Loading...
Regular meeting, June 26, 2018 - No. 1 mins.pdf - Page 002UNADOPTED MINUTES AGENDA DATE: July 10, 2018 ITEM NO.: 1 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF WEST COVINA Tuesday, June 26, 2018 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the West Covina Council Chambers. Commissioner Holtz led the Pledge of Allegiance and the Commission observed a moment of silence. ROLL CALL Present: Heng, Holtz, and Redholtz Absent: Castellanos (excused), Jimenez (Arrived at 7:15 p.m.) City Staff Present: Tsai, Anderson, M Hernandez, Garcia, Delostrinos, Manoquin and de Zara APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 1. Regular meeting, June 12, 2018 The minutes were approved as submitted. OTHER MATTERS OR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None Vice Chairman Redholtz said the Commission would consider Item No. 5 out of order. NON-HEARING ITEMS 5. (Heard out of order) PLANNING DIRECTOR'S MODIFICATION NO. 18-06 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION Request for two (2) storage sheds at 203 South Azusa Avenue (Options for Learning). Associate Planner Christine Delostrinos presented the staff report. During her presentation she reviewed the previous requests and explained that the current request was for the addition of two storage sheds on the property. She also said staff \\Storagel\plandatalPLANCOM1MINUTES12018 MINUTES16.26.18 minutes.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 — June 26, 2018 recommended landscaping to be installed to provide a visual barrier; however, the applicant requested that condition be removed. Cliff Marcussen, Executive Director, explained that they are willing to provide landscaping, except on the west side. He explained that a planter on the west side could result in a reduction of the play area, and landscaping on that side might provide a place for people to hide. He added that prior to their occupancy there were problems with homeless people and illegal drinking on the property. Man Lu, architect, said he was present to answer any questions. Vice Chairman Redholtz asked if anyone present wished to speak to the Commission regarding this matter. No one came forward. Chairman Jimenez arrived at 7:15 p.m. There was a discussion by the Commission regarding the location and use of the sheds, and the recommended landscaping along the west side of the property. Commissioner Holtz asked about the doors on the storage sheds and Vice Chairman Redholtz asked staff why they were recommending landscaping near the sheds. Staff indicated that landscaping was being recommended to create a visual barrier. The Commission considered the landscaping on the south and east sides of the property. It was the consensus of the Commission to require landscaping on the south and east sides of the property, but not on the west side. Motion by Jimenez, seconded by Holtz, to approve Planning Director's Modification No. 18-06, as amended. Motion carried 4-0 (Castellanos absent, excused.) PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. (Continued from February 13, 2018) PRECISE PLAN NO. 15-07 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 73652 VARIANCE NO. 1 5 - I 8 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPLICANT: Steven Eide, Drafting and Design, Ltd. LOCATION: 1920 W. Pacific Lane REQUEST: Request to construct a total of seven (7) condominiums and a tentative tract map to subdivide the property. In addition, a variance has been requested to deviate from code requirements including rear yard setback requirements. The project site is in a Multi-Family Residential (MF-20) zone. The site is .62 acres and is currently occupied by a single-family home, which will be demolished as part of the project. Senior Planner Ron Garcia presented the staff report. He reminded the Commission that this matter had been continued from the February 13, 2018 \\StoragellplandataIPLANCOM\MINUTES12018 MINUTES16.26.18 minutes.doc Nanning Commission Minutes Page 3 — June 26, 2018 meeting and the applicant had been asked to hold a community meeting with the residents of the adjacent neighborhood. During his presentation he told the Commission that the applicant had redesigned the project to reduce the number of variances, provide more on-site parking and incorporate architectural compatibility with the existing neighborhood. In addition, Mr. Garcia told the Commission that staff and the City Attorney's office had investigated the existing zoning of the lot and the history of that zoning. He also told the Commission that inquiries to the Los Angeles County Assessor's office revealed that the property was one single lot and had been zoned for multifamily residential use since approximately 1964. A copy of the ordinance was provided to the Planning Commission in the staff report. Commissioner Holtz asked for clarification of the requested variance. Chairman Jimenez opened the public hearing. PROPONENTS: Clem Zirolli, applicant, spoke in favor of the project. Mr. Zirolli told the Commission that extensive research had showed that the property is one single lot, not two as previously believed. In addition, he told the Commission that they discovered the property had been zoned for multi-family since 1964. He added that he had worked with staff to reduce the number of units, redesigned the architecture, added parking and held a community meeting with the surrounding residents. Chairman Jimenez asked about the community meeting and Commissioner Holtz asked how the additional parking had been achieved. OPPONENTS: Yen Benton, Dae Han, Gretchen M. Hillman, Phillip Moreno, Cheryl Rodriquez, Richard Rodriguez, Richard J. Rodriguez, Fredrick Sykes, Robert Torres and Mary Grey spoke in opposition. Th'e opponents addressed the Commission regarding their concerns with increased crime and homeless people in the area, safety of pedestrians in the area due to the new driveway that will serve the development and lack of stop signs in the area, possible loss of property value, the density of the project and the number of units proposed, increase in traffic and parking, changing the character of the neighborhood due to the multi-family residential project, negative environmental impacts, changing the ingress and egress of the project from Pacific Lane to Pacific Avenue to reduce traffic in the residential neighborhood, whether or not this project would be affordable housing, concerns with the proposed landscaping, whether or not the property is one lot or two lots, when the zoning of the property was adopted by the Council, lack of compromise from the developer, the impact of a multi-family development on West Covina public safety resources, further reduction in the number of proposed units, and requiring a new Environmental Impact Study and Negative Declaration for the amended project. \\Storagel\plandata\PLANCOMIMINUTES12018 MINUTES16.26.18 minutes.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 — June 26, 2018 REBUTTAL: Mr. Zirolli rebutted the testimony from the opponents by telling the Commission he had already reduced the density of the proposed development. In addition, he pointed out that the area is not a single-family residential area since there is another multi-family use in the neighborhood. In addition, he pointed out that the existing zoning had been in place since 1964. Chairman Jimenez closed the public hearing. There was a discussion by the Commission regarding the number of units allowed on this property by the Municipal Code due to its size and zoning. In addition, the Commission considered the zoning of the property and how long the zoning had been in place, the adoption of the General Plan and the community meeting held by the developer. Commissioner Redholtz commented that the applicant had reduced the number of units and variances requested. In addition, he had provided additional on-site parking and had changed the architecture of the project to make it more harmonious with the existing neighborhood. He indicated he would support the project. Commissioner Holtz concurred with Commissioner Redholtz and added he would not be in favor of changing the ingress and egress of the property from Pacific Lane to Pacific Avenue due to safety concerns. Commissioner Heng commented that the shape of the property made development difficult. During their discussion, the Commission also asked Miguel Hernandez, Engineering Department, to comment on the changing the ingress and egress of the project from Pacific Lane to Pacific Avenue. Chairman Jimenez commented that the project complies with the Zoning Code and that the unique shape of the property supported the requested variance. He also indicated he would support the project. Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Holtz, to waive farther reading and adopt Resolution No. 18-5952, approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. Motion carried 4-0 (Castellanos absent, excused.) Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Holtz, to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 18-5953 approving Precise Plan No. 15-07. Motion carried 4-0 (Castellanos absent, excused.) Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Holtz, to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 18-5954 approving Tentative Tract Map No. 73652. Motion carried 4-0 (Castellanos absent, excused.) \\Storagellplandata\PLANCOM1M1NUTES12018 MINUTESI6.26.18 minutes.doe Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 — June 26, 2018 Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Holtz, to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 18-5955, approving Variance No, 18-5955. Motion carried 4-0 (Castellanos absent, excused.) Chairman Jimenez said these actions are final unless appealed to the City Council within ten days. Chairman Jimenez called a recess at 8:45 p.m. Chairman Jimenez reconvened the meeting at 8:50 p.m. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 17-12 ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT NO. 18-10 PLANNING DIRECTOR'S MODIFICATION NO, 17-29 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION APPLICANT: Juan Jimenez — Tierra Mia Company LOCATION: 2301 South Azusa Avenue (Woodside Plaza) REQUEST: Request for approval for a conditional use permit to allow a drive- through use in an existing drive-through building and an administrative use permit for outdoor seating. Additionally, the applicant is requesting the approval of a Planning Director's Modification for architectural modifications to the facade of an existing commercial building located at the northwest corner of the "Woodside Plaza" commercial center. Planning Intern Erick Marroquin presented the staff report. During his presentation he spoke about the existing drive-through and told the Commission the applicant was requesting use of the drive-through in conjunction with his new café. Mr. Marroquin said the applicant is also requesting outdoor seating. Mr. Marroquin told the Commission that a traffic study had been done and it showed access to the drive- through would not impact traffic on the street. Mr. Marroquin also said that a condition restricting the time for deliveries to the business had been added, and the applicant was requesting that it be amended or deleted as a condition of approval. There was a short discussion by the Commission regarding the location of the drive- through window and the reasons why the applicant was requesting that the condition restricting the time of deliveries be removed. Chairman Jimenez opened the public hearing. PROPONENTS: Ulysses Romero, owner of the business, Steven Olives, Chief Operating Officer, and Robert Torres spoke in favor of the project. Mr. Romero spoke to the Commission regarding the operation of his business in other locations, and requested that deliveries be allowed early in the morning since \\StoragellpiandatalPLANCOM1M1NUTES12018 MINUTES16.26.18 minutes.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 6— June 26, 2018 the pastries offered for sale by the business are delivered fresh every morning. Mr. Romero also gave a Power Point presentation showing his other locations. He spoke about the types of coffee sold, types of pastries that are sold, and how his company has refurbished existing buildings to make them suitable for use by his business. In addition, he answered questions regarding his business and his use of drive-throughs in other locations by the Commission. Robert Torres said he was excited they were opening a business in West Covina since he is a frequent visitor to the company's Pico Rivera location. He also commented that the business is very professional and will enhance the existing neighborhood. Chairman Jimenez asked about what time deliveries will take place at the location. Commissioner Holtz asked how many employees will be hired. OPPONENTS: No one spoke in opposition to the project. Chairman Jimenez closed the public hearing. There was a discussion by the Commission regarding the proposed business. It was the consensus of the Commission to amend the conditions of approval to modify Condition No. 3, restricting deliver time. Commissioner Redholtz indicated he was happy they are coming to the city and felt this business will help attract other businesses to the area. Commissioners Holtz and Heng concurred with Commissioner Redholtz. Chairman Jimenez also said he would support the project and was happy they were coming to West Covina. Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Jimenez, to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 18-5956, as amended, approving Conditional Use Permit No. 17-12. Motion carried 4-0 (Castellanos absent, excused.) Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Jimenez, to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 18-5957 approving Administrative Use Permit No. 18-10. Motion carried 4-0 (Castellanos absent, excused.) Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Jimenez, approving Planning Director's Modification No. 17-29. Motion carried 4-0 (Castellanos absent, excused.) Chairman Jimenez said these actions are final unless appealed to the City Council within ten (10) days. \\Storagellplandata\PLANCOM\MINUTES12018 MINUTES16.26.18 minutes.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 — June 26, 2018 4. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 17-02 GENERAL EXEMPTION APPLICANT: City of West Covina LOCATION: Citywide REQUEST: The proposed code amendment consists of amendments to the Downtown Plan and Code, which is part of the West Covina Municipal Code. The Downtown Plan includes the Civic Center area/Cameron Avenue, Plaza West Covina and Vincent Avenue/Glendora Avenue. Planning Director Jeff Anderson presented the staff report. During his presentation he told the Commission that the Downtown Plan and Code had been adopted by the City Council on December 20, 2016. Since the adoption of the Code, staff had noted sections that should be amended in the new code. Those areas were: nonconforming expiration time of two years, outdoor dining approval process, hospital building height allowance, building height within 100 feet of single family residential properties, zoning designations and allowed building types, Downtown Plan parking requirement application, minor modification permits, standards for special exceptions, adding standards for blade signs, parking requirements for properties on the east side of Glendora Avenue, a list of permitted used, perimeter wall and fence height and gutters and down spouts for non-residential zones. The proposed code amendment would address those areas. There was discussion by the Commission during the presentation regarding the various matters being addressed by the code amendment. Chairman Jimenez opened the public hearing. No one spoke in favor of, or in opposition to, the Code Amendment. Chairman Jimenez closed the public hearing. There was a short discussion regarding code amendment. It was the consensus of the Commission to recommend adoption of the code amendment to the City Council. Motion by Redholtz, seconded by Jimenez, to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 18-5958, recommending to the City Council, approval of Code Amendment No. 17-02. Motion carried 4-0 (Castellanos absent, excused.) Chairman Jimenez said final action on this matter will take place at a public hearing before the City Council on a date to be determined. CONTINUATION OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None COMMISSION REPORTS/COMMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS Commissioner Redholtz — regarding the Summer Concert Series in the Civic Center. \\Storagellplandata\PLANCOM\MINUTES12018 MINUTES16.26.18 ininutes.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 — June 26, 2018 Commissioner Holtz — regarding an application from Crestview Cadillac. 5. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT: a. FORTHCOMING — July 10, 2018 b. Subcommittee for Design Review Minutes — June 12, 2018 Planning Director Jeff Anderson presented the Planning Director's Report. 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: None ADJOURNMENT Chairman Jimenez adjourned the meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted: Lydia de Zara Senior Administrative Assistant ADOPTED AS SUBMITTED ON: ADOPTED AS AMENDED ON: \\Storagellplandata\PLANCOMIIVIINUTES12018 MINUTESI6.26.18 minutes.doc AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 DATE: July 10, 2018 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT ADMINSTRATIVE USE PERMIT NO. 17-45 SUBCOMMITTEE FOR DESIGN REVIEW NO. 17-81 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION APPLICANT: Jiahui Tong LOCATION: 2641 Elena Avenue I. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting an administrative use permit (AUP) to allow a 78-square foot addition to the front of the house and to allow the construction of an open patio with a deck and a room addition above at the rear of the house. Construction has already begun on the proposed additions. With the proposed additions and modifications the house will have a total floor area of 2,924 square feet, including the 450-square foot garage. On April 24, 2018 the Planning Commission continued the item with direction that the applicant redesign the second-story addition. IL ANALYSIS On April 24, 2018, Planning Commission reviewed and continued the proposal for the applicant to work with the designer and the Planning Department staff in redesigning the second story addition to be more consistent and compatible with the existing house and neighborhood. Members of the community attended the meeting and shared their concerns with the illegal construction of the additions and the compatibility of the second story addition. The staff report and minutes from the April 24, 2018 meeting are included in this staff report. (See Attachments No. 2 and 3). On June 25, 2018, staff received a letter of concern from an adjacent neighbor in opposition to the applicants proposal. The letter stated concerns that a shed roof may be more appropriate and acceptable than the proposed gable roof. Additionally, that the applicant did not stop construction and that the measurements on the plans are incorrect. The applicant has modified the proposed second story to be consistent in roof pitch and style as the existing house. The second story sun room addition will have a gable style roof pitch. The north, east and south elevations will incorporate floor to ceiling windows to maintain the intention of a sun room. Administrative Use Pemtit No. 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue July 2, 2018- Page 2 V. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION This project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303 pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), the project consists of the remodeling of an existing single-family residence on an individual property. HI. CONCLUSION The applicant took into consideration Planning Commission and staff's recommendations to redesign the second story addition to be consistent in roof pitch and architecture as the existing home and neighborhood. The applicant redesigned the second story addition to incorporate a gable roof and floor to ceiling windows on the north, east and south elevations to maintain the intention of a second story sun room. The subject property is on a 5,748-square foot lot. The existing two-story home is 2,706 square feet and is located in a two-story neighborhood in the Planned Community Development No. 1 (PCD-1) Zone. The house with the proposed addition will be 2,924 square feet, including a 450-square foot two-car garage. The additions include the following: • first-floor addition to the front elevation of 78 square feet • second story addition of 140 square feet, proposed to be a sunroom • second story balcony that exceeds 200 square feet whereas the proposed balcony is 230 square feet. The house requires an administrative use permit (AUP) for maximum unit size exception (MUSE), a second-story balcony that exceeds 200 square feet and second-story addition (sunroom). Although, the proposed house would be 1.25 times larger than the average house size, the house would be similar in size as the largest home in the neighborhood that is 2,565 square feet. ZACase FileslAUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)1PC 7.10.181STAFF REPORT NO 2.doc Administrative Use Permit No, 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue July 2, 2018- Page 3 IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 and Subcommittee Design Review No. 17-81. Planning Associate REVIEWED AND APPROVED: Jeffricnderson, AICP Planning Director ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 — Administrative Use Permit Resolution for Approval Attachment 2— Planning Commission Minutes, April 24, 2018 Attachment 3 — Planning Commission Staff Report, April 24, 2018 Attachment 4 — June 25, 2018, Letter of Concern Attachment 5 — Plans (Available for review by the public at the West Covina Library, West Covina Police Department, and West Covina Planning Department) ZACase Files\AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)IPC 7.10.181STAFF REPORT NO 2.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT NO. 17-45 ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT NO. 17-45 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION APPLICANT: Jiahui Tong LOCATION: 2641 Elena Avenue WHEREAS, there was filed with this City a verified application on forms prescribed by the City, a request for an administrative use permit to approve a maximum unit size exception, second story addition and the construction of a total of 230-square feet of balcony area on a single-family property, on that certain property generally described as Assessor's Parcel No. 8731-001-028, as listed in the records of the office of the Los Angeles County Assessor; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, upon giving the required notice, did on the 10th day of July, 2018, conduct a duly advertised public hearing to consider the subject application for an administrative use permit; and WHEREAS, studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission and in its behalf reveal the following facts: 1. The applicant is requesting an administrative use permit to allow for maximum unit size exception for a 2,924- square foot home including a 450- square foot two- car garage. The subject site is located in the "R-1" (Single-Family Residential) Zone, Area District III. 2. The applicant is proposing to construct second-story additions which include a 230- square foot balcony and a 140- square foot sunroom on the west elevation of the existing residence. 3. Appropriate findings for approval of an administrative use permit for a two-story single family house, maximum unit size exception, and large addition are as follows: ZACase Files\A1JP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd stoiy addition)113C 11AUP RESO.doc Planning Commission Resolution No. Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 July 10, 2018 — Page 2 a. The lot and proposed development is consistent with the general plan, zoning, and meets all other applicable code requirements. b. The development utilizes building materials, color schemes and a roof style which blend with the existing structure, if any, and results in a development which is harmonious in scale and mass with the surrounding residences. c. The development is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles. d. The development can be adequately served by existing or required infrastructure and services. e. The design of the structure has given consideration to the privacy of surrounding properties through the usage and placement of windows and doors, cantilevers, decks, balconies, minimal retaining walls, trees and other buffering landscaping materials. f. The development is sensitive to the natural terrain, minimizes necessary grading, de-emphasizes vertical massing which could disrupt the profile of a natural slope, and does not impede any scenic vistas or views open to the public or surrounding properties. 4. Appropriate findings for approval of an administrative use permit for a balcony is as follows: (1) The proposed retaining wall, elevated structure, and/or other structure, has been designed so as to substantially minimize any adverse aesthetic and visual impacts as visible from surrounding properties and public rights-of- way. (2) The proposed retaining wall, elevated structure, and/or other structure complies with the following design standards: Colors and materials. Decorative materials and/or design elements shall be used as necessary to enhance the aesthetic appearance of the retaining wall structure. Suggested materials include, but are not limited to, stone, masonry, wood, textured poured concrete, and textured colored precision block with colored grout. Natural and earth-tone colors should be utilized for retaining walls to blend the wall with existing surroundings. A variation in design or materials should be used where necessary to break up large masses and/or add visual interest. ZACase Files\AUP 12017 117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)WC 11AUP RESO.doe Planning Commission Resolution No. Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 July 10, 2018— Page 3 Landscaping. Landscaping shall be integrated into the design of the retaining wall or elevated structure as necessary to screen the retaining wall or structure from open view. Where required, a landscape and irrigation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the planning director. Wall separation. Retaining walls shall be separated into terraced segments where necessary to break up large undifferentiated masses. iv. Privacy impacts. Retaining walls and structures shall be located and designed to avoid unreasonable interference with the privacy of surrounding properties. 5. This project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303 pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), the project consists of the construction of a new two-story single-family residence on an individual property. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of West Covina does resolve as follows: 1. On the basis of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, the Planning Commission makes the following large addition and two-story single family house findings: a. The lot and proposed building are consistent with the "Residential Low-Medium" (4.1-8.0 dwelling units per acre) General Plan designation and "Single-Family Residential" (R-1) zoning. The proposal consists of the additions to an existing single-family home which meets all applicable requirements of the "Planning Community Development" (PCD-1) Zone and Area District III development standards. b. The addition to the front elevation will maintain the existing roof line footprint. The proposed addition will be consistent in materials and colors to the existing single family residence. Additionally, the applicant proposes to incorporate stone veneer siding along the front elevation. The proposed two-story addition and modification to the existing residence is consistent with the architectural style of its surrounding residences. c. The existing house is accessible from a driveway off Elena Avenue and will not negatively impact circulation or safety for pedestrians and vehicles. The subject property is developed with front-yard setbacks greater than the minimum required by the Municipal Code. The proposed additions do not negatively affect the convenience and safety of the pedestrians or vehicles in that it will not result in any visual obstructions adjacent to a right-of-way that would affect convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles. Z:\Case Files\AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)IPC 11AUP RESO.doc Planning Commission Resolution No. Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 July 10, 2018 — Page 4 d. The lot is adequately served by existing infrastructure (streets, sewer, water, etc.). The proposed two-story house is not anticipated to require additional infrastructure or services beyond that provided for the existing residences nearby. Therefore the development can be adequately served by existing infrastructure and services. e. The design of the structure has given consideration to the privacy of surrounding properties in that the area consists of large lots with single-family residences. The area includes hillsides and varied topography, allowing for greater visibility into neighboring yards. Majority of the neighboring properties are two-story homes. The proposed balconies are located on the rear elevations of the house in the direction of the side and rear yards. The proposed balcony and second story addition will be consistent and integral to the architecture of the house. Because the subject property is located in an area of topography any addition to the structure will have a marginal effect on the view from surrounding properties. The proposed additions will not eliminate or substantially deteriorate the view from surrounding properties. f. The proposal is sensitive to the natural terrain in that there are no major terrain modifications. The project proposed construction of the second story balcony and addition would not impede or obstruct any scenic views from surrounding properties. The proposal is not out of character in comparison to the existing neighborhood as there are other two-story homes located in the vicinity, and the subject property is located in area of topography including mature trees. Because the subject property is located in an area of topography any addition to the structure will have a marginal effect on the view from surrounding properties. The proposed new house will not eliminate or substantially deteriorate the view from surrounding properties. 2. On the basis of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, the Planning Commission makes the following balcony findings: a. The proposal includes a balcony addition of 230 square feet on the west elevation. The proposed balcony will be consistent and integral to the architecture of the house. b. The proposed balcony will complement the existing style and architecture of the home. The balcony is to incorporate a four-foot railing along the north and west elevations. 6. That pursuant to all of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, and further based on the findings above, Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 is approved subject to the provisions of the West Covina Municipal Code, provided that the physical development of the herein described property shall conform to said plan nCase Files\AUP 12017\17-45 2641 Elena Ave, (extension and 2nd story addition)1PC 11AUP RESO.doe Planning Commission Resolution No. Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 July 10, 2018— Page 5 and the conditions set forth herein which, except as otherwise expressly indicated, shall be fully performed and completed or shall be secured by bank or cash deposit satisfactory to the Planning Director, before the use or occupancy of the property is commenced and before the Certificate of Occupancy is issued, and the violation of any of which shall be grounds for revocation of said administrative use permit by the Planning Director, Planning Commission, or City Council. 7. That the administrative use permit shall not be effective for any purpose until the owner of the property involved (or a duly authorized representative) has filed at the office of the Planning Director, his affidavit stating he is aware of, and accepts, all conditions of this administrative use permit as set forth below. Additionally, no permits shall be issued until the owner of the property involved (or a duly authorized representative) pays all costs associated with the processing of this application pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 8690. 8. The costs and expenses of any enforcement activities, including, but not limited to attorneys' fees, caused by the applicant's violation of any condition imposed by this approval or any provision of the West Covina Municipal Code shall be paid by the applicant. That the approval of the administrative use permit is subject to the following conditions: a. Comply with plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 10,2018. b. That the project comply with all requirements of the "Planned Community Development" (PCD-1) Zone, Area District HI, and all other applicable standards of the West Covina Municipal Code. c. The approval is for the following modifications to the existing single family residence: • 78- square foot first story addition to extend the front portion of the living room and entrance of the residence • 140- square foot second story addition for a sunroom at the west elevation • 230- square foot second story balcony with a four-foot railing on the north and west elevations • Two-foot stone veneer siding along the front elevation with a minimum 24- inches of wrapping to the side elevations d. The 140- square foot second story sun room addition at the rear of the residence shall maintain a consistent roof pitch, material and style as the existing single family residence. e. That any proposed changes to the approved site plan, floor plan or elevations be reviewed by the Planning Department, and the written authorization of the Planning Director shall be obtained prior to implementation. Z:1Case Files1AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)\PC 1\AUP RESO.doe Planning Commission Resolution No. Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 July 10, 2018 — Page 6 f. This development shall conform to all applicable Municipal regulations, Fire, Building, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing codes and recognized, approved, standards of installation. g. The approved use shall not create a public nuisance as defined in the West Covina Municipal Code Section 26-416 regarding landscape maintenance and property maintenance. h. The applicant shall sign an affidavit accepting all conditions of this approval. i. Any graffiti that appears on the property during construction shall be cleaned or removed on the same business day. j. Landscape areas visible from the public right-of-way shall have landscaping installed prior to final inspection. k. This approval is effective for a period of one (1) year. All applicable building permits must be obtained within one (1) year of project approval. 1. Building Requirements: I. All Conditions of Approval as approved by the Planning Commission shall appear as notes on the plans submitted for building plan check and permits. 2. Submit complete construction plans and calculations to the Building Division for review and permits. ZACase Files\AUP 1201711745 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)1PC 1 \AUP RESO.doc Planning Commission Resolution No. Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 July 10, 2018 — Page 7 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of West Covina at a regular meeting held on the lo th day of July 2018, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: DATE: July 10, 2018 EXPIRATION DATE: July 10, 2019 If not used. Jose Jimenez, Chaiiman Planning Commission Jeff Anderson, AICP Planning Commission ZACase Files1AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)IPC I \AUP RESO.doc Planning Commission Minutes ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Page 2— April 24, 2018 EtE ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT NO. 17-45 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION APPLICANT: Jiahui Tong LOCATION: 2541 Elena Avenue REQUEST: Request for approval of an administrative use permit for a second-story addition to allow a deck and a sun room to be located to the rear of an existing single-family residence. Associate Planner Christine Delostrinos presented the staff report. During her presentation she spoke about the history of the renovations and construction on the subject property, adding that the applicant was seeking to legalize existing construction. She also explained what was proposed and recommended approval, subject to a condition addressing the pitch of the roof There was a discussion by the Commission regarding a stop-work order, the timing for the submittal of plans, and the application and issuance of building permits for this project. Commissioner Jimenez also asked about the redesign of the proposed sunroom. Chairman Holtz opened the public hearing. \\Storagellplandata \PLANCOM \MINUTES\20 18 MINUTES14.24.1 8 minutes.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 — April 24, 2018 PROPONENT: Jiahui Tong, applicant, and Bao Yao, designer on the project, spoke in favor of the project. Ms. Tong told the Commission that she had purchased the property and started renovations in 2016. She also told the Commission that she believed the contractor had acquired permits. In addition, she indicated she would like to retain the sunroom because the structural integrity of the home could be compromised if it were removed. She also answered questions by the Commission regarding the contractors who worked on her home, permits they had applied for, who the architect on the project was, and if any work had been done since the stop-work order had been given. Mr. Yao told the Commission that he is the designer on the project, and said the company he works for also owns a construction company. He indicated that Ms. Tong had supplied the plans being used for the improvements. OPPONENTS: Robert Agee, Maribel Kratz, Carla Agee and Monica Trujillo spoke in opposition to the project. Mercedes Pinnell indicated her opposition to the project on an Agenda Item Position card. Mr. Agee explained to the Commission that the sunroom wasn't consistent with other homes in the neighborhood. In addition, he told the Commission that he was concerned because the drainage from the roof would have a negative effect on the drainage for his property. He also expressed his concerns with loss of property value, the trees planted in front of the home, and the size of the sunroom. Ms. Kratz expressed her opinion that the home is too massive and was too large for the surrounding neighborhood. Ms. Agee stated her belief that the drawings provided to the Commission were not accurate, and that the sunroom is too large. In addition, she told the Commission that work on the home has continued after the stop-work order was issued. Ms. Agee told the Commission that the drawings are inaccurate and the sun room is much larger than shown on the plans. In addition, she told the Commission that work on the home had continued despite the stop-work order. Ms. Trujillo reiterated that the plans presented at this meeting are not accurate. In addition, she spoke to the Commission about issues that have arisen with the people working on the house, and concurred with the other opponents that work has not stopped on the home. 11Storagellptandata\PLANCOM\MINUTES12018 MlNUTES14.24.18 minutes.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 — April 24.2018 REBUTTAL: Ms. Tong said she is hoping to be able to finish the work on the home so that she can live comfortably with her family. In addition, she denied that unpermitted work has continued but said that she had hired people to replace the fence around the pool when she was told it was required. She also said the sunroom was existing when she purchased the house. Further, she told the Commission that she had submitted plans for remodeling the interior of the house, then acquired one for the exterior of the house. Chairman Holtz closed the public hearing. There was a discussion by the Commission regarding the proposed home. Commissioner Castellanos said that at the Subcommittee for Design Review he had not supported the design. He indicated that he would not be in favor of approving the request. Commissioners Jimenez and Redholtz concurred with Commissioner Castellanos and both expressed their opinions that the design is not consistent or harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood. Commissioner Heng also recommended that the applicant work with the Planning Department and architect to find a way to finish the renovations on the home. Chairman Holtz said that he felt there were too many inconsistencies in the plans and said he would not support the project. Planning Director Jeff Anderson said the most concern was for the sunroom and balcony design. He suggested that the applicant and her architect work with staff to find a solution so that her renovations can be finished. The revised plans would be presented to the Planning Commission for their review. Motion by Castellanos, seconded by Redholtz, to continue this matter to allow the applicant time to revise the plans. Motion carried 5-0. Planning Director Jeff Anderson said a notice will be sent out when this matter is rescheduled for a public hearing. \\Storagellplandata\PLANCOM\MINUTES12018 NIINUTES14.24.18 minutes.doe ATTACHMENT NO. 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 DATE: April 24, 2018 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT NO. 17-45 SUBCOMMITTEE FOR DESIGN REVIEW NO. 17-81 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION APPLICANT: Jiahui Tong LOCATION: 2641 Elena Avenue I. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting an administrative use permit (AUP) to allow a 78-square foot addition to the front of the house and to allow the construction of an open patio with a deck and a room addition above the rear of the house. Construction has already begun on the proposed additions. With the proposed additions and modifications the house will have a total floor area of 2,924 square feet, including the 450-square foot garage (A public hearing was requested during the 10-day public review period). ZACase Files\AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)1Staff Report.doc Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue ApiiI 24, 2018- Page 2 Staff recommends the approval of Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 and Subcommittee Design Review No. 17-81 with the following condition: • The 140-square foot second story sun room addition at the rear of the residence shall maintain a consistent roof pitch, material and style with the existing single-family residence. II. BACKGROUND Zoning: "Planned Community Development No. 1" (PCD-1) North: "Planned Community Development Na. 1" (PCD-1); single- family residences East: "Planned Community Development No. 1" (PCD-1); single-family residences South: "Planned Community Development No. 1" (PCD-1); single- family residences West: "Planned Community Development No. 1" (PCD-1); single-family residences Notices of Public Hearing have been mailed to 52 owners and occupants of properties located within 300 feet of the subject site. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS The subject property consists of a 5,748-square foot lot. The existing two-story home is 2,706 square feet and is in a two-story neighborhood in the Planned Community Development No. (PCD-1) Zone. The house with the proposed addition will be 2,924 square feet, including a 450-square foot two-car garage. The applicant is proposing the following improvements: • First floor addition to the front elevation of 78 square feet, to extend the existing living room area • Legalize second story addition of 140 square feet, to be a sunroom • Legalize a second story balcony that exceeds 200 square feet whereas the proposed balcony is 230 square feet • Construct an open patio that will be a total of 392 square feet The house requires an administrative use permit (AUP) for maximum unit size exception (MUSE), a second-story balcony exceeding 200 square feet and second-story addition. In October 3, 2017, a stop work notice was issued by the Building Department. On December 15, 2017, the applicant submitted an administrative use permit application for the proposed additions. The applicant has stopped construction and is continuing to work with staff on the ZACase Fi1es\AUP\2017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)1Staff Reportdoe Administrative Use Pernik No. 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue April 24,2018- Page 3 processing of the administrative use permit for the proposed addition, balcony and second story sunroom addition. The existing house was built in 1976 in the PCD-1 zone. The house currently has four bedrooms and three bathrooms. The first story includes a bedroom, bathroom, family room, living room, kitchen, and two-ear garage. The second story includes one master bedroom with an exclusive bathroom, two bedrooms, and one bathroom. The proposed additions will include extending the first-story living room, adding a 392-square foot open patio on the first story, adding a new 230-square foot balcony on the second floor, and adding a new 140-square foot gunroom on the second floor. The proposed additions consist of stucco and stone veneer siding on the front elevation. The roof pitch of the proposed sunroom will differ from the existing house's roof pitch to provide for high ceiling windows. Staff recommended a roof pitch that is consistent with the existing residence, but the applicant determined to retain the proposed roof pitch to maximize their view opportunities. For lots with a lot area under 20,000 square feet, the maximum allowable unit size is 3,999 square feet or 50 percent of the lot area, whichever is less. The subject property is 5,748 square feet; therefore the maximum allowable unit size for the property is 2,874 square feet. An administrative use permit is required for a maximum unit size exception (MUSE) when the proposed addition exceeds the maximum allowable unit size (2,924 square feet, in this case). Additionally, an administrative use permit is required for a second-story addition and a balcony that exceeds 200 square feet. The proposed addition is in compliance with all zoning requirements. The proposed first-floor addition will be 25 feet from the east front yard property line, 5 feet 8 inches from the north side yard property line, and 29 feet from the south side yard property line. The proposed second-floor addition will be 24 feet from the west rear yard property line, 10 feet from the north side yard property line, and 11 feet and 8 inches from the south side yard property line. PCD-1 REQ. PROPOSED SETBACKS 1 STORY 2 STORY 1 STORY 2 STORY FRONT 10' 15' 25' 25' REAR 10' 10' 39' 22' 6" SIDE 5' 10' 5'-3"16'-6" 10'/11' LOT COVERAGE 0.50(50%) 50% Second Story Balcony over 200 square feet The Municipal Code requires the approval of an administrative use permit for second-story balconies greater than 200 square feet. The applicant is proposing a second story balcony located on the west elevation of 230 square feet that will be accessed by two of the existing bedrooms in the residence. The balcony will have a 4-foot railing along the north and west elevation. ZACase Files\AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd gory addition)\Staff Report.doe Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue April 24,2018- Page 4 Staff Survey of Surrounding Residences Staff surveyed the surrounding neighborhood of the subject property and found that the area consists primarily of two-story, single-family houses that were constructed in 1976. Additionally, a majority of the residential homes located along Elena Avenue maintain a second story balcony. The following chart shows the mean and median lot size, square footage of the homes, number of bedrooms, and floor area ratio of the surveyed homes. The mean is the average of all 18 homes, and the median is the number that falls directly in the middle if listed in numerical order. The houses that were surveyed are located along Elena Avenue and Evelyn Avenue. LOT SIZE FLOOR AREA NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) MEAN 6,363 sq. ft. 2,335 sq. ft. 3.7 37% MEDIAN 6,637 sq. ft. 2,407 sq. ft. 4 36% SUBJECT PROPOSAL 5'748 sq. ft. 2,924 sq. ft. 4 50% The house as proposed would be 1.25 times larger than the average size of the surrounding surveyed homes. The median size of the homes is 2,407 square feet. The house sizes range from 1,776 square feet to 2,565 square feet. The lot sizes of the surveyed homes range from 5,258 square feet to 7,218 square feet, while the lot size of the subject property is 5,748 square feet. Floor area ratios range from 27 percent to 49 percent. The proposed floor area ratio of the subject property is 50 percent. The house, as proposed, would be 1.25 times larger than the average size of the surrounding surveyed homes of 2,335-square feet. Although, the proposed house would be 1.25 times larger than the average house size, the house would be 1.14 times larger than the largest home in the neighborhood that is 2,565 square feet. Subcommittee for Design Review Additions made to the front elevation and to the second story of a residential property are required to be reviewed by the Subcommittee Design Review Board. The proposal was reviewed by the Subcommittee Design Review Board on February 27, 2018. Subcommittee directed staff to continue the Administrative Use Permit process of mailing the public notifications for the 10-day public review period. Subsequently, to return the application to the Subcommittee Design Review Board meeting once the public review period closed with any public input. Staff prepared and mailed out notices to the surrounding property owners on March 1, 2018. During the public review period staff received 9 email requests for a public hearing. The public hearing requests included concerns of illegal construction, public nuisance, obstruction of neighboring views, and inconsistency to existing neighboring architectural designs. The proposal was therefore scheduled for Planning Commission Review. The proposed two-story single-family residence requires an Administrative Use Permit for a Maximum Unit Size Expansion (MUSE), a balcony that exceeds 200 square feet and a two-story nease Files\AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)1StaffReport.doc Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue April 24, 2018- Page 5 addition and is subject to discretionary review by administrative staff. The following is a discussion of Subcommittee Guidelines for second-story additions: 1. Design the two-story house or addition so that all setbacks, including second story, have been met. The proposed two-story single-family residence is in compliance will all applicable setback requirements. The proposed first-floor addition will be 25 feet from the east front yard property line, 5 feet 8 inches from the north side yard property line, and 29 feet from the south side yard property line. The proposed second-floor addition will be 24 feet from the west rear yard property line, 10 feet from the north side yard property line, and 11 feet and 8 inches from the south side yard property line. 2. In an area that is predominately one story, consider reducing the size of the second story in relation to the ground floor. A smaller second floor will not appear as massive or boxy. The subject property is located in a single-family residential neighborhood consisting of two-story homes. 3. New two-story additions can result in privacy impacts to neighboring properties. Consider designing the second story to reduce or eliminate the need for windows on the side elevations. High windows that allow light in but restrict views onto neighboring properties may also reduce privacy impacts. The subject property is located in an area with varied topography. Additionally, the subject property is located in an area where there are no properties adjacent to the rear yard property line. The existing residence only maintains a neighboring property on the north and south property lines. The proposed second story balcony and addition maintain a setback that is less than the required side yard setback. Therefore, the privacy impacts of the second-floor additions are not significant. 4. In an area that is predominately one story, the elements of the house usually emphasize the horizontal. Many modern two-story designs emphasize the vertical through two- story porches with tall columns, tall windows, and two-story front elevations with no horizontal breaks. These elements are generally out-of-character with a one-story neighborhood. The proposed second story additions of the balcony and sunroom on the rear elevation incorporate architectural detailing that do not emphasize the vertical massing and impact of the residence. The subject property is improved with an existing two-story house. 5. When adding a second-story elevation in a one-story area, consider providing a significant second-story setback on the front elevation. By setting back the second story from the first story, the front of the house will fit better in the context of a one-story neighborhood. ZACase Files\AUP\2017 117-45 2641 Elena Ave, (extension and 2nd story addition)1StaffReport.doe Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue April 24,2018- Page 6 The proposed second-floor addition will be 24 feet from the west rear yard property line, 10 feet from the north side yard property line, and 11 feet and 8 inches from the south side yard property line. The two-story house as proposed provides sufficient setback to create a buffer from the neighboring two-story residences. 6. In an area that is predominately one story, the addition of a second-story balcony, especially in a flatland neighborhood, can have an effect on privacy. In these areas, balconies in rear yards are discouraged. The applicant is proposing a total 230 square feet of balcony space which will be located on the west elevation of the residence. The proposed balcony will be accessed from two of the bedrooms located at the rear of the residence. Additionally, the second story addition of a sun room will be 140 square feet on the west elevation of the residence. With the varied topography, compliance to required second story setbacks and the lack of neighbors in the rear of the lot the proposed balcony and second story addition will not have an effect on privacy. 7. When designing a second-story addition, consider that all sides of the second story are visible, Window treatment on second-story windows is encouraged. The proposed balcony will maintain railing that is a maximum height of four feet. Additionally, the proposed suntoom will be constructed with floor to ceiling windows on the north, south and west elevations. The following is a discussion of the applicable Subcommittee Guidelines for single-story additions: 1, Design the front and any other visible elevations especially corner houses with a variety of materials. Most houses have the exterior elevations that are primarily stucco. Providing an alternative material such as stone, wood (or simulated wood product) or brick will provide a more aesthetic elevation. (Where alternative material is at the corner, material should wrap around 24 inches on the side) The proposed addition to the front elevation will be consistent in materials and colors as the existing single-family residence. The applicant proposes to incorporate two feet of stone veneer siding along the front elevation. 2. Design the house to fit into the architectural context of the surrounding neighborhood. The applicant proposes to maintain consistent architectural style, colors and materials along the front elevation addition. The proposed house is consistent in bulk and mass with the other homes in the vicinity. 3. Window treatment on windows are encouraged including stucco pop outs, wood trim, pot shelves, shutters, recessed windows, etc. or provide a variety of window types (bay ZACase Files\AL/P12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)\Staff Report.doe Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue April 24, 2018- Page 7 windows, octagonal windows, other shapes, etc) Consider painting window treatment in contrasting color to the house. The applicant proposes to include stucco pop outs and trimming along the existing windows of the front elevation. IV. FINDINGS Before an application for an administrative use permit for a Maximum Unit Size Exception, and second stoiy addition, may be granted, the following findings must be made: 1. The lot and proposed development is consistent with the general plan, zoning, and meets all other applicable code requirements. The lot and proposed building are consistent with the "Residential Low-Medium" (4.1-8.0 dwelling units per acre) General Plan designation and "Single-Family Residential" (R-1) zoning. The proposal consists of the additions to an existing single-family home which meets all applicable requirements of the "Planning Community Development" (PCD-1) Zone and Area District III development standards. 2. The development utilizes building materials, color schemes and a roof style which blend with the existing structure, if any, and results in a development which is harmonious in scale and mass with the surrounding residences. The addition to the front elevation will maintain the existing roof line footprint. The proposed addition will be consistent in materials and colors to the existing single-family residence. Additionally, the applicant proposes to incorporate stone veneer siding along the front elevation. The proposed two-story addition and modification to the existing residence is consistent with the architectural style of its surrounding residences. 3. The development is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles. The existing house is accessible from a driveway off Elena Avenue and will not negatively impact circulation or safety for pedestrians and vehicles. The subject property is developed with front-yard setbacks greater than the minimum required by the Municipal Code. The proposed additions do not negatively affect the convenience and safety of the pedestrians or vehicles in that it will not result in any visual obstructions adjacent to a right-of-way that would affect convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles. 4. The development can be adequately served by existing or required infrastructure and services. The lot is adequately served by existing infrastructure (streets, sewer, water, etc.). The proposed two-story house is not anticipated to require additional infrastructure or services beyond that provided for the existing residences nearby. Therefore, the development can be adequately served by existing infrastructure and services. Mase Files\AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)1StaffReport.doe Administrative Use Permit No, 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue April 24, 2018- Page 8 5. The design of the structure has given consideration to the privacy of surrounding properties through the usage and placement of windows and doors, cantilevers, decks, balconies, minimal retaining walls, trees and other buffering landscaping materials. The design of the structure has given consideration to the privacy of surrounding properties in that the area consists of large lots with single-family residences. The area includes hillsides and varied topography, allowing for greater visibility into neighboring yards. Majority of the neighboring properties are two-story homes. The proposed balconies are located on the rear elevations of the house in the direction of the side and rear yards. The proposed balcony and second story addition will be consistent and integral to the architecture of the house. Because the subject property is located in an area of topography any addition to the structure will have a marginal effect on the view from surrounding properties. The proposed additions will not eliminate or substantially deteriorate the view from surrounding properties. 6. The development is sensitive to the natural terrain, minimizes necessary grading, de- emphasizes vertical massing which could disrupt the profile of a natural slope, and does not impede any scenic vistas or views open to the public or surrounding properties. The proposal is sensitive to the natural terrain in that there are no major terrain modifications. The project proposed construction of the second story balcony and addition would not impede or obstruct any scenic views from surrounding properties. The proposal is not out of character in comparison to the existing neighborhood as there are other two- story homes located in the vicinity, and the subject property is located in area of topography including mature trees. Because the subject property is located in an area of topography any addition to the structure will have a marginal effect on the view from surrounding properties. The proposed new house will not eliminate or substantially deteriorate the view from surrounding properties. Before an application for an administrative use permit for balconies greater than 200 square feet, the following findings must be made: The proposed retaining wall, elevated structure, and/or other structure, has been designed so as to substantially minimize any adverse aesthetic and visual impacts as visible from surrounding properties and public rights-of-way. The proposed balcony is 230 square feet. The proposed balconies will be consistent and integral to the architecture of the house. (2) The proposed retaining wall, elevated structure, and/or other structure complies with the following design standards: i. Colors and materials. Decorative materials and/or design elements shall be used as necessary to enhance the aesthetic appearance of the retaining wall structure. Suggested materials include, but are not limited to, stone, masonry, Mase Files\AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)1Staff Report.doc Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue April 24, 2018- Page 9 wood, textured poured concrete, and textured colored precision block with colored grout. Natural and earth-tone colors should be utilized for retaining walls to blend the wall with existing surroundings. A variation in design or materials should be used where necessary to break up large masses and/or add visual interest. The proposed balcony will complement the existing style and architecture of the home. The balcony is to incorporate a four-foot railing along the north and west elevations. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be integrated into the design of the retaining wall or elevated structure as necessaiy to screen the retaining wall or structure from open view. Where required, a landscape and irrigation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the planning director. Not applicable. Wall separation. Retaining walls shall be separated into terraced segments where necessary to break up large undifferentiated masses. Not applicable. iv. Privacy impacts. Retaining walls and structures shall be located and designed to avoid unreasonable interference with the privacy of surrounding properties. The balcony will be consistent with the architecture of the house. The balcony is located to allow visibility of the San Gabriel Mountains. V. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION This project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15303 pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), the project consists of the remodeling of an existing single-family residence on an individual property. VI. CONCLUSION The subject property lies on a 5,748-square foot lot. The existing two-story home is 2,706 square feet and is located in a two-story neighborhood in the Planned Community Development No. 1 (PCD-1) Zone. The house with the proposed addition will be 2,924 square feet, including a 450-square foot two-car garage. The additions include a first-floor addition to the front elevation of 78 square feet and a second story addition of 140 square feet. The second story addition is proposed to be a sunroom. Additionally, the applicant proposes to add a second story balcony that exceeds 200 square feet whereas the proposed balcony is 230 square feet. The house requires an administrative use permit (AUP) for maximum unit size exception (MUSE), a second-story balcony that exceeds 200 square feet and second-story addition (sunroom). Although, the proposed house would be 1.25 times larger than the average house size, ZACase Files\AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)1StaffReport.doe Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 2641 Elena Avenue April 24, 2018- Page 10 the house would be similar in size as the largest home in the neighborhood that is 2,565 square feet. VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The proposed second story balcony, first story addition and second story addition are in compliance with the municipal code. However, the architectural style of the proposed second story addition (sun room) is not consistent with of the existing house and neighboring houses. Staff recommends the approval of Administrative Use Permit No. 17-45 and Subcommittee Design Review No. 17-81 with the following condition included in the resolution: • The 140- square foot second story sun room addition at the rear of the residence shall maintain a consistent roof pitch, material and style as the existing single family residence. Christine Delostrinos Planning Associate REVIEWED AND APPROVED: Jeff/Ahderson, AICP Planning Director Attachments: Attachment No. 1 —Administrative Use Permit Resolution for Approval Attachment No. 2 — Emails Received Requesting for Public Hearing Attachment No. 3 — Emails Received of Concerns Attachment No. 4 — Letter of Concern, dated April 17, 2018 Attachment No. 5 — Plans (Available for review by the public at the West Covina Library, West Covina Police Department, and West Covina Planning Department) ZACase Files\AUP12017117-45 2641 Elena Ave. (extension and 2nd story addition)I.StaffReport.doe ATTACHMENT NO. 4 West Covina City Planning Dept. Subject: ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT for property at 2641 Elena Ave. Robert & Carla Agee 2647 Elena Ave. West Covina, CA 91792 Dear Sirs, June 25, 2018 cc: Code enforcement Dept. Building Department Prior to the public hearing on April 24, 2018, the owner asked what I opposed about her plan for the second story sun room. I told her that the architectural design was not in keeping with the house or the neighborhood, and that the large size and design would impair my view. I also said that I would prefer the addition not extend rearward from the existing sliding glass door in the master bedroom more than 8 feet and that I was concerned about water from the roof design. Apparently, she didn't care what effect her project has on her neighbors because at the public hearing she pushed for approval of her plans as they were at that time. The Planning Commission suggested that a shed roof might be more appropriate and acceptable. It was also suggested that she acquire the services of a licensed architect, designer and/or engineer to help with the design as the plan submitted appeared to be prepared by an amateur. She was also told that she needed to hire a licensed contractor to complete the construction. She was asked if construction continued after the stop-work order was issued. She denied that work continued. However; on March 27, 2018, the owner's boyfriend and two workers constructed a wall to the second story sunroom and added plywood to a wall previously partially constructed. At 8:45 a.m. on April 19, less than a week before the public hearing, work was being performed on the heating and air conditioning. There was white van in the driveway, California license 32417W1. The revised design now submitted appears to have been prepared by the same person who prepared the first design. The plans still contain the same errors as the first plans. For example, the 4' 6" x 16' 6" offset on the back of the existing house is not shown making it appear that the second story sunroonn/master bedroom and bath addition is smaller. It is larger than plans indicate by at least 74 square feet. The master bath, shown as existing, is not an accurate representation, as it shows the bathtub in the area of the offset. The existing master bedroom is 14' x 16' 6". If the 12' (or 14') x15' 6" addition plus a 4' 6" x 5' addition to the master bath is approved it will make the master bedroom 12' (or 14') x 32'. The master bath will be 5' x 21'. It will also extend a second story addition rearward 15' 6" from the existing back of her house, creating a blank wall floor to ceiling. Not a pretty view from my balcony! While I realize you cannot own a view, lack of consideration for your neighbors does not promote good neighbor relations. Page 2 Construction/demolition has been taking place on this property for 2 years 3 months and the current condition of the property begs these questions: * Is the owner in need of professional help recommended by the Planning Commission, to guarantee a successful completion of any construction approved? * Does she have a realistic understanding of the cost of construction of the proposed addition? Her appeal for being allowed to continue construction as I recall, was limited funds? * Does she have a bid from a licensed contractor? * If limited finances are a fact, does she have the finances necessary to complete any approved project. * Shouldn't the open exterior walls (both first and second story) be completed prior to starting a second story addition? * Shouldn't a permanent pool fence be erected? * Does the second story, 12' x 15' 6" addition, supported only by the back of the house and two metal posts meet building code requirements. * I understand that she may travel to China later this year. Who will manage construction in her absence? * She is a single mother with a baby, living in a 4 bedroom house. Her parents live in China. Why does she want to increase the size of the master bedroom to 12 or 14 feet x 32 feet? What is her intended use for the property? Sincerely, Ceoz,69._ ,71e-es2-- Robert & Carla Agee cfa Ponera Bread Wahot Creek Ups Vore Hcru Sushi AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 DATE: July 10, 2018 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT PRECISE PLAN NO. 18-04 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION APPLICANT: Bob Christoff for BMW Management, Inc. (Sizzler) LOCATION: 1100 W. West Covina Parkway I. DESCRIPTION OF APPLICATION The applicant is proposing a precise plan to expand and remodel the existing Sizzler restaurant located on the south side of West Covina Parkway, west of California Street. Walnut Creek Walnut Creek SUBJECT PROPERTY PEITO Staff is recommending approval of the precise plan. II. BACKGROUND The existing Sizzler restaurant building is 5,915 square feet in size with a 956-square foot outdoor seating area. The restaurant is located within the West Covina Parkway Plaza commercial center. The commercial center is 125,000 square feet in size. An interior remodel of the existing restaurant was completed in 2004. ZACase Files\PP12018118-04 1100 W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)IStaff Report.doc Precise Plan 18-04 July 10, 2018 Page 2 On August 8, 2017, the Planning Commission approved Planning Director's Modification No. 17-03 to enclose an existing outdoor seating area, improve the parking lot, and upgrade the façade of the building. The applicant later decided to propose an addition to the rear of the restaurant, which requires the approval of a precise plan. Staff is presenting all the improvements concurrently for clarity. ITEM DESCRIPTION "General Urban" (GU) and "Commercial" North: "UC" (Urban Center); Plaza West Covina South, East, and West: "Single-Family Residential" (R-1); single-family residences Sizzler Restaurant III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to complete a remodel of the existing Sizzler restaurant. The interior of the restaurant will include new seating and decor as well as accessibility upgrades. An existing outdoor patio area will be enclosed to allow for more seating. Minor parking lot upgrades are also proposed for ADA accessibility. Addition The applicant is proposing a 1,050-square foot addition to the rear of the existing 5,985- square foot restaurant. The addition will include an expansion of the kitchen and a new indoor trash enclosure. The addition will maintain a 33-foot, 1-inch distance from the rear property line, and the drive aisle will remain unchanged. The area to be remodeled is currently paved, with an existing landscape area and exterior trash enclosure area. New landscaping will be installed around the proposed addition. The applicant will be required to submit a landscape and irrigation plan as a condition of approval. Patio Enclosure The applicant is also proposing to enclose an existing 956-square foot outdoor seating patio area located on the east side of the existing restaurant building. The enclosed area will include a new storage room and add 36 seats to the restaurant. The restaurant will feature a total of 184 fixed seats. With the new addition and the enclosure of the patio area, the restaurant will be a total of 8,000 square feet. Facade Improvement The applicant is proposing façade renovations including new paint, cultured stone veneer, new windows and awnings, and new architectural details. Z:\Case Files\PP12018118-04 1100 W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)IStaff Repot-Woe Precise Plan 18-04 July 10,2018 Page 3 The applicant is proposing to install new windows along the north, west, and east elevations. The windows will feature new dark red canvas awnings. Stone veneer will be added along the north elevation and portions of the east and west elevations. Additionally, new wall features are proposed along the north and west elevations. These wall features will incorporate a parapet roof, metal siding in a slate gray color, and metal- framed American flag artwork. Metal louvered siding will also be incorporated on the north elevation of the newly-enclosed outdoor seating area, and a rod-supported steel canopy will be added above the north entrance to the restaurant. The building will be repainted in the following colors: "Olive Green" (dark green), "Pacific Pines" (light green), "Harvest Moon" (yellow), "Coyote Paw" (light brown), "Old Redwood" (dark brown), "Cochise" (beige), and "Honeycomb" (orange). In summary, the revised facade will add a variety of textures, color, and detail as well as modernize the building and create visual interest at the pedestrian level. Other Improvements The applicant is also proposing to upgrade the existing parking lot to include new accessible ADA parking. The modifications do not change the number of parking spaces provided. IV. PRECISE PLAN FINDINGS OF APPROVAL a. That the proposed plans and uses are consistent with applicable general and specific plans. The proposed precise plan is consistent with the General Plan Designation of Commercial. The proposed project is consistent with the following goals of the Economic Development Element (2. Our Prosperous Community) of the General Plan: P2.1 Maintain and enhance the City's current tax base. b. That the design or improvement of the proposed plans and uses are consistent with applicable general and specific plans. The applicant is proposing to construct a 1,050-square foot addition to the existing restaurant. The entire restaurant property is 125,000 square feet. The property is zoned "General Urban" (U-C) Zone. The proposed precise plan is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Commercial. With the approval of the precise plan, the proposed project will meet or exceed all applicable Municipal Code requirements. ZACase Files1PP12018118-04 1100W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)1Staff Report.doc Precise Plan 18-04 July 10, 2018 Page 4 c. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development. The proposed development will be visible from the surrounding area, including surrounding streets and buildings. The design and architecture of the proposed building reflect standards and materials that will make them architecturally interesting and aesthetically appealing. The building architecture proposed is contemporary in style and provides for a variety of articulation in building surfaces. The proposed architecture and site layout will not interfere with orderly development in the area. d. That the site is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of the development being proposed, including vehicle access and circulation, utilities, and the absence of physical constraints. The subject site is suitable to accommodate the expanded restaurant. The restaurant is currently in operation and the addition will be minor and to the rear of the building. On-site parking is provided for customers and employees. Vehicular access to the site is adequate with four ingress/egress points: two on West West Covina Parkway, and two on California Street. e. The architecture, site layout, location, shape, bulk and physical characteristics of the proposed development are compatible with the existing and future land uses, and do not interfere with orderly development in the vicinity. The proposed addition includes a 965-square foot enclosure and a 1,050-square foot addition to the rear of the building. The additions will increase the size of the restaurant from 5,985 square feet to 8,000 square feet. The addition is designed to be consistent with the proposed architecture of the restaurant. The proposed development incorporates on-site parking and landscaping improvements. The subject site is located in an area where commercial uses, including restaurants and retail, are prevalent. The proposed addition to the existing restaurant is in compliance with zoning standards. Conditions of approval have been included in the resolution to reduce impacts, including the submittal of landscape plans. The parking lot has been designed to comply with required parking for customers and employees. V. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. The proposal is consistent with the following General Plan Policies and Actions: a. Policy 2.1: Maintain and enhance the City's current tax base. Z: \Case Files\PP12018 118-04 1100 W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)IStaffReport.doc Veronica Hernandez Associate Planner Jeff Precise Plan 18-04 July 10, 2018 - Page 5 VI. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The project is a Categorical Exemption Class 1 (Section 15301: Existing Facilities) pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) since the project involves only the rehabilitation of an existing structure and existing facilities and an addition that does not result in the increase of more than 2,500 square feet to the floor area. VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Precise Plan No. 18-04. REVIEWED AND APPROVED: Planning Director ATTACHMENTS: Attachment No. 1 — Precise Plan Resolution Attachment No. 2 — Plans (Available for review by the public at the West Covina Library, West Covina Police Department, and West Covina Planning Department) Z:\Case FileaP12018118-04 1100 W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)IStaff Report.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PRECISE PLAN NO. 18-04 PRECISE PLAN NO. 18-04 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION APPLICANT: Bob Christoff for BMW Management, Inc. (Sizzler) LOCATION: 1100 W. West Covina Parkway WHEREAS, there was filed with this City, a verified application on the forms prescribed in Chapter 26, Article VI of the West Covina Municipal Code, requesting approval of a precise plan to: Remodel an existing 5,915-square foot restaurant to enclose an existing 956-square foot outdoor seating area and add 1,050 square feet to the building on that certain property described as: Assessor's Parcel Number 8475-002-036, as listed in the records of the office of the Los Angeles County Assessor; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission upon giving the required notice did on the 10th day of July, 2018, conduct a duly advertised public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said application; and WHEREAS, studies and investigations made by this Commission and in its behalf reveal the following facts: 1. The applicant is requesting approval of a precise plan to remodel an existing restaurant of 5,915 square feet and add 2,085 square feet to the building. 2. The project is within the General Urban (G-U) Zone. 3. Appropriate findings for approval of a precise plan of design are as follows: a. The proposed development plans and the uses proposed are consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. b. The proposed development is consistent with adopted development standards for the zone and complies with all other applicable provision of the Municipal Code. ZACase Files\PP 12018\18-04 1100W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)1PP Reso.doc Planning Commission Resolution No, Precise Plan No. 18-04 July 10, 2018 - Page 2 c. Granting the permit would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, and welfare and would not unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the vicinity of the subject property. d. The site is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of the development being proposed, including vehicle access and circulation, utilities, and the absence of physical constraints. e. The architecture, site layout, location, shape, bulk and physical characteristics of the proposed development are compatible with the existing and future land uses, and do not interfere with orderly development in the vicinity. 4. The project is a Categorical Exemption Class 1 (Section 15301: Existing Facilities) pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) since the project involves a minor expansion of the restaurant building. NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of West Covina does resolve as follows: 1. On the basis of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: a. The proposed precise plan is consistent with the General Plan Designation of Commercial. The proposed project is consistent with the following goals of the Economic Development Element (2. Our Prosperous Community) of the General Plan: i. P2.1 Maintain and enhance the City's current tax base b. The applicant is proposing to construct a 1,050-square foot addition to the existing restaurant. The entire restaurant property is 125,000 square feet. The property is zoned "General Urban" (U-C) Zone. The proposed precise plan is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Commercial. With the approval of the precise plan, the proposed project will meet or exceed all applicable Municipal Code requirements. c. The proposed development will be visible from the surrounding area, including surrounding streets and buildings. The design and architecture of the proposed building reflect standards and materials that will make them architecturally interesting and aesthetically appealing. The building architecture proposed is contemporary in style and provides for a variety of articulation in building surfaces. The proposed architecture and site layout will not interfere with orderly development in the area. d. The subject site is suitable to accommodate the expanded restaurant. The restaurant is currently in operation and the addition will be minor and to the rear of the building. On-site parking is provided for customers and employees. Vehicular ZACase Files \PP\2018118-04 1100W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)IPP Reso.doc Planning Commission Resolution No. Precise Plan No. 18-04 July 10, 2018 Page 3 access to the site is adequate with four ingress/egress points: two on West West Covina Parkway, and two on California Street. e. The proposed addition includes a 965-square foot enclosure and a 1,050-square foot addition to the rear of the building. The additions will increase the size of the restaurant from 5,985 square feet to 8,000 square feet. The addition is designed to be consistent with the proposed architecture of the restaurant. The proposed development incorporates on-site parking and landscaping improvements. The subject site is located in an area where commercial uses, including restaurants and retail, are prevalent. The proposed addition to the existing restaurant is in compliance with zoning standards. Conditions of approval have been included in the resolution to reduce impacts, including the submittal of landscape plans. The parking lot has been designed to comply with required parking for customers and employees. 2. That pursuant to all of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, and further based on the findings above, Precise Plan No. 18-04 is approved subject to the provisions of the West Covina Municipal Code, provided that the physical development of the herein described property shall conform to said plan and the conditions set forth herein which, except as otherwise expressly indicated, shall be fully performed and completed or shall be secured by bank or cash deposit satisfactory to the Planning Director, before the use or occupancy of the property is commenced and before the Certificate of Occupancy is issued, and the violation of any of which shall be grounds for revocation of said precise plan by the Planning Commission or City Council. 3. That the precise plan shall not be effective for any purpose until the owner of the property involved (or a duly authorized representative) has filed at the office of the Planning Director, his affidavit stating he is aware of, and accepts, all conditions of this precise plan as set forth below. Additionally, no permits shall be issued until the owner of the property involved (or a duly authorized representative) pays all costs associated with the processing of this application pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 8690. 4. The costs and expenses of any enforcement activities, including, but not limited to attorneys' fees, caused by the applicant's violation of any condition imposed by this approval or any provision of the West Covina Municipal Code shall be paid by the applicant. 5. That the approval of the precise plan is subject to the following conditions: a. Comply with plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 10, 2018. b. Comply with all applicable sections of the West Covina Municipal Code. c. This approval is for the modification to the façade of the existing building, including installing new windows along the north, east, and west elevations, installing new stucco wall features with a parapet roof and stone veneer wainscoting ZACase Files1P1312018118-04 1100W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)WP Reso.doe Planning Commission Resolution No. Precise Plan No. 18-04 July 10, 2018 - Page 4 and metal-framed artwork, new metal siding along the north and west elevations, new stone veneer along the north, east, and west elevations, new canvas awnings along the north, east, and west elevations, and a new steel canopy along the north elevation. d. This approval also includes the enclosure of an existing 956-square foot patio to the east of the existing building in order to create more seating and a storage room. The newly-enclosed area shall match the building in architecture, colors, and materials. e. This approval also includes the addition of 1,050 square feet to the rear of the building in order to expand the existing kitchen. The addition shall match the proposed architecture in terms of colors, style, and materials. f. This approval also includes painting the building in a new color palette. The range of paint colors approved are: "Olive Green" (dark green), "Pacific Pines" (light green), "Harvest Moon" (yellow), "Coyote Paw" (light brown), "Old Redwood" (dark brown), "Cochise" (beige), and "Honeycomb" (orange). g. This approval is also for the remodeling of the parking lot to include two new ADA accessible parking spaces. h. All approved colors and materials shall be clearly indicated on the plans. Any proposed change to the approved site plan, floor plan or elevations• must be reviewed by the Planning, Building, Fire and Police Departments and that the written authorization of the Planning Director shall be obtained prior to implementation. Prior to requesting a final inspection by the Building Division, the Planning Department shall inspect the development. k. Comply with all requirements of the "General Urban" (GU) Zone. 1. During construction, the delivery of materials and equipment, outdoor operations of equipment, and construction activity shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. m. All construction equipment, stationary or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers. n. All construction equipment shall be stored on the project site during the construction phase to eliminate daily heavy-duty truck trips on vicinity roadways. o. All mechanical equipment not shown on the approved Study Plan shall be screened from all views in a manner that is architecturally compatible with the buildings on which they are mounted. Plans and elevations indicating the type of equipment and method of concealment shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and ZACase FilesTP12018118-04 1100 W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)1PP Reso.doe Planning Commission Resolution No. Precise Plan No. 18-04 July 10, 2018 - Page 5 approval prior to the issuance of building permits pursuant to Municipal Code Section 26-568. P. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, that all roof mounted mechanical equipment is placed behind a permanent parapet wall and is completely restricted from all ground level views, pursuant to Section 26-568 of the Municipal Code. q. All outdoor trash areas shall be screened on all sides from public view by a minimum 5'6" high decorative block wall with a gate constructed of durable materials and a solid architectural cover. Provide construction details prior to issuance of a building permit. r. All new gutters and downspouts shall not project from the vertical surface of the building pursuant to Section 26-568 (a) (3). s. Awnings shall be kept clean and well maintained. Worn or damaged awnings shall be replaced. t. If new lighting is proposed, a parking lot lighting plan showing electrolier types and locations, average illumination levels, points of minimum illumination and photometric data in conformance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 2513 and as requested shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department and the City Engineer. u. Building and parking lot lighting is required to be architecturally integrated with the building design. Standard security wall packs are not acceptable unless they are provided with hooding that is architecturally compatible with the building v. That any proposed change to the approved elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to implementation. w. This permit is valid for 12 months from the date of approval. If a building permit is not issued within this period the approval will expire. Please be advised that the applicant will not be notified by the Planning Department about pending expiration of the subject entitlement. x. The applicant shall execute an indemnity agreement, in a form provided by the City and approved by the City Attorney, indemnifying the City against any and all actions brought against the City in connection with the approvals set forth herein. y. This approval does not include the approval of signs; a separate sign permit shall be obtained. All signs shall be required to comply with the City of West Covina Sign Code. ZACase Files\PP12018118-04 1100W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)WP Reso,doe Planning Commission Resolution No. Precise Plan No. 18-04 July 10, 2018 - Page 6 z. Comply with all requirements of the "Art in Public Places" ordinance (WCMC Chapter 17), prior to the issuance of building permits. Artwork shall be installed or required fee paid prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. aa. The new development shall comply with the Development Impact Fees (Ordinance No. 2286 and Resolution No. 2015-81). The impact fees will be due at the time of building permit issuance. Please contact the Building Department for the current impact fee rate. bb. That prior to final building permit issuance, a detailed landscape and irrigation plan in compliance with AB 1881 and Executive Order B-29-15 shall be submitted for all planted areas to be affected by project. Plans shall include type, size and quantity of landscape materials and irrigation equipment. All vegetation areas shall be automatically irrigated and a detailed watering program and water budget shall be provided. All damaged vegetation shall be replaced and the site shall be kept free of diseased or dead plant materials and litter at all times. The applicant shall coordinate with the applicable water district to determine if the water district has any specific requirements for water efficient landscaping. CC. Any sidewalk, hardscape or parking facility, with potholes, broken, raised or depressed sections, large cracks, mud and/or dust, accumulation of loose material, faded or illegible pavement striping or other deterioration shall be repaired. dd. Parking lots or other paved areas with a cracked, broken or otherwise deteriorating surface, in excess of ten (10) percent of the surface area shall be considered a nuisance and shall be repaired. ee. The asphalt at the site shall be slurry sealed at a minimum to repair cracked/broken asphalt and to get rid of oil stains. ff. Replace any plants destroyed during the construction process. gg. Any graffiti that appears on the property shall be cleaned or removed on the same business day. hh. Graffiti-resistant coatings shall be used on all walls, fences, sign structures, or similar structures to assist in deterring graffiti. BUILDING DIVISION The accessible path of travel is required to be 48" wide with running slope of no more than 1:20 and cross slopes of no more than 1:48. Please verify that the existing sidewalk and paving complies. A curb ramp complying with CBC§ 11B-406 will be required to connect the raised sidewalk from the parking surfaces. ZACase Files\PP12018118-04 1100 W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)IPP Reso.doe Planning Commission Resolution No. Precise Plan No, 18-04 July 10, 2018 Page 7 kk. All Conditions of Approval as approved by the Planning Commission shall appear as notes on the plans submitted for building plan check and permits. 11. Building design shall comply with the 2016 California Building Code (CBC). mm. Separate application(s), plan check(s), and permit(s) is/are required for: a. Tenant Improvements b. Signs c. Fire sprinkler/Alarm systems (see Fire Department Prevention Bureau for requirements) d. Plumbing e. Mechanical f. Electrical rm. Complete architectural plans prepared a by State licensed architect will be required. Submit design for review at formal plans review. oo. Complete structural plans with calculations by State licensed engineer or architect will be required. Submit design for review at formal plans review. PP. Compliance to California Green Building Code will be required. Submit design for review at formal plans review. qq. Separate plumbing, mechanical and electrical plan check will be required. Submit design for review at formal plans review. IT. A complete code analysis is required. Address type of construction, occupancy, exiting, allowable areas, allowable heights, etc. Provide a summary on the drawing. ss. Compliance with the State of California Accessibility regulations is required, including: a. Building entrances shall be provided with an accessible path of travel connecting the building entrances from the public sidewalk, accessible parking, and other buildings or essential facilities located on the site. b. Accessible parking: 1. Shall be located at each main entrance. Where multiple major entrances occur, accessible parking shall be equally distributed among the entrances. 2. Shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet deep and be provided with a loading and unloading passenger access aisle of 8 feet wide for Van space and 5 feet wide for regular accessible spaces. c. Aisles and seating shall be accessible. ZACase Files1PP12018118-04 1100 W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)IPP Reso.doe Planning Commission Resolution No. Precise Plan No. 18-04 July 10, 2018 - Page 8 tt. Provide Fire Alarms and Detection systems complying with CBC § 907 for the following projects: uu. West Covina Municipal Code requires fire sprinklers for the projects listed below except for open garages as defined by the California Building Code. WCMC § 7- 18,13, a. In any existing building after the completion of any addition, which will exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet of floor area. WCMC § 7-18.13.1. VV. Total plumbing fixtures required shall be determined by California Plumbing Code (CPC). FIRE DIVISION ww. NFPA 13D/13R113 Fire Sprinkler System. xx. NFPA 10 — Portable Fire Extinguishers. yy. Fire sprinkler modifications in accord with the new enclosure will require separate approval and permit from the Fire Depai fluent. Panic hardware is required on exit door(s). ZACase Files TP12018\18-04 1100 W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)IPP Reso.doe Planning Commission Resolution No. Precise Plan No. 18-04 July 10, 2018 - Page 9 I HEREBY CERTIFY foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of West Covina, at a regular meeting held on the 22n d day of August, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DATE: July 10, 2018 EXPIRATION DATE: July 9, 2020 If not used. Jose Jimenez, Chairman Planning Commission Jeff Anderson, AICP, Secretary Planning Commission Z:\Case Files\PP12018118-04 1100 W West Covina Parkway (Sizzler Addition)IPP Reso.doc City of West Covina Memorandum AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 TO: Planning Commission DATE: July 10, 2018 FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: REVISION TO PLANNING COMMISSION STIPENDS As part of the City's efforts to reduce expenditures in the City of West Covina Budget. At the June 11, 2018 City Council meeting, the City Council approved revisions to the stipends for Commissions. Planning Commission stipends have been $75 per meeting up to $150 a month. The new stipend will be $75 per meeting up to $75 a month. The revision began on July 1, 2018. Jefr A derson Planning Director, AICP PAMEMOLTRVA120181Study Sessions\PC Stipends\PC Staff Report.doc AGENDA NO. 5. a. DATE: July 10, 2018 FORTHCOMING PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS July 24, 2018 A. CONSENT CALENDAR None B. PUBLIC HEARINGS None C. NON-HEARING ITEMS (1 ) STUDY SESSION — CODE AMENDMENT NO. 18-01 August 14, 2018 A. CONSENT CALENDAR None B. PUBLIC HEARINGS None C. NON-HEARING ITEMS None A NI-on?, in uriT) TE_Tnro, ArnTrn n Q 1.1 14 AGENDA NO. 5.B. DATE: July 10, 2018 _ July 2018 Planning Commission Project Status Report Project # Address Description of Project PC Approved PD Mod Plan Check Submittal Bldg. Plan Check Permit Approval Issued Construction Status PDMod 18-06 203 S Azusa Ave Storage Sheds at Day Care 06/26/2018 CUP 17-12, AUP 18-10, PDMod 17-29 2301 S Azusa Ave Drive-Through for Tierra Mia 06126/2018 PP 15-07, TM 73652, V 15- 18 1920 W Pacific Ln 7-Unit Residential Project 06/26/2018 PP 17-04, TRP 18-07, TM 77133 1530 W Cameron Ave 56-Unit Residential Project 05/22/2018 AUP 17-30, PDMod 17-40 1027 Amar Rd Rooftop Wireless 04/24/2018 AUP 18-04 2750 E Larkhill Dr Single Family House 04/24/2018 06/11/2018 AUP 17-33 734 Donna Beth Ave AHQ 02/27/2018 05/14/2018 CUP 17-04 652 S Sunset Ave Beauty School 02/13/2018 CUP 17-19, AUP 17-39 1220 inspiration Pt Single Family House 12/12/2017 , J 02/08/2018 1 04/11/2018 04/11/2018 I Under Construction Project # Address Description of Project PC Approved Plan Check Plan Check PD Mod Submittal Approval Bldg. Permit Issued Construction Status CUP 17-18, PDMod 17- 34, AR 17- 02, AUP 17- 1129 West 41 Covina Pkwy Gaucho Grill, live entertainment, exterior remodel, outdoor seating & roof sign 12/12/2017 10/1912017 01/31/2018 ' 01/3112018 Under Construction V 17-09, AUP 17-32 1852 E Walnut Creek Pkwy 1227 S Orange Ave Front Setback/AHQ Water Tank Wireless Facility 12/12/2017 12/12/2017 02/13/2018 01/11/2018 04/05/2018 04/11/2018 04/05/2018 05/01/2018 -I CUP 17-15 CUP 17-14 1424 S Azusa Ave Tutoring/Dance Studio 12/12/2017 09/13/2017 05/15/2018 05/15/2018 TPM 74787, V 16-19 845 S Sunkist Ave 3-Lot Subdivision (No Addresses Assigned) 11/28/2017 Waiting for Recordation of Final Map AUP 17-24 3014 E. Cameron Ave Single Family House 11/28/2017 01/02/2018 06/12/2018 06/14/2018 PDMod 17- 39, AUP 17- 23 711 N Azusa Ave Building Remodel & On-Sale ABC 10/24/2017 V 17-5 2934 E Garvey Ave S Number of Wall Signs 10/24/2017 Sign Criteria Approved 212 Inspiration AUP 17-11 Pt Balcony 10/10/2017 12/13/2017 2016 E Garvey V 17-07 Ave S Wall Height 10/10/2017 11/13/2017 11/13/2017 CUP 17-17 AUP 17-31 2831 Skyview Ln Single Family House 09/26/2017 , 02/15/2018 Project # Address Description of Project PC , Approved ' PD Mod Plan Check Submittal Plan Check Approval Bldg. Permit Issued Construction Status PP 16-07, CUP 16-12, V 16-20, TRP 17-03 1400 West Covina Pkwy Assisted Living Facility 0912612017 01118/2018 Grading Approved 2/13/18 PP 16-02, AUP 17-26 1360W Garvey Ave S I New Bakery and Café 09/12/2017 04/2612017 01/18/2018 01/18/2018 Under Construction PDMod 17-17 1000 & 1050 Lakes Dr Adding Compact Parking 08/22/2017 04/02/2018 Expired CUP 17-13, AUP 17-19 1203 Inspiration Addition to Single-Family Pt House 08/22/2017 10/03/2017 11/06/2017 11/06/2017 Under Construction PP 17-03, V 17-03 2539 E Garvey N Site Remodel 08/22/2017 PDMod 14-05 501 S Vincent Ave Building Façade Remodel 08/08/2017 08/28/2017 04/25/2018 04/26/2018 Under Construction CUP 17-07 421 S Glendora Ave Tattooing Studio 08/08/2017 08/28/2017 04/24/2018 04/24/2018 Under Construction CUP 17-11 1200 Lakes Drive Off-Sale ABC 07/25/2017 CUP 14-15 1455 Queen Summit Addition to Single-Family House 07/11/2017 08/23/2017 04/18/2018 04/18/2018 Under Construction TPM 73142, CUP 17-05 & 17-05, AUP 16-16 & 16- 524 Barranca 54 Street 2-Lot Subdivision (524 S Barranca & 3017 E Cortez) 06/13/2017 10/19/2017 I Waiting for Recordation of Final Map CUP 16-14, AUP 16-41 3017 Hillside Dr Large Home 04/11/2017 08/30/2017 05/31/2018 05/31/2018 'Under Construction Project # Address Description of Project PC Approved PD Mod Plan Check Plan Check Submittal Approval Bldg. Permit Issued Construction Status TPM 74133, V 16-08 3-Lot Subdivision (2250 W 2222W Garvey Garvey, 1035 S Willow, 1039 Ave S Willow) 03/28/2017 07/31/2017 CUP 17-01, AUP 16-56 Addition to Single-Family 1321 Silverbirch House 03/14/2017 04/18/2017 07/19/2017 07/19/2017 Under Construction CUP 16-13 3201 E Cameron Ave Replace Building at Water Facility 03/14/2017 07/05/2017 11/08/2017 03/27/2018 Under Construction AUP 16-23 223 N Leland Ave MUSE & 2nd Story 01/24/2017 03/22/2017 12/06/2017 12/06/2017 Under Construction AUP 16-44 2730 Vanderhoof 1,361 sf Detached Garage 12/13/2016 03/06/2017 06/12/2017 06/12/2017 Under Construction AUP 16-19 1117 S Serena Dr Retaining Wall 10/11/2016 04/13/2017 06/13/2017 0/25/2017 PP 16-03, CUP 16-05, V 16-03 801 S Glendora Ave Remodel Service Station 08/23/2016 12/0512016 07/05/2017 07/05/2017 Under Construction AUP 15-43 927 S Van Horn Ave Addition to Single-Family House 07/26/2016 09/07/2016 11/04/2016 11/04/2016 Under Construction Subcommitte e for Design 15-46 916 E Michelle St Remodel & addition to Single- Family House , 05/10/2016 06/09/2016 09/07/2016 09/07/2016 Under Construction CUP 15-20, 100 Buckboard AUP 15-36 Cir Addition to Single-Family House 04/26/2016 09/22/2016 04/25/2017 05/01/2017 Under Construction PDMod 15-51 2934 E Garvey Ave S Remodel Exterior of Building 03/08/2016 & 8/23/2016 PDMod 18-15 approved 6/13/18 Project # Address PC Description of Project Approved PD Mod Plan Check Submittal Plan Check Approval Bldg. Permit Construction Issued Status PDMod 06-02 (CUP 05-13 & V 05-05) 1042 East ldahome Street Conversion of garage to Second Unit 02/23/2016 Convert garage back by 2/23/17 PP 14-05 835W Christopher St 02/09/2016 Construction of SEEK 1st Ext Education 2/9/18 12/21/2017 PP 14-01, CUP 14-05 1030 E. Merced Ave 12/08/2015 1st Ext - Expansion of Day Care 12/13/17 2nd Facility Ext -1/23/18 GPA 14-01, ZC 14-01, PP 14-03, CUP 14-20 & V 14- 23 1388 E Garvey Ave South 12/15/2015 lst Ext - 12/13/17 - 2nd Ext - Public storage facility 12/13/18 AUP 15-11 824 E Michelle Street Remodel of Single Family House 08/26/2015 01/14/2016 02/22/2017 02/22/2017 Under Construction PP 15-02, V 15-07 1773W San Bernardino Rd Completion of Prosperity Business Park 05/12/2015 03/05/2015 01/04/2016 01104/2016 Complete AUP 14-41 2736E Larkwood St 546 sf Detached Garage 04/28/2015 10/22/2015 12/17/2015 12/17/2015 Under Construction