Loading...
Resolution - 8348• • RESOLUTION NO. 8348 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT NO. 388 AND VARIANCE NO. 926 FOR A DETACHED SECOND -FAMILY UNIT ON A SINGLE-FAMILY LOT. (Martin Castille) WHEREAS, there were filed with the City of West Covina, verified applications on forms prescribed in Chapter 26, Article VI, of the West Covina Municipal Code, requiring approval of an unclassified use permit, to permit the following use: A detached second -family unit on a single-family lot and a variance to allow a driveway width of less than the required twelve feet, and a circular driveway on that certain property described.as follows: Lot 42 Tract 13865, in the City of West Covina, County of Los Angeles, State of California, as per map recorded in Book 291, Pages 41 thru 43 of Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County: and WHEREAS, a hearing on said applications was duly noticed and conducted by the Planning Commission on May 17, 1989, at which time the applications were denied, and; WHEREAS, the action of the Planning Commision was appealed by the applicant after proper legal notice to the June 12, 1989, City Council meeting for hearing and consideration, and; WHEREAS, studies and investigations made by the City Council and in its behalf reveal the following facts: 1. The applicant is requesting approval of an unclassified use permit for a detached second -family unit on a single-family lot at the above location in the Single -Family (R-1) Zone, Area District I. 2. The applicant is also requesting that the City Council review a circular driveway modification as provided in section 26-267 of the Municipal Code. 3. The circular driveway meets all requirements of section 26-402 and 26-402.5, and is eligible for approval as part of the unclassified use permit. 4. The existing 2,103 square foot single story first unit and garage are proposed to be moved from the front of the lot to the rear. 5. The 2,300 square foot, two story new unit and garage is proposed to be located on the front of the lot, 42 feet away from the first unit. 6. The applicant is also requesting a. variance from section 26-402 to allow an existing legal ten -foot, six inch driveway width to be relocated (along with the existing dwelling) to the rear of the lot. Res. No. 8348 UUP/338/VAR/926/CC - Castille - Page 2 of 8 • 7. The proposal meets or exceeds all the requirements of Chapter 26, Article XII, Division 11 of the West Covina Municipal Code (second -family units) and the R-1 Zone, Area District I. 8. Appropriate findings for approval of a variance are as follows: a. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances not applicable generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone. b. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. d. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. 9. Appropriate findings for approval of an unclassified use permit are as follows: a. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or community. b. That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. C. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and is so shaped as to accommodate said use, as well as, all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and any other features necessary to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood and make it compatible thereto. d. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and improvements to carry traffic generations typical of the proposed uses and that street patterns of such a nature exist as to guarantee that such generations will not be channeled through residential • areas on local residential streets. e. That the granting of such unclassified use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City, any other adopted plan of the City, or the adopted plan of any other governmental agency. Res. No. 8348 UUP/388/VAR/926/CC - Castille - Page 3 of 8 • 10. This project is categorically exempt, Class 3, in that it involves the construction of a detached single-family residence (second -unit) not in conjunction with the building of two or more such units. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of West Covina does resolve as follows: 1. On the basis*of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, the City Council makes the following findings for approval of a variance: a. That there are exceptional circumstances not generally applicable to other property in the vicinity and zone in that, due to the existing building and lot width, if the new second unit is to be visibile to Meeker Avenue for aesthetic purposes to enhance the character of the neighborhood, an existing legal substandard driveway width must be relocated with the old dwelling to the rear of the lot. b. That this variance is necessary to develop the site in a manner commensurate with other second -unit lots located in the single-family zone throughout the City. C. That the granting of a variance that allows the development of a project to enhance and preserve the character of the neighborhood will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located. d. That the granting of a variance that is instrumental in maintaining the character of the neighborhood, while developing a project declared by the State to be consistent with the General Plan, will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. 2. On the basis of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, the City Council makes the following findings for approval of an unclassified use permit: a. As declared by the California State Legislature, second units are necessary and desirable by: i. Providing a cost-effective means of serving development through the use of existing infrastructures, as contrasted to requiring the construction of new costly infrastructures to serve development in undeveloped areas. • ii. Providing relatively affordable housing for low - and moderate -income households without public subsidy. Res. No. 8348 UUP/388/VAR/926/CC - Castille - Page 4 of 8 • iii. Providing a means for purchasers of new or existing homes, or both, to meet payments on high -interest loans. iv. Providing security for homeowners who fear both criminal intrusion and personal accidents while alone. b. The proposed second unit will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity since this project, located in a residential area, abides by, all regulations of the R-1 Zone. c. Being under the maximum 35 percent building coverage allowed by Section 26-411, the site is adequate in size and so shaped as to accommodate a second unit. d. The site fronts on Meeker Avenue, in close proximity to Merced Avenue a minor arterial which is adequate in width to carry traffic generated by a dwelling unit, and traffic will not be channeled through other residential areas on local residential streets. e. Section 65852.2 of the California Governmental Code declares that a second residential unit shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located and shall be deemed to be consistent with the existing General Plan and zoning designations for the lot. 3. That pursuant to all of the evidence presented, both oral and documentary, and further based on the findings above, Unclassified Use Permit No. 388 and Variance No. 926 are 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 unclassified use permit 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 a Certificate of Occupancy is issued, and the violation of any of which shall be grounds for revocation of said Unclassified Use Permit by the Planning Commission or City Council. 4. The Unclassified Use Permit shall not be effective for any purpose until the owner of the property involved (or his 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 Unclassified Use Permit as set forth below. 5. That the approval of the Unclassified Use Permit is subject to the following conditions: a. Comply with Study Plan "A", dated May 17, 1989. b. Comply with Exhibits 1 and 2 (elevations and floor plan). Res. No. 8348 UUP/388/VAR/926/CC - Castille - Page 5 of 8 • C. The second unit may be rented but shall not be sold except in conjunction with the entire lot and the first unit. d. The unclassified use permit for a second unit shall become null and void upon transfer of ownership of the subject property before the unclassified use permit vests. e. Comply with Chapter 7 of the Municipal Code and all applicable building codes adopted by the City of West Covina which apply to additions and construction of single-family dwellings shall apply to second units. f. Adequate water and sewer services shall be available or supplied by the applicant of the unclassified use permit for a second unit. g. Establishment of the second unit shall not impact traffic flow in the vicinity. h. The following showings required for an unclassified use permit shall not be violated: i. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well-being of the neighborhood or community. ii. That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. iii. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and is so shaped as to accommodate said use, as well as all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, landscaping and'any other features necessary to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood and make it compatible thereto. iv. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and improvements to carry traffic generations typical of the proposed uses and that street patterns of such a nature exist as to guarantee that such generations will not be channeled through residential areas on local residential streets. V. That the granting of such unclassified use permit . will not adversely affect the General Plan _ adopted by the City, or the adopted plan of any other governmental agency. i. Letting of rooms as permitted in Section 26-673(c) of the West Covina Municipal Code is prohibited in both units on this second -unit lot. Res. No. 8348 UUP/388/VAR/926/CC - Castille - Page 6 of 8 • j. A park fee shall be paid to the City of West Covina prior to issuance of building permits, pursuant to Section 26-204 of the Municipal Code. k. Engineering Department Requirements: i. Comply with all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 567. ii. Sanitary sewers shall be provided to each "lot" in compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 23, Article 2, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. iii. Four -foot wide sidewalks shall be constructed along Meeker to join any existing sidewalks adjacent to property line.. iv. Adequate provision shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. V. Parking lot and driveway improvements on private property shall comply with Planning Commission Resolution No. 2513 and be constructed to the City of West Covina Standards. vi. Water service facilities shall be constructed to at least meet the requirements for fire flow established by the City's Fire Department and the requirements of the subsequent water purveyor/owner of the facilities. vii. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, all of the following requirements shall be satisfied: a. A final grading and drainage plan showing existing and proposed elevations and drainage structures and showing existing and proposed on -site and off -site improvements shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning, Building and Engineering Departments. b. Arrangements for the installation of street lights with underground wiring shall be made with Southern California Edison Company. At the time of installation, the applicant shall provide the necessary trenching and backfill. Submit two sets of the subdivision and/or development plan to the Engineering Department, Traffic and Lighting Section, to be used for designing • the street lighting system. Res. No. 8348 UUP/388/VAR/926/CC - Castille - Page 7 of 8 . C. 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 City Engineer and Planning Director. d. An itemized cost estimate for all on -site and off -site improvements to be constructed, except buildings, shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for approval. Based upon the approved cost estimates, required fees shall be paid and improvement securities for all on -site and off -site improvements, except buildings, and 100% labor/material securities for all off -site improvements, shall be posted prior to final approval of the plans. 1. Building Department Requirements a. Comply with all requirements of the following Codes of the City and State: i. 1985 Uniform Building Code ii. 1985 Uniform Plumbing Code iii. 1985 Uniform Mechanical Code iv. 1987 National Electric Code V. Title 24 State of California Energy/Insulation Regulations and Handicapped Persons Standards. vi. West Covina Security Ordinance M. Fire Department Requirements: i. Steamer fire hydrants (21" x 4" outlets) - James Jones model 3700. Provide 1 new fire hydrant S/E corner of Meeker and Merced. ii. Water system as specified. iii. Fire hydrants on plan to be flushed and painted by contractor or developer before Fire Department acceptance. iv. Both hydrant outlet openings shall form a 450 angle with curb face. V. Center of hydrant head outlet openings to be 18" - 36" above finish grade. • vi. On -site water serviceable hydrants to be provided by developer before framing started. Hydrants to be provided as development progresses supplied with water. Res. No. 8348 UUP/388/VAR/926/CC - Castille - Page 8 of 8 vii. Water mains and hydrants to be installed as per City of West Covina Water Department Standards or AWWA Standards. See C600, "AWWA Standard for Installation of Cast Iron Water Mains", and AWWA Manual M17, "Installation, Operation and Maintenance of Fire Hydrants", and AWWA C503-75 "Wet Barrel Fire Hydrants". viii. Water requirements are as specified. ix. Fire hydrants shall be capable of providing a minimum 1000 gpm fire flow. A verification letter from water company shall be submitted to Fire Department. n. Police Department Requirements: No requirements. 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 12th day of June, 1989. ATTEST: Aj City Clerk I, Janet Berry, City Clerk of the City of West Covina, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of West Covina at the regular meeting of June 12, 1989. The votes cast for approving Unclassified Use Permit No. 388 were as follows: AYES: Councilmembers: Tarozzi, McFadden, Manners, Bacon NOES: Councilmembers: Lewis ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None The votes cast for approving Variance No. 926 were as follows: AYES: Councilmembers: Tarozzi, McFadden, Planners NOES: Councilmembers: Lewis, Bacon ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None City Clerk Janet rry APPROVED AS TO FORM: