Loading...
PC - 2012-06 - Approving Zone Varience 10-02 and Modification 10-04 for The Relief from Rosemead Municipal Code Setions 17.12.190 and 17.84.130 at 9026 Valley BoulevardPC RESOLUTION 12 -06 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONE VARIANCE 10 -02 AND MODIFICATION 10 -04 FOR THE RELIEF FROM ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 17.12.190 AND 17.84.130 FOR DEVELOPMENT SITE LOCATED AT 9026 VALLEY BOULEVARD IN THE CBD -D (CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT WITH A DESIGN OVERLAY) ZONE (APN: 8954 - 001 -031). WHEREAS, on August 5, 2010, Fresh and Easy, Inc. submitted a Zone Variance and a Modification application requesting to deviate from the required construction of a six -foot high masonry wall along the southeast property line; WHEREAS, this property located at 9026 Valley Boulevard is located in the CBD -D (Central Business District with a Design Overlay) zone; and WHEREAS, Section 17.108.020 of the Rosemead Municipal Code provides the purpose and criteria for Zone Variance approval; Section 17.12.190 of the Rosemead Municipal Code provides the criteria to modify from the construction of a six -foot high masonry wall; and WHEREAS, Sections 65800 & 65900 of the California Government Code and Sections 17.108.020 and 17.12.190 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorize the Planning Commission to approve, conditionally approve or deny zone variance and modification applications; and WHEREAS, Section 17.84.130 of the Rosemead Municipal Code requires the installation of a six -foot solid masonry wall where parking area abuts property classified for residential uses; and WHEREAS, an applicant must obtain a Zone Variance in order to create a development that does not meet the minimum standards. Section 17.108.020 sets criteria required for granting such a variance. If one of these criteria cannot be met, then the variance may not be granted. These criteria require that granting such a variance will not: A. Constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity; B. Be materially detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity; C. Adversely affect the comprehensive general plan; and D. That because of special circumstances, the strict enforcement of the code would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under identical zone classifications. WHEREAS, Section 17.12.190 of the Rosemead Municipal code requires that a six -foot masonry wall be installed where a commercially zoned lot has a common line with a residentially zoned property. Section 17.12.190 sets the criteria required for granting a modification; E. The Planning Commission shall give the application for such modification an opportunity to be heard if he or she so desires, and thereafter may grant or deny the application for the modification, or may grant the same upon such conditions as the Planning Commission deems necessary for the preservation of the safety, health or property of the general public. WHEREAS, on August 16, 2010, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing for Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04; and WHEREAS, on March 8, 2012, fifty -six (56) notices were sent to property owners within a 300 -foot radius from the subject property, in addition to notices posted in six (6) public locations and onsite, specifying the availability of the application, plus the date, time, and location of the special public hearing for Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04, and on March 9, 2012, the notice was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2012, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed and advertised public hearing to receive oral and written testimony relative to Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04; and WHEREAS, the Rosemead Planning Commission has sufficiently considered all testimony presented to them in order to make the following determination. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead as follows: SECTION 1 . The Planning Commission HEREBY DETERMINES that Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04 are classified as a Class 4 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15304(b) and Class 5 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15305(a) of CEQA guidelines. Section 15304(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exempts projects consisting of minor public or private alterations in the condition of land, such as new gardening or landscaping, including the replacement of existing conventional landscaping with water efficient or fire resistant landscaping. Section 15305(a) of CEQA exempts projects consisting of minor alterations to land use limitations, such as minor lot line adjustments, side yard, and setback variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcel. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Zone Variance 10 -02 in accordance with Section 17.108.020 et seq., of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. Constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity; FINDING: The applicant has attempted to meet the requirement of constructing a six -foot high masonry wall by exploring two options. The first option was to construct a new masonry wall along the common property line between the market and the adjacent residential property. However, the construction of a new six -foot masonry wall is not feasible due to the size and location of an existing four -foot wide AT &T (originally PacBell) telephone easement, which runs north and south along the property line. The construction of a new masonry wall would require the relocation of the telephone easement and telephone cable. In addition, the construction of a new masonry wall presents the potential of damaging the existing light pole that is located along that property line. Fresh and Easy proposed extending the height of the existing 5' -2" brick wall to six -feet. According to Fresh and Easy's Structural Engineer, the existing structural foundation is found to be structurally not capable of supporting any additional concrete masonry wall load. Due to the location and size of the easement, which is a special existing physical circumstance on the subject property, strict enforcement of Section 17.84.130 causes hardship. Therefore, the approval of the application does not constitute a grant of special privilege to the property owner inconsistent from other properties in the neighborhood. B. Be materially detrimental to the public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity; FINDING: Fresh and Easy has completed the construction stage of their project. The applicant is requesting relief from the six -foot high masonry wall requirement due to the special existing physical circumstances on the property, which is the location of a four -foot wide AT &T telephone easement along the east property line. To prevent impacts of noise, light, and glare on the adjacent residential property, the applicant is proposing to maintain and paint the existing 5-2" brick wall located in this area, and supplement the requirement by installing thirty -six (36) 15- gallon Ficus Nitida hedges (also known as Indian Laurel Fig) within the existing landscape planter located along the common property line between the market and the residential property. The installation of dense landscaping, in combination with the existing 5' -2" brick wall, will provide a substantial buffer to the adjacent residential property. C. Adversely affect the comprehensive general plan; and FINDING: The General Plan will not be adversely affected by the zone variance request. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the subject property as Commercial and the proposed project is consistent in all ways with the General Plan. In addition, the zone variance application requesting relief from the required six -foot high masonry wall will not in any way alter the use of the land. The applicant is proposing to maintain and paint the existing 5' -2" brick wall, and supplement the requirement by installing thirty -six (36) 15- gallon Ficus Nitida hedges (also known as Indian Laurel Fig) within the existing landscape planter located along the subject property line to prevent impacts of noise, light, and glare on the adjacent residential property. The plant material will be six -feet tall when planted and the proposed hedge will be fully established within a period of six to eight months. D. That because of special circumstances, the strict enforcement of the code would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under identical zone classifications. FINDING: Due to the special existing physical circumstances that the four -foot wide AT &T telephone easement poses on the subject property, the applicant is unable to meet the required construction of a six -foot high masonry wall along the common property line between the market and the adjacent residential property. The applicant has attempted to meet the requirement of constructing a 6' -0" high masonry wall by exploring two options. The first option was to construct a new masonry wall along the common property line between the market and the adjacent residential property. However, the construction of a new six -foot masonry wall is not feasible due to the size and location of an existing four -foot wide AT &T (originally PacBell) telephone easement, which runs north and south along the property line. The construction of a new masonry wall would require the relocation of the telephone easement and a telephone cable. In addition, the construction of a new masonry wall presents the potential of damaging the existing light pole that is located along that property line. Fresh and Easy proposed extending the height of the existing 5' -2" brick wall to six -feet. According to Fresh and Easy's Structural Engineer, the existing structural foundation is found not to be structurally capable of carrying any additional concrete masonry wall load. For these reasons, the applicant is proposing to maintain and paint the existing 5' -2" brick wall and to supplement the requirement by installing thirty -six (36) 15- gallon Ficus Nitida hedges (also known as Indian Laurel Fig) within the existing landscape planter located in this area. The plant material will be six -feet tall when planted and the proposed hedge will be fully established within a period of six to eight months. SECTION 3. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Modification 10 -04 in accordance with Section 17.12.190 of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. The Planning Commission shall give the application for such modification an opportunity to be heard if he or she so desires, and thereafter may grant or deny the application for the modification, or may grant the same upon such conditions as the Planning Commission deems necessary for the preservation of the safety, health or property of the general public. FINDING: Fresh and Easy has completed the construction stage of their project. The applicant is requesting to deviate from the six -foot high masonry wall requirement due to the special existing physical circumstances on the subject property, which is the four -foot wide AT &T telephone easement that runs north and south along the east property line. To prevent impacts of noise, light, and glare on the adjacent residential property, the applicant is proposing to maintain and paint an existing 5' -2" brick wall and install thirty -six (36) 15- gallon Ficus Nitida hedges (also known as Indian Laurel Fig) within the existing landscape planter located along the subject property line. The plant material will be six -feet tall when planted, and the proposed hedge will be fully established within a period of six to eight months. SECTION 4 . The Planning Commission HEREBY APPROVES Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04, allowing Fresh and Easy Market to deviate from the required construction of a six -foot high masonry wall along the portion of the property line that abuts the residential lot as required in Sections 17.84.130 and 17.12.190. SECTION 5 . This resolution is the result of an action taken by the Planning Commission on March 19, 2012, by the following vote: YES: ENG, HERRERA, HUNTER, RUIZ AND SACCARO NO: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE SECTION 6 . The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall transmit copies of same to the applicant and the Rosemead City Clerk. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 19 day of March, 2012. A Na 6y) Eng, lair CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead at its regular meeting, held on the 19 day of March, 2012 by the following vote: YES: ENG, HERRERA, HUNTER, RUIZ AND SACCARO NO: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE n Michelle Ramirez, 0 cretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Gregory M. Wrphy /, Planrfrt&. CommissigXAttorney Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP EXHIBIT "B" ZONE VARIANCE 10 -02 AND MODIFICATION 10 -04 9026 VALLEY BOULEVARD (APN: 8954 -001 -031) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL March 19, 2012 1. Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04 shall be in compliance and remain in compliance with all Conditions of Approval for Design Review 09 -04 and Conditional Use Permit 09 -03, in addition to the Conditions of Approval for Zone Variance 10 -04 and Modification 10 -04. 2. Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04 are approved to provide relief from Rosemead Municipal Code Sections 17.84.130 and 17.12.190. 3. Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04 are approved for six (6) months from the Planning Commission approval date. The applicant shall commence the proposed use or request an extension within 30- calendar days prior to expiration. The one (1) year initial approval period shall be effective from the Planning Commission approval date. For the purpose of this petition, project commencement shall be defined as beginning the permitting process with the Planning and Building Divisions, so long as the project is not abandoned. If Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04 have been unused, abandoned or discontinued for a period of one (1) year it shall become null and void. 4. The Planning Commission hereby authorizes the Planning Division to make and /or approve minor modifications. The following conditions must be complied with to the satisfaction of the Planning Division prior to final approval of the associated plans, building permits, occupancy permits, or any other appropriate request. 5. Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04 are granted or approved with the City and its Planning Commission and City Council retaining and reserving the right and jurisdiction to review and to modify the permit, including the conditions of approval based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the modification of the use, a change in scope, emphasis, size, or nature of the use, or the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration, or change of use. This reservation of right to review is in addition to, and not in lieu of, the right of the City, its Planning Commission, and City Council to review and revoke or modify any permit granted or approved under the Rosemead Municipal Code for any violations of the conditions imposed on Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04. 6. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Rosemead or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Rosemead or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set side, void, or annul, an approval of the Planning Commission and /or City Council concerning the project, which action is brought within the time period provided by law. 7. Approval of Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04 shall not take effect for any purpose until the applicant has filed with the City of Rosemead an affidavit stating that they are aware of and accept all of the conditions set forth in the letter of approval and this list of conditions. 8. The applicant shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws relative to the approved use including the requirements of the Planning, Building, Fire, Sheriff and Health Departments. 9. The onsite public hearing notice posting shall be removed within 30 days from the end of the 10 -day appeal period of Zone Variance 10 -02 and Modification 10 -04. 10. Thirty -six (36) 15- gallon Ficus Nitida hedges (also known as Indian Laurel Fig) shall be planted within the existing landscape planter located along the east property line, where the property line has a common boundary with the adjacent residential lot. Within the first 20 feet measured from the south property line (the depth equal to the required front yard setback on the abutting residential lot), the plant material shall be installed and maintained at a height not to exceed 42 inches. The landscape hedge shall be installed and maintained at a height of six - feet along all other portions of the planter. The applicant shall repair cracking on the east side of the existing perimeter block wall and shall continue to maintain the wall as needed in order to ensure its continued structural integrity (Modified by the Planning Commission on March 19, 2012). 11. Violations of the conditions of approval may result in citation and /or initiation of revocation proceedings. 12. All compact stalls onsite shall be painted and marked in accordance with Rosemead Municipal Code Section 17.84 marking standards (Modified by the Planning Commission on March 19, 2012).