Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
PC - Item 3A - Modification 17-05 at 9036-9038 Garvey Avenue Staff Report
M ` ilt---'''''''�a ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIR AND PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DIVISION DATE: AUGUST 21, 2017 SUBJECT: MODIFICATION 17-05 9036-9038 GARVEY AVENUE SUMMARY Connecticut Ave. XB, LLC has submitted a Modification Application requesting to modify Design Review 14-06. Design Review 14-06 was approved by the Rosemead Planning Commission on September 15, 2014, for a mixed use project consisting of a 6,500 square foot retail building fronting Garvey Avenue and 48 residential units in the rear. To incorporate restaurant use, the applicant is proposing to re-classify the retail use to a shopping center use. Parking will not be impacted as the parking requirements for a shopping center is consistent with retail use. The subject site is located at 9036-38 Garvey Avenue (known as 9048 Garvey Avenue), in the Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay (C-3/MUDO/D-O) zone. Per Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) Section 17.120.110(C), a proposed change that does not comply with the criteria identified in subsection B of [RMC Section 17.120.110], or any other provision of the Zoning Code, may only be approved by the original review authority for the project through a modification permit application filed and processed in compliance with [RMC Chapter 17.120]. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines exempts projects consisting of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination. Accordingly, Modification 17-05 is classified as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of CEQA guidelines. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 17-17 with findings (Exhibit "A"), and APPROVE Modification 17-05, subject to the 102 conditions outlined in Attachment "A" attached hereto. FE CD CD CD 3 — O CD Q M M M S2. -s Q N CD °-°' 9N Q C CD CD _ • (� O g- Cn CD O N CQ O � ro ro- r -a ,-a CD CD CQ CD CD 0 CD P o D O ON CD O -o- 0- �< C7 CD r Sv O CD O `< CD r-� Cn o U;, O CD O CD n -0 - � CD CD � m W C� (D 0 O< 0')Cf)Q c� C3) O O `< O O w. O = O N U)Q .-r - O B CO r -o- —1 Cn =<CQ CD _- � co CD O N � � C7 -P O _ S� CD O 'O '-° D n CD Q Z O O _� �: --%cn ,-,- O CD v CD O O �. CD n Q C7 cn '-°• O= O N CCS (a O C/) O '-° CD Q CD CD '-'- M w CD -°' O CD CD .� CQ CD CD n 3 c Sll CD CO O m (D CDO 00® -a C7 Cn (D O O O < cn DCn nD CDQO O ` <�3 O (CD N O CD �D -O 3 CD 3 CD CD N �-� X Q C6- Cn �- _ � n W -O O m CD -O ,_-�: C7 C7 r a CD CD 0QCn :T 0CD �CD� Sl Q. O O CD x CD CD UD oo CQ 0- 0 CDCD o cn O n c�D -Ocn CD �. �_ �'�0(D3 CD �-% Q.� -� L� O ;v r- :n X'O r— M < CD O CD r-* E Q (D •0 CD :3CD O CD 00-PC-cno O O pp � � -O <. �W ccn n Z3 3 Q0 Q� cD CD C3� O N O � O O' % ,_,. < --� Q - o-, CD Q CD O CD O O Cn CD �- - CD CD cn 0 Cn CD Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 3 of 24 SITE & SURROUNDING LAND USES The project site is designated in the General Plan as Mixed Use: Residential/Commercial (60 du/ac) and on the Zoning Map it is designated C-3/MUDO/D-O (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone. The site is surrounded by the following land uses: North General Plan: Mixed Use: IndustriaVCommercial Zoning: Medium Commercial (C-3) Land Use: Commercial South General Plan: Office/Light Industrial and Public Facilities Zoning: Light Manufacturing and Industrial (M-1) and Open Space Land Use: Industrial and Rio Hondo Wash East General Plan: Mixed Use: Residential/Commercial (60 du/ac) and Public Facilities Zoning: Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay(C-3/MUDO/D-O) and Open Space Land Use- Commercial and Rio Hondo Wash West General Plan: Mixed Use: Residential/Commercial (60 du/ac) Zoning: Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay(C-3/MUDO/D-O) Land Use: Commercial ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYSIS Design Review 14-06 was approved with 102 conditions of approval. A copy of the Planning Commission Staff Report, Planning Commission Resolution No. 14-12, and meeting minutes have been included as Exhibit "D", "E", and "F", respectively. The applicant is requesting to modify condition of approval number 1, which currently states: "Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 are approved for the construction of a new residential/commercial mixed use development, in accordance with the plans marked Exhibit "C", dated August 28, 2014. Any revisions to the approved plans must be resubmitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division." The purpose of modifying condition of approval number 1 is to re- classify the retail use to a shopping center use, in order to allow for the incorporation of restaurant use. The original site plan, included as Exhibit "G", was only approved for retail use. For this reason, the applicant is proposing to revise the plans to re-classify the retail use to a shopping center use. Preface, LLC, the original applicant for the project, had only planned to develop the commercial building as retail use. For this reason, parking was calculated based on the retail use at 1 parking space per 250 square feet of floor area. Since purchasing the commercial component of the mixed use project, Connecticut Ave. XB, LLC has received letters of interest from restaurant chains, such as Waba Grill and Fins or Tails Poke Bar. Due to the confidential nature of the letters of interest from these two restaurants, the applicant has opted not to share the letters. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 4 of 24 After receiving interest from Waba Grill and Fins or Tails Poke Bar, the applicant made the decision to submit a modification application to incorporate restaurant use into the commercial development. After reviewing the off-street parking requirements and consulting with the City Attorney's Office, staff has determined that the applicant's request to convert the commercial component of the mixed use project into a shopping center is compliant with the Rosemead Municipal Code. In addition, the applicant is not required to provide a parking study. The mixed use project is unique in that the development is designed as a horizontal mixed use, where the commercial component stands alone along the front of the lot and the residential row townhomes is situated in the rear. The retail building may be defined as a shopping center as it consists of five tenant spaces. Per RMC Section 17.04.050, a shopping center means a commercial site with two or more separate businesses managed as a total entity, sharing common access, circulation, signage, and pedestrian and parking areas so that a public right-of-way does not need to be used to get from one business to another in the C-1, C-3, and CBD zones. In addition, parking will not be impacted as a shopping center (less than 100,000 square feet) with more than four tenants is parked at a parking ratio of 1 parking space per 250 square feet of floor area. This is consistent with the parking ratio for retail use. As illustrated in Exhibit "B", the applicant is not proposing any changes to the facade or building floor plan of the retail building. Staff has also consulted the applicant's request with the City Engineer and since the commercial building is only 6,500 square feet, the City Engineer did not foresee any impacts to traffic. For this reason, the City Engineer did not request a traffic study. Parking Analysis The commercial component of the mixed use project, approved under Design Review 14- 106, was originally approved for a 6,500 square foot retail building. RMC Table 17.112.040.1 requires retail uses to be parked at a ratio of 1 parking space for every 250 square feet of floor area. Based on this requirement, a total of 26 parking spaces were provided for the retail use. The re-classification of the retail use to a shopping center use would allow for restaurant use to be permitted without affecting parking requirements. According to RMC Table 17.112.040.1, a shopping center that has more than four tenants is parked at a ratio of 1 parking space for every 250 square feet of floor area if the total combined floor space of all structures on the parcel is up to 100,000 square feet of floor area. Based on the parking requirement, the retail building could be classified as a shopping center as it consists of five tenant spaces and the required parking is consistent with retail use. The re- classification of the 6,500 square foot retail building to a shopping center would require 26 parking spaces. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 5 of 24 Use Total Building Area Parking Required Parking Provided (s.f.) Ratio Spaces Parking Spaces Retail 6,500 1 space/250 26 26 s.f. Shopping Center 6,500 1 space/250 26 26 s.f. Floor Plan The commercial portion of the mixed use project was approved for a 6,500 square foot retail building with five tenants. The proposed modification will not increase the square footage of the retail building or the number of tenants. Staff has carefully reviewed the applicant's modification request to verify that the modification would remain in conformity with the standards of the Rosemead Municipal Code if Condition of Approval No. 1 is modified. Condition of Approval No. 1 currently states: Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 are approved for the construction of a new residential/commercial mixed use development, in accordance with the plans marked Exhibit "C", dated August 28, 2014. Any revisions to the approved plans must be resubmitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division. For this reason, it is recommended that Condition of Approval No. 1 be modified to state the following: Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 are approved for the construction of a new residential/commercial mixed use development, in accordance with the plans marked Exhibit "C", dated August 28, 2014. Modification 17-05 would re-classify the retail use to a shopping center use, allowing for the incorporation of restaurant use. Any revisions to the approved plans must be resubmitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division. As a result of the applicant's request for this modification, it is recommended that the following condition be revised and added to the Conditions of Approval for this project to more accurately reflect both the nature of the project and the City's requirements for its use. All other conditions of approval from Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 will remain. Condition of Approval No. 1 will be modified to reflect the re-classification of the retail use to a shopping center use for the incorporation of restaurant use. Staff has verified that the proposed modification would be in compliance with the applicable development standards of the Rosemead Zoning Code. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 6 of 24 MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIREMENTS Per Rosemead Municipal Code Section 17.28.020(A)(1), in the Design Overlay zone, Design Review procedures shall be followed for all improvements requiring a building permit or visible changes in form, texture, color, exterior facsade, or landscaping. On September 15 2014, the Planning Commission approved Design Review 14-06 for a mixed use project consisting of a 6,500 square foot retail building fronting Garvey Avenue and 48 residential units in the rear. Rosemead Municipal Code Section 17.28.020(C) provides the criteria by which the Planning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application. Per Rosemead Municipal Code Section 17.120.110(C), a proposed change that does not comply with the criteria identified in subsection B of [RMC Section 17.120.110], or any other provision of the Zoning Code, may only be approved by the original review authority for the project through a modification permit application filed and processed in compliance with [RMC Chapter 17.120]. The applicant has submitted a Modification Application requesting to modify Design Review 14-06. Design Review 14-06, along with Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14- 03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871, which was approved by the Rosemead Planning Commission on September 15, 2014, for a mixed use project consisting of a 6,500 square foot retail building fronting Garvey Avenue and 48 residential units in the rear. The applicant is proposing to re-classify the retail use to a shopping center use, in order to incorporate restaurant use. The commercial component of the mixed use project may be defined as a shopping center as it consists of five tenant spaces. Per RMC Section 17.04.050, a shopping center means a commercial site with two or more separate businesses managed as a total entity, sharing common access, circulation, signage, and pedestrian and parking areas so that a public right-of-way does not need to be used to get from one business to another in the C- 1, C-3, and CBD zones. In addition, parking will not be impacted as a shopping center (less than 100,000 square feet) with more than four tenants is parked at a parking ratio of 1 parking space per 250 square feet of floor area. This is consistent with the parking ratio for retail use. The re-classification of the 6,500 square foot retail building to a shopping center would require the same number of parking spaces (26 parking spaces). PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process, which includes a 300-foot radius public hearing notice to twenty-six (26) property owners, publication in the Rosemead Reader on August 10, 2017, and postings of the notice at the six (6) public locations and on the subject site. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 7 of 24 Prepared by: iit : by: nne Lao' al nzuela Assistant Planner Interim Community Development Director EXHIBITS: A. Planning Commission Resolution 17-17 with Attachment"A"(Conditions of Approval) B. Site/Floor Plans C. Assessor Parcel Map (MN:5282-026-052) D. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated September 15, 2014 E. Resolution No. 14-12 F. Planning Commission Minutes. dated September 15, 2014 a Site Plan for Design Review 14-06 Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 8 0124 EXHIBIT "A" PC RESOLUTION 17-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MODIFICATION 17-05, A MODIFICATION OF DESIGN REVIEW 14-06, TO RE-CLASSIFY THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT OF THE MIXED USE PROJECT TO A SHOPPING CENTER USE, FOR THE INCORPORATION OF RESTAURANT USE. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 9036-38 GARVEY AVENUE, IN THE MEDIUM COMMERCIAL WITH A MIXED USE AND DESIGN OVERLAY (C- 3/MUDO/D-O) ZONE (APN: 5282-026-052). WHEREAS, on July 18, 2017, Connecticut Ave. XB, LLC submitted a Modification application requesting to modify Design Review 14-06 to re-classify the retail use of the commercial building to a shopping center use, for the incorporation of restaurant use at 9036-38 Garvey Avenue; WHEREAS, 9036-38 Garvey Avenue is located in a Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay (C-3/MUDO/D-O) zone; WHEREAS, Sections 17.120.110 and 17.28.020(C) of the Rosemead Municipal Code provide the criterias for authorizing changes to an approved project and Design Review; WHEREAS, Sections 65800 & 65900 of the California Government Code and Section 17.120.110 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorize the Planning Commission to approve changes to development or new use authorized through a permit granted in compliance with the zoning code; WHEREAS, on August 10, 2017, twenty-six (26) notices were sent to property owners within a 300-foot radius from the subject property, the notice was published in the Rosemead Reader, and notices were posted in six (6) public locations and on site, specifying the availability of the application, and the date, time, and location of the public hearing for Modification 17-05; WHEREAS, on August 21, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed and advertised public hearing to receive oral and written testimony relative to Modification 17- 05; and WHEREAS, the Rosemead Planning Commission has sufficiently considered all testimony presented to them in order to make the following determination. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 9 of 24 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead as follows: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission HEREBY DETERMINES that Modification 17-05 is classified as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption, pursuant to Section 15301. Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines exempts projects consisting of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination. Accordingly, Modification 17-05 is classified as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of CEQA guidelines. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Modification 17-05, in accordance with Section 17.120.110 and 17.28.020(A)(1) of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. Per Rosemead Municipal Code, Section 17.120.110(C), a proposed change that does not comply with the criteria identified in subsection B of [RMC Section 17.120.1101, or any other provision of the Zoning Code, may only be approved by the original review authority for the project through a modification permit application filed and processed in compliance with [RMC Chapter 17.120]. FINDING: The applicant has submitted a Modification Application requesting to modify Design Review 14-06. Design Review 14-06, along with Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871, which was approved by the Rosemead Planning Commission on September 15, 2014, for a mixed use project consisting of a 6,500 square foot retail building fronting Garvey Avenue and 48 residential units in the rear. The applicant is proposing to re-classify the retail use to a shopping center use, in order to incorporate restaurant use. The commercial component of the mixed use project may be defined as a shopping center as it consists of five tenant spaces. Per RMC Section 17.04.050, a shopping center means a commercial site with two or more separate businesses managed as a total entity, sharing common access, circulation, signage, and pedestrian and parking areas so that a public right-of-way does not need to be used to get from one business to another in the C- 1, C-3, and CBD zones. In addition, parking will not be impacted as a shopping center (less than 100,000 square feet) with more than four tenants is parked at a parking ratio of 1 parking space per 250 square feet of floor area. This is consistent with the parking ratio for retail use. The re-classification of the 6,500 square foot retail building to a shopping center would require the same number of parking spaces (26 parking spaces). SECTION 3. The Planning Commission HEREBY APPROVES Modification 17-05 for the modification of Design Review 14-06 to re-classify the commercial component of the mixed use project to a shopping center for the incorporation of restaurant use at 9036- Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 10 of 24 38 Garvey Avenue, and subject to the conditions listed in Attachment "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 4. This action shall become final and effective ten (10) days after this decision by the Planning Commission, unless within such time a written appeal is filed with the City Clerk for consideration by the Rosemead City Council as provided in Rosemead Municipal Code, Section 17.160.040 — Appeals of Decisions. SECTION 5. This resolution is the result of an action taken by the Planning Commission on August 21, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: 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 21st day of August, 2017. Sean Dang, Chair 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 21st day of August, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Lily T. Valenzuela, Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Gregory M. Murphy, Planning Commission Attorney Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 11 of 24 ATTACHMENT "A" (PC RESOLUTION 17-17) MODIFICATION 17-05 (ORIGINALLY DESIGN REVIEW 14-06, ZONE VARIANCE 14-02, ZONE VARIANCE 14- 03, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72871) 9036-38 GARVEY AVENUE (APN: 5282-026-052) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AUGUST 21, 2017 Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 are approved for the construction of a new residential/commercial mixed use development, in accordance with the plans marked Exhibit "C", dated August 28, 2014. Modification 17-05 would re-classify the retail use to a shopping center use, allowing for the incorporation of restaurant use. Any revisions to the approved plans must be resubmitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division. 2. Approval of Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 shall not take effect for any purpose until the Applicant has filed with the City of Rosemead a notarized affidavit stating that he/she is aware of and accepts all of the conditions of approval as set forth in the letter of approval and this list of conditions, within ten (10) days from the Planning Commission approval date. 3. The onsite public hearing notice posting shall be removed by the end of the 10-day appeal period of Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 . 4. Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 are approved for a period of one (1) year. 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 Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 have been unused, abandoned, or discontinued for a period of one (1) year it shall become null and void. Planning Commission Meeting August21,2017 Page 12 of 24 5. The Planning Commission hereby authorizes the Planning Division to make and/or approve minor modifications. 6. 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. 7. Design Review 13-02 and Tentative Tract Map 72347 is 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 modification of existing or imposition of new 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 Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. Building permits will not be issued in connection with any project until such time as all plan check fees, and all other applicable fees, are paid in full. 11. Occupancy will not be granted until all improvements required by this approval have been completed, inspected, and approved by the appropriate department(s), including but not limited to all improvements required to file a final tract map and the filing and recordation of that final map. 12. The numbers of the address signs shall be at least 6" tall with a minimum character width of 3/4", contrasting in color and easily visible at driver's level from the street. Materials, colors, location, and size of such address numbers shall be approved by the Planning Division, prior to installation. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 13 of 24 13. All requirements of the Planning Division, Building Division, and Public Works Department shall be complied with prior to the final approval of the proposed construction. 14. The hours of construction shall be limited from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday to Saturday. No construction shall take place on Sundays or on any federal holidays without prior approval by the City. 15. The Planning, Building, and Public Works staff shall have access to the subject property at any time during construction to monitor progress. 16. The site shall be maintained in a graffiti-free state. Any new graffiti shall be removed within twenty-four (24) hours. A 24-hour, Graffiti Hotline can be called at (626) 569-2345 for assistance. 17. The site shall be maintained in a clean, weed, and litter free state in accordance with the Rosemead Municipal Code. All trash containers shall be stored in the appropriate trash enclosure at all times. All trash, rubbish, and garbage receptacles shall be regularly cleaned, inspected, and maintained in a clean, safe, and sanitary condition. 18. A detailed elevation drawing shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval all trash enclosures prior to submittal of construction drawings. All trash enclosures shall be of an integral part of the building design, and incorporate complementary colors and materials. All trash enclosures shall have a solid roof cover and doors shall be opaque, self-closing, and self-latching. 19. All commercial loading activities and trash pickup for the mixed use project shall be prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. daily. 20. All off-street parking shall comply with the relevant section of the Rosemead Municipal Code applicable as of the date these Conditions of Approval are adopted. The parking area, including loading and handicapped spaces, shall be paved and re-painted periodically to City standards to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. In accordance with the currently applicable section of the Rosemead Municipal Code, all designated parking spaces shall be double striped. Such striping shall be maintained in a clear, visible, and orderly manner. 21. The Applicant shall keep the electrical and mechanical equipment and/or emergency exits free of any debris, storage, furniture, etc., and maintain a minimum clearance of five (5) feet. 22. All roof top appurtenances and equipment shall adequately be screened from view to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. There shall be no mechanical equipment located on the sides of the building. Such equipment shall not exceed Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 14 of 24 the height of the parapet wall. All ground level mechanical/utility equipment (including meters, back flow preservation devices, fire valves, NC condensers, furnaces, utility cabinets and other equipment) shall be located away from public view or adequately screened by landscaping or screening walls so as not to be seen from the public right of way or other public space within the development. The Planning Division shall approve said screening prior to inspection. 23. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall comply with the City's storm water ordinance and storm water mitigation plan requirements with respect to the proposed project. 24. Prior to issuance of any building permit related to this project, the Applicant shall prepare Covenant Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) or other similar recorded instrument indicating how and who will maintain proposed common areas. The CC&R's shall be prepared by the Applicant and approved by the City Attorney and shall include the following statements: 'This statement is intended to notify all prospective property owners of certain limitations on construction to residential dwellings contained in this planned development project. Any necessary modifications or additions must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and approved or denied by the Community Development Director or his/her designee at his/her discretion". The CC&R's will cover all aspects of property maintenance of the common areas, including but not limited to driveways, fencing, landscaping, lighting, parking spaces, open space and recreational areas. All applicable City Attorney fees shall be at the responsibility of the Applicant. 25. The Applicant shall include provisions in the CC&R's to provide maintenance of all building improvements, on-grade parking and landscaping, and maintenance of the driveway, in a manner satisfactory to the Planning Division, and in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 26. The subdivider shall include provisions in the CC&R's to require regular trash pickup service at least once a week for the residential condominium trash bins, and twice a week for the commercial tenant space trash bins. 27. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall submit a comprehensive Parking Management Plan for review and approval by the Planning Division or designee. The Parking Management Plan shall be incorporated into the CC&R's and shall be enforced by the property owners association. Said Parking Management Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following provisions: • Designated parking for customers and employees. • Parking permit procedures for overnight guest parking. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 15 of 24 Every homeowner shall be allowed to keep up to two (2) vehicles on the premises. The parking monitor/security guard shall be responsible for issuing overnight guest parking permits when there are excess parking spaces available. Employee parking shall be restricted to the retail parking areas only. 28. All open areas not covered by concrete, asphalt, or structures shall be landscaped and maintained on a regular basis. Maintenance procedures of such landscaped and common areas shall be specifically indicted in the CC&R's prior to issuance of any building permit. 29. Prior to the issuance of any sign permit, the Applicant shall submit a Master Sign Program to the Planning Division for review and approval. The sign program shall address sign materials, colors, height, width and location. It shall also address the use of temporary signage such as banners as well as appropriate window signage. Any proposed monument signs shall accommodate to obstructing sight lines (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). 30. A final landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The new planting materials shall include a combination of colorful and drought tolerant trees, large potted plants, shrubs, and low growing flowers. The landscape and irrigation plan shall include a sprinkler system with automatic timers and moisture sensors. 31. Violations of the conditions of approval may result in citation and/or initiation of revocation proceedings. 32. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit a lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division. The lighting plan shall include a schematic depicting the location of lighting sources, as well as type of lighting proposed. The lighting plan shall address the following criteria: • Lighting shall be fully shielded to minimize glare and painted to match the surface it is attached to. • Light fixtures shall be architecturally compatible with the structure's design. • Structure entrances should be well lit. • Lighting and trees should not conflict with one another. • The design of exterior parking lot lighting fixtures shall be compatible with the architecture used in the development and not be on poles over 25 feet high. • Solar power lighting shall be used for common areas where feasible (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). 33. Exterior glass to be used for the project shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. No exterior glass shall be approved if it creates significant light and glare spillage to adjacent properties or highways. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 16 of 24 34. Two weeks prior to commencement of construction, notification shall be provided to the immediate surrounding off-site residential, school, and church uses that discloses the construction schedule, including the types of activities and equipment that would be used throughout the duration of the construction period. Engineering Conditions of Approval GENERAL 35. Details shown on the tentative map are not necessarily approved. Any details which are inconsistent with requirements of ordinances, general conditions of approval, or City Engineer's policies must be specifically approved in the final map or improvement plan approvals. 36. A final tract map prepared by, or under the direction of a Registered CMI Engineer authorized to practice land surveying, or a Licensed Land Surveyor, must be processed through the City Engineer's office prior to being filed with the County Recorder. 37. A preliminary subdivision guarantee is required showing all fee interest holders and encumbrances. An updated title report shall be provided before the final parcel map is released for filing with the County Recorder. 38. The final tract map shall be based on a field survey, and monuments shall be set to permanently mark parcel map boundaries, street center lines and lot boundaries to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The basis of bearing used for the field survey required for the final map shall include two survey well monuments found or set. The City Engineer may waive this requirement upon petition should this be impractical. Well monuments shall be set in accordance with standard plan No. S08-001, if required. 39. Final tract map shall be filed with the County Recorder and one (1) Mylar copy of filed map shall be submitted to the City Engineer's office. Prior to the release of the final map by the City, a refundable deposit in the amount of $1,000 shall be submitted by the developer to the City, which will be refunded upon receipt of the Mylar copy of the filed map. 40. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 41. Approval for filling of this land division is contingent upon approval of plans and specifications mentioned below. If the improvements are not installed prior to the filing of this division, the developer must submit an Undertaking Agreement and a Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bond in the amount estimated by the City Engineer guaranteeing the installation of the improvements. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 17 of 24 42. The City reserves the right to impose any new plan check and/or permit fees approved by City Council subsequent to tentative approval of this map. 43. The project plans indicate that the airspace in the six buildings shall be subdivided (a condominium) requiring the filing of a tentative tract map with the City of Rosemead to be followed by the recording of a final map. The final map shall be based on a field survey performed by a Licensed Land Surveyor (or by a registered Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying), with all monuments (horizontal control) being set to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and/or City Land Surveyor of the City of Rosemead. 44. Prior to performing any grading, obtain a permit from the Engineering Department. Submit grading and drainage plans pre the City's grading guidelines and the latest edition of the Los Angeles County Building Code. The plans shall be stamped and signed by a California State Registered Civil Engineer. 45. Prior to the recordation of the final map, grading and drainage plans must be approved to provide for contributory drainage from adjoining properties as approved by the City Engineer, including dedication of the necessary easements. 46. A grading and drainage plan must provide for each lot having an independent drainage system to the public street, to a public drainage facility, by means of an approved drainage easement, or by the existing drainage channel (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). 47. Historical or existing storm water flow from adjacent lots must be received and directed by gravity to the public street, to a public drainage facility, by means of an approved drainage easement, or by the existing drainage channel (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). 48. Prepare and submit hydrology and hydraulic calculations for sizing of all proposed drainage devices. The analysis shall also determine if changes in the post development versus pre development conditions have occurred. The analysis shall be stamped by a California State Registered Civil Engineer and prepared per the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Hydrology Method. 49. All grading projects require an Erosion Control Plan as part of the grading plans. Grading permit will not be issued until and Erosion Control Plan is approved by the Engineering Department. 50. The project is greater than one acre; therefore, a Storm Water Pollution Plan is required. A Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be filed with the State Water Resources Control Board. When submitting the SWPPP for the City's review, please include the NOI and the Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number. ROAD Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 18 of 24 51 . New drive approaches shall be constructed at least 3' from any above-ground obstructions in the public right-of-way to the top of "x" or the obstruction shall be relocated. New drive approaches shall be limited to the frontage of the parcel. The drive approach is intended to serve, and is designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 52. All work proposed within the public right-of-way shall require permits from the Public Works Department. 53. Remove and replace existing curb and gutter from westerly property line to easterly property line. 54. Remove and replace sidewalk from westerly property line to easterly property line, minimum seven feet wide. 55. Remove and construct driveway approaches as indicated on the plans. 56. Remove existing trees and replace with 48-inches box min. Contact City Arborist for tree species recommendations. SEWER 57. Approval of this land division is contingent upon providing a separate house sewer lateral to serve each lot of the land division. 58. Prepare and submit a sewer calculations analysis for sizing of proposed laterals including capacity conditions of existing sewer trunk line. The analysis shall be stamped by a California State Registered Civil Engineer and prepared per the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Guidelines. 59. All existing laterals to be abandoned shall be capped at the public right of way to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Building Official of the City of Rosemead. UTILITIES 60. All power, telephone and cable television shall be underground. 61. Any utilities that are in conflict with the development shall be relocated at the developer's expense. 62. Existing street lights are not shown on the proposed project plans, nor are proposed street lights shown. A street lighting plan shall be developed using ornamental lights with underground services as necessary to accommodate the proposed development and to obtain the approval of the City Engineer. The applicant shall Planning Commission Meeting August 21.2017 Page 19 of 24 bear all costs to provide street lighting, etc., if required. In addition, all utility services to serve the proposed project shall be placed underground. WATER 63. Prior to the filing of the final map, there shall also be filed with the City Engineer, a statement from the water purveyor indicating subdivider compliance with the Fire Chiefs fire flow requirements. Traffic Conditions of Approval 64. The applicant shall construct the on-site circulation system in substantial compliance to the site plan submitted in the traffic impact study. 65. Vehicle access shall be left turn in, right turn in, and right turn out only. Outbound left turns shall be prohibited by construction of a raised center median (See Traffic Impact Study Exhibit Q), and appropriate turn restriction signs to the satisfaction of the City. 66. A stop sign, stop bar, and stop legend shall be installed and maintained at the project exit, and traffic calming devices shall be installed in the primary access drive consistent with the existing easement conditions (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). 67. The applicant shall be responsible for the design and modification of the existing raised center median on Garvey Avenue at the project driveway to prohibit outbound left turns. The median shall be constructed per City standards prior to occupancy of any buildings. 68. A sight distance analysis at the driveway along Garvey should be prepared. 69. All residential parking spaces shall be signed and marked as noted in the Traffic Impact Study (Exhibit 0). 70. Radiused curbs shall be constructed on the raised planters adjacent to all parallel parking spaces and shall not extend deeper than 7-feet from the inside edge of the parking space for improved parking access. 71. All improvements recommended by the Traffic Impact Study, prepared by RK Engineering Group, LLC shall comply prior to the Building and Safety final inspection (Added by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). Fire Department Conditions of Approval (Added by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014) Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 20 of 24 72. Provide the bond verification for the improvements prior to the clearance of the Final Map. 73. Submit the Final Map to the Land Development Unit for review. 74. Submit the Grading Plan to the Land Development Unit for review. 75. Submit a minimum of three (3) copies of the water plans indicating the new fire hydrant locations to the Fire Department's Land Development Unit for review. All required PUBLIC fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to beginning construction. ACCESS 76. The Tentative Tract Map, as submitted, meets current Fire Department requirements for access. 77. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the required Fire Apparatus Access Roads and the fire hydrants shall be inspected for compliance by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department. 78. All on-site Fire Department vehicular access roads shall be labeled as "Private Driveway and Fire Lane" on the site plan along with the widths clearly depicted on the plan. Labeling is necessary to assure the access availability for Fire Department use. The designation allows for appropriate signage prohibiting parking. 79. Fire Department vehicular access roads must be installed and maintained in a serviceable manner prior to and during the time of construction. Fire Code 501.4 80. All fire lanes shall be clear of all encroachments, and shall be maintained in accordance with the Title 32, County of Los Angeles Fire Code. 81. The Fire Apparatus Access Roads and designated fire lanes shall be measured from flow line to flow line. 82. Provide a minimum unobstructed width of 28 feet, exclusive of shoulders and an unobstructed vertical clearance "clear to sky" Fire Department vehicular access to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building when the height of the building above the lowest level of the Fire Department vehicular access road is more than 30 feet high, or the building is more than three stories. The access roadway shall be located a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 21 of 24 of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. Fire Code 503.1.1 & 503.2.2 83. The dimensions of the approved Fire Apparatus Access Roads shall be maintained as originally approved by the fire code official. Fire Code 503.2.2.1 84. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved Fire Department turnaround. Fire Code 503.2.5 85. Fire Department vehicular access roads shall be provided with a 32 foot centerline turning radius. Fire Code 503.2.4 86. Fire Apparatus Access Roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing 37 '1 tons and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Fire apparatus access roads having a grade of 10 percent or greater shall have a paved or concrete surface. Fire Code 503.2.3 87. Provide approved signs or other approved notices or markings that include the words "NO PARKING - FIRE LANE". Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be provided for fire apparatus access roads, to clearly indicate the entrance to such road, or prohibit the obstruction thereof and at intervals, as required by the Fire Inspector. Fire Code 503.3 88. A minimum 5 foot wide approved firefighter access walkway leading from the fire department access road to all required openings in the building's exterior walls shall be provided for firefighting and rescue purposes. Fire Code 504.1 89. Fire Apparatus Access Roads shall not be obstructed in any manner, including by the parking of vehicles, or the use of traffic calming devices, including but not limited to, speed bumps or speed humps. The minimum widths and clearances established in Section 503.2.1 shall be maintained at all times. Fire Code 503.4 90. Traffic Calming Devices, including but not limited to, speed bumps and speed humps, shall be prohibited unless approved by the fire code official. Fire Code 503.4.1 91. Security barriers, visual screen barriers or other obstructions shall not be installed on the roof of any building in such a manner as to obstruct firefighter access or egress in the event of fire or other emergency. Parapets shall not exceed 48 inches from the top of the parapet to the roof surface on more than two sides. Fire Code 504.5 92. Approved building address numbers, building numbers or approved building Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 22 of 24 identification shall be provided and maintained so as to be plainly visible and legible from the street fronting the property. The numbers shall contrast with their background, be Arabic numerals or alphabet letters, and be a minimum of 4 inches high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch. Fire Code 505.1 93. Multiple residential and commercial buildings having entrances to individual units not visible from the street or road shall have unit numbers displayed in groups for all units within each structure. Such numbers may be grouped on the wall of the structure or mounted on a post independent of the structure and shall be positioned to be plainly visible from the street or road as required by Fire Code 505.3 and in accordance with Fire Code 505.1. WATER SYSTEM 94. All fire hydrants shall measure 6"x 4"x 2-1/2" brass or bronze, conforming to current AWWA standard C503 or approved equal, and shall be installed in accordance with the County of Los Angeles Fire Department Regulation 8. 95. All on-site fire hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25' feet from a structure or protected by a two (2) hour rated firewall. Exception: For fully sprinkled multi-family structures, on-site hydrants may be installed a minimum of 10 feet from the structure. Fire Code Appendix C106 96. All required PUBLIC fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to beginning construction. Fire Code 501.4 97. All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and approved prior to building occupancy. Fire Code 901.5.1 - Plans showing underground piping for private on-site fire hydrants shall be submitted to the Sprinkler Plan Check Unit for review and approval prior to installation. Fire Code 901.2 & County of Los Angeles Fire Department Regulation 7 FIRE FLOW 98. The required fire flow for the public fire hydrants for this project is 3750 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure for 3 hours. Three (3) public fire hydrants flowing simultaneously may be used to achieve the required fire flow. Fire Code 507.3 & Appendix B105.1 99. The required fire flow for the on-site private fire hydrants for this project is1250 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure for 2 hours. One (1) on-site fire hydrant flowing simultaneously may be used to achieve the required fire flow. Planning Commission Meeting August 21,2017 Page 23 of 24 PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANTS 100. Install one (1) public fire hydrant as noted by the Fire Department on the plan dated August 20, 2014. 101. The fire flow for the existing public fire hydrant is adequate per the fire flow test dated May 20, 2014 by the San Gabriel Valley Water Company is adequate. PRIVATE ON-SITE FIRE HYDRANTS 102. Install one (1) private on-site fire hydrant as noted on the plan dated August 20, 2014. Planning Commission Meeting August21,2017 Page 24 of 24 EXHIBIT "C" 5282 26 .. in®' o�m n�,m. .as.wm. .,� rir . ems ee 1.4 3 §ss?s � I I I I i ¢ I I / n GORVEY rvmNe - r RI. p�-..,zx. ''' "s.nwcr P "oer. B30 -r= a — / vvvramxr�l co , ' Y Sidery' 1ZTETT /I I Ei PROJECT SITE > et gale "a C , 's,m II 1 I I G j P 44, a ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DIVISION DATE: SEPTEMBER 15, 2014 SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW 14-06, ZONE VARIANCE 14-02, ZONE VARIANCE 14-03, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72871 9048 GARVEY AVENUE Summary Matt Hamilton of Preface, LLC has submitted entitlement applications requesting to construct a new residential/commercial mixed use development. The project will consist of a 6,500 square foot retail building fronting Garvey Avenue and 48 residential units behind. The mixed use development would be located on a 2.1 acre site. The subject site is located at 9048 Garvey Avenue, in the C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone. Environmental Analysis Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and local environmental guidelines exempt "in-fill development projects' where the proposed development occurs within city limits on a site measuring no more than five (5) acres substantially surrounded by urban uses, meeting applicable General Plan and Zoning regulations. Accordingly, Design Review is classified as a Class 32 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15332 of CEQA guidelines. Staff Recommendation Based on the analysis and findings contained in this report, it is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 14-12 with findings (Exhibit "A") and APPROVE Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871, subject to the seventy (70) conditions outlined in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. Property History and Description According to Los Angeles County records, the property is currently developed with several industrial buildings, totaling approximately 30,802 square feet. EXHIBIT D Planning Commission Meeting • September 15,2014 Page 2 of 37 ! ti ipinarm t V tE�ll1 View from North Project Analysis The Applicant is proposing to demolish all existing buildings onsite to construct a commercial and residential mixed-use development comprised of a retail building, 48 residential units, surface and garage parking, common recreational areas, and landscaped areas. The one-story 6,500 square foot retail building will be constructed at the front of the property, fronting Garvey Avenue. The building will include six (6) retail units with an outdoor plaza area. Surface parking will be provided for the retail building directly behind the building. A total of 26 parking spaces will be provided for the retail building. The 48 residential units behind will consist of three-story, three bedroom homes, ranging in size between 1,601 to 1,765 square feet. A two-car garage is provided for each residential unit. A total of 24 guest parking spaces will be provided for the residential development. The proposed project would provide a combination of common and private open space in the form of private balconies, roof decks, and common recreational areas for the residential units. A total of 8,889 square feet of common open space and 6,912 square feet of private open space would be provided. Site & Surrounding Land Uses The project site is designated in the General Plan as Mixed Use: Residential/Commercial (60 du/ac) and on the Zoning Map it is designated C-3 MUDO- Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 3 of 37 D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone. The site is surrounded by the following land uses: North General Plan: Mixed Use: Industrial/Commercial Zoning: C-3 (Medium Commercial) Land Use: Commercial South General Plan: Office/Light Industrial and Public Facilities Zoning: M-1 (Light Manufacturing and Industrial) and Open Space Land Use: Industrial and Rio Hondo Wash East General Plan: Mixed Use: Residential/Commercial (60 du/ac) and Public Facilities Zoning: C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay)and Open Space Land Use-Commercial and Rio Hondo Wash West General Plan: Mixed Use: Residential/Commercial (60 du/ac) Zoning: C-3 MUDO-D(Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) Land Use: Commercial Development Standards The developer has incorporated the Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use Development Overlay Zone standards for the proposed mixed-use project. The Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use Development Overlay Zone allows the Planning Commission to grant approval of a well-designed development project that combine residential with nonresidential uses. s,i� ,{" r RT -�. �yk4�� ix _ Proposed . 1IIII Lot Size 30,000 s.f. 210 acres(91,476 s f) Floor Area Ratio 2.0:1 (max allowed) 0.99:1 (FAR) 12'-0'with 7'-0"wide sidewalk clear zona and 5'-0" 12'-0'with 7-0"wide sidewalk Public Sidewalk wide parkway(amenity zone) ) (clear zone)and 5'-O wide parkway(amenity zone) Front Setback Zero Zero Interior Lot Line May be zero(0)but shall be a minimum of ten(10)feet Easl:>10 feet Setback if more than zero(0). West: 10 feet Side Street -" Setback None N/A(Interior Lot) Rear Abutting I --- Residential 10'-0" N/A(does not abut residential) Setback Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 4 of 37 Retail Building: One-story at 34'-6' Height Three-stories with a maximum height of forty-five(45) Residential:Three-stones at 38'-6' The second floor and above shall be stepped back from the rear property line as follows:establishing a height at N/A(not adjacent to residential) Variable Height six(6)feet above finished grade of the adjacent residential property line,a 20-degree Two(2)parking spaces per dwelling plus one(1)guest Two-car garage per residential unit Parking parking space per two (2)dwelling units and 24 quest parking spaces (Residential) Parking Retail and Office: One(1) parking space per two 26 parking spaces (Commercial) hundred fifty(250)square feet of floor space Bicycle Parking Ten (10) percent(00/a)of required off-street parking. 16 bicycle parking spaces Y 146=15 bicycle parking spaces Open Space Common Open Space: 150 at/dwelling unit(4,200 s.f.) Common Open Space:8,889 s.f. _ Private Open Space: 60 s.f/dwelling unit(1,660 s.f) Private Open Space: 6,912 s.f. Building 75% Residential and Commercial/ 75% Residential and 25% Commercial 25%Commercial Residential Ratio Zone Variance The subject site is a unique piece of land from a legal and planning perspective. While it appears to be a standard lot for the zone, there is a large access easement across the east side of the property, the size of which is 18,474 square feet. The easement allows the neighboring property owner to the east (9056 Garvey Avenue) full ingress and egress rights over a 30 foot wide strip of land that runs the entire length (610 feet) of the property. The size of this easement creates almost a 20% reduction in net buildable area, and causes the buildable area to be more narrow than it otherwise would be. Due to the presence of this easement and the practical inability to get rid of the easement due to the need of the adjoining landowner to continue using it, the Applicant is requesting to deviate from RMC Code Sections 17.28.030(D)(3)(a)(3) and 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3). On August 1, 2014, the applicant submitted a letter (attached as Exhibit "D")justifying reasons why they should be granted the two variances. Section 17.28.030(D)(3)(a)(3) states: Residential parking shall be separate from commercial parking and accessed through a secured gated entrance. The access easement agreement specifically prohibits any impediment to access across the easement, such as a secured gate. Therefore no gating of the entirety of the residential portion of the property is possible. As set forth more fully below, the design of the residential portion is one of several "rows" of residences. The Applicant seeks a variance from the requirement that it gate the entire residential space and is instead proposing to completely secure each residential "row" of the development by incorporating the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing. Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 5 of 37 Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) states: Mixed-Use: High Density Residential/ Commercial shall be developed with forty(40) to sixty(60) dwelling units per acre and a maximum 2.0:1 FAR. The project shall consist of 75-percent residential and 25-percent commercial land use mix, Deviations from the land use percentage mix may be approved by the Planning Commission. As explained above, due to the presence of the easement the buildable area of the subject site is long and narrow. The presence of a large access easement is inconsistent with the state of otherwise-similar lots in this portion of the commercial district, and other lots do not even share a common driveway. Due to this unique circumstance, the Applicant is proposing to deviate from the minimum density requirement to develop the residential component at 24 units per gross acre, which with the reduced buildable acreage works out to approximately 30 units per net buildable acre. The project has the potential to create massing impacts if developed at 40 to 60 units per acre on this unique piece of land, because of the need to build a long and narrow building and avoid impacting the easement area. To comply with the strict requirements of the Rosemead Municipal Code, the Applicant would be required to develop a massive residential project, not be compatible with the scale and massing of adjacent buildings and not consistent with the site's context within the overall community. In addition, developing a project at the required density would almost certainly require the development of taller buildings, which may potentially create the request for a variance as to the Code's height limitations. Furthermore, it may also require substantial grading to create subterranean parking to accommodate the parking requirement for the additional units. The large access easement deprives the subject property from developing a normal mixed use project under the standards in the code. The development is of high quality and reflective of Rosemead's goals. For these reasons, the Variance requests are supported by staff. Proposed Floor Plans Commercial The floor plans submitted with this application show six (6) commercial units in the retail building. The project is designed with sufficient on-site parking to accommodate the commercial use, as shown in the table above and on the development plan. Residential There are two types of residential floor plans. Plan One includes a tandem two-car garage and a den on the first floor, a living room, dining room, kitchen, bedroom, closet, bathroom, balcony, and laundry facility on the second floor, and two bedrooms, each with a closet and bathroom on the third floor. Plan Two includes a two-car garage, bedroom, and laundry facility on the first floor, a living room, dining room, kitchen, bathroom, and balcony on the second floor, and two bedrooms, each with a closet and bathroom on the third floor. Plan Two also includes a private roof deck. The residential units range in size from 1,601 square feet to 1,765 square feet of living area. Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page of 37 Proposed Landscaping and Fencing: A conceptual landscape plan has been attached as "Exhibit C." New landscaping is proposed throughout the site. Landscaping is shown in the form of perimeter planting areas and landscaped islands within the surface parking lot areas. Additionally, the central courtyard provides added landscaping. The Applicant will be required to submit a detailed landscape and irrigation plan to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of any Building Permits. The Applicant is proposing to construct new decorative perimeter block walls along the south and west property lines. Parking and Circulation Access to the site would be provided via one driveway along Garvey Avenue. The Applicant is proposing surface and garage parking for the development. A total of 146 parking spaces would be provided, which includes 26 parking spaces for the retail building and 120 parking spaces for residential parking. In addition, the proposed project would also include 16 bicycle parking spaces. Traffic A traffic impact study (TIS) prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated July 16, 2014 (updated on August 21, 2014) was completed for the project. The study provides a summary of findings, analysis procedures, and evaluation of the proposed project with respect to on-sire and off-site traffic impacts. The study analyzes trip generation and level of service impacts upon three nearby intersections. The intersections studied are as follows: Sullivan Avenue at Garvey Avenue, Project Driveway at Garvey Avenue, and Garvey Community Center at Garvey Avenue. Based on the traffic study, the proposed project can be accommodated with the implementation of the improvements recommended in the study. The City's Traffic Consultant and Engineering Division have reviewed the TIS and several conditions of approval have been added to the project. Proposed Architecture: The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high quality project that meets the City's design goals for the MUDO-D overlay. The front façade of the retail building has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. To promote active, pedestrian-friendly streets, each retail unit is oriented to and accessible from the Garvey Avenue and directly accessible from the public sidewalk. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the northeast corner of the retail building. To further enhance the building façade, the Applicant is incorporating contrasting exterior finishes, metal screens, slate veneer, stucco trim, vertical ribbed siding, and canvas awnings. In addition, pedestrian amenities will be provided, which includes an outdoor plaza area with outdoor seating and bicycle racks. The Applicant is proposing a modern architectural design for the residential buildings, which are organized in 6 parallel rows behind the commercial building. The exterior Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 7 of 37 facade of the residential buildings will consist of contrasting sand stucco finish in earth tone colors, horizontal wood siding, and vertical ribbed siding. The residential buildings will be accented with metal shade trellises, canvas awnings, stucco trims, and metal railings. Lighting New exterior lighting is proposed for the property. New wall mounted fixtures will be placed along the front, side, and rear of the building. New light standards will be installed in the parking lot area. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. Staff has added conditions of approval, requiring that prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit a lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division. The lighting plan shall include a schematic depicting the location of lighting sources, as well as type of lighting proposed. The lighting plan shall address the following criteria: • Lighting shall be fully shielded to minimize glare and painted to match the surface it is attached to. • Light fixtures shall be architecturally compatible with the structure's design. • Structure entrances should be well lit. • Lighting and trees should not conflict with one another. • The design of exterior parking lot lighting fixtures shall be compatible with the architecture used in the development and not be on poles over 25 feet high. Soils Report The California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey has identified the project site as one subject to potential liquefaction. Liquefaction is the sudden failure and fracturing of saturated ground resulting from an earthquake, which can cause structural failure of buildings, roadways, bridges, etc. Structures presently on the site, as well as any future structures, are subject to the consequences liquefaction. For this reason, a revised soils report was prepared for this project by EEI Geotechnical and Environmental Solutions. The City's independent geotechnical and engineering geology consultants have reviewed the revised report and have deemed it acceptable as presented on August 21, 2014. Municipal Code Requirements Design Review Section 17.28.020(A)(1) of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) states that design review procedures shall be followed for all improvements requiring a building permit or visible changes in form, texture, color, exterior façade or landscaping. Section 17.28.020(C) provides the criteria by which the Planning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application: Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 8 of 37 A. The plans indicate proper consideration for the relationship between the e proposed structure and site developments that exist or have been approved or the general neighborhood; The proposed development is located within an established commercial district of the City. The Applicant has provided a design of high aesthetic quality, which in Staffs determination will improve the project site's relationship to the commercial district. The proposed project is consistent with the Goal 3, Policy 3.1 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan in that the goal and policy call for encouraging mixed-use development as a means of upgrading established uses and developing vacant parcels along arterials to provide new commercial, residential, and employment opportunities. In addition, Goal 3, Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan calls for promoting lively and attractive ground-floor retail uses that will create public revenues needed to provide for City services and the City's tax base. B. The plan for the proposed building and site development indicates the manner in which the proposed development and surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations and other factors which may have an adverse effect on the environment, and the manner of screening mechanical equipment, trash, storage and loading areas; To ensure that the surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors, conditions of approval have been incorporated which specifically addresses noise and lighting. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. This development will not generate any permanent impacts to noise levels for the surrounding area. All construction work will be required to comply with the timeframe, and decibel levels indicated in the City's Noise Ordinance (Ordinance 478 and 541). Conditions of approval will specifically address factors such as noise, construction hours, screening of mechanical equipment, landscaping, lighting, and the overall maintenance of the property. C. The proposed building or site development is not, in its exterior design and appearance, so at variance with the appearance of other existing buildings or site developments in the neighborhood as to cause the nature of the local environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value; The proposed project will improve the physical appearance of the commercial neighborhood by eliminating all existing dilapidated structures and nonconforming buildings and uses onsite. The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high quality project that meets the City's design goals for the MUDO-D overlay. The front facade of the retail building has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. To promote active, pedestrian-friendly streets, each retail unit is oriented to and Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 9 of 37 accessible from the Garvey Avenue and directly accessible from the public sidewalk. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the northeast corner of the retail building. To further enhance the building façade, the Applicant is incorporating contrasting exterior finishes, metal screens, slate veneer, stucco trim, vertical ribbed siding, and canvas awnings. In addition, pedestrian amenities will be provided, which includes an outdoor plaza area with outdoor seating and bicycle racks. The Applicant is proposing a modern architectural design for the residential buildings. The exterior facade of the residential buildings will consist of contrasting sand stucco finish in earth tone colors, horizontal wood siding, and vertical ribbed siding. The residential buildings will be accented with metal shade trellises, canvas awnings, stucco trims, and metal railings. Notwithstanding this, the approved design will create a development that is an aesthetic upgrade over the surrounding area and that has the potential to enhance land values in the general area. This is due to the proposed new building facade with higher quality materials, a design that blends better with the area, and greatly improved landscaping and parking lot area. D. The proposed building or structure is in harmony with the proposed developments on land in the general area, especially in those instances where buildings are within or adjacent to land shown on the General Plan as being part of the Civic Center or in public or educational use, or are within or immediately adjacent to /and included within any precise plan which indicates building shape, size or style; The property is not part of the Civic Center Plan, precise plan or land reserved for public or educational use, so there is no special need to create harmony with the general area. Notwithstanding this, the approved design will create a development that is an aesthetic upgrade over the surrounding area and that has the potential to enhance land values in the general area. This is due to the proposed new building facade with higher quality materials, a design that blends better with the area, and greatly improved landscaping and parking lot area. E. The proposed development is in conformity with the standards of this Code and other applicable ordinances in so far as the location and appearance of the buildings and structures are involved; and This proposed development meets most of the minimum code requirements for the C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone, and all applicable referenced code sections of the Rosemead Municipal Code. The Applicant has submitted two Zone Variance applications to deviate from Code Sections 17.28.030 (D)(3)(a)(3) and 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3). Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 10 of 37 F. The site plan and the design of the buildings, parking areas, signs, landscaping, luminaires and other site features indicates that proper consideration has been given to both the functional aspects of the site development, such as automobile and pedestrian circulation, and the visual effect of the development from the view of public streets. The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high quality project that meets the City's design goals for the MUDO-D overlay. The front facade of the retail building has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. To promote active, pedestrian-friendly streets, each retail unit is oriented to and accessible from the Garvey Avenue and directly accessible from the public sidewalk. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the northeast corner of the retail building. To further enhance the building facade, the Applicant is incorporating contrasting exterior finishes, metal screens, slate veneer, stucco trim, vertical ribbed siding, and canvas awnings. In addition, pedestrian amenities will be provided, which includes an outdoor plaza area with outdoor seating and bicycle racks. Access to the site would be provided via one driveway along Garvey Avenue. The Applicant is proposing surface and garage parking for the development. A total of 146 parking spaces would be provided, which includes 26 parking spaces for the retail building and 120 parking spaces for residential parking. In addition, the proposed project would also include 16 bicycle parking spaces. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. Staff has added conditions of approval, requiring that prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit a lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division. The lighting plan shall include a schematic depicting the location of lighting sources, as well as type of lighting proposed. Zone Variance An applicant must obtain a Zone Variance in order to create a development that does not meet the minimum standards. Section 17.140.040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) sets criteria required for granting such a variance. All of the following findings shall be made by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the approval of a Variance: A. There are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property (such as location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other physical features, etc.) that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity under an identical zoning district; The subject site is a unique piece of land. There is a large access easement which totals 18,474 square feet. The easement allows the neighboring property Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 11 of37 owner to the east (9056 Garvey Avenue) full ingress and egress rights over a 30 foot wide strip of land that runs the entire length (610 feet) of the property and eliminates almost 20% of the gross square footage of the parcel from the buildable square footage. This creates both a unique shape to the buildable area and distinguishes the lot from other parcels along the commercial district, as other lots do not even share a common driveway, much less have large portions dedicated to the access needs of adjacent parcels. 1. Due to the special circumstance of the large access easement, the Applicant is requesting to deviate from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(3)(a)(3) and proposing to completely secure the residential portion of the development by incorporating the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing for the residential area as a whole but also for each residential row's drive aisle. 2. Due to the special circumstance of the large access easement, the Applicant is proposing to deviate from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) to develop the residential component at 24 units per gross acre, or approximately 30 units per net buildable acre. B. Strict compliance with Zoning Code requirements would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under an identical zoning district; 1. Due to the large access easement agreement, strict compliance with RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(3)(a)(3) would prevent the property from being developed and deprive the owner of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity in the same zoning district. In consideration for the variance, the Applicant will incorporate the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing, eliminating the deprivation without granting any special privilege. 2. Due to the large access easement, strict compliance with RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) would cause the development to be inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood and with the RMC requirements for future development of the neighborhood. Specifically the dedication of 20% of the gross areas of the property has created a buildable area that is long and narrow, and strict compliance with the minimum density requirement would result in an awkward development that would necessarily have massing and design issues that negatively affect the neighborhood. This eliminates the ability to build out the parcel in the same manner as other properites in the vicinity and under the same zoning district. Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 12 of 37 C. Approving the Variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; and The subject site is a unique piece of land. There is a large access easement which totals 18,474 square feet. The easement allows the neighboring property owner to the east (9056 Garvey Avenue) full ingress and egress rights over a 30 foot wide strip of land that runs the entire length (610 feet) of the property. The size of this easement creates almost a 20% reduction in buildable area. In addition, the large access easement is inconsistent with the lots along the commercial district, as other lots do not share a common driveway. There is no special privilege granted by these variances, as each is necessary for the property to be developed as a mixed-use project due to the limitations that are placed on the property by the access easement. In addition, the applicant has agreed to conditions that will completely eliminate any grant of special privilege. 1. Deviation from RMC Section 17.28,030(D)(3)(a)(3) does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated, because the deviation is necessary due to the terms of the access easement and the the Applicant has agreed to enhance the gating and fencing for the project by incorporating the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing. 2. Deviation from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated, as this property is long and narrow and developed with a large access easement, such that a mixed-use project as anticipated by the RMC would not be possible to build on the parcel without the project having either massing that would take it out of conformity with the neighborhood as built and with the standards and purposes of the RMC MUDO-D zone or other variances to alleviate barriers to development, or both. D. The requested Variance would not allow a use or activity that is not otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel. The subject site is located in the C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone and the residential/commercial mixed use project is permitted. 1. The residential use is explicitly permitted, and only the design details of the fencing are being modified. No disallowed use is being proposed. Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 13 of 37 2. The residential use is explicitly permitted and only the density is being changed, to take into account the unique condition of the buildable square footage of the property- No disallowed use is being proposed. PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS On September 4, 2014, twenty-one (21) notices were sent to property owners within a 300-feet radius from the subject property, in addition to notices posted in six (6) public locations, on-site, and published in the Rosemead Reader on September 4, 2014. Prepared by: Submitted by: lidli Lily nh Michelle Ramirez Associate Planner Community Development Director EXHIBITS: A. Planning Commission Resolution No.14-12 B. Conditions of Approval C. Site Plan/Floor Plan/Elevations D. Variance Justification Letter E Assessors Parcel Map(5282-026-048&049) Planning Commission Meethg September 15,2014 Page 14 of 37 EXHIBIT "A" PC RESOLUTION 14-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 14-06, ZONE VARIANCE 14-02, ZONE VARIANCE 14-03, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72871 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENTIAUCOMMERCIAL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT COMPROSED OF A 6,500 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING AND 48 RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 9048 GARVEY AVENUE IN THE C-3 MUDO-D (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL WITH A MIXED USE AND DESIGN OVERLAY) ZONE (APN: 5282-026-048 & 049). WHEREAS, on April 22, 2014, Matt Hamilton of Preface, LW. submitted entitlement applications for the construction of a new residential/commercial mixed use development. The project is located at 9048 Garvey Avenue; and WHEREAS, 9048 Garvey Avenue is located in the C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone; and WHEREAS, Section 17.28.020(A)(1) & Section 17.28.020(C) of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) provides the purpose and criteria for a design review; and WHEREAS, Section 17.140.040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) sets criteria required for granting such a variance; and WHEREAS, Sections 65800 & 65900 of the California Government Code and Sections 17.28.020(C) and 17.140.040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorize the Planning Commission to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove design review applications; and WHEREAS, on September 4, 2014, twenty-one (21) 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 Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871, and on September 4, 2014, the notice was published in the Rosemead Reader; and WHEREAS, on September 15, 2014, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed and advertised public hearing to receive oral and written testimony relative to Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871; and Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 15 of 37 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 Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 are Categorically Exempt from environmental review as a Class 32 Exemption pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Design Review 14-06 in accordance with Section 17.28.020(C) of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. The plans indicate proper consideration for the relationship between the proposed building and site developments that exist or have been approved for the general neighborhood; FINDING: The proposed development is located within an established commercial district of the City. The Applicant has provided a design of high aesthetic quality, which in Staffs determination will improve the project site's relationship to the commercial district. The proposed project is consistent with the Goal 3, Policy 3.1 of the Land Use Element of the _City's General Plan in that the goal and policy call for encouraging mixed-use development as a means of upgrading established uses and developing vacant parcels along arterials to provide new commercial, residential, and employment opportunities. In addition, Goal 3, Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan calls for promoting lively and attractive ground-floor retail uses that will create public revenues needed to provide for City services and the City's tax base.. B. The plan for the proposed building and site development indicates the manner in which the proposed development and surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors which may have an adverse effect on the environment, and the manner of screening mechanical equipment, trash, storage and loading areas; FINDING: To ensure that the surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors, conditions of approval have been incorporated which specifically addresses noise and lighting. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. This development will not generate any permanent impacts to noise levels for the surrounding area. All construction work will be required to comply with the timeframe, and decibel levels indicated in the City's Noise Ordinance (Ordinance 478 and 541). Conditions of Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 16 of 37 • approval will specifically address factors such as noise, construction hours, screening of mechanical equipment, landscaping, lighting, and the overall maintenance of the property. C. Approving the Variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; and FINDING: The proposed project will improve the physical appearance of the commercial neighborhood by eliminating all existing dilapidated structures and nonconforming buildings and uses onsite. The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high quality project that meets the City's design goals for the MUDO-D overlay. The front facade of the retail building has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. To promote active, pedestrian- friendly streets, each retail unit is oriented to and accessible from the Garvey Avenue and directly accessible from the public sidewalk. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the northeast corner of the retail building. To further enhance the building facade, the Applicant is incorporating contrasting exterior finishes, metal screens, slate veneer, stucco trim, vertical ribbed siding, and canvas awnings. In addition, pedestrian amenities will be provided, which includes an outdoor plaza area with outdoor seating and bicycle racks. The Applicant is proposing a modern architectural design for the residential buildings. The exterior facade of the residential buildings will consist of contrasting sand stucco finish in earth tone colors, horizontal wood siding, and vertical ribbed siding. The residential buildings will be accented with metal shade trellises, canvas awnings, stucco trims, and metal railings. Notwithstanding this, the approved design will create a development that is an aesthetic upgrade over the surrounding area and that has the potential to enhance land values in the general area. This is due to the proposed new building facade with higher quality materials, a design that blends better with the area, and greatly improved landscaping and parking lot area. D. The proposed building or structure is in harmony with the proposed developments on land in the general area, especially in those instances where buildings are within or adjacent to land shown on the General Plan as being part of the Civic Center or in public or educational use, or are within or immediately adjacent to land included within any precise plan which indicates building shape, size, or style; FINDING: The property is not part of the Civic Center Plan, precise plan or land reserved for public or educational use, so there is no special need to create harmony with the general area. Notwithstanding this, the approved design will create a development that is an aesthetic upgrade over the surrounding area and that has the potential to enhance land values in the general area. This is due to the proposed new Planning Commission Meeting September 15.2014 Page 17 of 37 building facade with higher quality materials, a design that blends better with the area, and greatly improved landscaping and parking lot area. E. The proposed development is in conformity with the standards of this code and other applicable ordinances in so far as the location and appearance of the buildings and structures are involved; and FINDING: This proposed development meets most of the minimum code requirements for the C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone, and all applicable referenced code sections of the Rosemead Municipal Code. The Applicant has submitted two Zone Variance applications to deviate from Code Sections 17.28.030 (D)(3)(a)(3) and 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3). F. The site plan and the design of the buildings, parking areas, signs, landscaping, luminaries, and other site features indicates that proper consideration has been given to both the functional aspects of the site development, such as automobile and pedestrian circulation, and the visual effect of the development from the view of public streets. FINDING: The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high quality project that meets the City's design goals for the MUDO-D overlay, The front facade of the retail building has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. To promote active, pedestrian-friendly streets, each retail unit is oriented to and accessible from the Garvey Avenue and directly accessible from the public sidewalk. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the northeast corner of the retail building. To further enhance the building facade, the Applicant is incorporating contrasting exterior finishes, metal screens, slate veneer, stucco trim, vertical ribbed siding, and canvas awnings. In addition, pedestrian amenities will be provided, which includes an outdoor plaza area with outdoor seating and bicycle racks. Access to the site would be provided via one driveway along Garvey Avenue. The Applicant is proposing surface and garage parking for the development. A total of 146 parking spaces would be provided, which includes 26 parking spaces for the retail building and 120 parking spaces for residential parking. In addition, the proposed project would also include 16 bicycle parking spaces. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. Staff has added conditions of approval, requiring that prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit a lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division. The lighting plan shall include a schematic depicting the location of lighting sources, as well as type of lighting proposed. SECTION 3. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Design Review 14-06 in accordance with Section Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 18 of 37 17.140.040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. There are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property (such as location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other physical features, etc.) that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity under an identical zoning district; FINDING: The subject site is a unique piece of land. There is a large access easement which totals 16,474 square feet. The easement allows the neighboring property owner to the east (9056 Garvey Avenue) full ingress and egress rights over a 30 foot wide strip of land that runs the entire length (610 feet) of the property and eliminates almost 20% of the gross square footage of the parcel from the buildable square footage. This creates both a unique shape to the buildable area and distinguishes the lot from other parcels along the commercial district, as other lots do not even share a common driveway, much less have large portions dedicated to the access needs of adjacent parcels. 1. Due to the special circumstance of the large access easement,3 the proposing to t is requesting to deviate from RMC Section 17.26.030(D)( )( )( ) completely secure the residential portion of the development by incorporating the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing for the residential area as a whole but also for each residential row's drive aisle. 2. Due to the special circumstance of the large access easement, the Applicant is proposing to deviate from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) to develop the residential component at 24 units per gross acre, or approximately 30 units per net buildable acre.. B. Strict compliance with Zoning Code requirements would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under an identical zoning district; FINDING: Due to the large access easement agreement, strict compliance with RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(3)(a)(3) would prevent the property from being developed and deprive the owner of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity in the same zoning district. In consideration for the variance, the Applicant will incorporate the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing, eliminating the deprivation without granting any special privilege. Due to the large access easement, strict compliance with RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) would cause the development to be inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood and with the RMC requirements for future development of the neighborhood. Specifically the dedication of 20% of the gross areas of the property has created a buildable area that is long and narrow, and strict compliance with Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 19 of 37 the minimum density requirement would result in an awkward development that would necessarily have massing and design issues that negatively affect the neighborhood. This eliminates the ability to build out the parcel in the same manner as other properites in the vicinity and under the same zoning district. C. The proposed building or site development is not, in its exterior design and appearance, so at variance with the appearance of other existing buildings or site developments in the neighborhood as to cause the nature of the local environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value; FINDING: The subject site is a unique piece of land. There is a large access easement which totals 18,474 square feet. The easement allows the neighboring property owner to the east (9056 Garvey Avenue) full ingress and egress rights over a 30 foot wide strip of land that runs the entire length (610 feet) of the property. The size of this easement creates almost a 20% reduction in buildable area. In addition, the large access easement is inconsistent with the lots along the commercial district, as other lots do not share a common driveway. There is no special privilege granted by these variances, as each is necessary for the property to be developed as a mixed-use project due to the limitations that are placed on the property by the access easement. In addition, the applicant has agreed to conditions that will completely eliminate any grant of special privilege. 1. Deviation from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(3)(a)(3) does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated, because the deviation is necessary due to the terms of the access easement and the the Applicant has agreed to enhance the gating and fencing for the project by incorporating the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing. 2. Deviation from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated, as this property is long and narrow and developed with a large access easement, such that a mixed-use project as anticipated by the RMC would not be possible to build on the parcel without the project having either massing that would take it out of conformity with the neighborhood as built and with the standards and purposes of the RMC MUDO-D zone or other variances to alleviate barriers to development, or both. D. The requested Variance would not allow a use or activity that is not otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel. FINDING: The subject site is located in the C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone and the residential/commercial mixed use project is permitted. Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 20 of 37 1. The residential use is explicitly permitted, and only the design details of the fencing are being modified. No disallowed use is being proposed. 2. The residential use is explicitly permitted and only the density is being changed, to take into account the unique condition of the buildable square footage of the property. No disallowed use is being proposed. SECTION 4. The Planning Commission HEREBY APPROVES Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 for the construction of a new residential/commercial mixed use development, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto. SECTION 5. This resolution is the result of an action taken by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014, by the following vote: YES: NO: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: 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 15`h day of September, 2014. Nancy Eng, Chair Planning Commission Meeting September 15,2014 Page 21 of 37 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 15th day of September by the following vote: YES: NO: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Michelle Ramirez, Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Gregory M. Murphy, Planning Commission Attorney Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP PC RESOLUTION 14-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 14-06, ZONE VARIANCE 14-02, ZONE VARIANCE 14-03, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72871 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENTIALICOMMERCIAL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF A 6,500 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING AND 48 RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 9048 GARVEY AVENUE IN THE C-3 MUDO-D (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL WITH A MIXED USE AND DESIGN OVERLAY)ZONE (APN: 5282-026-048 & 049). WHEREAS, on April 22, 2014, Matt Hamilton of Preface, LLC. submitted entitlement applications for the construction of a new residentiaVcommercial mixed use development. The project is located at 9048 Garvey Avenue; and WHEREAS, 9048 Garvey Avenue is located in the C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone; and WHEREAS, Section 17.28.020(A)(1) & Section 17.28.020(C) of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) provides the purpose and criteria for a design review; and WHEREAS, Section 17.140.040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) sets criteria required for granting such a variance; and WHEREAS, Sections 65800 & 65900 of the California Government Code and Sections 17.28.020(C) and 17.140.040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorize the Planning Commission to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove design review applications; and WHEREAS, on September 4, 2014, twenty-one (21) 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 Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871, and on September 4, 2014, the notice was published in the Rosemead Reader; and WHEREAS, on September 15, 2014, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed and advertised public hearing to receive oral and written testimony relative to Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871; and WHEREAS, the Rosemead Planning Commission has sufficiently considered all testimony presented to them in order to make the following determination. EXHIBIT E NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead as follows: SECTION 'I. The Planning Commission HEREBY DETERMINES that Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 are Categorically Exempt from environmental review as a Class 32 Exemption pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Design Review 14-06 in accordance with Section 17.28.020(C) of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. The plans indicate proper consideration for the relationship between the proposed building and site developments that exist or have been approved for the general neighborhood; FINDING: The proposed development is located within an established commercial district of the City. The Applicant has provided a design of high aesthetic quality, which in Staffs determination will improve the project site's relationship to the commercial district. The proposed project is consistent with the Goal 3, Policy 3.1 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan in that the goal and policy call for encouraging mixed-use development as a means of upgrading established uses and developing vacant parcels along arterials to provide new commercial, residential, and employment opportunities. In addition, Goal 3, Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan calls for promoting lively and attractive ground-floor retail uses that will create public revenues needed to provide for City services and the City's tax base.. B. The plan for the proposed building and site development indicates the manner in which the proposed development and surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors which may have an adverse effect on the environment, and the manner of screening mechanical equipment, trash, storage and loading areas, FINDING: To ensure that the surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors, conditions of approval have been incorporated which specifically addresses noise and lighting. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. This development will not generate any permanent impacts to noise levels for the surrounding area. All construction work will be required to comply with the timeframe, and decibel levels indicated in the City's Noise Ordinance (Ordinance 478 and 541). Conditions of approval will specifically address factors such as noise, construction hours, screening of mechanical equipment, landscaping, lighting, and the overall maintenance of the property. 2 C. Approving the Variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; and FINDING: The proposed project will improve the physical appearance of the commercial neighborhood by eliminating all existing dilapidated structures and nonconforming buildings and uses onsite. The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high quality project that meets the City's design goals for the MUDO-D overlay. The front facade of the retail building has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. To promote active, pedestrian- friendly streets, each retail unit is oriented to and accessible from the Garvey Avenue and directly accessible from the public sidewalk. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the northeast corner of the retail building. To further enhance the building façade, the Applicant is incorporating contrasting exterior finishes, metal screens, slate veneer, stucco trim, vertical ribbed siding, and canvas awnings. In addition, pedestrian amenities will be provided, which includes an outdoor plaza area with outdoor seating and bicycle racks, The Applicant is proposing a modern architectural design for the residential buildings. The exterior facade of the residential buildings will consist of contrasting sand stucco finish in earth tone colors, horizontal wood siding, and vertical ribbed siding. The residential buildings will be accented with metal shade trellises, canvas awnings, stucco trims, and metal railings. Notwithstanding this, the approved design will create a development that is an aesthetic upgrade over the surrounding area and that has the potential to enhance land values in the general area. This is due to the proposed new building façade with higher quality materials, a design that blends better with the area, and greatly improved landscaping and parking lot area. D. The proposed building or structure is in harmony with the proposed developments an land in the general area, especially in those instances where buildings are within or adjacent to land shown on the General Plan as being part of the Civic Center or in public or educational use, or are within or immediately adjacent to land included within any precise plan which indicates building shape, size, or style; FINDING: The property is not part of the Civic Center Plan, precise plan or land reserved for public or educational use, so there is no special need to create harmony with the general area. Notwithstanding this, the approved design will create a development that is an aesthetic upgrade over the surrounding area and that has the potential to enhance land values in the general area. This is due to the proposed new building façade with higher quality materials, a design that blends better with the area, and greatly improved landscaping and parking lot area. E. The proposed development is in conformity with the standards of this code and other applicable ordinances in so far as the location and appearance of the 3 buildings and structures are involved; and FINDING: This proposed development meets most of the minimum code requirements for the C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone, and all applicable referenced code sections of the Rosemead Municipal Code. The Applicant has submitted two Zone Variance applications to deviate from Code Sections 17,28.030 (D)(3)(a)(3) and 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3). F. The site plan and the design of the buildings, parking areas, signs, landscaping, luminaries, and other site features indicates that proper consideration has been given to both the functional aspects of the site development, such as automobile and pedestrian circulation, and the visual effect of the development from the view of public streets. FINDING: The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high quality project that meets the City's design goals for the MUDO-D overlay. The front facade of the retail building has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. To promote active, pedestrian-friendly streets, each retail unit is oriented to and accessible from the Garvey Avenue and directly accessible from the public sidewalk. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the northeast corner of the retail building. To further enhance the building facade, the Applicant is incorporating contrasting exterior finishes, metal screens, slate veneer, stucco trim, vertical ribbed siding, and canvas awnings. In addition, pedestrian amenities will be provided, which includes an outdoor plaza area with outdoor seating and bicycle racks. Access to the site would be provided via one driveway along Garvey Avenue. The Applicant is proposing surface and garage parking for the development. A total of 146 parking spaces would be provided, which includes 26 parking spaces for the retail building and 120 parking spaces for residential parking. In addition, the proposed project would also include 16 bicycle parking spaces. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. Staff has added conditions of approval, requiring that prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit a lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division. The lighting plan shall include a schematic depicting the location of lighting sources, as well as type of lighting proposed. SECTION 3. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Design Review 14-06 in accordance with Section 17.140.040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. There are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject property (such as location, shape, size, surroundings, topography, or other physical features, etc.) that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity under an identical zoning district; 4 FINDING: The subject site is a unique piece of land. There is a large access easement which totals 18,474 square feet. The easement allows the neighboring property owner to the east (9056 Garvey Avenue) full ingress and egress rights over a 30 foot wide strip of land that runs the entire length (610 feet) of the property and eliminates almost 20% of the gross square footage of the parcel from the buildable square footage. This creates both a unique shape to the buildable area and distinguishes the lot from other parcels along the commercial district, as other lots do not even share a common driveway, much less have large portions dedicated to the access needs of adjacent parcels. 1. Due to the special circumstance of the large access easement, the Applicant is requesting to deviate from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(3)(a)(3) and proposing to completely secure the residential portion of the development by incorporating the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing for the residential area as a whole but also for each residential row's drive aisle. 2. Due to the special circumstance of the large access easement, the Applicant is proposing to deviate from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) to develop the residential component at 24 units per gross acre, or approximately 30 units per net buildable acre.. B. Strict compliance with Zoning Code requirements would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under an identical zoning district; FINDING: Due to the large access easement agreement, strict compliance with RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(3)(a)(3) would prevent the property from being developed and deprive the owner of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity in the same zoning district. In consideration for the variance, the Applicant will incorporate the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing, eliminating the deprivation without granting any special privilege. Due to the large access easement, strict compliance with RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) would cause the development to be inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood and with the RMC requirements for future development of the neighborhood. Specifically the dedication of 20% of the gross areas of the property has created a buildable area that is long and narrow, and strict compliance with the minimum density requirement would result in an awkward development that would necessarily have massing and design issues that negatively affect the neighborhood. This eliminates the ability to build out the parcel in the same manner as other properites in the vicinity and under the same zoning district. C. The proposed building or site development is not, in its exterior design and appearance, so at variance with the appearance of other existing buildings or site 5 developments in the neighborhood as to cause the nature of the local environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value; FINDING: The subject site is a unique piece of land. There is a large access easement which totals 18,474 square feet. The easement allows the neighboring property owner to the east (9056 Garvey Avenue) full ingress and egress rights over a 30 foot wide strip of land that runs the entire length (610 feet) of the property. The size of this easement creates almost a 20% reduction in buildable area. In addition, the large access easement is inconsistent with the lots along the commercial district, as other lots do not share a common driveway. There is no special privilege granted by these variances, as each is necessary for the property to be developed as a mixed-use project due to the limitations that are placed on the property by the access easement. In addition, the applicant has agreed to conditions that will completely eliminate any grant of special privilege. 1. Deviation from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(3)(a)(3) does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated, because the deviation is necessary due to the terms of the access easement and the the Applicant has agreed to enhance the gating and fencing for the project by incorporating the use of electronic vehicular gates, pedestrian gates, and decorative walls and fencing. 2. Deviation from RMC Section 17.28.030(D)(12)(d)(3) would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated, as this property is long and narrow and developed with a large access easement, such that a mixed-use project as anticipated by the RMC would not be possible to build on the parcel without the project having either massing that would take it out of conformity with the neighborhood as built and with the standards and purposes of the RMC MUDO-D zone or other variances to alleviate barriers to development, or both. D. The requested Variance would not allow a use or activity that is not otherwise expressly authorized by the regulations governing the subject parcel. FINDING: The subject site is located in the C-3 MUDO-D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay) zone and the residential/commercial mixed use project is permitted. 1. The residential use is explicitly permitted, and only the design details of the fencing are being modified. No disallowed use is being proposed. 2. The residential use is explicitly permitted and only the density is being changed, to take into account the unique condition of the buildable square footage of the property. No disallowed use is being proposed. 6 SECTION 4. The Planning Commission HEREBY APPROVES Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 for the construction of a new residential/commercial mixed use development, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto. SECTION 5. This resolution is the result of an action taken by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014, by the following vote: YES: DINH, ENG, HERRERA, LOPEZ AND TANG 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 15th day of September, 2014. /U Nan ng, C 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 15th day of September by the following vote: YES: DINH, ENG, HERRERA, LOPEZ AND TANG NO: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: NONE diem,` Michelle Ramirez, Se ry APPROVED AS T' • - h : Gregory(' urphy ' - • ing Commission Attorney Burke, iams & Sorensen, LLP 7 • EXHIBIT "B" DESIGN REVIEW 14-06, ZONE VARIANCE TRACT MAP R ZONE N VARIANCE 14-03, AND 7 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL September 15, 2014 1. Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 are approved for the construction of a new residential/commercial mixed use development, in accordance with the plans marked Exhibit "C', dated August 28, 2014. Any revisions to the approved plans must be resubmitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division. 2. Approval of Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 shall not take effect for any purpose until the Applicant has filed with the City of Rosemead a notarized affidavit stating that he/she is aware of and accepts all of the conditions of approval as set forth in the letter of approval and this list of conditions, within ten (10) days from the Planning Commission approval date. 3. The onsite public hearing notice posting shall be removed by the end of the 10- day appeal period of Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871. 4. Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 are approved for a period of one (1) year. 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 Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14-02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871 have been unused, abandoned, or discontinued for a period of one (1) year it shall become null and void. 5. The Planning Commission hereby authorizes the Planning Division to make and/or approve minor modifications. 6. 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. 7. Design Review 13-02 and Tentative Tract Map 72347is 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 8 modification of existing or imposition of new 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 Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14- 02, Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. Building permits will not be issued in connection with any project until such time as all plan check fees, and all other applicable fees, are paid in full. 11. Occupancy will not be granted until all improvements required by this approval have been completed, inspected, and approved by the appropriate department(s), including but not limited to all improvements required to file a final tract map and the filing and recordation of that final map. 12. The numbers of the address signs shall be at least 6" tall with a minimum character width of 3/4", contrasting in color and easily visible at driver's level from the street. Materials, colors, location, and size of such address numbers shall be approved by the Planning Division, prior to installation. 13. All requirements of the Planning Division, Building Division, and Public Works Department shall be complied with prior to the final approval of the proposed construction. 14. The hours of construction shall be limited from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday to Saturday. No construction shall take place on Sundays or on any federal holidays without prior approval by the City. 15. The Planning, Building, and Public Works staff shall have access to the subject property at any time during construction to monitor progress. 16. The site shall be maintained in a graffiti-free state. Any new graffiti shall be 9 removed within twenty-four (24) hours. A 24-hour, Graffiti Hotline can be called at (626) 569-2345 for assistance. 17. The site shall be maintained in a clean, weed, and litter free state in accordance with the Rosemead Municipal Code. All trash containers shall be stored in the appropriate trash enclosure at all times. All trash, rubbish, and garbage receptacles shall be regularly cleaned, inspected, and maintained in a clean, safe, and sanitary condition. 18. A detailed elevation drawing shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval all trash enclosures prior to submittal of construction drawings. All trash enclosures shall be of an integral part of the building design, and incorporate complementary colors and materials. All trash enclosures shall have a solid roof cover and doors shall be opaque, self-closing, and self-latching. 19. All commercial loading activities and trash pickup for the mixed use project shall be prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. daily. 20. All off-street parking shall comply with the relevant section of the Rosemead Municipal Code applicable as of the date these Conditions of Approval are adopted. The parking area, including loading and handicapped spaces, shall be paved and re-painted periodically to City standards to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. In accordance with the currently applicable section of the Rosemead Municipal Code, all designated parking spaces shall be double striped. Such striping shall be maintained in a clear, visible, and orderly manner. 21. The Applicant shall keep the electrical and mechanical equipment and/or emergency exits free of any debris, storage, furniture, etc.. and maintain a minimum clearance of five (5)feet. 22. All roof top appurtenances and equipment shall adequately be screened from view to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. There shall be no mechanical equipment located on the sides of the building. Such equipment shall not exceed the height of the parapet wall. All ground level mechanical/utility equipment (including meters, back flow preservation devices, fire valves, NC condensers, furnaces, utility cabinets and other equipment) shall be located away from public view or adequately screened by landscaping or screening walls so as not to be seen from the public right of way or other public space within the development. The Planning Division shall approve said screening prior to inspection. 23. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall comply with the City's storm water ordinance and storm water mitigation plan requirements with respect to the proposed project. 24. Prior to issuance of any building permit related to this project, the Applicant shall prepare Covenant Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) or other similar recorded instrument indicating how and who will maintain proposed common 10 areas. The CC&R's shall be prepared by the Applicant and approved by the City Attorney and shall include the following statements: "This statement is intended to notify all prospective property owners of certain limitations on construction to residential dwellings contained in this planned development project. Any necessary modifications or additions must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and approved or denied by the Community Development Director or his/her designee at his/her discretion". The CC&R's will cover all aspects of property maintenance of the common areas, including but not limited to driveways, fencing, landscaping, lighting, parking spaces, open space and recreational areas. All applicable City Attorney fees shall be at the responsibility of the Applicant. 25. The Applicant shall include provisions in the CC&R's to provide maintenance of all building improvements, on-grade parking and landscaping, and maintenance of the driveway, in a manner satisfactory to the Planning Division, and in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 26. The subdivider shall include provisions in the CC&R's to require regular trash pickup service at least once a week for the residential condominium trash bins, and twice a week for the commercial tenant space trash bins. 27. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall submit a comprehensive Parking Management Plan for review and approval by the Planning Division or designee. The Parking Management Plan shall be incorporated into the CC&R's and shall be enforced by the property owners association. Said Parking Management Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following provisions: • Designated parking for customers and employees. • Parking permit procedures for overnight guest parking. Every homeowner shall be allowed to keep up to two (2) vehicles on the premises. The parking monitor/security guard shall be responsible for issuing overnight guest parking permits when there are excess parking spaces available. Employee parking shall be restricted to the retail parking areas only. 28. All open areas not covered by concrete, asphalt, or structures shall be landscaped and maintained on a regular basis. Maintenance procedures of such landscaped and common areas shall be specifically indicted in the CC&R's prior to issuance of any building permit. 29. Prior to the issuance of any sign permit, the Applicant shall submit a Master Sign Program to the Planning Division for review and approval. The sign program shall address sign materials, colors, height, width and location. It shall also address the use of temporary signage such as banners as well as appropriate window signage. Any proposed monument signs shall accommodate to obstructing sight lines (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 11 15, 2014). 30. A final landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The new planting materials shall include a combination of colorful and drought tolerant trees, large potted plants, shrubs, and low growing flowers. The landscape and irrigation plan shall include a sprinkler system with automatic timers and moisture sensors. 31. Violations of the conditions of approval may result in citation and/or initiation of revocation proceedings. 32. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit a lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division. The lighting plan shall include a schematic depicting the location of lighting sources, as well as type of lighting proposed. The lighting plan shall address the following criteria: • Lighting shall be fully shielded to minimize glare and painted to match the surface it is attached to. • tight fixtures shall be architecturally compatible with the structure's design. • Structure entrances should be well lit. • Lighting and trees should not conflict with one another. • The design of exterior parking lot lighting fixtures shall be compatible with the architecture used in the development and not be on poles over 25 feet high. • Solar power lighting shall be used for common areas where feasible (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). 33. Exterior glass to be used for the project shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director. No exterior glass shall be approved if it creates significant light and glare spillage to adjacent properties or highways. 34. Two weeks prior to commencement of construction, notification shall be provided to the immediate surrounding off-site residential, school, and church uses that discloses the construction schedule, including the types of activities and equipment that would be used throughout the duration of the construction period. Engineering Conditions of Approval GENERAL 35. Details shown on the tentative map are not necessarily approved. Any details which are inconsistent with requirements of ordinances, general conditions of approval, or City Engineer's policies must be specifically approved in the final map or improvement plan approvals. 36. A final tract map prepared by, or under the direction of a Registered Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying, or a Licensed Land Surveyor, 12 must be processed through the City Engineer's office prior to being filed with the County Recorder. 37. A preliminary subdivision guarantee is required showing all fee interest holders and encumbrances. An updated title report shall be provided before the final parcel map is released for filing with the County Recorder. 38. The final tract map shall be based on a field survey, and monuments shall be set to permanently mark parcel map boundaries, street center lines and lot boundaries to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The basis of bearing used for the field survey required for the final map shall include two survey well monuments found or set. The City Engineer may waive this requirement upon petition should this be impractical. Well monuments shall be set in accordance with standard plan No. S08-001, if required. 39. Final tract map shall be filed with the County Recorder and one (1) Mylar copy of filed map shall be submitted to the City Engineer's office. Prior to the release of the final map by the City, a refundable deposit in the amount of $1,000 shall be submitted by the developer to the City, which will be refunded upon receipt of the Mylar copy of the filed map. 40. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 41. Approval for filling of this land division is contingent upon approval of plans and specifications mentioned below. If the improvements are not installed prior to the filing of this division, the developer must submit an Undertaking Agreement and a Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bond in the amount estimated by the City Engineer guaranteeing the installation of the improvements. 42. The City reserves the right to impose any new plan check and/or permit fees approved by City Council subsequent to tentative approval of this map. 43. The project plans indicate that the airspace in the six buildings shall be subdivided (a condominium) requiring the filing of a tentative tract map with the City of Rosemead to be followed by the recording of a final map. The final map shall be based on a field survey performed by a Licensed Land Surveyor (or by a registered Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying), with all monuments (horizontal control) being set to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and/or City Land Surveyor of the City of Rosemead. 44. Prior to performing any grading, obtain a permit from the Engineering Department. Submit grading and drainage plans pre the City's grading guidelines and the latest edition of the Los Angeles County Building Code. The plans shall be stamped and signed by a California State Registered Civil Engineer. 45. Prior to the recordation of the final map, grading and drainage plans must be approved to provide for contributory drainage from adjoining properties as approved by the City Engineer, including dedication of the necessary easements. 13 46. A grading and drainage plan must provide for each lot having an independent drainage system to the public street, to a public drainage facility, by means of an approved drainage easement, or by the existing drainage channel (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). 47. Historical or existing storm water flow from adjacent lots must be received and directed by gravity to the public street, to a public drainage facility, by means of an approved drainage easement, or by the existing drainage channel (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). 48. Prepare and submit hydrology and hydraulic calculations for sizing of all proposed drainage devices. The analysis shall also determine if changes in the post development versus pre development conditions have occurred. The analCa ia e peparedis sperl be stamped bthe Los AngelesaCoulntyrnDeparttment of Registered PublicCivil Engineer Works Method. 49. All grading projects require an Erosion Control Plan as part of the grading plans. Grading permit will not be issued until and Erosion Control Plan is approved by the Engineering Department. 50. The project is greater than one acre; therefore, a Storm Water Pollution Plan is required. A Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be filed with the State Water Resources Control Board. When submitting the SWPPP for the City's review, please include the NOI and the Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number. ROAD 51. New drive approaches shall be constructed at least 3' from any above-ground obstructions in the public right-of-way to the top of "x" or the obstruction shall be relocated. New drive approaches shall be limited to the frontage of the parcel. The drive approach is intended to serve, and is designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 52. Al work proposed within the public right-of-way shall require permits from the Public Works Department. 53. Remove and replace existing curb and gutter from westerly property line to easterly property line. 54. Remove and replace sidewalk from westerly property line to easterly property line, minimum seven feet wide. 55. Remove and construct driveway approaches as indicated on the plans. 56. Remove existing trees and replace with 48-inches box min. Contact City Arborist for tree species recommendations. 14 SEWER 57. Approval of this land division is contingent upon providing a separate house sewer lateral to serve each lot of the land division. 58. Prepare and submit a sewer calculations analysis for sizing of proposed laterals including capacity conditions of existing sewer trunk line. The analysis shall be stamped by a California State Registered Civil Engineer and prepared per the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Guidelines. 59. All existing laterals to be abandoned shall be capped at the public right of way to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Building Official of the City of Rosemead. UTILITIES 60. All power, telephone and cable television shall be underground. 61. Any utilities that are in conflict with the development shall be relocated at the developer's expense. 62. Existing street lights are not shown on the proposed project plans, nor are proposed street lights shown. A street lighting plan shall be developed using ornamental lights with underground services as necessary to accommodate the proposed development and to obtain the approval' of the City Engineer. The applicant shall bear all costs to provide street lighting, etc., if required. In addition, all utility services to serve the proposed project shall be placed underground. WATER 63. Prior to the filing of the final map, there shall also be filed with the City Engineer, a statement from the water purveyor indicating subdivider compliance with the Fire Chief's fire flow requirements. Traffic Conditions of Approval 64. The applicant shall construct the on-site circulation system in substantial compliance to the site plan submitted in the traffic impact study. 65. Vehicle access shall be left turn in, right turn in, and right turn out only. Outbound left turns shall be prohibited by construction of a raised center median (See Traffic Impact Study Exhibit Q), and appropriate turn restriction signs to the satisfaction of the City. 15 66. A stop sign, stop bar, and stop legend shall be installed and maintained at the project exit, and traffic calming devices shall be installed in the primary access drive consistent with the existing easement conditions (Modified by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). 67. The applicant shall be responsible for the design and modification of the existing raised center an on Garvey Avenue at the outbound left turnsiaeproject . The median shallbe constructed per City standards prior to occupancy of any buildings. 68. A sight distance analysis at the driveway along Garvey should be prepared. 69. All residential parking spaces shall be signed and marked as noted in the Traffic Impact Study (Exhibit 0). 70. Radiused curbs shall be constructed on the raised planters adjacent to all parallel parking spaces and shall not extend deeper than 7-feet from the inside edge of the parking space for improved parking access. 71. All improvements recommended by the Traffic Impact Study, prepared by RK Engineering Group, LLC shall comply prior to the Building and Safety final inspection (Added by the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014). Fire Department Conditions of Approval (Added try the Planning Commission on September 15, 2014) 72. Provide the bond verification for the improvements prior to the clearance of the Final Map. 73. Submit the Final Map to the Land Development Unit for review. 74. Submit the Grading Plan to the Land Development Unit for review. 75. Submit a minimum of three (3) copies of the water plans indicating the new fire hydrant locations to the Fire Department's Land Development Unit for review. All required PUBLIC fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to beginning construction. ACCESS 76. The Tentative Tract Map, as submitted, meets current Fire Department requirements for access. 77. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the required Fire Apparatus Access 16 Roads and the fire hydrants shall be inspected for compliance by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department. 78. All on-site Fire Department vehicular access roads shall be labeled as "Private Driveway and Fire Lane" on the site plan along with the widths clearly depicted on the plan. Labeling is necessary to assure the access availability for Fire Department use. The designation allows for appropriate signage prohibiting parking. 79. Fire Department vehicular access roads must be installed and maintained in a serviceable manner prior to and during the time of construction. Fire Code 501.4 80, All fire lanes shall be clear of all encroachments, and shall be maintained in accordance with the Title 32, County of Los Angeles Fire Code. 81. The Fire Apparatus Access Roads and designated fire lanes shall be measured from flow line to flow line. 82. Provide a minimum unobstructed width of 28 feet, exclusive of shoulders and an unobstructed vertical clearance "clear to sky Fire Department vehicular access to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building when the height of the building above the lowest level of the Fire Department vehicular access road is more than 30 feet high, or the building is more than three stories. The access roadway shall be located a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. Fire Code 503.1.1 & 503.2.2 83. The dimensions of the approved Fire Apparatus Access Roads shall be maintained as originally approved by the fire code official. Fire Code 503.2.2.1 84. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved Fire Department turnaround. Fire Code 503.2.5 85. Fire Department vehicular access roads shall be provided with a 32 foot centerline turning radius. Fire Code 503.2.4 86. Fire Apparatus Access Roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing 37 '/x tons and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Fire apparatus access roads having a grade of 10 percent or greater shall have a paved or concrete surface. Fire Code 503.2.3 17 87. Provide approved signs or other approved notices or markings that include the words NO PARKING - FIRE LANE. Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches wide by 18 inches high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be provided for fire apparatus access roads, to clearly indicate the entrance to such road, or prohibit the obstruction thereof and at intervals, as required by the Fire Inspector. Fire Code 503.3 88. A minimum 5 foot wide approved firefighter access walkway leading from the fire department access road to all required openings in the building's exterior walls shall be provided for firefighting and rescue purposes. Fire Code 504.1 89. Fire Apparatus Access Roads shall not be obstructed in any manner, including by the parking of vehicles, or the use of traffic calming devices, including but not limited to, speed bumps or speed humps. The minimum widths and clearances established in Section 503.2.1 shall be maintained at all times. Fire Code 503.4 90. Traffic Calming Devices, including but not limited to, speed bumps and speed humps, shall be prohibited unless approved by the fire code official. Fire Code 503.4.1 91. Security barriers, visual screen barriers or other obstructions shall not be installed on the roof of any building in such a manner as to obstruct firefighter access or egress in the event of fire or other emergency. Parapets shall not exceed 48 inches from the top of the parapet to the roof surface on more than two sides. Fire Code 504.5 92. Approved building address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification shall be provided and maintained so as to be plainly visible and legible from the street fronting the property. The numbers shall contrast with their background, be Arabic numerals or alphabet letters, and be a minimum of 4 inches high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch. Fire Code 505.1 93. Multiple residential and commercial buildings having entrances to individual units not visible from the street or road shall have unit numbers Splayed in groups for all units within each structure. Such numbers may be grouped on the wall of the structure or mounted on a post independent of the structure and shall be positioned to be plainly visible from the street or road as required by Fire Code 505.3 and in accordance with Fire Code 505.1. WATER SYSTEM 94. All fire hydrants shall measure 6"x 4"x 2-1/2" brass or bronze, conforming to current AWWA standard C503 or approved equal, and shall be installed in 18 accordance with the County of Los Angeles Fire Department Regulation 8. 95. All on-stte fire hydrants shall be installed a minimum of 25' feet from a structure or protected by a two (2) hour rated firewall. Exception: For fully sprinkled multi- family structures, on-site hydrants may be installed a minimum of 10 feet from the structure. Fire Code Appendix C106 96. All required PUBLIC fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to beginning construction. Are Code 501.4 97. All private on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and approved prior to building occupancy. Fire Code 901.5.1 - Plans showing underground piping for private on-site fire hydrants shall be submitted to the Sprinkler Plan Check Unit for review and approval prior to installation. Fire Code 901.2 & County of Los Angeles Fire Department Regulation 7 FIRE FLOW 98. The required fire flow for the public fire hydrants for this project is 3750 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure for 3 hours. Three (3) public fire hydrants flowing simultaneously may be used to achieve the required fire flow. Fire Code 507.3 & Appendix B105.1 99. The required fire flow for the on-site private fire hydrants for this project is1250 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure for 2 hours. One (1) on-site fire hydrant flowing simultaneously may be used to achieve the required fire flow. PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANTS 100. Install one (1) public fire hydrant as noted by the Fire Department on the plan dated August 20, 2014. 101. The fire flow for the existing public fire hydrant is adequate per the fire flow test dated May 20, 2014 by the San Gabriel Valley Water Company is adequate. PRIVATE ON-SITE FIRE HYDRANTS 102. Install one (1) private on-site fire hydrant as noted on the plan dated August 20, 2014. 19 Minutes of the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING September 15,2014 (Revised on 10-6-14) The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Eng in the Council Chambers, 8838 E.Valley Boulevard. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE-Chair Eng INVOCATION-Commissioner Herrera ROLL CALL-Commissioners Herrera, Lopez,Tang,Vice-Chair Dinh,and Chair Eng ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS PRESENT: City Attorney Murphy, Community Development Director Ramirez,Associate Planner Trinh,and Commission Secretary Lockwood. 1. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS Greg Murphy,City Attorney, presented the procedure and appear rights of the meeting. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE None 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. DESIGN REVIEW 14-06, ZONE VARIANCE 1442, ZONE VARIANCE 14-03, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72871- Matt Hamilton of Preface, LLC has submitted entitlement applications requesting to construct a new residenliallcommerctal mixed use development. The project will consist of a 6,500 square foot retail building fronting Garvey Avenue and 48 residential units behind. The mixed use development would be located on a 2.1 acre site. The subject site is located at 9048 Garvey Avenue, In the C-3 MUDO-D(Medium Commercial with a Mixed Use and Design Overlay)zone. PC RESOLUTION 14-12 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD,COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 14- 06, ZONE VARIANCE 1442, ZONE VARIANCE 1403, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72871 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT COMPROSED OF A 6,500 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING AND 48 RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 9048 GARVEY AVENUE IN THE C-3 MUDO-D (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL WITH A MIXED USE AND DESIGN OVERLAY)ZONE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION • Based on the analysis and findings contained in this report, it is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 14.12 with findings and APPROVE Design Review 14-06, Zone Variance 14.02,Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map 72871, subject to the seventy(70)conditions. Associate Planner Trinh presented the staff report. She stated staff is requesting that Condition of Approval number seventy-one(71)be added which states, "All improvements recommended by the Traffic Impact Study, prepared by RK Engineering Group, LLC shall comply prior to the Building and Safety final inspection°. She said staff has added the LA County Fire Department's Conditions of Approval and the final revised Conditions of Approval has been 1 EXHIBIT F provided this evening. She explained this item will not be presented to the City Council because it is under the new code. In addition, she explained that the traffic study was not included in the staff report but it was forwarded electronically to the Planning Commission and has also been provided this evening. Community Development Director Ramirez explained that the Conditions of Approval that have been added to Exhibit "8" has been discussed with the applicant and the applicant has agreed to the conditions. She further explained that this item will not be presented before the City Council because under the new code when a Mixed Use Development is submitted within one of the nodes and does not include al density bonus request,then the Planning Commission is the approving authority at this level. She added it would only be presented to the City Council if the dem were to be appealed. Chair Eng thanked Community Development Director Ramirez and stated she has been in meetings off and on and has not had time to review the traffic study. Community Development Director Ramirez stated staff did not feel them was a need to attach the report, because it is discussed in the staff report She added that it was decided that the Planning Commission may want a copy of the traffic report, so it was provided earlier today electronically and this evening at the dais. She stated the applicant's Traffic Engineer is present if the Planning Commission has any questions. Chair Eng asked if the Planning Commission had any questions or comments for staff. Commissioner Tang requested clarification in regards to the Zore Variance. Associate Planner Trinh explained that the property has a thirty (30') foot wide easement that takes up the entire length of the lot,so the applicant was not able to meet two(2)standards of the code.She stated the first standard the applicant could not meet was to install a secured gate to divide the residential from the commercial because of the easement. She added there are three(3) entrances into the residential properties and the applicant will put secured gates at each of those entrances. Commissioner Tang asked if the easement is a shared with the neighboring property. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. City Attorney Greg Murphy clarified that the way the code reads is that it ask that there is a secured gate for all of the residential properties opposed to what the applicant is proposing, which is a number of secured gates. He explained the same security is going to be provided and instead of one gate for all the residents it is being broken down in rows. He explained that staff and his office found this variance very easy to support. Commissioner Tang referred to the staff report on page eleven (11) of thirty-seven (37) and read point number one (1). He asked if there will be one(1)security gate for the entire site. Associate Planner Trinh replied no. She explained that each row of residential homes will have an entrance gate. She referred to the site plan and pointed out that there will be a security gate at each location numbered fifteen(15). Planning Commissioner Tang asked if an outdoor dining area was considered. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes, it was considered and explained because of the uniqueness of this lot it would not have met the parking requirements for a restaurant. Commissioner Tang read Condition of Approval number twenty-four(24) and asked if the homeowners association qualifies as that also. 2 Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. Chair Eng thanked Greg Murphy, City Attorney,for his clarification on the code for the gate. She explained that while the standards for mixed use were being developed, one of the reasons a gate was required is to pmvide privacy and to separate the residential from commercial uses. Vice-Chair Dinh referred to page two (2) of thirty-seven (37)of the staff report and recommended it be clarified that there are six(6)separate three story buildings. She referred to section twenty-seven(27)and asked staff if that was the only trash enclosure and how many trash enclosures will be installed. Associate Planner Trinh replied each residential unit will have their own trash enclosure. She explained section twenty-seven (27) is for organic waste only. Vice-Chair Dinh asked how trash will be removed from the premises. Associate Planner Trinh replied the applicant has worked out a route of entering and exiting the site with Consolidated Disposal. Vice-Chair Dinh asked if this has been worked out for each unit Associate Planner Trinh replied yes and stated the applicant is present if further explanation is needed. Vice-Chair Dinh asked if a speed limit will be posted along the thirty(30)foot wide easement Associate Planner Trinh replied the Traffic and Engineering Department did not make reference to a speed limit. Vice-Chair Dinh expressed concern that speeding may occur because it is a long driveway and recommended that a speed limit be installed. Community Development Director Ramirez stated that is something the Homeowners Association may address. Chair Eng clarified that this mixed use complex is not the traditional style with residential above the commercial. She explained that this mixed use is a commercial/residential use but the residential units are townhome styles and that is why there are separate buildings. Vice-Chair Dinh explained that in complexes that are townhomes or pud's the trash enclosures are usually shared,so as to ease the removal of trash for the disposal companies. Community Development Director Ramirez stated that it is fortunate that the applicant has worked out a plan with Consolidated Disposal. Commissioner Lopez referred to the commercial units and asked if applications to rent/lease have been processed or will the units be vacant. Associate Planner Trinh stated that question may be addressed by the applicant. Chair Eng commented that this is one of the nicest projects she has seen to provide housing for families and thanked the applicant. She referred to the body shop business in front of 9048 Garvey and asked staff if ft is part of this parcel. 3 Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. Chair Eng asked if this business and driveway will be demolished for this development. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. Chair Eng referred to the shared easement and asked if there were terms that were placed to use it Associate Planner Trinh replied the applicant may address that question. Commissioner Tang asked staff if it is a shared easement,who is the responsible party for maintaining it. Associate Planner Trinh replied the applicant may address that question. Chair Eng asked how wide the driveway for egress and ingress is. Associate Planner Trinh replied the driveway is thirty(30')feet. Chair Eng asked if that is enough for back and forth traffic lane. Associate Planner Tdnh replied yes. Chair Eng asked where the trash enclosures are located for the commercial units. Associate Planner Trinh replied ii is number twelve(12)on the site plan adjacent to Parking P7. Chair Eng asked if it has been worked out with Consolidated Disposal in regards to entering and exiting from each residential unit for disposal of waste and if there is enough room. Associate Planner Trinh replied yes. Chair Eng asked what the commercial parking standard for a residential/commercial mixed use development. Associate Planner Trinh replied it is per use and the restaurant is one(1)per one hundred and commercial is one(1) per two hundred fifty(250). Chair Eng stated she is concerned that the commercial parking standard is being met at this time. but in the future this standard may limit the ability for an intense use such as a food establishment. She asked staff if a food establishment applied how this parking standard would be addressed, Associate Planner Trinh replied that staff has explained to the applicant that the current parking standard is one (1) per two hundred fifty(250), She explained that in the future, if they would like to incorporate a food establishment or different type of use, then they would be required to submit a parking study to analyze and show they meet the standard parking requirement. Community Development Director Ramirez further explained that walking with the applicant, the applicant did have the choice to make the commercial areas smaller to be able to meet the restaurant parking requirements. She stated these are the standards that the applicant chose to be set for the development. Chair Eng recommended that this is the opportunity for the Planning Commission to discuss with the applicant to increase commercial parking if needed for commercial uses in the future. She referred to traffic concerns and stated 4 she did not have time to study the traffic study. She added that Garvey Avenue traffic gets congested and restricting the exit onto Garvey Avenue with a no left turn is a good idea. She commented that she would like to address the possibility of considering solar lighting for the common areas with the applicant. She asked staff if the HVAC units are located on the rooftops for both commercial and residential units. Associate Planner Thnh replied yes. Chair Eng referred to Condition of Approval number twenty-four(24)and asked Greg Murphy,City Attorney, what the language means in regards to"limiting the construction'and asked if that is the language that is being requested to be included in the CC&R. City Attorney Greg Murphy explained Planned Developments with CC& R's can mislead an individual property owner into thinking that if the homeowner association board approves some change to the property that may be the only permit or approval that is necessary. He added this puts owners on notice because it will be in the CC & Rs that some activities may still have to come to the City. He asked Community Development Director Ramirez if there are any other reasons for this. Community Development Director Ramirez added that there have been issues with other Planned Developments where CC &Rs were recorded and residents have added patio covers, which needs to go through the Planning and Building Division for approval and permits. She explained that when the homeowner decides to sell the property it is then discovered that a permit was not obtained and they had thought because the homeowners association approved it,that was all that was needed. Chair Eng stated, in other words this is stating that if a homeowner wanted to make any type of structural change to the unit they would have to obtain approval from the homeowners association and the city. Community Development Director Ramirez explained that it may not only be a structural change, it could also apply to other things like electrical or plumbing. Chair Eng referred to Condition of Approval number twenty-seven (27)and asked if they are being required to have a security guard. Community Development Director Ramirez explained that it is written "parking monitor and or security guard'and it will be enforced by the homeowners association. Chair Eng referred to Condition of Approval number twenty-nine (29) regarding the Master Sign Program. She recommended that if there is a desire to apply for a master sign in the future she would like staff to work with the applicant and make sure the placement of it will not cause an obstruction at site line far safety reasons and that there is space dedicated for it. Community Development Director Ramirez stated that staff works with applicants in regards to Master Signs and it is done early in the process, as that helps on the design of their building. Chair Eng referred to Condition of Approval number thirty (30) regarding landscaping and due to the water drought crisis she would like to discuss what opportunities would be available to conserve water or use recycled water with the applicant. She stated she received a concern from a resident regarding Condition of Approval number fifty(50) for the Storm Water Pollution Plan and read the concern to the audience. Associate Planner Thnh stated Condition of Approval fifty (50) regarding the Storm Water Pollution Plan was implemented from the Engineering Department and they are not present this evening to address this concern. 5 Community Development Director Ramirez stated that it will have to be trusted that the City Engineer would know what the law is and is stated accordingly. Chair Eng requested that staff double check with the Engineering Department to confirm it is correct. She referred to Condition of Approval number fdty-four(54)and asked for the width of the sidewalk on the westerlypropertyline. Associate Planner Trinh replied it will be twelve(12') feet when this project is completed. She stated there will be a five(5)foot amenity zone and a seven(7')foot sidewalk. Chair Eng referred to the "Traffic Conditions of Approval" and referred to Condition of Approval number sixty-four (64)" regarding the onsite circulation system but commented that the Traffic Study was not included in her packet so she was not able to review it. Commissioner Lopez asked if the entrance is the only entrance into the site. Commissioner Lopez asked if there is a aisis and this entrance is blocked, are there any other exists. Associate Planner Tdnh's reply was not audible. Community Development Director Ramirez explained that it is not uncommon for development's to have only one entrance and one exit. Commissioner Lopez referred to trash disposal in the residential units and asked if there will be chutes that drop into a main bin in each unit to dispose of trash or will there be individual trash bins behind each unit. Associate Planner Trinh replied each unit will have their own trash bin. Commissioner Lopez asked if the residents will have to walk the trash to the front. He expressed concern that the driveway may not be wide enough for the disposal trucks to enter and exit safely. Associate Planner Trinh explained that the applicant has worked out a plan with Consolidated Disposal and the applicant will be able to give a further explanation. Vice-Chair Dinh commented that with this type of housing development (three story buildings and with two sets of stairs) seems to accommodate the younger physically fit generation. She asked if a study was conducted to see if there is a demand for the type of ownership for these forty-eight(48)units. Community Development Director Ramirez explained that staff did discuss this with the applicant early in the project and they felt there is a demand but that is a question that can be addressed to the applicant. Chair Eng opened the Public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium. Applicant Matt Hamilton introduced Bryan Coggins and stated they are both there to answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. Applicant Bryan Coggins stated he would like to tank City staff for their excellent customer service. He explained that adjacent land owners were contacted in person or by letter to make them aware of this project. He added that this project is a good implementation of the City's General Plan and will reach out to young families and professionals as a new starter home.The homes will be selling in the mid 400,000 price range. He explained the concerns that the Planning Commission brought up such as the easement trash disposal, speed limits, speed bumps being installed, horizontal mixed-use,retail tenants that are interested, solar lighting for common areas, monument sign not blocking 6 the line of site,conserving water to address water drought concerns, and added they are willing to implement all of them into the project. He stated the single entrance is a concern but there is not much they can do as they are land locked in there. Applicant Matt Hamikon also thanked staff for their help. He referred to waste disposal and explained that it has been worked out with Consolidated Disposal that each home will have two(2) wheeled containers that will be kept in the garage. He added one(1) will be for trash and one(1) will be for household recyclables. He added on trash day the residents will wheel them outside of their garage and Consolidated will come in to pick them up. There may be a potential third(3rd)wheeled container for the city's organics green waste program. He stated the retail uses will have their own trash enclosures. He referred to the easement previously negotiated with the property owners to the east and this property and added that it is a shared maintenance agreement with the HOA overseeing it. In regards to storm water concerns, the DOMP has strict requirements that they will make sure are met. He addressed the drainage concern and requested that existing drainage channel be kept as a fourth option to Conditions of Approval numbers forty-six(46)and forty-seven(47). Commissioner Tang asked who will be maintaining the shared easement. Applicant Matt Hamilton replied that the shared easement agreement contemplates that both owners will maintain it. He explained the HOA for the forty-eight homeowners will take the lead on maintaining it.. Commissioner Tang asked if there is a reason why the trash enclosure is located near the entrance of the parking lot instead of the end of the parking lot. Applicant Matt Hamilton replied this was discussed with Consolidated Disposal and is the spot that would work the best for them as far as entering and exiting. Commissioner Tang requested that the trash enclosure be placed in the back of the parking lot instead for aesthetic reasons. Community Development Director Ramirez stated after speaking with Consolidated Disposal this is the location where they would like it to go. Vice-Chair Dinh asked if the easement will remain as is permanently or will it be developed while this project is being built, Applicant Matt Hamilton replied the thirty (30') foot easement will remain because that easement is in favor of the adjacent property owner. Vice-Chair Dinh asked if anything will be done to the easement. Applicant Matt Hamilton replied it will be repaved, graded, and new utilities will be put in. He stated the plan is to underground the overhead poles that run along that easement and it will be a nice paved driveway when it is completed. Vice-Chair Dinh stated that she is in favor of not having a security gate between the commercial and residential units for emergency masons so there is easy access For emergency vehicles entering or exiling. Applicant Matt Hamilton stated the Los Angeles Fire Department did review and approve the plan. Chair Eng asked if the neighboring property was sold and the use was changed what would happen to the easement. 7 Applicant Matt Hamilton replied that it is in the adjacent property owner's favor and they can terminate it if they wanted to redevelop their property and put a new entrance in. He added 9048 Garvey Avenue has no power to terminate or revise the easement Chair Eng stated that can happen, if they should decide they no longer have the use for that property,terminate the easement and we have this large property, and if we can just think forward in the event if that happens, what opportunities will that create for this project. Applicant Matt Hamilton agreed and stated a lot of things may happen. Chair Eng asked the Traffic Engineer to the podium to answer a few questions. Community Development Director Ramirez referred to the applicants request to the addition to Conditions of Approval numbers forty-six(46)and forty-seven(47)and the existing drainage and stated staff is acceptable to these request. Principal Engineer Bob Kahn of the RK Engineering Group Inc., stated he would like to thank staff and the Consulting Traffic Engineer from the City, which was very helpful to them. He explained this was primarily a focus type of traffic study that was based on the intersections of Sullivan and Garrey Avenue,the project access on Garvey Avenue, and the signal tight at the Garvey Community Center located on Garvey Avenue.He stated they did look at the on-site and off-site impacts of the proposed project and based on their analysis they did meet the City criteria when it came to city traffic impacts. He added if the Planning Commission has any questions he would be happy to answer any of them. Chair Eng stated she did not have time to review the Traffic Study and requested that Mr. Kahn explain what is looked at and answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. Principal Engineer Bob Kahn explained that when they do a Traffic Study, they contact staff and their technical staff to discuss and decide what type of scope of work should be done on this Traffic Study. He explained that it was decided the traffic impacts that needed to be addressed were for the locations of Sullivan and Garvey Avenue, the project access, and the Garvey Community Center. He explained in doing that,they conduct traffic counts during the AM and PM peak hours with the AM peak hours being from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and the PM hours are from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM. He stated they not only look at the thru traffic but also the turning movements during those periods, and then they analyze what will the project and any other approved projects in that area and what will they do to those intersections. He stated they look at the uses(retail and 48 townhomes)on the site and they will be able to generate the amount of traffic they will produce and based upon what is referred to as the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Factors and these are factors that will tell them how many trips per hour and per day each of the uses vrill generate. He stated the retail will generate about two-hundred and seventy-eight(278)trips per day with 1/2 going in and 112 going out. He added the townhomes will generate about two hundred and seventy-nine (279) trips per day with 112 going in and 112 going out,which will total to five hundred and fifty-seven trips per day. He explained further factors that are considered and stated the study found that this project meets the standard and does not provide a significant impact to any of those intersections. He referred to the project driveway at Garvey Avenue and stated that is a concern with people making a left turn from there. He stated they have recommended that the medium be extended and modified to prevent a lefttum from being taken from the site.He explained a left turn would be able to enter the site but a left turn would not be able to me made when exiting the site. He stated a number of recommendations have been made such as the on-site circulation system be built as proposed,the single access as proposed is acceptable, installing a (stop sign, stop bar, stop legend) at the exit, signing and striping being implemented in the medium area, the raised medium be reconstructed, and site distance would be reviewed when the design stage begins. He addressed the speed limit concern and explained that this is a private easemenUroad and California Vehicle Code does not apply here unless the HOA chooses for it to be done. He recommended that traffic calming devices be used such as a"speed cushion'and described its function. 8 Commissioner Lopez referred to the right-turn only and stated Sullivan Avenue is currently the only location a U-turn can be made. He asked if it is going to be right-turn only onto Garvey Avenue where will a U-turn be able to be made. Principal Engineer Bob Kahn replied there is a signal at the Garvey Community Center and a U-turn is not restricted there. Chair Eng asked if trips generated from the Garvey Center were compared with this project. Principal Engineer Bob Kahn replied no. Chair Eng asked applicant Matt Hamilton if the proposed gates in the alley will they be armed. Applicant Matt Hamilton replied no, it is a sliding gate made of rod iron and slides across. Vice-Chair Dinh asked what the time frame they anticipate for this project to be completed. Applicant Matt Hamilton replied the entire project will probably be completed in two(2)years. Chair Eng asked if there were any other questions. None Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing and asked fora motion. City Attorney Greg Murphy stated before a motion is made based on what staff and the applicant has said, he would like to direct them to'Condition of Approval number thirty-two(32)'and the applicant has said he is willing to do solar lighting for the common areas. He added that Community Development Director Ramirez has already gone over Conditions of Approval numbers forty-six (46) and forty-seven (47). He referred to Condition of Approval number sixty-six(66) and stated a clause should be added to the end of the sentence stating, "Traffic calming devices shall be installed in the primary access drive consistent with the existing easement conditions". He requested that Conditions of Approval be included in the motion as amended. Chair Eng stated Condition of Approval number twenty-nine (29) regarding the Master Sign Program, the applicant has indicated if they were to have a monument sign they would be accommodating to make sure it will not obstruct the site line. Community Development Director Ramirez stated staff is agreeable to having that added because staff would not allow that regardless. Commissioner Tang commented this project serves as a first step in improving Garvey Avenue with a lot of opportunity and will complement the character of the City.He stated he is happy to support this project. Commissioner Lopez stated he has been a resident for over forty years (40) and thanked the applicant for this project. Commissioner Tang made a motion,seconded by Commissioner Lopez,to ADOPT Resolution No. 14-12 with findings and APPROVE Design Review 14-06,Zone Variance 14-02,Zone Variance 14-03, and Tentative Tract Map T2871, subject to the one hundred and two (102)conditions. (Amendments were made to Condition of Approval numbers 29,32,46, 47,and 66 by the Planning Commission.) 9 Vote resulted in: Yes: Dinh,Eng, Herrera,Lopez,Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: None Community Development Director Ramirez explained the ten(10)day appeal process. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of August 4,2014 Community Development Director Ramirez explained the technical and audio difficulties took place at the Planning Commission meeting held on Monday,August 4, 2014. She added the system was not able to record and since then a new audio system has been installed.She stated this is why the Minutes of August 4,2014 are action minutes. Commissioner Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera, to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of August 14,2014, as presented. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng,Dinh, Herrera,Lopez,Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 5. MATTERS FROM STAFF Community Development Director Ramirez stated there are two upcoming City events;the first one will be the Civic Center Dedication and gave the date, time, and location. She stated the second event will be the Fall Fiesta and gave the date, time, and location of where this will take place. She invited the Planning Commission to attend the events. 6. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIR&COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Tang updated the Planning Commission on the Garvey Avenue Specific Adhock Committee. He stated the committee just met and they went over the analysis that was presented by the Consultant and discussed the opportunities on what can go along the Garvey Avenue condor. He added there was also discussion on the Community Survey that was taken by staff and developers to determine what would be a good development project for the city as well as the neighbors to achieve the goals to make the City of Rosemead a lively, balanced, place to work and play.He stated the committee will meet next month to discuss the alternatives that will be studied further in the EIR process. He added ff the Planning Commission has any suggestions or questions to please contact the committee. Vice-Chair Dinh stated she heard there may be a new staff member added to the Community Development Department and asked staff for confirmation. Community Development Director replied yes, and the position has been offered to Cory Hahn. She stated he has accepted the position and will begin working in a couple of weeks. 10 Chair Eng referred to an article she read on a oversaturation of hotels being built She stated she had asked Community Development Director Ramirez how would the City address that concern and was told for projects like that a market study would be looked at She asked what does a market study consist of and the importance of it. Community Development Director Ramirez explained that the applicant is the one to conduct the market study, not the City. She added this is a requirement that would have to be completed before the project is presented to the Planning Commission. She explained that a market study boks at a number of things such as the number of hotels in the area, what their current service rates are, are they oversaturated, is there a demand, who's coming in, who's leasing up these units, vacancies rates, and a number of other studies. She added they put all of that together to complete a market study and determine if there is a demand for an additional hotel. She stated from the City standpoint you would want a study to be completed and explained why. She added market studies are something that are also being considered to be included in the Specific Plan not only for hotels but other types of developments to see if there is a need for the use within the City. Chair Eng asked if the market study looks at completed projects, projects that are being considered,projects that are being developed,or at what stage do they study them. Community Development Director Ramirez replied they look at everything that they have available City Attorney Greg Murphy added in terms of projects that are being talked about or projects that have been approved, or not yet been built, the studies he has seen tend to talk about in great certainty about projects that are already developed and explained why. Vice-Chair Dinh asked the status of the hotel next to the UFC Gym. Community Development Director Ramirez stated they are currently working on the tentative improvements. Commissioner Herrera thanked the City of Rosemead for taking care of the situation with the tour buses. Vice-Chair Dinh stated that on the Northeast corner of Ivar Avenue a bus may have hit one of the light poles and recommended that Public Works look at it. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting Adjourned at 8:25 p.m. The next regular Planning Commission meeting will beheldon Monday, October 6,2014. A ST. A/� L(f-- Cc -•�. sZDCQw� Nancy Eng lv\ Chair Rachel Lockwood Commission Secretary 11 _if.4,44"84 OBI _ ^^^ _ � - alcE {Qa ihrm —I!! 1 yyy - Ij € a = . ° gA r _ 3 — � ^ mj ill ¢ 3- S ' i i < N V on S i zo N �3i8. £ g '&3.-1- r _ . /,-�g b��'�/ 4r 4c g1 az 2 88 � riratt 51 la lTt ° a 6 --_r 5,11 i2 i la 1y ` - O' C 3 ` � �- - -, � E LLJ od S8. < o ,yYi a o � 3. oLI €w� a< ,mJ g �orgcrow �g c fl LaF� sE as a ei -"az la 3 0 i I ah-:_. © J La ® I'll 0© o L. I�3 _ iom a m u 3O � -mol oC_. — Ll . . ioc �- ° ar °rmCJ � -� r' a ; & x _ c ° w Ba 4o2a - IP HI �� JJ�lJ f l,.o:m '� 4i5,4 rLonc ❑ oroo- 33 l 1 EP L r 4 Sad wx .. w s QE s EA ®® � , . S “ o'- S 33 a >o- 1 - LM a . a. =33 e. _^ a� � m " a ¢ o m'I ue -• J •.C-••• - z 2 S rr- P EL-V Id 3rI ^ a ofd o 3 3 ' tls�d S� 0-; 55g- 2 —+ u20w 6„ , 3 , 4 g 3 zo ft m i \ ad €3 _ -_ 8W ze d J oodo --? _ r _. mlayT .- dJ g "V = V In& " Om e c3 " \� 9 d1Q 11 Z LH 5Ld 9ll s 8I.' L rd ¢ L1l!a Z9-Vd ti_ll fill 1 Zid I? mry a 5 g zo i 0 £ l i--- d • — tl � Il l ] w ` ' € a a C3b ° o wO d au ✓'di3C d 53m d ,W ' g f a ' - 't - 8 5r153 -152 aa ®S , anil 3 IZ w0V ' o oqm s35a '5 = 6ao E962 F EMII re al ° Gpo - gU9a g9 5 I...l 3213AV A3nav9 r T - 27 50 L EXHIBIT G