF PRESENT: Douglas R. Evans, Director of Planning & Building Alex Meyerhoff, Principal Planner Sky Warden, Assistant Planner Todd Mierau, Assistant Planner Marcus Fuller, Civil Engineer Michele Boyd, Administrative Coordinator Chairman Klatchko called the meeting to order at 1:35 p.m. The February 13, 2002 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Department of Planning & Building counter by 4:00 p.m., Friday, February 08, 2002. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: M/S/C (Caffery/Jurasky 6-0) to approve the minutes of December 12, 2001 as submitted. M/S/C (Raya/Matthews 4-0, 2 abstentions to approve the minutes of December 19, 2001 as submitted. Page 3 of 12 Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2002 311 5.0858 — Application by Steve Schnieder of Lyons, Warren &Associates for aJrevised wall and final landscape plan for Jack in the Box, located at 694 South Palm Canyon Drive, C-2 Zone, Sectionn,23. Director reported that revised plans have not been submitted to staff at this time. Withdrawn from agenda. Sign Program — Applications y Evan Matzner for'"an amendment to the Sign Program for Cornerstone Plaza, located at 301 North Palm Canyon Drive, CBD Zone, Section 15, Director reported that an actual motorcy4,le ill"be cut in half in order to use the front section as the sign, projecting from the building. He stated that there will be no headlight on the bike; that there will be red neon lighting underneath the`fen'der for glow; and that it would be visible from North Palm Canyon Drive and Amado Roadr`He stated that the Sign Program states that all merchants should have similarly designed signs; however, tHb\Planning Commission can allow deviations. Commissioner Jurasky statedth at, as the Amado Ro d''sign is mounted on a building column, so should the North Palm Canyon Drive sign be. Director confirmed that an architectural column is available for sign placement. o` Chairman Klatchko called the applicant to the podium. R �4 Mr. Jesse Cross,R�6est Signs, addressed the Planning Commission to state=that the second blade sign will be located on the last pillar—furthest to the west. He reported that'signage, aside from the motoraydle, will be smaller in order to fit within the allowable square foota"ge. He confirmed that, for/halo effect, neon will be placed under the wheel well. He stated that there will be no spot lights0s discussed at the previous Study Session) as the halo would be lost in a spqight. M/S/C (Jurasky/Matthews 4-2, Shoenberger and Caffery dissenting) to approve as submitted. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Case 6.457—Application by Ron Dale for a Variance to allow an existing shade structure in the southwest corner of a property at 253 E. Mesquite Avenue, R-1-C Zone, Section 23. Todd Mierau, Assistant Planner, reported that the subject property is 120 feet by 135 feet (approximately 16,200 square feet) and that an existing 3,700 square foot home and a pool are located on the property. The subject 240 square foot shade structure is located in the southwest corner of the property. He reported that the setback for a side yard is 10 feet and, for a the rear yard, is 15 feet. He stated that the existing shade structure is a few inches off of the property line on both rear and side property lines at the posts of the structure, but that the roof structure toha0 Page 4 of 12 . Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2002 cantilevers over both property line walls by a few inches. He stated that the structure is currently five feet above the property line wall to the neighbor to the west and that it violates building code due to the allowable type of construction on a property line. Director reported that, several years ago, Planning and Building staff met onsite and discussed the framed structure (which at that time did not have a roof) and advised the applicant to not build it; or to seek permits to move it. He stated that staff has received complaints since the structure was built. Vice Chairman Jurasky opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Ron Dale, applicant, addressed the Planning Commission to state that two or three years ago, staff did come to his vintage 1920's two-story home. He stated that, in the 1920's,the property was much larger;that it has since been subdivided. He stated that the shade structure has always been on the property and that he was repairing it. He stated that he and Building staff reviewed a 1940's aerial photograph of the area and, unfortunately,the houses were covered with Tamarisk trees and the shade structure was hidden. He stated that a tree fell on the cabana and broke a roof supporting beam and was repairing it when a Stop Work Order was issued by the Building Division. He stated that he did stop work on the structure until last September, when he had to resume to make the structure ready for a wedding ceremony. He stated that the neighbor to the west of his home has a permitted structure within inches of the property line and that the neighbor to the east had a similar structure but it was burned down and rebuilt adjacent to the property line. He stated that the subject structure does not obstruct any neighbor's views. Mr. Fred Bryant addressed the Planning Commission to state that he has lived adjacent to the subject property for more than 30 years and that the cabana has existed that entire time. He stated that it has been in disrepair; however, the applicant has improved the neighborhood by repairing the structure. He stated that he can not: see the structure from his property and that it does not cause a loss of view. There being no further appearances, the Public Hearing was closed. Director reported that the building does not meet building code requirements and that, for safety, the structure would have to be completely retrofitted and reconstructed (framed, stuccoed, one- hour firewall, etc.) if the location were approved. He reported that the structure has been completely replaced —that it is not a question of repairs to an existing structure. He reported that approximately two to three years ago it was all new construction. He stated that building code requires that noncompliant buildings must comply — that there is no leniency allowed within the code. He reported that the Building Division will do a detailed code review of the structure after Planning Commission review of the Variance request. Commissioner Shoenberger stated that he felt the structure was not bothering anyone in the neighborhood and that other property owners have similar structures. He stated that he needed clarification as to whether or not the structure was new. /vA0,90 Page 5 of 12 Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2002 Commissioner Jurasky called the applicant to the podium. Mr. Dale stated that a Senior Building Inspector stated that, because the beams that support the roof structure are wooden laminate from the 1960's, the structure is newer than the house. He stated that the previous owner had some repairs done in the 1970's. He stated that the bases of the posts were rotted so he cut the bottoms off by suspending the cabana and roof structure and replaced the bottom section of posts. He stated that he moved to the property in 1993 and that there is no gas or electric service to the structure. He confirmed that he and his neighbor did the work on the structure. He stated that the neighbor closest to the structure had a complaint because he had raised the block wall to eight feet in one section but that he fixed that. Commissioner Caffery stated that if there is existing tile on the building, the age could be determined. Commissioner Shoenberger stated that, in order to make findings, he needed to know whether or not the structure had been repaired or replaced; whether or not it was legally erected. M/S/C (Caffery/Shoenberger 5-0, 1 abstention) to continue to the meeting of February 27, 2002. Case900 —Application by Dennis Freeman for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a 700'\ uare foot guest house located at 3125 Marigold Circle, R-1-B Zone, Section 35. i Todd Mierau ssistant Planner, reported that a single family residence was recently approved for this site and tha t>e proposed guesthouse exceeds 1/50th of'the lot area and features two bedrooms and two b h�ooms. He reported that the guesthouse will be located in front of the existing primary residence,,on an existing building pad and does comply with all setback requirements. He reported thAt,,jZo access drives or parking facilities are proposed and that the existing driveway will be sufficient p�rovide additjonal parking for the guesthouse. He confirmed that the applicant has indicated that the guesthouse will not be utilized as a rental unit. He explained that staff recommends the use &andscaping to screen views from the guesthouse to the primary residence which would also soften ' s visual impact. Chairman Klatchko opened the Public Hearing. There eing no appearances, the Public Hearing was closed. Director stated that p�s1or the primary residence are current in plan check. M/S/C (Jurasky/alffery 6-0) to approve subject to Conditions of App val. TT Z30453Application by The Heavenstone Collections, LLC, for a Tentative Tract Map to O-fT CA I Y OF PALM SPRINGS / Building D pt & Engineering Division `4STOP WORK DOUBLE FEE ❑PENALTY �/ " FAILURE TO COMPLY MAY RESULT IN CITATION n REASON: ADDRESS: Permit No. s specifications requi d Planning/Z ing Approval CORRECTIONS AN INSPECTION OF THE ABOVE PREMISES SHOWS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS TO BE IN VIOLATION OF CITY OR STATE LAWS. C/sGlc4— N iSw \ CaN f4Pw1�T�lam+ 61 �„y5�j "COYZ n � l P,SKWI Poc Pcv+ti�+rrq APPV S72uCTi� p� I b� N°T IZoo Ft50� 1�A 2r pl Y G� gyp, e q.. ".' ATE , 26, Cf TIME _ INSPECTOR map X ORR CT WITHIN ❑ PROCEED ONLY WHEN CORRECTI SHAVE BEEN MADE /0��, CALL 373-8242 FOR REINSPECTION BY BLDG DEPT ❑ CALL 323-8253 FOR REINSPECTION BY ENG DIVISION Building Inspectors Office Hours: 7:30-8:00 a.m. & 3:30-4:00 p.m. CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 27, 2002 1:30 p.m. Council Chamber, City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92262 ROLL CALL Present this Meeting Present to Date FY 01-02 Excused Absences Philip Klatchko, Chairman X 14 1 Jeffrey Jurasky, V. Chr. X 14 1 Ralph Raya X 14 1 Jon Shoenberger X 14 1 Jon Caffery X 14 1 Mark Matthews X 12 3 STAFF PRESENT: Douglas R. Evans, Director of Planning & Building Marcus Fuller, Civil Engineer Michele Boyd, Administrative Coordinator Chairman Klatchko called the meeting to order at 1:40 p.m. The February 27, 2002 agenda was available for public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and the Department of Planning & Building counter by 4:00 p.m., Friday, February 22, 2002. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None. Page 3 of 14 Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2002 view of the valley floor but not much else. He stated that the fall of the land and pads are fairly consistent at nine foot increments downhill. He confirmed that, if a pool were proposed,there must be a pool fence five feet in height. He stated that single family residences are allowed a maximum height of 18 feet and this home is proposed at 16 feet to be sensitive to neighborhood views. He clarified that views are a consideration for hillside homes according to the Ordinance but it is not required that views be protected. Commissioner Jurasky stated that he felt this application addresses every aspect of sensitivity regarding building a new single family residence in a hillside neighborhood. M/S/C (Caffery/Shoenberger 5-0, 1 abstention) to approve subject to Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Matthews abstained as he was not present for Staff Report. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Case 6.457 —Application by Ron Dale for a Variance to allow an existing shade structure in the southwest corner of a property at 253 E. Mesquite Avenue, R-1-C Zone, Section 23. Continued from the February 13, 2002 meeting. Chairman Klatchko abstained due to a conflict of interest. Director stated that this Public Hearing was continued from the previous Planning Commission meeting in order to further research whether or not the structure had been repaired or replaced and whether or not it was legally erected. He stated that the Senior Building Inspector and he interpreted the aerial maps from 1937, 1947, 1958, and 1979 and determined that no shade structure existed or was permitted. Vice Chairman Jurasky reopened the Public Hearing. Mr. Ron Dale, applicant, addressed the Planning Commission to submit photographs of the residence, the neighbor's residence and their view of the cabana (on file in the Planning Division). He stated that there were many trees and shadows obscuring the view of the shade structure and that is why staff had difficulty locating the existing structure on the aerial maps. He also stated that the footprint and orientation of the residence has changed dramatically since the 1930's. He stated that, in conclusion, to improve the City and follow its goals and objectives, he has made the improvements to his home and property. He stated that the Planning Commission has heard testimony that the shade structure existed more than 30 years. He stated that the structure does not interfere with the neighborhood and that the City should not insert itself into the situation. He stated that he is willing to work with staff to comply with building codes. Mr. Phillip Klatchko, attorney for Mr. James Henderson, addressed the Planning Commission to state that his client owns the property to the rear of the subject site and, as such, is the most impacted by this unsightly and inappropriate structure. He stated the Mr. Dale was informed prior Affi3, Page 4 of 14 Planning Commission Minutes February 27, 2002 to, and during, the construction of this structure by his law office and by City staff that permits are required. He stated that Mr. Dale proceeded at his own peril. He stated that the foundation is brand new and, further, that the wall between the two properties had a gate and now the gate has been removed because it was apparently inconsistent with the new structure. He stated that there are no findings for a Variance. He stated that doing the construction to bring the structure up to code requirements would make this situation even worse for his client. He stated that this is a heavy beam and tile roofed structure and not a "shade structure." He stated that his client, Mr. Henderson, will address the Planning Commission to provide information regarding when the structure was built. Mr. James Henderson addressed the Planning Commission to state that he is here to protect his property and submitted a packet of information that includes photographs, a note from a City Building Inspector from March 1999 notifying Mr. Dale that the structure is illegal and will have to be entirely removed, and a written summary of the events to date regarding the construction of the new structure. He stated that the building has plumbing and electricity and that the roof hangs within two inches of the property line. He asked that the Planning Commission consider the code violations apparent at the site, the spirit of the Variance laws governing California, his privacy and view, the definition of"shade structure," his integrity, and City and State property owner laws. Mr. Greg Bryan addressed the Planning Commission to state that the structure has been there for at least 25 years and that it does diminish the view from his property. He stated that Mr. Henderson's view is only of his home and not of Mr. Dale's home or cabana. There being no further appearances, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Caffery stated that, despite the significant research by staff and review by Planning Commission, findings cannot be made,to support the application. Commissioner Matthews addressed Mr. Dale to state that he was given notification of the problem by the City during construction and that the City has used every avenue available in order to help him (e.g. staff time, Public Hearings at the Planning Commission, etc.) but that it is evident that in 1958 the structure did not exist and the Ordinance must be followed. Commissioner Raya stated that he is concerned regarding the safety of the high voltage power pole and lines at the southeast corner of the property due to the location of the subject structure. M/S/C (Caffery/Matthews 5-0, 1 abstention) to prepare resolution of denial. Case 8.245—Application by Quiel Bros. Signs for a Sign Variance to allow the installation of a roof- mounted 60 square foot sign which would exceed maximum height regulations and face a private right-of-way; and allow for a 29.3 square foot accessory sign which would exceed the six square foot maximum sign area forthe Caliber Collision Center, located at 672 South Palm Canyon Drive, CM Zone, Section 23. Continued from the February 13, 2002 meeting. ,�143� 04/30/2002 07:40 M-325-6464 HUGH VANCE PAREXEL PAGE 01 April 29,2002 HAIURESAVER"FAXMEMa V1616 oa�e ages Todd Miereau, r FNm 'e u Assistant City Planner Co roep co City of Patin Springs phones Phone e /ax i Fu A Regarding: Appeal of case number 6.457(Variance) 253 E Mesquite Please read the Following into the record during the city council meeting schedulcd on May 1, 2002: 1 am the property owner at 266 E.Palo Verde,a lot that adjoins the lot at 253 E Mesquite. 1 have no objection of any kind to the shade structure. On the contrary it is positive aspect and appropriate to the neighborhood in both style and function. Please approve the request for variance. Thank you, Hugh Vance 2666 Palo Verde � Palm Springs, CA 92264 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) �`€ COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) yam., C I,the undersigned,say: I am and was at all times herein mentioned,a citizen of the United States and employed in the County of Riverside, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action or proceeding; that my business address is 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Drive, Palm Springs, California;that on the 31"day of January,2002, 1 served the within (NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING) on PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO.6.457 to consider a request for a variance by Ron Dale to obtain the approval of a variance to allow an existing shade structure on the rear property line in the southwest corner of a property at 253 East Mesquite Avenue on persons contained in Exhibit"A"attached hereto in said action or proceeding by depositing a true copy thereof,enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in a mailbox,sub-post office,substation or mail chute, or other like facility, regularly maintained by the Government of the United States in the City of Palm Springs, California, addressed to the list of persons or firms indicated on the report received from and certified by the City's Planning Staff dated and attached hereto as Exhibit"A". I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. a Anita C. Graves Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 31"day of January, 2002. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION Case No, 6.457- Variance Application by Ron Dale for a Variance to allow an existing shade structure in the southwest corner of a property at 253 E. Mesquite Avenue, Zone R-1-C, Section 23. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of February 13, 2002. The Planning Commission meeting begins at 130 p.m. (Public Hearings begin at 2:00 p.m.) in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of this hearing is to consider an application by Ron Dale to obtain the approval of a Variance to allow an existing shade structure on the rear property line in the southwest corner of a property at 253 East Mesquite Avenue. The property is zoned R-1-C(Single Family Residential). Pursuant to Section 21080(b)(9)of the Public Resources Code,the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If any individual or group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at, or prior to, the Planning Commission hearing. An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Todd Mierau, Assistant Planner, Department of Planning & Building, (760) 323-8245. A notice of Public Hearing is being sent to all property owners within four hundred (400)feet of the subject property. Douglas . vans Director of Planning and Building PROPERTY OWNERS CERTIFICATION I, _T r(w i S IL AV100 , certify that on_�L era�tl�e.0 10,' , 200\ the attached property oA ers list was prepared by First American Title Co. pursuant to application requirements furnished by the Riverside County Planning Department. Said list is a complete and tnie compilation of the owners of the subject property and all other property owners within feet of the property involved, based upon the latest equalized assessment rolls. If the project is a subdivision with identified off-site access/ improvements, said list includes a complete and true compilation of the names and _ mailing addresses of the owners of all the property that is adjacent to the proposed off- site improvemenY alignment. I fiirther certify that the information filed is tnie and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that incorrect or incomplete information may be grounds for rejection of denial of the application. first American Title Co. Customer Service 3625 Fourteenth St. Riverside, CA 92502 Tel. 909-787-1700 Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 51600 508 291 019 508 291 020 508 291 021 Joseph Scionte&Gilda Scionte William Walker&Christopher Martin Alfred Marohl 623 Courtney Ave 216 E Palo Verde Ave 206 E Palo Verde Ave Fullerton,CA 92833 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 291 022 508 291 032 508 291 O3 Gaetan Choquette Edward Proffitt James&Jacquelyn Storm 190 E Palo Verdc Ave 185 E Mesquite Ave 248 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 291 036 508 292 008 508 292 009 Everett Martin Richard Needham Rosemarie Goldberg 225 E Mesquite Ave 207 E Palo Verde Ave 219 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 292 010 508292011 508 292 012 Richard&Lynn Doyle Elizabeth Gardiner Cecil&Ca-rol Plumb 2150 E Tahquitz Canyon Way 44 3328 SE Knapp St 251 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92262 Portland,OR 97202 Palm Springs,CA 92264 $08 292 013 508 292 016 308 292 028 Charles Stumpf&Patricia Stumpf Ralph George Richter Neal Patter&Terry Patter 252 E Ocotillo Ave 218 E Ocotillo Ave 240 E Oconllo Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 508 311 002 509 311 004 508 311 007 Bill&Sandra Hoppe Michael&Elizabeth Terry Carlo Wahlbeck 271 E Mesquite Ave 206 E Bay Ave 675 E Mesquite Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Newport Beach,CA 92661 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 311 008 508 311 022 508 311 026 Robert Shapiro John&Nancy Kelley Tad Webster&Linda Savoie 6523 Hesperia Ave 688 S Palo Verde Ave 2318 2Nd St#4 Reseda,CA 91335 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Santa Monica,CA 90405 508 311 027 508 311 028 508 311 029 William&Sheila Gordon Walter Hugh Vance James Henderson 13100 Saticoy St 266 E Palo Verde Ave PO Box 181 North Hollywood,CA 91605 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Stockbridge,MA 01262 508 311 034 508 311 036 508 311 037 Cid Preciado Jr. &Gilbert Rodriguez Joseph&Joan Martin Jeffrey Glasser 277 E Mesquite Ave 634 E Palo Verde Ave 610 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 311 039 508 312 00I 508 312 002 Randy&Sharon Burns David&Becky Schroeder Asa Hewitt 555 E Mesquite Ave 10934 NW Arcadian Ln 273 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Portland,OR 97229 Palm Springs, CA 92264 /l7 AVERY© Address Labels Laser 5960TM Smooth Feed SheetSTM Use template for 51600 508 191 007 508 191 009 508 191 011 Ronald&Norma Van Meeieren Unity In The Desert Inc Muirterco Inc 1276 N Palm Canyon Dr 815 S Camino Real 1874 S Pacific Coast Hwy#201 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Redondo Beach,CA 90277 508 191 015 508 192 024 508 192 025 1St Church Of Christ Scientists Ps Del Sol Tortuga Leiman Faber&Grant Thompson 605 S Riverside Dr 715 E San Lorenzo Rd 1341 W Thom St Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 San Diego,CA 92103 508 192 026 508 192 027 508 192 028 Grant Thompson&L B Faber Lawrence&Geraldine Miller Lawrence&Geraldine Miller 745 E San Lorenzo Rd 1840 Mountain View Dr 1840 Mountain View Dr Palm Springs,CA 92264 Tiburon,CA 94920 Tiburon,CA 94920 508 192 029 508 192 030 508 192 031 Thomas&Mary Louise Sekul William&Jan Diggs Mark O'Connor 1324 Gary Way 792 E Mesquite Ave 1421 Goodman Ave Carmichael,CA,95608 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Redondo Beach,CA 90278 508 192 032 508 192 033 508 192 034 Thomas Lenhan Christopher Keenan Luis&Debbie Jovellanos 611 S Palm Canyon Dr#7178 748 E Mesquite Ave 730 E Mesquite Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 192 041 508 201 011 508 201 013 Robert Kester Robert Charles&Carrie Dao Allan Unity In The Desert Inc 700 E Mesquite Ave 832 E San Lorenzo Rd 815 S Camino Real Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 202 001 508 202 002 508 202 003 Robert Salgado Gregory Voivarr&I Paul Tarr William Drury 827 E San Lorenzo Rd 833 E San Lorenzo Rd 839 E San Lorenzo Rd Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508202011 508 202 012 508 202 013 Donald&Rosalind Urista Robert Pacholkc Melissa Mile 4717 White Ct 960 S Camino Real 842 E Mesquite Ave Torrance,CA 90503 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 291 010 508291011 508 291 013 Robert&Barbara Woods Robert Woods&Barbara Woods Steven Kelley&Paul Kouba 205 E Mesquite Ave 205 Mesquite Ave 10940 Fruitland Dr Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Studio City,CA 91604 508 291 014 508 291 015 508 291 016 Jonathan&April Hildner Frank Bryan Tad Webster&Peter Johnson 241 E Mesquite Ave 249 E Mesquite Ave 11112 La Maida Si#9 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 North Hollywood,CA 91601 ` AVERY© Address Labels Laser 5960TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 51600 508 312 003 508 312 004 508 312 005 Richard Kraemer&Timothy Wear Jacqueline Becker Dorothy Dempsey 285 E Palo Verde Ave 295 E Palo Verde Ave 625 F Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 312 006 508 312 010 508 312 011 Carol&llah Wahiberg James&.Juanita Garner David&Becky Rea Schroeder 645 E Palo Verde Ave 86100 Cathedral Canyon Dr 10394 NW Arcadian Ln Palm Springs, CA 92264 Cathedral City,CA 92234 Portland, OR 97229 508 312 012 508 312 013 508 312 014 Douglas E Wylie Eloisa Berzunza Letitia Macdonald&Kathleen Macdona 284 E Ocotillo Ave 270 E Ocoullo Ave 262 E Ocoullo Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508-191-029 5 A Craig Fields P.O. Box 14264 San Francisco, CA 94114 //0 AVERY@ Address Labels Laser 5960T" PROOF OF PUBLICATION Thus is space foi County Ocrk's Filing Stamp (2015.5.C.C.P) S I � STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Riverside 1 am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Proof of Publication of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen _—------------_ _ _—----- _ years,and not a party to or interested in the No.1 oil above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a CITY CITY PCOUALM SPRINGS printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING Appeal of Case No- 6,457yariance) COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, Existing Shade Structwa on - printed and published in the city of Palm Springs, Property tine County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been 263 E. Mesquite Avenue adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the NCTICI: 15 HEREBY GIVEN that the City council Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of of the City of Palm Spring*, California,will hold a ublle hesnng at its meeting of April 17, 2002 California under the date of March 24,1988.Case erne City Council meetin? begins aC 7 00 p.m. in the Council Chambers a City Hall, 3200 E. Tah- Number 191236;that the notice,of which the qultz Canyon way, Palm springs. annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller The purpose of the hearing is to consider an 5p- than non panel,has been published in each regular peal by Ron Dale of the denial of tho Planning Commission of the V3nante application for an ex- and entire issue of said newspaper and not In anyIsting 10 foot tall uhado structure on the property lillo in the southwest corner of ins property locat- supplement thereof on the following dates,to Wit: ad at 252 E. Mesquito Avunue Zone F-1-C, Sec- April Sth non 20, V1CINfTYMAP All in the year 2002 I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the t'� foregoing is true and correct. F i 5lit i . r Dated at Palm Springs,California this---------day April i 2002 �����= cln ar- rrntin 5?rnmics -E-A ir Signature If any nroup challenges the action in Court,issues raised may be limited to only thoso issues raised at the public hr•onnq described in this notice or in wgtton correspondence at, or prior to, the City Council hearing. An opportunely will be given at said hearingg ocr rill interested persons to be nearo Qucstiens regarding this case Ina be di- rcctcd to Todd Fnlerau, A"i.rlunt Planner (760)323-62a5. PA'i riiCln A, SANDERSs City Clerk PUB: Apill 5 2002 PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space for County Clerk's Feline Stamp �f (2015_5_C.C.P) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Riverside I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Proof of Publication of the County aforesaid; 1 am over the age of eighteen ........... ___-- years,and not a party to or interested in the No.I 170 CITY COUNCIL shove-entitled matter.I am the principal Clerk of a clrr OF PALM SPRwCS printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING Appeal of Case No. C,457 (variance) COMPANY a newspaper of general circulation, [:iyting Shade Strootuno on printed and published in file city of Pahn Springs, property Line County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been 25a E. Mesquite Avo„uc adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the NOTICE IS HEREDY GIVEN that the City Council Superior Copt(of the County of of the City of Palm Spins, CoKomm,will hold a Riverside,State of pubhc hearing at Its meu Inp of Ma t 2002.The California tinder the date of March 24, 1t988.Case council cnhmbcrs nai ciryiis.,lai,t sago Taitquhtz Number 191236;that the notice,of which the Canyon way, Palm Spnnvs. anne'1Cd is a printed copy(set in type not smaller The purpose of the hearing i.:to consider an ap- peal by Ron Dale of ,he denial of the Pi innnp than non pariel,has been published in each regular Commission of thu variance applic1hpn for an ex- isting 10 foot tall shade Struplurc on the ppi operty Ind entire issue of said newspaper an not in any line in the southwt yt corner of the pro "v locat- supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: nonat 3s3 r. Mesquite Avenue, zone�-1-C Sec- Aprill8th _._ -` VICINrrrMAIP All in the year 2002 S.MY u,xtl „o-- I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 191h Dated at Palm Springs,California this day i `t April g —lir rn rALk ^Frwrg Signature 11 any group challenges the nelion in court issues raised may be Ilmite.d to only those issues rn-,%d at the public hcannpp, described in Chi;•notice or in wnit(n rorrespontlence at, or prior to the City Council hearing. An opportunity will be given ,t hsaid heannp or all interested per,ans to be eard. Cuus ions regarding Chi, puse may be dI- r�cicd to Todd Miemu, Assistant Planner (760) 323-824b. PATRICIA A. SANQFRS PUB. April 18, 2002 City Clerk AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES I, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing before the City Council of the City of Palm Springs,in conjunction with Appeal of Case No. 6.457 (Variance) regarding Existing Shade Structure on Property Line, located at 253 E.Mesquite Avenue, applicant lion Dale,was mailed to each and every person on the attached list on the 18th day of April,2002. A copy of said Notice is attached hereto. Said mailing was completed by placing a copy of said Notice in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Palm Springs, California, this IS"' day of April, 2002. ATRICIA A. SANDERS City Clerk �,2 Vlti CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Appeal of Case No. 6.457 (Variance) Existing Shade Structure on Property Line 253 E. Mesquite Avenue NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its meeting of May 1, 2002, The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an appeal by Ron Dale of the denial of the Planning Commission of the Variance application for an existing 10 foot tall shade structure on the property line in the southwest corner of the property located at 253 E. Mesquite Avenue, Zone R- 1-C, Section 23. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at, or prior to the City Council hearing. An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Todd Mierau, Assistant Planner, (760) 323-8245. PATRICIA A. SANDERS City Clerk Publish: April 18, 2002 The Desert sun r VICINITY MAP f N.T.S. d _ �j =3 SU Uj vDUNE5 L UNNY DUNE RD �,... Wm w ■ i MESQUITE AV too 10 MESQU STONE1 TER �* w * X s lYF boo MAR E LN r>< PALO VERDE AV ONYX DR w OCOTILLO AV LN CAMEO DR MORONGO RD o SONORAG a. dp cc PALME A n - - -A;4C CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO. 6.457 DE CRIPTION APPLICANT Ron Dale To allow an existing shade structure in the southwest corner of a property at 253 1 - Mesquite Avenue, Zone R-1-C, Sect. 23 Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 51600 508 312 003 508 312 004 508 312 005 Richard Kraemer&Timothy Wear Jacqueline Becker Dorothy Dempsey 285 E Palo Verde Ave 295 E Palo Verde Ave 625 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 312 006 508 312 010 508 312 011 Carol&Ilah W ahlberg James&Juanita Garner David&Becky Rea Schroeder 645 E Palo Verde Ave 86100 Cathedral Canyon Dr 10394 NW Arcadian Ln Palm Springs,CA 92264 Cathedral City, CA 92234 Portland, OR 97229 5OS 312 012 508 312 013 508 312 014 Douglas E Wylie Eloisa Berzunza Letitia Macdonald&I{athleen Macdona 284 E Ocotillo Ave 270 E Ocotillo Ave 262 E Ocotillo Ave Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Ron Dale 253 E. Mesquite Ave Palm Springs, CA 92264 508-191-029 5 A Craig Fields P.O. Box 14264 San Francisco, CA 94114 //_.� AVERY@ Address Labels I —ar s, ,)TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 51600 508 291 019 508 291 020 508 291 021 Joseph Scionte&Gilda Scionte William Walker&Christopher Martin Alfred Marohl 623 Courtney Ave 216 E Palo Verde Ave 206 E Palo Verde Ave Fullerton,CA 92833 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 291 022 508 291 032 508 291 033 Gaetan Choquette Edward Proffitt James&Jacquelyn Storm 190 E Palo Verde Ave 185 E Mesquite Ave 248 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 291 036 508 292 008 508 292 009 Everett Martin Richard Needham Rosemarie Goldberg 225 E Mesquite Ave 207 E Palo Verde Ave 219 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 292 010 508 292 011 508 292 012 Richard&Lynn Doyle Elizabeth Gardiner Cecil&Carol Plumb 2150 E Tahqultz Canyon Way#4 3328 SE Knapp St 251 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92262 Portland,OR 97202 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 292 013 508 292 016 508 292 028 Charles Stumpf&Patricia Stumpf Ralph George Richter Neal Pader&Terry Patler 252 E Ocotillo Ave 218 E Ocotillo Ave 240 E Ocotillo Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 311 002 508 311 004 508 311 007 Bill&Sandra Hoppe Michael&Elizabeth Terry Carlo Wahlbeck 271 E Mesquite Ave 206 E Bay Ave 675 E Mesquite Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Newport Beach,CA 92661 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 311 008 508 311 022 508 311 026 Robert Shapiro John&Nancy Kelley Tad Webster&Linda Savoie 6523 Hesperia Ave 688 S Palo Verde Ave 2318 2Nd St#4 Reseda,CA 91335 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Santa Monica,CA 90405 508 311 027 508 311 028 508 311 029 William&Sheila Gordon Walter Hugh Vance James Henderson 13100 Saticoy St 266 E Palo Verde Ave PO Box 181 North Hollywood,CA 91605 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Stockbridge,MA 01262 508 311 034 508 311 036 508 311 037 Cid Preciado Jr. &Gilbert Rodriguez Joseph&Joan Martin Jeffrey Glasser 277 E Mesquite Ave 634 E Palo Verde Ave 610 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 311 039 508 312 001 508 312 002 Randy&Sharon Burns David&Becky Schroeder Asa Hewitt 555 E Mesquite Ave 10934 NW Arcadian Ln 273 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs, CA 92264 Portland,OR 97229 Palm Springs,CA 92264 153, AV15RY© Address Labels I ,,r rc,"ITM Smooth Feed SheetSTM Use template for 51600 508 191 007 508 191 009 508 191011 Ronald&Norma Van Mccteren Unity In The Desert Inc Muirterco Inc 1276 N Palm Canyon Dr 815 S Canuno Real 1874 S Pacific Coast Hwy#201 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Redondo Beach,CA 90277 508 191 015 508 192 024 508 192 025 lSt Church OF Christ Scientists Ps Del Sol Tortuga Leiman Faber&Grant Thompson 605 S Riverside Dr 715 E San Lorenzo Rd 1341 W Thorn St Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 San Diego,CA 92103 508 192 026 508 192 027 508 192 028 Grant Thompson&L B Faber Lawrence&Geraldine Miller Lawrence&Geraldine Miller 745 E San Lorenzo Rd 1840 Mountain View Dr 1840 Mountain View Dr Palm Springs,CA 92264 Tiburon,CA 94920 Tiburon,CA 94920 508 192 029 508 192 030 508 192 031 Thomas&Mary Louise Sekul William&Ian Diggs Mark O'Connor 1324 Gary Way 792 E Mesquite Ave 1421 Goodman Ave Carmichael,CA 9560E Palm Springs,CA 92264 Redondo Beach,CA 90278 508 192 032 508 192 033 508 192 034 Thomas Lenhan Christopher Keenan Luis&Debbie Jovellanos 611 S Palm Canyon Dr#7178 748 E Mesquite Ave 730 E Mesquite Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 50S 192 041 508 201 Oil 508 201 013 Robert Kesler Robert Charles&Carrie Dao Allan Unity In The Desert Inc 700 B Mesquite Ave 832 E San Lorenzo Rd 815 S Camino Real Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 202 001 508 202 002 508 202 003 Robert Salgado Gregory Voniarr&I Paul Tarr William Drury 827 E San Lorenzo Rd 833 E San Lorenzo Rd 839 E San Lorenzo Rd Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 202 011 1 508 202 012 508 202 013 Donald&Rosalind Urisia Robert Pacholke Melissa Mike 4717 White Ci 960 S Camino Real 842 E Mesquite Ave Torrancc,CA 90503 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 291 010 508 291 Oil 508 291 013 Robert&Barbara Woods Robert Woods&Barbara Woods Steven Kelley&Paul Kouba 205 E Mesquite Ave 205 Mesquite Ave 10940 Fruitland Dr Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Studio City,CA 91604 508 291 014 508 291 015 508 291 016 Jonathan&April Hildner Frank Bryan Tad Webster&Peter Johnson 241 E Mesquite Ave 249 E Mesquite Ave 11112 La Maida St#9 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 North Hollywood,CA 91601 10117 AvErm Address Labels Laser 5960TM AF- IDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICES 1, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the Appeal of Case 6.457 (Variance) Existing shad structure on property line at 253 Mesquite Avenue,applicant Ron bale was mailed to each and every person set forth on the attached list on the 29th day of March,2002- A copy of said letter and attachments is attached hereto. Said mailing was completed by placing a copy of said Notice in a sealed envelope,with postage prepaid,and depositing same in the U.S.Mail at Palm Springs, California. I declare tmder penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Pahn Springs, California, this 29th day of March, 2002. Ca:: PATRICIA A. SANDERS City Clerk r*7Y pr- r•ALM SFFT1 C r•v n^ ^nL S`;nl'2G ; `iEr4'. }; Cf1U1�TEn '21u0r435da0 Hr��ir = Ci'1L�:7 Ci A] 'AiuF.s R010,LI1 UAL` rIA E: CJO/2O/Q-' E@`S cF DATE' N'IJ1410 T!lR; Y1r7 r9:LJ'7x- jir���tA°1T�P1 hArdIJNT lEL".n1 r,j=0i�' Ai�Qlii•." A°�ERL .:".iJ,aCl] ?I_^.iY«.",: fli�ip AoFtia' rHcr; PAD! 5275. 'C C c',I', 'n?D', CHECK ;Jr- 1,511 TErJ 'EREb. 52i5 On, _1=PIr'E;rLII,; alt'.. i5 -Lix CITY COUNCIL CITY OF PALM SPRINGS Appeal of Case No. 6.457 (Variance) Existing Shade Structure on Property Line 253 E. Mesquite Avenue NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, will hold a public hearing at its.meeting of April 17, 2002. The City Council meeting begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs. The purpose of the hearing is to consider an appeal by Ron Dale of the denial of the Planning Commission of the Variance application for an existing 10 foot tall shade structure on the property line in the southwest corner of the property located at 253 E. Mesquite Avenue, Zone R- 1-C, Section 23. If any group challenges the action in court, issues raised may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence at, or prior to the City Council hearing. An opportunity will be given at said hearing for all interested persons to be heard. Questions regarding this case may be directed to Todd Mierau, Assistant Planner, (760) 323-8245. PATRICIA A. SANDERS City Clerk VICINITY MAP N,T,S. Q � J uJ.l � vvDUNES L UNNY DUNE RD r _ _ IALU j tr MESQUITE AV 100 too MESQU STONEI TER x S IY: 600 MAR E LN a PALO VERDE AV ONYX DR LU>- JADE ILN OCOTILLO AV CAMEO DR MORONGO RD o SoNQRA °� a VD PALME A CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO. 6-457 DESCRIPTION APPLICANT Ron Dale To allow an existing shade structure in the southwest corner of a property at 253 E. Mesquite Avenuc, Zone R-1-C, Sect. 23 Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template For 5160(9 508 312 003 508 312 004 508 312 005 Richard Kraemer&Timothy Wear Jacqueline Becker Dorothy Dempsey 295 E Palo Verde Ave 295 E Palo Verde Ave 625 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 312 006 508 312 010 508 312 011 Carol&Ilah Wahlbcrg James&Juanita Garner David&Becky Plea Schroeder 645 E Palo Verde Ave 86100 Cathedral Canyon Dr 10394 NW Arcadian Lit Palm Springs,CA 92264 Cathedral City,CA 92234 Portland,OR 97229 508 312 012 508 312 013 508 312 014 Douglas E Wylie Eloisa Berzunza Letitia Macdonald&Kathleen Macdona 284 E Ocotillo Ave 270 E Ocotillo Ave 262 E Ocotillo Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 2t'ln L)o Ie_ 508-191-0295 25 3 M escf U i . vp_ A Craig Fields P.O. Box 14264 al 1"n irl 11 3 CO- San Francisco, CA 94114 u 9 ZZ(r 2\ AVI=RYO Addrp-,s I -bel�, ';96^TM Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 51608 508 191 007 508 191 009 508 191 011 Ronald&Norma Van Meeteren Unity In The Desert Inc Muirterco Inc 1276 N Palm Canyon Dr 815 S Camino Real 1874 S Pacific Coast Hwy#201 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Redondo Beach,CA 90277 508 191 015 508 192 024 508 192 025 - 1St Church Of Christ Scientists Ps Del Sol Tortuga Lciman Faber&Grant Thompson 605 S Riverside Dr 715 E San Lorenzo Rd 1341 W Thorn St Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 San Diego,CA 92103 508 192 026 508 192 027 508 192 028 Grant Thompson&L B Faber Lawrence&Geraldine Miller Lawrence&Geraldine Miller 745 E San Lorenzo Rd 1840 Mountain View Dr 1840 Mountain View Dr Palm Springs,CA 92264 Tiburon,CA 94920 Tiburon,CA 94920 508 192 029 508 192 030 508 192 031 Thomas&Mary Louise Sekui William&Jan Diggs Mark O'Connor 1324 Gary Way 792 E Mesquite Ave 1421 Goodman Ave Carmichael,CA 95608 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Redondo Beach,CA 90278 508 192 032 508 192 033 508 192 034 Thomas Lenhan Christopher Keenan Luis&Debbie Jovellanos 611 S Palm Canyon Dr#7178 748 E Mesquite-Ave 730 E Mesquite Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 192 041 508 201 Ol 1 508 201 013 Robert Kester Robert Charles&Carrie Dao Allan Unity In The Desert Inc 700 E Mesquite Ave 832 E San Lorenzo Rd 815 S Camino Real Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 202 001 508 202 002 508 202 003 Robert Salgado Gregory Vontarr&J Paul Tara- William Drury 827 E San Lorenzo Rd 833 E San Lorenzo Rd 839 E San Lorenzo Rd Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 922641 508 202 011 508 202 012 509202013 Donald&Rosalind Urista Robert Pacholke Melissa Mike 4717 White Ct 960 S Camino Real 842 E Mesquite Ave Torrance,CA 90503 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 291 010 508 291 Ol l 508 291 013 Robert&Barbara Woods Robert Woods&Barbara Woods Steven Kelley&Paul Kouba 205 E Mesquite Ave 205 Mesquite Ave 10940 Fruitland Dr Palm Springs,CA 92764 Palm Springs, CA 92264 Studio City,CA 91604 508 291 014 508 291 015 5OS 291 016 Jonathan&April Hildner Frank Bryan Tad Webster&Peter Johnson 241 E Mesquite Ave 249 E Mesquite Ave 11112 La Maida St 09 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 North Hollywood,CA 91601 R\ AVrRYO PddrP I ^hPls ' l . Z.- ./ /-" /) I -c;pr 596nrw Smooth Feed SheetSTM Use template for 5160® 508 291 019 508 291 020 508 291 021 Joseph Scionte&Gilda Scionte William Walker&Christopher Martin Alfred Marohl 623 Courtney Ave 216 E Palo Verde Ave 206 E Palo Verde Ave Pullerton,CA 92833 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 291 022 508 291 032 508 291 033 Gaetan Choquette Edward Proffitt James&Jacquelyn Storm 190 E Palo Verde Ave 185 E Mesquite Ave 248 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA, 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 291 036 508 292 008 508 292 009 Everett Martin Richard Needham RoseMarie Goldberg 225 E Mesquite Ave 207 E Palo Verde Ave 219 H Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 292 010 508 292 011 508 292 012 Richard&Lynn Doyle Elizabeth Gardiner Cecil&Carol Plumb 2150 E Tahquitz Canyon Way#4 3328 SE Knapp St 251 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92262 Portland,OR 97202 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 292 013 508 292 016 508 292 028 Charles Stumpf&Patricia Stumpf Ralph George Richter Neal Paller&Terry Palter 252 E Ocotillo Ave 218 E Ocotillo Ave 240 E Ocotillo Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 311 002 508 311 004 509 311 007 Bill&Sandra Hoppe Michael&Elizabeth Terry Carlo Wahlbeck 271 E Mesquite Ave 206 E Bay Ave 675 E Mesquite Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Newport Beach,CA 92661 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 311 008 508 311 022 508 311 026 Robert Shapiro John&Nancy Kelley Tad Webster&Linda Savoic 6523 Hesperia Ave 688 S Palo Verde Ave 2318 2Nd Si#4 Reseda,CA 91335 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Santa Monica,CA 90405 508 311 027 508 311 028 508 311 029 William&Sheila Gordon Walter Hugh Vance James Idendcrson 13100 Saticoy St 266 E Palo Verde Ave PO Box 181 North Hollywood,CA 91605 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Stockbridge,MA 01262 508 311 034 508 311 036 508 311 037 Cid Preciado Jr.&Gilbert Rodriguez Joseph&Joan Martin leffrey Glasser 277 E Mesquite Ave 634 E Palo Verde Ave 610 E Pala Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 508 311 039 509 312 001 508 312 002 Randy&Sharon Burns David&Becky Schroeder Asa Hewitt 555 E Mesquite Ave 10934 NW Arcadian Ln 273 E Palo Verde Ave Palm Springs,CA 92264 Portland,OR 97229 Palm Springs, CA 92264 50 0.0F17Yt<9 n.irlracc I -hale I -sar 59'f1TM 012010 c- 4 C.2t6o '"14- C 4 tti 5()8, 12 001 JOD -Y Sc.pOrtland ,�34..'�4 Ar ro'clel, 0, -v 2 ,6�0 4�1�o C) Op 0 cp 0 0 A PR p'007 S() 191007 Ronald&Norma Vav1271 N palC ae eler nyon D, j 18 p-? -77— PaInI Springs, CA 92262 r �C,6L VA VA,'\l MIZ E:xr, PC J-t�R�,,j PALM'�-C)X JE23- '-� L TY -'Q L5ffNr) ,SPRXN65 CA rLJRN 292 028 Og 311 027 C� �,ri' William S ° :a 131 p heila Nati t orthHollyWd o CA rn �� 91605 It Flo/��WOUd C9 7 Son r� A y1G07 � r�Gl00 o cp ✓ � � t F A •� "v 0-?,/, o /g `r v yd IC G'G-0 � r'�02�.p g�•� r _ ' •` e ` Z�,�ud^ ►''h 'fir -'���' Ff• �;. '�- r • ! M�IMNxm"` aiv�i�i�Clrya-.Fur'' , r � �••, i r a rµaty�'My1W�'!fMl."' ,"t�+V,wT1�+t ' �`�,• � ��. Y t 1�� it frT� p.__• INA ... 1 �—WIN' Ga _7 I Y'•S��i. �;' ' ar - r�� 1 L �n III I Mi IWO IWO ff4m 'P � . I ,Art. I � , rTj ZL I,���1 ,���'A�����rr j � � _.� awl , _�'• _ y—�� 1 7 ;�.•� � I �s�` .l 11�� h�FVF, _ 'ter•-�--� s• _. ;•+ v i I I I �� .yily. M• F .1�M I11f r � _. .�"y rv.IIQ • � Yr I -'I�YM}iJ�� � � 1 .F. i I y I i�nl i III i M,. .n J alll � e nil Y ? r _•� III 1 — h �, �'1 u� ' � 1 .�� AAJIM;rp,y'I,�a ielld l l"Il ✓ Ff r�/Y''C9PI�ffJi fl/t� I f i � .$�� r �'� �,. _-� �� �, `� - . ,� . 1 � y - '-y�• "� .� \. � I �� � -, � � r � � . i' 1 ,. •� _ ! • � � �, �_. . �`� M ,fir Ytir.t. �1:�} � .►a(�• ' �1 ►r. ... i oil .7 r�y s w• Ir - 7N'L9 •� . .`y� •• �.� a �qR� Y• n �`. l r s t,+f, 14 pr wr '� �,.r A - x;. fir" "•_ .�s''~�." � . 1 � .��` `'ir�•Y �__`:ri.`'. , ram•. . .4. .y�-rt • - 3M •r+ ` '•.n; - �.._ - jam•- :.• Pro It 4 dir rr" !4 wpf fj r •1.,Fl�M{ram "•� a �,7� "Lr.TTTw���x _ l' - - � iY � }7. r lY 'J•. •+t " _ •r All 3 I Ii , r F �r�A �.k,�. � ' t�W}. ., fll� r^ •r rAr• �.� a + in r,-