Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission backs staff recommendation and denies variance for unpermitted patio at 535346 Camino Loreto
Summary
At a public hearing, the Coachella Planning Commission voted to deny a variance request for an unpermitted detached patio at 535346 Camino Loreto after staff said the structure failed to meet required setback findings; the applicant and family urged flexibility and were directed to work with staff on compliance options.
The Coachella Planning Commission voted to deny a variance request for an unpermitted detached patio at 535346 Camino Loreto after staff told the commission the structure does not meet required setback findings and recommended denial.
Vanessa Sanchez Mesa, a planning technician for the city, summarized the file and told commissioners that the rear setback measures 3 feet 7 inches and the side setback 3 feet 11 inches, below the city's 5-foot minimum. "Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny variance number 25-05 with the findings listed in Resolution PC2026-02," she said, and noted that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review under Section 15303 as a small structure.
Family members of the property owner urged the commission to consider the lot's constraints. "The contractor told us that it was a new lean-to," said Eduardo Velasquez, who appeared to speak on behalf of the household, and later said the lot 'is very small' and that there was limited room to move or shrink the structure. Carlos Velasquez described the patio as a well-built family gathering area: "It's a nicely well built pergola."
A commissioner emphasized that variances are intended to address unique physical circumstances beyond a homeowner's control and not to excuse self-created conditions. The commissioner said applicants should not rely on contractors to determine permit needs and recommended the family work with Development Services to explore options such as shrinking or attaching the structure so it complies with the municipal code.
Planning staff also told the commission that Riverside County Fire and the city's Building Division had proposed conditions should the commission approve the variance, including a one-hour rated wall, an approved fire-retardant finish, and as-built plans stamped by a licensed architect; destructive inspections might also be required to verify safety.
After discussion about precedent and enforcement consistency, a motion was made to follow staff's recommendation and deny variance number 25-05 with the findings in Resolution PC2026-02. The motion passed with three votes in favor and two abstentions; the commission chair announced the motion carried. Commissioners instructed the applicant that, following denial, the property owner may work with city staff to pursue options to bring the patio into compliance or to seek appeal to the City Council if they choose.
The commission then moved on to informational items and reminders about upcoming training for commissioners.
