Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1271 . v.-.-:;:;;....i-"'.:.. . . - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1271 A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-19 TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A 97 UNIT RETIREMENT HOTEL AT 601 SUNSET BOULEVARD. WHEREAS, on August 6, 1984, an application was filed by Berger-Socoloske to construct a 97 unit retirement hotel, Planning Department Case No. 84-19, on property commonly known as 601 Sunset Boulevard, more particularly described as follows: Portion of Lot 3, Tract 14846 in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles State of California, as recorded in Map Book 241, Pages 8-9 of Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said County. WHEREAS, public hearings were held on August 28 and September 25, 1984 at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard . and to present evidence; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the entire record of the proceeding including the staff report, plans, artistic renderings, letters, petitions and testimony; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the factual data submitted by the Planning Department in the attached report is true and correct. Section 2. This Commission finds: 1. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the pUblic health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity because the use is residential in nature and will supplant an abandoned service station adjacent to a residential zone. 2. That the use applied for at the location indicated is properly one for which a Conditional Use Pennit is authorized in that the zoning code permits such uses subject to conditions that are imposed on the use, as set forth in Section 3 following, which conditions address and mitigate various . potential problems that relate to subject use. ~ "l.. .~...~ - . . . . 3. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use, and all yards, spaces, walls, fences, parking, loading, landscaping and other features required to adjust said use with the land and uses in the neighborhood because this use provides a transition between the adjacent commercial property and the surrounding residential property; the proposed building has setbacks along Michillinda Avenue and Sunset Boulevard which are not normally found in the commercial zone and these setbacks will be landscaped along with an interior courtyard area; and that based upon the parki ng requi rements and needs of the two exi sti ng reti rement facil i ties in the City there is adequate on-site parking to accommodate this use. 4. That the site abuts streets and highways adequate in width and paveJrent type to carry the ki nd of traffic generated by the proposed use because Sunset Boulevard is a major arterial in the City and Michillinda Avenue is a secondary arteri al and based upon the limited amount of traffic generated by the existing retirement facilities in the City, it was the Planning Commission's opinion that this type of use would be less intense than a commercial activity on the site and would generate less traffic volume. 5. That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because this quasi-residential use is less intense than a commercial use. 6. That the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the environment because it is less intense than a commercial use, will generate less traffic than a commercial use and SUbject to the conditions set forth in Section 3 following, will have minimal impact on the environment. 7. That this is a desirable project and would have the least impact on the nei ghborhood. Section 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission grants a conditional u.se permit to construct a 97 unit retirement hotel upon the followi ng condi tions: 1. That the conditions as outlined in the attached report from the Department of Public Works shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 2. That fire safety shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Fire Chi ef. -2- 1271 '.,... _r- - . . . . . 3. That a modification shall be granted for 4D parking spaces in lieu of 117 parking spaces required. 4. That the minimum age for residency in this facility shall be 60 years and a covenant or other required documentation as specified by the City Attorney shall be filed .guaranteeing that the minimum age of residents shall be 60 years. 5. That exiting from the driveways located on Sunset Boulevard and Michilli nda Avenue shall be restricted and posted for "right turn only". 6. That a security gate shall be provided in the subterranean garage. 7. That a maximum of 117 peopl e shall reside on the property at anyone. time and a covenant or other required documentation as specified by the City Attorney shall be fil ed guaranteei ng that the maximum occupancy shall not exceed 117 persons. 8. That the setback along Sunset Boul evard shall be a mi nimum of 12' to 14' from the property line. 9. That the rental peri od for a un i t shall be a mi nimum of one week and the City shall be entitled to review a rental agreement upon request. 10. That a limousine service or comparable transportation service shall be provided on a permanent basis to the residents. 11. That the planting area along Sunset Boulevard shall be densely landscaped; said landscape material shall be SUbject to the review and approval of the Planning Department. 12. That the wi ndows in the units along Sunset Boulevard shall be doub 1 e-gl azed. 13. That C.U.P. 84-19 shall not take effect until the owner and applicant have executed a form available at the Planning Departlrent indicating awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. Sectio~4. The decision, findings and conditions contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of September 25, 1984 and the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner Dixon Commissioners Fee, Hedlund, Szany, Wells, Harbicht Commissioner Jahnke -3- 1271 t . ~ ,> . . Section 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the Ci ty of Arcadi a. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeti ng of the Planni ng Commi ssion hel d on the 9th day of October, 1984 by the fo 11 owi ng vote: AYES Commissioners Dixon, Fee, Hedlund, Szany, Harbicht NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Jahnke, Wells ~..,....--/ // '//" ~<-(> /?d5/Z-?:~ Chairman, Planning Commission City of Arcadia ATTEST: /ty jJl/lnul!J!JIJ!/l/iL Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadi a -4- 1271 . . . ------~. .. '~~,,:. November 20, 1984 TO: FR()t; SUBJECT. ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL PLANNING DEPARTMENT DONNA L. BUTLER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 1271 601 SUNSET BOULEVARD The Planning Commission at its October 9, 1984 meeting voted 5 to 0 with two members absent to adopt Resolution 1271 granting Conditional Use Permit 84-19 to construct and operate a 97 unit retirement hotel at 601 Sunset Boulevard. On October 16, an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision was filed by residents in the area. A public hearing on this application has been scheduled for tonight's meeting. This application was filed by Phillip Berger and Saul Socoloske who will construct and operate the proJect; the property is owned by Maiar Brewi ng company. The proposed 52,500 sq. ft. retirement facility will be two and three stories in height. Each of the living units will contain 370 sq ft. of floor area. There will be a central dining area for the residents. Forty parki ng spaces are provided; 36 of these spaces will be1n a subterranean garage and four spaces will be located along the Michillinda Avenue side. The Planning Commission in its findings noted that: (1) this proposed project would provide a transition between the adjacent commercial property and the surrounding residential property; and (2) the use applied for will not have a substantial adverse impact on the neighborhood or environment because it is less intense than a commercial use, will generate less traffic than a commercial use and SUbJect to the conditions set forth in the resolution will have a minimal impact on the environment and the neighborhood. Attached for your cons iderat ion are the letter of appeal, a letter and survey from Phillip Berger dated November 9, 1984, a petition from residents in the area in opposi t ion to the proposed project, a copy of the August 28 and September 25, 19~ Planning Commission minutes, Resolution 1271 and the staff report. . . . P. C. Resolution 1271 Ci ty Council Report November 20, 1984 Page 2 > FINDINGS AND MOTIONS Approval If the City Council intends to take action to approve this proJect, the Council should move to approve and file the Negatlve Declaration and find that the proJect will not have a significant effect on the environment and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution incorporating the specific findings and conditions of approval set forth in the staff report (or as modified by the Council). Deni al If the City Council intends to take action to deny this prOJect, the Council should move to deny and direct staff to prepare an appropriate resolution incorporting the Council's decision and findings in support of that decision. e PLEASE SEE STAFF REPORT FOR PETITIONS PRESENTED . ~- e . . . ~ -\ '" .,.... /~ / ,/ / A 'v October 10. 1984 > . Arcadia City Council c/o City Clerk City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Arcadia, California Drive 91006 Re: C.U.P. 84-19 Application for Conditional Use Permit to construct a 97 unit Senior Citizen Retirement Hotel and related parking modifications. Location: 601 Sunset Boulevard - The intersection of Sunset and Michillinda Avenue behind the May Co. We, the undersigned, as homeowners and residents of property located in the immediate vicinity of the above location, wish to appeal the decision of the Arcadia City Planning Commission wherein it granted a Conditional Use Permit in the above referenced application. We wish to appeal the granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the following reasons: Negative Declaration The Arcadia City Planning Commission has approved the filing of a Negative Declaration with respect to the proposed project. The Commission has decided that the project would not have a significant impact on the environment. We believe this to be inappropriate. An Environmental Impact Report should be required. It is our belief that the following important questions, among others, from the Environmental Checklist Form have not been properly addressed: 1) Will the proposal affect existing housing? We believe strongly that it will. We and others in the neighborhood believe that it will cause a significant decrease in our property values. 2) Will the proposal result in exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, etc? The project is being proposed for property in a Special Studies Zone, i.e. an earthquake fault. A preliminary geological study was made. However, a more thorough study should be made before building a project of such high density. ~..'J,:,,").!J'" .t~.;ll:-, rest 9 T 1JO .~ ::I ^ I ::I ;,) ::I ~ . , . . . Arcadia City Council -2- October 10, 1984 3) Will the proposal cause the generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? You know as well as we do, that this is a very busy intersection and one that has a continued history of accidents. We have been informed that, on an average, approximately 15,000 people travel daily on Sunset between Huntington and Michillinda. The proposal provides that cars will enter the underground lot from Sunset Avenue approximately 190 feet from the intersection. Because of the relatively short distance between the intersection and the May Co. loading docks, the driveway is, of necessity, a sharp, right turn from Sunset Avenue with an immediate sharp, right turn into the parking lot. This will cause cars entering the lot to have to slow greatly in order to enter safely. This will cause a traffic hazard on Sunset Avenue. This would also be dangerous to the residents of the project due to the high- speed traffic on California, Sunset and Michillinda. 4) Will the proposal result in the creation of objectionable odors? Yes. They will have a dining hall operating three times a day, seven days a week, to feed up to 117 people. This can only produce odors. Anyone that lives near a restaurant can tell you that these odors can be very objectionable at times. 5) Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area. Very definitely it will. This property is zoned C-2, commercial. It was not intended that this property be used a high density residential. 6) Will the proposal result in a need for new or altered fire protection or police protection services? It is very possible that it will. 7) Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population of an area? This proposal will allow up to 117 people on approximately 50,000 square feet of land or approximately one person on every 427 square feet of land. This definitely alters the distribution and density of the human population in this area. As you can see, a number of questions are raised by this proposed project. We believe that it is time, in cases such as this, that the City begin requiring a complete Environmental Impact Report. Arcadia City Council -3- October 10, 1984 . Zoning The proposed project is to be built upon property which is zoned C-2, General Commercial and not upon property zoned for residential usage. As was told by the developer at the prior hearings, this will not be a "hotel" but will be residential. The residents will normally lease the units on a ~ . month-to-month lease. There will not be the transient traffic normal to a "hotel". We have been informed that the name of the proposed project includes the word "hotel" so as to fit into the C-2 commercial zoning requirements. This is an attempt to circumvent the previously intended usage of the property through the use of semantics. A residential project was not the intended usage of that property. Additionally, this project would not meet the requirements of an R-3, Multi-Family residential zoning due to the high density of the residential units of this project. The Planning Department has indicated that a similar project has been previously built in a C-Z zoned area. That may be, but, just because it has been done before does not make it right to do it again. The C-2 zoning allows a hotel with a Conditional Use Permit. This is not a hotel by any definition. It is a residential project. If a residential project is to be put on that property, then the applicant should apply for a zoning change and should comply with the residential zoning requirements. Density . As was stated by Commissioner Jahnke at the Planning Commission's public hearing, this project is "too dense for that corner and area". We totally agree with Commissioner Jahnke. As he also said, "this project is busting at the seams". The applicant is trying to cram too much into a small area. We in the neighborhood believe that this is detrimental to the neighborhood and to the City of Arcadia. Unsound Project Will this project work? The developer indicated that they plan to charge $1,000 to $1,100 per month rent to the residents. We are to expect the residents of this project to pay these amounts for small and crowded units which are close to heavy traffic (which they can't help but hear). The set back is only 12 to 14 feet. If they can't fill the project, what becomes of it? Are we going to have a large "white elephant" on that corner? Personally, we would rather see the deserted gas station.than a "white elephant". The developer has not been willing to discuss the logistics of the project with us and has been informed by the State of California that in no way would it be able to meet the requirements of a licensed board and care facility. Therefore, there is speculation as to whether May Co. will again make a "mistake" in putting this land to use. Privacy . The.homeowne:s ~ho~e property backs up onto Sunset and those that face the proJe~t on M~ch~ll~n~a face an invasion of their rights as to privacy. The s~des of the proJect that face Michillinda Avenue and Sunset will have, Arcadia City Council -4- October 10, 1984 . in addition to normal windows, a balcony for every two units. Those whose backyards are on Sunset will lose all privacy normally expected in a person's backyard and house. Any person in a room or on a balcony on the second floor will look into the backyards and houses of those on Sunset. They will also look into the front yards and houses of those on Michillinda Avenue. ~ -In summary, we are opposed to the granting of this Conditional Use Permit because we believe the proposal to be an improper use of the property. We believe that the proposal is in conflict with the zoning, a Negative Declaration is inappropriate and an Environmental Impact Report should be required as all issues have not been properly addressed. We also believe that the proposed project is unsound and will result in an invasion of the privacy rights of the neighboring homes. For the above reasons, we request that the Arcadia City Council reverse the decision of the Arcadia City Planning Commission and deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit. . YltIIf;lf~ :( !ri({\ c'; (~:~S!,I, 1h6fv {'~ prest4ent The ~nta Anita Viii e sociation , 5"/ S"' (!" /v.... ~,... Rei tt..../.',c '100 C .5/)" L'D/"-1,/~ Rd A-Yc~..L~ (!.. It/' 9100.b 85.s- G /2J ,.,;.4 P. p;1. AI" .f<> ,.4., cA f Ie>t:) C Cj I Y ,fj J...L -.v tu u.:f:. Ih..-<-" 1< ~ J . G.. - c:; 10 Cl0 I A-~~ 07 /tiie-f ~{itUJ; ~AJ t:to~ ~1/~LcYtz /yk/-~ J11-v~l-t/t- StPS--- (''''''''''''if/A- ~ ,41rc-dll:> - ('4- tp/Nl t: ~ S (!~I..v.uI:ua r;eJ. )h(1/Jru'a / 1!4t1' 9/IJ!Jh (0) (. rJ.u-P/"J.- /2~, A vc~ .(,~ 1- C ~ Y '7 / ...., j t;"t) L,{..~j.., fllW<- /~V(."\~~ Lit. ~ /0- b . November 9, 1984 . City of Arcadia Planning Dept. 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, CA 91006 ;:: C .~ 1 -,; ;.;. .. 1 ~,~ ,.. I~d" Attn: Donna L. Butler r'-Y OF ARCAD..1" '~~"_A~":>:~~.\G \"""',,:,,"",:": RE: CUP 84-19 Dear Donna, . Our last conversation voiced some valid con- cerns that the Council might address in their hear- ing of Nov. 20th. In anticipation of their questions, we have updated our market research of Sept. 17, 1984, as to density, room size and street traffic count of existing facilities in the areas surround- ing our proposed project. The room sizes in our project seem to be consistently larger than the pro- jects investigated. Density at our site would be less than a majority of the sites investigated and the traf- fic count in front of our site was significantly less than the traffic count at over half the sites checked. If you can think of any other factual data that might be useful to the Council, please let me know. Very truly yours, /~,~~~~ Phillip M. Berger PMB: j n . LAND. DEVELOPMENT. MANAGEMENT 21S15 Vanowen SUee' . Suite 201' Canoga Park. CA 91303. (818\703.7724 , \ , &ADIA '.SADENA I MISSILe ARCADIA. I SANTA ANITA PLAZA. ARCADIA INN ARCADIA RETIRE- CASA MANOR OF! PASADENA GARDENS MENT HOTEL VILLA VILLA RETIREMENT CENTER DEL MAR REGENCY j ., NUMBER 160 ( 57 107 60 149 142 94 Present 64 97 OF ROOMS I i 25 Under Const. Total 119 USABLE 11' X 16' 16' X 16' 14' X 18' 16' X 17' 2 ' X 17 16' X 16' 14' X 14' 12' X 14' 18' X 14 '/9' X ROOM SIZE J..76 sq. ft. 256'1 sq. ft. 252 sq. 272 sq. ft. 04 sq. 256 sq. 196 sq. ft. 168 sq. 310 sq. f ft. ft. ft. ft. ft. TOTAL 239 sq. ft. 286 sq. ft. 282 307 sq. ft. 34 291 239 ft. 213 370 sq. ft. SUITE SIZE sq. sq. sq. sq. sq. ft. ft. ft. ft. PROPERTY 17,800 sq. 33,'390 ft. 87,327 33,600 ft. 7,978 38,000 * 110,200 28,000 50,000 sq. SIZE sq. sq. sq. sq. sq ft. ft. q. ft. sq. ft. ft. ft ft. SURFACE UNDERGROUND + PARKING SIZE -0- -0- 11,837 sq. 9,200 sq. ft. 6,800 15,000 * UNDERGROm D 1,000 sq. ft. ft. . q. ft. sq. ft. ON SURFACE. I NET AREA FOR BUILDING 17,800 sq. . 27,400 sq. ft. 75,490 sq. 24,400 sq. ft. 131,178 23,000 * 28,000 sq. 49,000 sq. ft. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. ft. ft. , DENSITY : (ROOMS/ACRE 392 Rooms 7j4 Rooms 54 Rooms 78 Rooms 35 Room~ 163 Rooms * 100 Rooms 90 Rooms W/PARKING) per acre per acre per acre per acre er acre per acre per acre per acre I DENSITY I (ROOMS/ACRE 392 Rooms 74 Rooms 62 Rooms 107 Rooms 08 Room~ 269 Rooms * 1100 . Rooms 91 Rooms , W/O PARKING) per .acre per acre lPer acre per acre er acre per acre per per acre acre I NUMBER OF 1\ RESIDENTS 13 UNKNOWN 17 23 21 UNKNOWN UNAVAILABLE 11 UNKNOWN W/CARS I , 7 ' , ( * I THIS FACILITY IS PART pF A TOTAL COMPLEX WHICH INCLUDES A CONVALESCENT HOSPITAL AND RETIREMENT CENTER. SINCE FACILITIES ARE TIED TOGETHER AS ONE, PARKING ALLOWED FOR RETIREMENT CENTER IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE. RETIREMENT HOTEL ANALYSIS . Pasadena Pasadena Manor 9/j0 E. Colorado Blvd. Pasadena, CA Number of Rooms 160 Usable Room Size 11' X 16' 176 sq. ft. 239 sq. ft. Total Suite Size plus bath 5'x6' (Incl. Closet & Bath) plus c1os. 3'x5' plus hall 6'x3' Property Size 17,800 sq. ft. Surface Parking Size (parking in adjacent structure across alley) -0- . Net Area for Building (Landscape & Appropriate Setbacks) Density (Rooms per Acre w/Parking) Density (Rooms per Acre w/out Parking) 17 , 800 sq. ft. 392 rooms per acre N/A Number of Residents with Cars 13 COMMENTS Building is an 8 story high rise with a parking structure across alley. Was originally a hotel and has been converted. 198/j Traffic Count (per city of Pasadena Public Works) on Colorado Blvd. Eastbound is 25,600 cars per 2/j hour period and Westbound is 35,100 cars per 2/j hour period. . RETIREMENT HOTEL ANALYSIS . Pasadena Arcadia Inn of Pasadena 811 E. Washington Blvd. Pasadena, CA Number of Rooms 57 Usable Room Size 16' X 16' 256 sq. ft. Total Suite Size plus Bath 5'x6',Closet (Incl. Closet & Bath) includ. in rm. 286 sq. ft. Property Size 33,390 sq.ft. Surface Parking Size -0- Net Area for Building (Landscape & Appropriate Setbacks) 27,400 sq.ft. . Density (Rooms per Acre w IParking) Density (Rooms per Acre w/out Parking) none 74 rooms per acre Number of Residents with Cars Unknown COMMENTS Located on heavy traffic street, with only curb parking. Older 1 story bunglllow style. No parking on site. 1984 Traffic Count, (per city of Pasadena, Public Works, Scott Fabbro 405-4191) on Washington Blvd. is Eastbound-16,600 cars per 25 hour period and Westbound - 13.300 cars per 24 hour period. . RETIREMENT HOTEL ANALYSIS . ARCADIA Arcadia Gardens 720 W. Camino Real Arcadia, CA Number of Rooms 107 Usable Room Size (14' X 18') 252 sq.ft. 282 sq.ft. Total Suite Size Plus 5'x6' bath,closet ( I ncl. Closet & Bath) includ. in room Surface Parking Size 87,327 sq.ft. 11,837 sq.ft. Property Size . Net Area for Building (Landscape & Appropriate Setbacks) Density (Rooms per Acre w IParking) Density (Rooms per Acre w/out Parking) 75,490 sq.ft. 54 rms per acre 62 rms per acre Number of Residents with Cars 17 COMMENTS Original City Council Resolution, June 4, 1963, gave approval to construct 129 rooms. Present site has underground parking as well as parking lot next to residential. Surface parking lot is not used. Located on quiet residential street facing and adjoining to the west residential properties. Had the project been built as per approval of 129 rooms the density would be: 74 rooms per acre w Iparking 65 rooms per acre w lout parking . RETIREMENT HOTEL ANALYSIS . ARCADIA Arcadia Retirement Hotel 753 W. Duarte Road Arcadia, CA - Number of Rooms 60 - Usable Room Size (16' X 17') 272 sq. ft. 307 sq. ft. Total Suite Size Plus 5'x7' bath (Incl. Closet & Bath) c1os. incl. in rm. - Property Size 33,600 sq. ft. 9,200 sq.ft. - Surface Parking Size . - Net Area for Building (Landscape & Appropriate Setbacks) - Density (Rooms per Acre w (Parking) Density (Rooms per Acre w lout Parking) 24,400 sq. ft. 78 rms. per acre 107 rms. per acre - Number of Residents with Cars 23 COMMENTS Located on a very heavily traveled street with an entrance driveway that is very difficult to get in and out because of the speed of traffic. This hotel is located In a commercial zone C-2D between a 2 story bank building and a 3 story office building. Rear of property (parking area) abuts expensive condominiums and apartments. 1983 Traffic Count (Arcadia Engineering Dept. Ramero Conzales) East on Duarte Is 8,800 cars per 24 hour period. Westbound Is 9,900 cars per 24 hour period. . RETIREMENT HOTEL ANALYSIS . ARCADIA - Arcadia Regency 601 Sunset Arcadia, CA Number of Rooms 97 - Total Suite Size Plus bath 6'x 1 0' (Incl. Closet & Bath) closet 310 sq. ft. 370 sq.ft. - Usable Room Size Property Size 50,000 sq. ft. 1, 000 sq. ft. Surface Parking Size Net Area for Building (Landscape & Appropriate Setbacks) 49,000 . Density (Rooms per Acre w /Parking) 90 rooms per acre Density (Rooms per Acre w/out Parking) 91 rooms per acre Number of Residents with Cars Unknown COMMENTS 1983 Traffic Count - (Arcadia Engineering Dept.) Michilinda Northbound 2990 cars per 24 hour period Southbound 3185 cars per 24 hour period Sunset Eastbound Westbound 6780 cars per 24 hour period 7050 cars per 24 hour period . RETIREMENT HOTEL ANALYSIS . PASADENA Casa Villa 925 E. Villa Pasadena, CA Number of Rooms 149 Usable Room Size (12' x 17') 204 sq. ft. 234 sq. ft. Total Suite Size Plus bath 5'x6' (Incl. Closet & Bath) closet incl.in rm. Property Size 47,978 sq.ft. 16,800 sq.ft. Surface Parking Size Net Area for Building (Landscape & Appropriate Setbacks) 31. 178 sq. ft. . Density (Rooms per Acre w /Parking) Density (Rooms per Acre w/out Parking) 135 Rms per acre 208 rms per acre Number of Residents with Cars 21 COMMENTS North borders single family residence, East across Mentor is single family residences. Surface parking is in rear adjoining single family houses. 50% of parking is 3 cars in tandum, rest single stalls. . RETIREMENT HOTEL ANALYSIS . SAN GABRIEL Mission Villa 901 W. Santa Anita San Gabriel, CA - Number of Rooms 142 - Usable Room Size ( 16'x16') 256 sq. ft. 291 sq. ft. Total Suite Size Plus S'x 7' bath (Incl. Closet & Bath) Closet incl. in rm. Property Size 38,000 sq. ft. 15,000 sq. ft. Surface Parking Size Net Area for Building (Landscape & Appropriate Setbacks) 23,000 sq.ft. Q Density (Rooms per Acre w/Parking) 163 rms per acre Density (Rooms per Acre w/out Parking) 269 rms per acre Number of Residents with Cars COMMENTS Property located on heavy traveled street (traffic count on Junipero Serra is 14,500 cars per 24 hour) and Is within 200 feet of a main line of Southern Pacific Rail Road. The train count (freight) is 10-12 trains per day of 75 to 100 cars. (Mr. Buckley 213629-6161 - Chief Dispatcher S.P.R.R.) .. RETIREMENT HOTEL ANALYSIS . TEMPLE CITY Santa Anita Retirement Center 5600 Gracewood Avenue Temple City, CA Number of Rooms Usable Room Size (14' x' 14') 94 present; 2S under constr. Total = 119 196 sq. ft. Total Suite Size Plus bath S'x7'} (Incl. Closet & Bath) Closet 3'x6'} 239 sq. ft. Property Size 110,200 · Surface Parking Size . Net Area for Building (Landscape & Appropriate Setbacks) . . Density (Rooms per Acre w IParking) Density (Rooms per Acre w/out Parking) . . Number of Residents with Cars Unavailable COMMENTS · This facility is part of a total complex which includes a convalescent hospital and retirement center. Since facilities are tied together as one, parking allowed for retirement center is impossible to determine. . RETIREMENT HOTEL ANALVSIS . PASADENA Plaza Del Mar 990 E. Del Mar Pasadena, CA - Number of Rooms 64 - Usable Room Size 12' x 14' 168 sq. ft. 213 sq.ft. - Total Suite Size plus S'x6' bath (Incl. Closet & Bath\;>lus 2.Sx6' closet - Property Size 28,000 sq.ft. Surface Parking Size underground . Net Area for Building (Landscape & Appropriate Setbacks) Density (Rooms per Acre w/Parklng) Density (Rooms per Acre w lout Parking) 28,000 sq. ft. 100 rms per acre same (underground) Number of Residents with Cars 11 COMMENTS Building located on heavy traveled street. Has subterranean parking for 32 cars, This is a first class facility similar to Arcadia Regency without a pool. 1984 traffic count (per City of Pasadena Public Works) East on Del Mar Is 1',300 cars per 24 hour period and West is 20,400 ca rs per 24 hou r period. . . . . PUBLIC HEARING C.U.P. 84-19 601 Sunset Boulevard Consideration of a request to construct a 97 unit retirement hotel. The staff report was presented; staff noted that a letter in opposition had been received from Mr. and Mrs. Donald Moore, and a telephone call from Mr. Jack Hartness at 861 Michillfnda Avenue objecting to the project. Commissioner Jahnke remarked that in the staff report, Page 3, third paragraph, the sentence beginning "This parking requirement is excessive..." should read "It is staff's opinion that this parking requirement is excessive" as he did not bel i eve any official body had so rul ed. In answer to questions from the Commission, staff advised the following: 1. Reported that at the Arcadia Gardens Retirement Hotel on Camino Real although they have been in this area numerous times they have never seen the parking lots on the east and west sides of the building full, with a total of 57 available on-site parking spaces and 105 rooms. Reported that at the Arcadia Retirement Hotel on Duarte Road with 60 rooms has 24 onsite parking spaces, observations have been made of 14 cars and one time and another time 16 cars in the lot. 2. Verified there is no stopping or parking on Sunset or Michillinda in the project area. 3. Verified that the limousine will pickup and deliver passengers at the main entrance of the facility on Michillinda Avenue, recommending the Commission inquire of the applicant where the vehicle will be parked when not in use. 4. Stated the security gate will be located at the bottom of the driveway, length of the driveway not shown on plans. August 28, 1984 Page 2 . . . The public hearing was opened. Mr. Greg Taylor, 14148 Magnolia Street, Sherman Oaks, represented the applf cant. Mr. T~lor said that they were presenting a redesigned project and he would address only the redesigned measures as the project was basically covered at a previous meeting. He canmented on the reduction from 103 to 97 units,with the ~~tatement that it takes approximately 85 units to cover construction costs and maintenance, the balance of the units on a project are expected to show the profit and take care of the vacancy factor. He stated this project is totally privately financed, no subsidies. The biggest change was the inclusion of subterranean parking area, for 36 vehicles, on-site, with 4 surface spaces includin9 1 handicap'space. The number of spaces is reduced by 2 from the original proposal, proportionate to the reduction in number of units. The applicant will have security gates installed on this subterranean parking. Mr. Taylor noted that the limousine will be parked in the subterranean parking when not in use, as will all employees' and residents' vehicles. They will have an attendant to do this parking if someone needs this service. In the redesign process the applicant has set the third story of the building back from the street side, orienting it to the interior court, with no windows but high ones above the visual level for the admission of light only. A line- of-sight study was made from the position of an individual standing inside a second story window. This line-of-sight study indicates that because of grade differences between the project and the homes across the street, and the high walls which surround their back yards, no one at the project can see into the back yards of those residences. Mr. Taylor pointed out that there is a major highway between the proposed project and residential property, both the R-l and the R-3, with a distance of almost one hundred feet between the proposed project and the property lines of the homes. The project also now includes the demolition of the existing tire shop, with a dining and recreational facility to be built in its place. Mr. Joseph Weiss, 9005 Cynthia Street, Los Angeles, also spoke for the appl ication. Questions from staff to Mr. Weiss established the following: 1. The applicant would be agreeable to setting 65 as a minimum age requi rement. 2. The applicant would be agreeable to having a covenant to the effect that there would be no less than a monthly rental periOd. Mr Weiss stated the contract they would be using states there is a month to month rental situation. He also remarked that if a resident is forced to leave because of illness and go to a hospital of some kind money is refunded to the individual. August 28, 1984 Page 3 . . . The applicant's facility at Riverside has at present 64 rooms, they are in the process of adding 55 more with 49 parking spaces; their facility at Garden Grove is an 81 room facility and they have 16 on- site parking spaces there. 4. It was established that a visitor to the proposed facility would park in the surface spaces if they were available, if not in the subterranean parki ng, with the gate open during that time. 3. Mr. Weiss also remarked it might be possible to issue cards/keys/clickers to those eligible for access to the secured area. He also estimated, from experience at their other facilities, that an average of 7 to 12 daily visitors could be expected. Mr. 8urger, one of the partners in the project, wished to emphasize to the Commission that while there will be a number exits per the fire department's requirement, the only entrance used normally for the units will be the main entrance in front; the elevator from the secured underground parking area will open opposite the main office of the facility where there will be someone on duty at all times. It was mentioned by Mr. Weiss there was a plan that this elevator woul d require a pass key to operate. Don Moore, 515 Columbia Road, spoke against the project. Mr. Moore said the redesign of the project was better then the original, but he was still opposed. He then read from a prepared statement (a copy of which may be seen in the Planni ng Department). In addition to the prepared statement, Mr. Moore made the following points: 1. He felt visitors parking to be inadequate, and that people would be parking in front of the homes, especially on holidays. 2. He said that sometimes when he is driving on Sunset and must make a left on to Balboa he finds the speed of traffic a serious hazard. 3. He considered the line-of-sight shown on the plans to be inadequate, sayi ng that he had stood on top of the gas station fonnerly on the si te and knew what coul d be seen from that poi nt. He stated in conclusion that he represented the neighborhood and they were strongly in opposition to the project, believing it to be totally detril1l!ntal, and he presented a petition with thirty signatures of residents in the surroundi ng area. Carlo Piumetti, 521 Columbia Road, was in opposition to the application. He felt the project woul d have a bad effect on property values in the area. Mr. Kyoshi Murakata, 509 Columbia Road also spoke against the project. He said in his opinion the parki ng issue was a minor matter, what was important was the environmental issues. He thought the noise level of the area to high to be suitable for a,senior citizen's residence, not only during the day but from 6:00 Augus t 28. 1984 Page 4 . . . o:clock in the morning to 11:00 p.m. or midnight. He fe1t a second environmental issue was the height of the building,and that tall buildings limit open space in a residential area and are an invasion of privacy. Mr. Murakata also was concerned with the effect the project would have on property val ues. " . Melinda Moore, 515 Columbia Road, had questions concerning the project. She asked if the visits made to property on Camino Real were connected with the retirement facility there. She stated also that the Negative Declaration as furnished by the Planning Department did not include attached explanations of "yes" and "maybe" items, and therefore was incomplete. She al so felt there was a contradiction in the pol ides as stated by the developers concerning the security provi sions for the underground parl<i ng; when it would be open and when closed, the handling of visitors with regard to the parl<ing, etc. Mrs. Moore woul d 1 i ke the appli cant to tell her whether bei ng a board and ca re facility without being a licensed board and care facility (chiefly the .inability to dispense prescription drugs) meant that some persons would be refused room at the facility, and was there a possibility that this would make it difficult to keep the facility operating at a money-maki ng level? Staff replied to the first two concerns Mrs. Moore had. The visits to property on Camino Real were to property on the north side, and had nothing to do with the retirement facility which is on the south side of Camino Real. An error was made in the distribution of the Negative Declaration; although a new Negative Declaration was made up with the proper supporting documents, it was not distributed with the staff report as it should have been. Staff advised that Mrs. Moore and the Commission would receive copies of the omitted material. Mr. Taylor in rebuttal explained in answer to Mr. Moore's concern, about holiday parking meaning cars parked on the streets, that he was informed by Mr. Weiss that holidays did not represent a problem in the parking area. His experience is that the residents are most often taken to a relative's home to spend a holiday. He also stated that although the unlicensed board and care cannot dispense prescription drugs an outside nurse comes in and takes care of this necessity. Otherwise the care received by board and care patients and those in a licensed facility is the same. This would not prevent any individual from living in the proposed faci 1 i ty. Mr. Taylor commented that the developer has made the applicable project, and feels the need for this type of facility is great; spending nearly three and a half million dollars on the project inclined to gamble with the funds. studi es for the he will be and would not be August 28 ~ 1984 t'aqe 5 '- . . . The Commission asked Mr. Taylor if the property was leased, he replied that the applicant has an agreement to sign a lease for 32-1/2 years. They also asked if the project was for 97 beds, or 97 rooms; Mr. Taylor replied that it was for 97 rooms, and that some of these rooms would contain two beds. Chairman Dixon asked Mr. Moore if he would like to respond. ~r. Moore remarked that although the Commission at a previous meeting recommended that the applicants contact the homeowners, they had not done so. He expressed personal doubt as to the economic feasibility of the project and the suitability of it to the proposed site; he questioned how the statements of the developer would be policed. No other persons wished to speak to the application, either for or against. totlTION It was moved by Commissioner Jahnke, seconded by Commissioner Fee, to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. commi ssioner Jahnke questioned the di sti nction between a "Hotel" and a "board and Care faci1i ty. Ms. Butler provided the code definitions of each. Commissioner Hedlund questioned the distance to the driveway gate. Ms. Butler noted that the distance would be approximately 52 feet from the property li ne. Commissioner Hedlund questioned whether a land division was required. Ms. Butler stated that one was not required. Commi ssioner Fee noted that the appl i cant has responded to cri tic; SIftS that had been made at the last meeting and that the project seemed adequate at this time. Commis~ioner Szany questioned the review process which might be required if a commerci al office project were proposed for thi s si te. Ms. Butl er outl i ned the requi rements. Comm; ssioner Szany fel t that the proposed project woul d be less intense than an office building or 7-11 type retail use, with less traffic impacts and that it was an attractive buffer. He had some concerns with the operation of the security gate, location of some of the parking spaces. He felt that a larger setback would be more accommodating to a residential environment, and that with more than one bed in a room the density would be greater. Commissioner Dixon felt that the use was appropriate for the site when the surrounding uses and zoning were considered. August 2B, 1984 Page 6 . Commissioner Jahnke felt that a commercial use would probably be single story not two to three as in this proposal, and would generally operate 8-10 hours per day. He also felt that the use seemed more like a board and care facility with longer term residents, and that the zoning should be changed if a board and care facility is to be proposed for this site. Commissioner Hedlund concurred with Commissioner Jahnke, and also noted that the ~ traffic on Sunset coul d be a probl em when drivers are seeki ng to enter the parki ng structure, and thi s shoul d be addressed a bi t more. t-UT!ON It was moved by Commissioner Fee, seconded by Commissioner Dixon, to approve the Negative Declaration, find that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution incorporating specific findings and conditions of approval as set forth in the staff report. ROLL CALL AYES: NOES: ABSENT: MOT! ON Commissioners Fee, Dixon Commissioners Hedlund, Jahnke, Szany Commissioners Harbicht, Wells . It was moved by Commissioner Jahnke, seconded by Commissioner Hedlund to deny the application based on the fact that it is improper zoning, and direct staff to prepare an appropriatte resolution incorporating said decision and findings in support of that decision. ROL L CALL AYES: NOES: ASS ENT : Commissioners Hedlund, Jahnke Commissioners Fee, Dixon, Szany Commi ssioners Harbicht, Wells Commissioner Szany explained his "no" vote on the first motion was because he had concerns with some of the proposal provisions; he voted "no" on the second motion because he did not believe the zoning to be incorrect. Commi ssioner Dixon stated a procedural matter had ari sen; as the City Attorney had explained at the opening of the meeting a total of four votes one direction or the other was necessary to conclude any item, he asked City Attorney Miller to explain the required procedure. . City Attorney Miller explained the matter will be deemed to be continued, and the absentee Commissioners will be afforded the opportunity to review the record of the proceeding that will be presented to them by the staff so that they can be apprised of what took place at the hearing. There was also the possibility that the hearing could be reopened for additional testimony. He asked if the applicant had ?ny Objections to this proceeding. August 28, 1984 Page 7 . . . The applicant indicated there was no objectinn. MonON It was moved by Commissioner Fee, seconded by Commissioner Dixon, that the public hearing be reopened and continued to the Commission's September 25, 1984 meeting; the motion passed by voice vote with none dissenting. ,} , . I) Fl.-v-., ~' ,I . ~ , - .' . ''"~......... f// f /f'l . . . CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING C.U.P. B4-19 . 601 Sunset Boul evard Consideration of a request to construct a 97 unit retirement hotel. The staff report wa s presented. Commissioners Ha rbi cht and Well s stated they have ca refully revi ewed the >transcri pt of the August 28th meeti ng and are prepared to vote on thi s proposal. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Berger, one of the partners making this application, spoke in support of it. He said in response to points of concern previously mentioned by residents of the neighborhood that the parking structure allows room for three cars to line up out of the street traffic and ahead of the gate system; this will be monitored by a television system with a screen at the main desk. The applicant felt that the fact there is a bus stop near the driveway location indicated traffic could slow and turn onto the driveway without a serious problemj in their personal check they experienced no difficulty in slowing down and making the necessary turn. Mr. Berger poi nted out that an office buil di ng of 15,000 square feet woul d require approximately 45 parking spaces. These 45 vehicles would go in and out of the commercial building more times and at peak traffic times, than would the normal number of vehicles from the proposed retirement hotel. The applicant offered to increase the setbacks from the street from 8' to 12' to a setback of 10' to 14' without any problem, and, with some difficulty if the Commission wanted this, a 12' to 16' setback. He also advised the Commission that their Architect, Mr. Rodwell, has won two multiple residential beautification awards in Arcadia as well as two national architectural awards, referring to previous questions from the audience concerning the appearance of the proposed building. Mr. Berger referred to a survey made of eight retirement homes in the immediate area of Aracadia to check on the number of cars owned by residents of the facilities and the ratio of private to semi-private rooms, details of lltlich were furnished to the Commissioners in written fonn. He said they estimate 2Q1, of the rooms in the proposed hotel would be semi-private, the remaining 80$ would be priva te. Their architect checked into the comparative sizes of rooms in hotels and one convalescent hospital. One convalescent hospital's typical room was 12' x 14', 168 square feet, and had three patients in it. At Howard Johnson's the average size motel room was 12' x 16', 192 square feet; the hotel rooms downtown averaged 14' x 18', 252 square feet. The applicants are proposing 370 square feet per room. They furnished the Commissioners with information on the State's definition of aa Board and Care Facility, The applicants were advised they could not get aa board and care license for the proposed facility. September 25, 1984 Page 2 . . . In regard to the concerns from the audience on the economics of the proposed facility, Mr. Berger stated that very thorough analyses have been made by the applicants as well as the May Company financial people and they were confident the proposal was economically sound. Commissioner Wells asked Mr. Berger if the project would be economically feasible ~tth 97 private rooms, and if they would be willin9 to have a condition to that effect in the conditional use permit. Mr. Berger replied this would be a feasible economic oasis for the project but that as there are some people who could not handle the expense of a private room he would like to have some rooms available for occupancy by two persons, however he woul d not object to having this a controlled percentage of the total rooms. In answer to a question from Commissioner Harbicht, Mr. Berger stated in their surveys they woul d expect no more than 20% of thei r rooms woul d be called upon to be double occupancy. Joseph Weiss, 9005 Cynthia Street, Los Angeles, operating partner for the proposed hotel, spoke for the application. He clarified the differences between a board and care facility and a retirement hotel, stating the proposed facility is to be a retirement hotel, acceptable in Arcadia's C-2 zone. City Attorney Miller confinned for the record that this application is being processed as a conditional use permit for a retirement hotel. Mr. Weiss stated that in some instances they accept people on a day to day or week to week basis, such as persons whose families go on a vacation and the elderly relative needs a place to stay for a few weeks, or someone wanting to try out the facility for a wtlile. In answer to a question from Commissioner Szany Mr. Weiss stated the balconies are not used very much by the residents, but the balconies as proposed by the architect enhance the appearance of the facility. Mr. Stu Cortis, Regional Vice President of Real Estate for the May Company's Department Stores on the West Coast, spoke in favor of the application. He spoke for the May Company's belief that architecture, color and rendition of the project were the most suitable for the neighborhood. Those speaking in opposition to the application included the following: Don Moore, 515 Columbia Road. He wished to emphasize that his Objection was to the densi ty of the proposed project; he stated that he woul d prefer a commercial office building at the proposed site. He also said the additional setback offered by the applicant did not satisfy him, that he considered the parking still a prOblem in that he thought vi sitors woul d find it easier to park on the streets opening off the other side of Sunset, such as Columbia, Balboa and up on California. He quoted the situation of last week, during the May Company parking lot sale, as evidence for this belief. He disputed the statement of Mr. Berger that the buses were able to stop at the bus stop without creating a traffic September 25, 1984 Page 3 . . . hazard. He stated the residents of the neighborhood do not feel the economics of the proposal are favorable for continued operation. He presented another petition against the proposal. Wayne Nuttall, 855 Coronado, also spoke against the application. Mr. Nuttall is president of the Homeowners Association for the area. He felt there should be an eJlvironmental report on this project, and also objected to the density of the > project. John Petrovich, 505 Columbia Road spoke against the project. He thought the parking and privacy problems have been ameliorated by the actions of the developers; he still however objected to the use of the property as a high density residential use; he felt it would be better if the applicant petitioned to have the zoning changed. He considered the proffered change in density, from 103 rooms to 97 rooms, insignificant and ineffective. He suggested that the outer rooms, next to the street, would be hard to rent because of the traffic noise. He questioned the prospects for alternative uses of the building if the economics of the proposed use do not work out in the future. Rebecca Petrovich, 505 Columbia Road, expressed the opinion that from the point of view of prospective elderly residents the location would be undesirable because of noise, air pollution from traffic, and what she considered the frequency of accidents on the adjacent streets. Carlos Piumetti, 521 Columbia, spoke against the project and stated his main concern is still the deval uation of surroundi ng properties he expects to occur if the proposed project is accepted. In Mr. Berger's rebuttal, he stated the developers have considered putting double glazed windows on the traffic sides of the building. He pointed out that the problems of traffic and parki ng the present proposal faces woul d al so be present if the property were developed with an office building. He reiterated the developers confidence in their studies of the economics of the project. Mr. Weiss added that in his previOUS experience with a contracting company which has built many retirement hotels, there is a tendency to avoid secluded places for these hotels as the residents like to be where things are going on, that senior citizens of today are active people. He stated that a vacancy figure of 3' to 5' exists in retirement hotels in this area, and this is considered "full"; they anticipate no difficulty in renting their rooms. There were no other persons who wished to speak for or against the application. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Wells, seconded by Comm1ssioner Jahnke, to close the public hearing. The motion passed by voice vote with none di ssent i ng. Chainnan Harbicht said few if any perfect projects come before the Commission and after weighing the evidence for and against this project he had decided this would be a desirable project for the area. He suggested a minimum residency age September 25, 1984 Page 4 . . . be established at 60 years, and a condition that no more than 117 persons be allowed to reside at any time in the building, which would allow 20 semi-private units. Commissioner Wells recalled that Mr. Weiss at a previous meeting had said the developer would agree to a minimum age of 65 years. "'commissioner Jahnke said he considered this to be a difficult piece of property to develop; he felt however the proposed project was too dense for the site, and was not in favor of the proposal. Commissioner Fee agreed with Commissioner Harbicht that this would be a desirable project, with the raising of the minimum age requirement, he would also like to see the setback on Sunset Boulevard increased to 10' to 14'. Commissioner Wells wanted to see a minimum residency period of one month imposed by condition to eliminate any form of transient population in the project. He was otherwi se in favor of it. Commissioner Szany thought this would be a good project for the site, with the least impact on the neighborhood. He was concerned about the setback along Sunset Boulevard, and offered the suggestion that heavy landscaping with an increased setback as proposed by the developer woul d improve the project. Commissioner Hedlund commented one of his concerns had been eased by the statistics obtained and presented to the Commission concerning the number of cars typically owned by residents of a facility of this type. He thought the proposed project would be a good use for the site, he concurred with the increase in the setback, and would like to see it stipulated that the limousine service would be maintained by some type of covenant or condition. City Attorney Miller said this could be done by an enforceable condition with no prob 1 em. The Commission recalled Mr. Berger to the microphone to discuss these conditions of approval. There was considerable discussion as to various ways to achieve a larger setback and maintain a pleasing appearance of the building, during which Mr. Berger exhibited a rendering of the proposed building. fotlTION It was moved by Commissioner Harbicht to approve C.U.P. 84-19, to approve and file the Negative Oeclaration and find that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment; further to direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution incorporating the specific findings and conditions set forth in the staff report, with a change in Item 4 that the minimum age for residency be 60 years, in Item 8 that the applicant execute a covenant that no more than 117 people reside at any one time in the project, in Item 9 that the setback be 12' to 14' , in Item 10 that the mi nimum r~ntal pe ri od be one week. in Item 11 that the 1 i mou sine servi ce be September 25, 1984 Page 5 . . . > . continued as long as the project is in business, and Item 12 that the area along Sunset Boulevard be landscaped to mitigate to whatever degree possible the fact that the setbacK is less than desirable. Commissioner Harbicht accepted as a amendment to the motion from Commissioner Sza~ the addition of a condition that the windows on Sunset Boulevard be doUble glazed for noise suppression. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wells. ROLL CALL AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Fee, Hedlund, Commissioner Jahnke Commissioner Dixon Szany, Wells, Harbicht A resolution will be presented at the next meeting of the Commission for their consideration; after that there will be a five working day appeal period. .---_.-------------------------------- September 25, 1984 Page 6 . . . Augus t 28 I 1984 . . TO: FROM: CASE NO.: PREPARED BY: ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING DEPARTMENT C.U.P. 84-19 DONNA L. BUTLER ASSOCIATE PLANNER GENERAL INFORMATION Berger-Socoloske (Lessee) 60l Sunset Boulevard -- located at the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Michil1inda Avenue Conditional use pennit to construct and operate a 97 unit retirement hotel and a modification for 40 on-site parking spaces in lieu of 117 required. SIZE: Approximately'"50,OOO sq. ft. (1.14 acres) APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: FRONTAGE: Approximately 219' on Sunset Boulevard Approximately 198' on Michillinda Avenue EXISTING LAND The subject site is developed with a vacant service station USE AND ZONING: and the vacant May Company TBA building; zoned C-2 SURROUNDING LAND NORTH: Developed with single-family dwellings; zoned USE" ZONING: R-l & D SOUTH: Developed with the May Company and El Rancho Shopping Center; zoned C-2 EAST: Developed with single-family dwellings and multiple- family dwellings; zoned R-l & D and R-3 WEST: Developed with single-family dwellings; zoned R-l Comnerci al GENERAL PLAN: HISTORY On July 24, the Planning Commission denied C.U.P. 84-12 to construct a 103 unit retirenent hotel with 42 parking spaces (14 on-site spaces and 28 off- site spaces). It was the consensus of the Commission that the project was too intense for the SUbject site and that the 28 off-site parking spaces were located too far from the SUbject site and that all parki ng shoul d be accommodated on the subject property. . SPECIAL INFORMATION Building Information The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing service station and ~. construct a 44,500 square feet building. The existing 8,000 sq. ft. May Company TBA building will be converted into a dining room, lounge and kitchen. The total building area will be 52,500 sq. ft. There will be 97 units which average 370 sq. ft. in area. Five of the units are designed for the handicapped; all of the units will have hardware in the bathrooms designed to assist the el derly. The building will be two and three stories with a maximum height of 40 feet, The first floor will be comprised of 31 living units, offices, storage areas, dining room, kitchen and lounge area. . The second floor will contai n 47 1 ivi ng units; eight of these units will be located over the existing TBA building. The third floor will have 19 1 ivi ng units. Four of these proposed units will face towards Sunset Boulevard; four will front onto Michillinda Avenue and the remaining ten units will front onto the center courtyard area. This third floor area has been designed to have the least amount of impact on the residential properties to the northeast and west. There will be five exit passages; the main entrance/exit will be on Michillinda Avenue; there will be one exit onto Sunset Boulevard; two exits at the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Michillinda Avenue and an additional exit onto Michillinda Avenue south of the main entrance. There will be a total of two elevators, one in each wing of the building. The buil di ng wi 11 have a 9' to 18' setback along Mi ch ill i nda Avenue and an 8' to 12' setback along Sunset Boulevard. There will be a 4,900+ sq. ft. landscaped interior courtyard which will have a swimmi ng pool and jacuzzi. PARKING AND LANDSCAPING Pa rki ng The applicant is proposing a total of 40 on-site parl<i ng spaces; 36 of these spaces will be in a subterranean garage and four spaces will be located along Michillinda Avenue. A loading space will also be located along Michillinda Avenue adjacent to the May Company building. . C.U.P. 84-19 August 28, 1984 Page 2 . . . A pick-up/drop-off area will be located along Michillinda Avenue. The subterranean garage will be entered off of Sunset Boulevard. This entrance will be approximately 192 feet from the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Michillinda Avenue. This garage area will be secured with a gate. The driveway ramp to the garage complies with the City's driveway ramp requirements for multiple family development. There will be three exits from the garage; a stairway at the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Michillinda Avenue which enters directly into the building; a stairway and elevator at the southwest corner of the garage which enters directly into the building and a ramp to the outside along Sunset Boulevard is located adjacent to the driveway ramp. All parking spaces comply with code. Based upon the code requirements for a hotel, 117 parking spaces are required (1.2 parking space per guest room). This parking requirement is excessive for a "retirement" facility. The Arcadia Retirement Hotel on Duarte Road has a parki ng ratio of one space for each 2.5 rooms and the Arcadia Gardens Retirement Hotel on Camino Real has a parking ratio of one space for each 1.84 rooms. Staff has never had any complaints regarding the parking at either of these projects and during visits to these sites, there has always been adequate on-site parking. The parki ng ratio for this complex will be one space for each 2.42 guest rooms. A limousine service will also-'be provided to transport residents to shoppi ng, medical and groomi ng locations. Landscapi ng The perimeter of the property adjacent to Sunset Boulevard and Michillinda Avenue will be landscaped as well as a portion of the interior courtyard area. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION The applicant has indicated there will be a maximum of eight (8) employees on any shift and that the minimum age for a resident will be 55 years. The following is a summary of the two existing retirement facilities located within the City of Arcadia and the proposed facility: Arcadia Retirement Hotel (Duarte Road) C.U.P. 84-19 August 28, 1984 Page 3 . . . Lot Size: Rooms: Parki ng: Parking Density: Unit Density: 27,648 sq. ft. 60 24 on-site parking spaces 1 parking space for each 2.5 rooms 1 room per 547.45 squa re feet Arcadia Gardens Retirement Hotel (Camino Real) Lot Size: Rooms: Parki ng: Parking Density: Unit Density: Proposed Project Lot Size: Ro oms: Parki ng: Parking Density: Unit Density: 87,327 sq. ft. 105 57 on-site parking spaces 1 parking space for each 1.84 rooms 1 room per 831. 68 squa re feet 50,000+ sq. ft. 97 40 on-site parking spaces 1 parking space for each 2.42 rooms 1 room per 515.46 square feet The subject site is located in the Alquist Priolo Special Study Zone. A geologic study was conducted on the subject site and after reviewing this study the City's geologist concludes that "based on the geotechnical report and revi ew of the trench logs, we recommend that the subject report be approved from a faul t rupture standpoi nt." ANAL YSIS A retirement hotel is a penni tted use in the C-2 zone wi th an approved conditional use permi t. The C-2 zone would allow a three-story, 40 foot high commercial building to be constructed adjacent to the Sunset Boulevard and Michillinda Avenue property lines. The noise and traffic generated by a retirement hotel is minimal and it is staff's opinion that this use is less intensive than most other commerci al uses which woul d be penni tted in the C-2 zone. Staff's major concern with the previous application was the lack of on-site parking. In this application, the applicant has provided 40 on-site parking spaces which staff feels are adequate for this proposed retirement hotel. The applicant has attempted to resolve some of the concerns expressed by the neighbors in regards to "invasion of privacy" by off-setting the third floor of the project and fronting the majority of the third floor units onto the interior courtyard area. C.U.P. 84-19 Augus t 28.l 1984 rage 4 . . . Sheet 5 of the applicant's plans illustrate a site line from the second floor units to the back yards of the properties on Columbia Road. Said site line indicates that persons standi ng in the second fl oor rooms woul d not be ab 1 e to see into these back yards. >' It is the Planning Department's opinion that this proposed retirement hotel is an appropriate use for this site and would not be detrimental to the surrounding properties or to the health and welfare of the public in general. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning Department has prepared an initial study for the proposed project. Said initial study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project includi ng land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of hi storical or aesthetic significance. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this document. REC()IMENDATION The Planning Department recommends approval of C.U.P. 84-19 subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. That the conditions as outlined in the attached report from the Department of Public Works shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 2. That fire safety shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Fire Chi ef. 3. That a modification shall be granted for 40 parlcing spaces in lieu of 117 pa rki ng spaces requi red. 4. That the mi nimum age for reSidency in this facility shall be 55 years and that a covenant in a form and content to be approved by the City Attorney shall be filed guaranteeing that the minimum age of residents shall be 55 years. 5. That exiting from the driveways located on Sunset Boulevard and Michillinda Avenue shall be restricted and posted for "right turn only". 6. That a security gate shall be provided in the subterranean garage. 7. That C.U.P. 84-19 shall not take effect until the owner and applicant have executed a form available at the Planning Department indicating awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. C.U.P. 84-19 August 28, 1984 Page 5 . . . FINDINGS AND MOTIONS Approval .If the Planning Commission intends to take action to approve this project, the ~ Commission should move to approve and file the Negative Declaration and find that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution incorporating the specific fi ndi ngs and condi ti ons of approva 1 set fo rth in the staff report (or as modifi ed by the Commission), Deni al If the Planning Commission intends to take action to deny this project, the Commission should move to deny and direct staff to prepare an appropriate resolution incorporating the Commission's decision and findings in support of that decision. C.U.P. 84-19 August 28, 1984 Page 6 . . . August 14, 1984 TO: PLANN I NG OEP ARTI.1ENT FRO"': DEPARTI-1ENT OF PUBLIC '..IGRKS . . SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-12 601 SUNSET BOULEVARD This department's review of the subject CUP resulted ln the following requirement: 1. Close existing driveways not to be used and construct new P.C.C driveway aprons that conform to City Standard Drawing S-ll. 2. Submit a grading and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer. 3. Arrange for utility service and dedicate easements to utility companies. Verify the location of the 6-inch sanitary sewer connection to the main in Sunset Boulevard to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works or install a 6-inch lateral to the main according to City of Arcadia Standards. 4. 5. The SUbject property is served by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District. Therefore, a CSD and a City permit will be required. The parkway widths at the site are eight (8) feet and t\~elve (12) feet on Michillinda Avenue and Sunset Boulevard, respectively. At present, street trees and plants are adequate. This department will reserve further comment on the 1 andscap i ng unt i 1 more def i n it ive plans have been prepared and submitted. Future plants, such as those planned at points of ingress and egress, could create site restrictions. I .' I 1.' ,.,.- ,f " tj(lI{F:? l! /;-C-.f 'tt ,y CHESTER N. HOWARD Director of Public Works CNH:CAH:rk . . . I; ; I r, ---J: If-j Ii , I , ' ! , I' I: i L-__ >< > 't; -0 :OFFlCG5 : ;, ~ ~. : : ..; --- ~ "~, -I . , ; r ~ ~. ;.. . ( ( : ~( , J ~. "11ft Y CO. <'\1, C-z , o C). ':.;-' 'i) '. A8) ,,-0, ;' J:'f " " , , , .. , o I I ' j Q ~,.,~" . - \.. ,Oft} . "U,' -, '~! I ~ ",r:.J o _."/ j ~ LOT 4 .~ .J ;:;;:,~ ,_,~~,"~,AJC:~ . .:E ! ~ ~ : '.~~ ';, , ! . . ~ ~., '.. ~ . ~ , . . I" , '.'( .... , PORTOLA ". : : '(1) ~@} . - - ~: '1-. I. L.. 0 T I -., .; ,- '-.';' ", :: I :'.::.' I ._...., . HUNTlr;Ci"'.:'l 1- I \ I'" i HUN ri:"~G-;-:::;'~ \ ". n. I .' , \ ( ~- CUP 84./3 LAND USE 8. ZON I NG I" = lOa' SCALE . . . ~rncg&J])IT~ rnJjj1rII~J]JjTIJITJjj~1r J]l@1rJ]]& (BS@1l ~m~~J]]1r ruI1WWo0 &mCC!1wTI& PROPERTY OWNER' LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROJECT RECAP MAIER 5REWING COMPANY 21 TAMAL VISTA 5LVD. CORTE l<<ADERA, CAUl'. '~C...OtIC.""o.grlO.l\ell"""V""""'l PARKING UNDSP-t3l!tOUNO __ FIRST LEVEL _____~__~___________ LO~IN19 OOQl;.____ ,,. CARS " CARS 1 TEtUCp:, BERGER-60COLOSKE 21~1' VAl<O~r< CANOeA PARK., CALlI' (618) 103 '1124 ,..., ....,... -' '" ,., ".., _ 10_, ......ell,.' '''''.-lli,C_, .....-......,.., ""...e."._....__...............-.ft_ lJ.,.._.....I.._.......... .,,'"..,...~.lII.._....,.c_.,_._.."'''_, ........... ...._..... ,.._ of._ ...,O'ft___,II...., "'.'" ,,_.....14_ ......."'....".._...,_. .'-'h'"011" W [_10....',.'....,............."'........,........_....,... __, ..... .f ..,. ,.. l. __............... "',"," "".. '_h' -'........,._............_..1'1I...........,'........,.......,. ...._......._.....;,.:,.......... _h"-.' W .._,...."". ::.':.t';t::.......~.:_~ ~~-::..c:"~.:~:..::..':.'~ .....,.. !......... -__., -- ..-..-............ ..._._"'___...0..._ ).1"'..............'" No. Ha).... ...,_ No. -....~ Of 0'110'.'""_ Of ..I' c.....,,, '_.01...,..... ..._.._ il_. _ '" Jt' Ill'" hOl 'lJ.n ,...t. ...............,'..._....,..,.," U..D7'U.CO...'..-._lft.... .......,......' ...""".._ .0_... _.. ....._ t...... .,.,.... ,........ _" Ill" ,,. lIP' r_ "'-II ,_ ,..- M. ...._.... _,," t... .......,....,_, ...................ld""._OI....._......,_. ........__'''n.07'1..[..'....aI'_...psI...,...,..__."1l..0,....: tu' M.J] '_ 1..-..... _ '" t.. .......11... '" .......lU_ .........., ,...... ., ._ ...,.... _".. ~,..... r.... J1.l1ll ,_, ,.....,. .. '''II''! _..._'"1l.0l"1..[....,...lIll....,...........iof"I...........".. '1......... )11.001-..-........ ......_.~.~D7'u.[..,.._" !.... ,..... "~_... ~ -.. ......... -<........,..... ........ :..:~ :I.~:.~~:-:r:::;..::-..~":'.~~-;: ;::;":::~,<;::: ~""::::.:::::: =='"",,"';:;'.~:~ ':' ,::::~::;.~.':.~: .....001. _ _~_"'" ..... '''' _''''_..1.. --''''''' """ ...............M._.'....l..'................91........ 1_'..._I'''.U.....'.I''I.....'.......I".........'"''''_.......'''..... _1............."'.........""......-......".....,......,...,....., ........."...................,..... HOTEL !lOOMS' P'lRBT FLOOR SECOND FLOOR. _.. THIR.O f'LOOlt DEVELOPER &1. 1t.OOMS "7 ROOMS 19 ROOMS H ROOMS TOTAL: AVE'Ef.,AGE. ROOM SIzE 910 SQ. PT. LOVIS E. RO!JW'ELL. ARCHITECT. INC. 1041 EAST GREEN STREET PA!5ADENA, CAl-II'. (618) 1'3-9"01 EMPLO'lEES . 8'00 AM TO (3'00 PM, _.___ e DMPLO'fEB:6 4=00 pM. TO MIDN1C3HT " EMPLO't'BES MIDN1<3HT TO a'OOAM._ ! EMPLO'tE"ES 'TOTAL DORING 24'ROtIR !"BRtOD_ 1~ EMF'LOY'US ARCHITIJ;CT :ZONING C-2 " @l i ~~ ,I __=-. ',.._ _4'___ II _~~::- -'_ i 1,\ ""'.:::,... rltAl- 111 ....~'" 11\ ,-",::::":::;~-=.===="",,-=~=--=----=,~___-:r~=-==~::,=:=~'=-='rJ , . .~ ,.'-- .,-..-------- -- --------------- .- -.......-........... /-~''''' , ',-..... ("'- ) ,~~' " , ", , '<--:'-. ~" ,- " '':.... ~ -~- ''::':~ "~~- '", _~~ie:<'''''~tN' 0m~e ~I,."ti " '" " :.::::-:,~ ~, " "::""';::::.-.., '. . . I ~----.1 ~- .I . . 'I . , I ! , . ! . . I . , I .~... ' I I ~: -------" ''', -", ~ , '-- ". ~ ------ " ''-- '" '1 . I I " ,,' I , II ;1\ . \ \ "- ----------- ", -~ " 1 ------------- ~ . . 'f'! ,-,-~~ ..... T"--'- , 1 , ~'" J "', ~; ~, ~~~""-,, ',. .O"",^<" { .~~ ~"'''''-~ /. '-.''-. .."'''-..., ""'::. ~" ~,. """"" " .~.,.~,.". ", "'~~ '~ '. .~"~ - '....~ "',,--- "'-~" ~~~ I ',- ". '2. 'J' AN 'f p 00, ..... ~ t:1Q.'J I I '-' 61Tt. ,,, , I i .1..'___ PI I , I I ii , , l~ I.' , o ,i- -r , , ~ . "', I ....._;-........,. If !. I I I I I i , . ~~ -~,.<:~ ~ . -~ -- - f I i \ "'~ "4 ")....r-"l.. I...... 000. c:.-:.cD~ __ ~ ~ . ..f.1 , -.~ -, -'<'::::,,-~ "- '-'- -'. "-">~::"C'''--_ '. ._-"-,~":<"'::"~,- ", '\ ~11i - I~ I' I~ I" ., iy ! ~~ L I ,i II II \ "'" I'~,,- '" I "--, ---. ~ . ~ L, ~~ lo,.)~ ~'- "', '-" ^ ~' t\,> . :;:.< CY;/".L . _. n::"-:) c.. . ~ ~'!~ Il ~! !~.." I ~J . I~ { ~ j ~ . ! .~ ". . ",. -'~-... ".,~ ~ """C~_ ~...~ .;. "',"". . r- j j _.',' '::"~..L...;?o.t1'i.~~-"#'#~'ir~. .'~:;\t:'.\" t.'1..to;;!O ,--, :.' ..../1 ~.. .J <j., '';'l-'' :i , ~""HSo :-',..,.. CU ~.:>,o.v,~. - :1 if il , l' " j:1 U ,,' ; ___...1.-. 'j.' '" e .- " 0 , 0 0 ~ =-'------, " ~,-, ,. r, i\. ~ " '" " " ~ '" u T r L " .. \/..' . 1'.0' e 0 . .~__ ....-r'~~. :~ . , --L_n ______ d ii' ot".}=';"'.';...~ ';J~ -, i. , ;~.-....~ ~ j" 1l":"i:i.;'d.11l1:,;~t: -~.".;.' ~~7:"'( .oe............... ',..,.. .'~' '! ~'...' . , I .1._ ""_ ~_~__c~ ...' " . d ---. --~~r.t. '! ""-l"""'7 t.-......... _." "i.,! , , ~',,' _rote'u ..,<)-:'\1 ,..'-c' "-'l";. --------. -~.!'~~.__. .- .. ''''8' . (0' ~ . . . "='~:'l~:.T ~:-:..\.I~ :.:....:.\.'~,r~,;~ " , ,,,. /~ I i " , ~:::';.;:~:"::i:::A AVE.. :.'_:.",)A":o:i !o:." ~ . . . File No. ClIP 84-1 q CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Ac:r NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA A. Description of project: Conditional Use Permit to construct and operate a 97 unlt retirement hotel B. Location of project: 601 Sunset Boulevard C. Name of applicant or sponsor: Berger-Socoloske D. Finding: This project will have no significant effect upon the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 for the reasons set forth in the attached Initial Study. E. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects: ~OQ 1<'nuirnnmont".l:lIl rnpr'lrliCl.r Fnrm Date: AlIgl1C!.t' Q 1 QRlL Signature Date Posted: Associate Planner Title . . . Name of Proponent ~, ~/Y t?SI:C Address and Phone Number of Proponent ~6/.J) VCrJ.ln~.JPiJ.I:sr #- .e'03 ~Ai..J/J6A ~J::: .~.4- '7/~ , 708 - 7724 A. RACKG~UND 1. ~ . 2, File No, /!u~e4-/L ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all .yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets. ) !!.O:!! _ill till prapoul ,.."It \ft I, OB.~lIbl' ..,.tll C'OftdltlOll. .sf 1ft c_.... III ,"lOlllt lubetl"Uet...r..~ D. Oh~I_', ch.phC::_Ilu.__ ,.etlOfl or o".re_rlno or t)'l' .o~l- r ~u\topoIlO\Inptly\)r~rolll\od ...rt_nrlt'ftutu,u' d. "'- lS.n.I'VC'tIOIl eonrl.ll'lor ..UteU!.1lII\ of Ill)' ""-lqlM 9eoloq1C or P>b7'.lul hat...,..," . An)' ,"C"", '" "lnIl or ..ur 1"_1011 ot lOll. "Ol,r On <Of aU tll' Uta' I 01.... In uluuon d.poII. tlon or .ro,l1on "",.e~ ...~ ."'hty tl\' Cl'l.,....: 0 ~ I rl"" 0 r I tr... I l.I:pox..u ot Pf""L. 'H pr09'lnr to ,_looIH "...ra ...CIl.. ..nnq....Il... ,.noblide. -..ullll... 'II~tall"n or .~I&Z' .....rlS.~ ~, .111 tlw pl"CIopOI'l NIIIlt LIl. I. ........U..) ur _1I.1OftI or <iet.rlonUan 01 Ulbltnt all '!'\IllLry' .. f1l,e"....tlOllofob'~IOfI&bl. -", r Ut..,..tlOflot,u_nt.. _brv. 01 UI~'.l'.U...n, or '.11)' do....... 1" el1..u ..t""f loe'H) '" ,..,..l1y' !!!!!. Will tlwl prapOtlU ,....1t .11 .. ~1.NI'n.u Ol't""_I''' otd1n~100\ot".t.,_t.u, fI'MI'I,,"tl"7 II. o..r..,.. HI UI.OI'1'UOtI f.t." b.'.... ,..te.I'll'. or till. r.t. &lid _tOf.ql'~I~...t..,II""tt, e '''It.,.tl.... to tM COli'" 01 n""'o(tlOlllod...t.,., ~. a.u.,. u u.. _t of "'I't_. nt., I" ...,. .It'f body? . D1.e'......llltO.lIl't.c....t.I'., or o. an) .1t'r.tJOIl 01 ~"l'I.c. "..t.r .,...11t,.. 111<:IUodln'l b..t nC~ 11_1ted tc ~",nt\U'. ,Uuol....:! ...:yq'1I O. tllrtlldLt!- 41t'l'.tl"",01 :III-Sll'.etIO/'lol f' t. of ~ 10. .. I q rellftd w. t.,. ~ , :ll"""ll t"'.qll.lllt.1ty of,tolUWl. ..ur.. ..t.ku :lIIrouqh dinrt .dlIiU01I. O. ""Ul4r...h, ~. :~rO\ol9" UlU'"PUO/'l "t Illy -'flutu II'! ~u Of ..C......U01I.' !.!!!!!!!! ~ !!!.!!!!!! ~ 1\ !1Ib.\.ntul r.ductlon. 'II tl'l' _"tof....tuoth.l'VI......ll.bh tOI' pub! I ~ ...e.r 'Uppll~" ,/ ,/ .. t.POlllfl of p.opl. Of 1I.0Jl'1t.\ to ....t.f ,.In'd ""'It'd. .\lCII.. !\oo<:hn9' ,/ 4.~.II'llt.hllpnapo)allf'..ultll\ . CI\.!t9.llItlWdl....rllt.,af.pecl", ~f IIlIIIber cf 'Ill' 'pIIel.. 01 phnt. IllIell><hn'l tf",', 'IIrub', ,n.., erop.. lUeroflou .nd. .qvatlC pllllul' o a.d\lc:uon(lfth'II~Uaf'lI) '/111'1<.1' UTI 0' ,1l4.".,U'H 'plel'.. alpl'lIt.1 L L -/ e l/'ltfodllCUMl of """ .""e\.. Cll p :.ntl IlIt<" .... .1"', ..r r"lIlt ~I'I I tI'ff"'trt."""r"!'<Ilflpl.nu~t of ,'l.tllle .peel'" / .....~_l L.ih. lI'lll tM propolll ......U ". ,/ ,/ Chan,. ~Il th. d1nl'llt)' ot .,.ci... or I'Il11l!M1n of .ny 'PIC~" of 6111..11 Ibird., 1"'ld ..1..h lnclGdlnq fltptl1.., tLIJIII./lo4f/t.l1Uf/l,,,..,,.thlcol'..'ftl_, UIt'CtlOf.1C,.,f'lUIll. o ~.ducUon ot thol n...." ot ."y I/.nll1f'J" rlU Or ftI4'Il'l'"e4 .~c1.. o{'l'Il..lI? ./ c. J1>tl'odl.>CtIOll ot _ .peet.. ot &1'11..11 1nto.n ar.., or Nl"llt In . ~.rri.r to t'" -.t..r.t.~onof_' _nt of anl_h1 <1. o.tu'10n\1I1III"0 .alU;Uo'!_1l41U. _lut? ./ ./ ./ ./ NCl" IH.l tll' pl'..,o..l ,..ult la' Il'Icr..... LII ".taU" not.. I...ls' II. l~url ot,.api. t.o .....1'. 1\001..11.....1.7 ;~S~~~lif:ht :~l~l:::'propo.d I. :"nd ll... IHll tM PfopoUt ""lilt 1ft i'"IiiIiit'""G1tUl duraU_ot the IIn"ntarplllln~ l&lld....of-.n......' .,/ ./ / / I. ".tuul...o\ll'~', .11l till pl'OfIO'.l r..ult 11'1' .. I..cr.... 11'1 tl'l' nt. Clt 11II1 Clf..., ~.t..r.l r..outc:..? t SUZl.UJltld INpbt.Ul1\ 1)1 .n., nonr'_&bl'lIltu.r.tr..OII'C.? / -1- ,,/ ,/ v ,,/' .,/ v or ./ .Jt( ,/ ,/ ,/ /' " ~Ul: ot ~.t. ,... W ~ ~ t.vpr"f"W.t LII,,,)I,,. . r~.t " ,n el<Jllollon or .... r.l.... of "..&ro-. ..u..tUl~' (lncll1lUllOl. but ftOt U_u.d to, oil, pMt1el"', ~cal. or tadhtlOll\I ~atM_tot Ul.ec:i~t " .,; ....t~ltl...7 . II :~~:~~;.., .~~~t~bu~~~:;':~:;: or,raort.lI UUo! .... "....... popull- "" 11Dr! tll.1t .n'~ ". :::~:. 11111 ... propOa.l .u," lloIgillq. orer..te . ,/ ~for acl4tuOOIll "_1"91 U. !'r_~Uoa/elrl:ol.tlQJl. 11111 Ulep~Ur..,.utln' .. 04ftent~on of .ubtUl\tlal ...,. ,/ U(ll'I.t 'N!\lC\1hr_M? ~ .. Uheu Of! u:uti.., p.&rklnq I.elllta. or "-ftd '0. AlIw ~rIHPl<J? L . SUbU..uU.l '-' \IpOfl uuUI\09 tr_pocu.UIlfl IYu._~ :C- .. Aturati._ topn.oatIl pattlnl' o. C:lt'CN.latiOflor__l'\t of p<<tph ....wor......' li. . Altlnti-.- to...tlr'born. rul ,/ " on tuUlc~ - (flCT.... " tuttH' ,.,...td. .0 ,/ _tor "'lleI.., blcyc:lllt1 o. peMUrlatl.? .. 'u,bUc: ..rYlel'. "1\ tlM prgpoul I'll" ... .neon ,.... o. r....it " . .... lorn_ClOt .1t.nd.,_......f1Ul .,"tWt ,. ...)'of ... 11>11_L1I<! .r...: "" prot.C't.lonl .I 'ol,ee IU'OI:.o:t.on' oL Jc.IlorIh" .... .. 'ark.o..ot_r ~.....u_d V tle~hu..7 .. III6.tllt-..aq of p.lie hc1H~ t~.. , lltCl.u...v ......, V' 0tM.. ,""",-lItll "'"1e..7 .L ... !!!!IX. .ill the propo..l r..uh " .. Qe;e or ..m.t&IIt.hl ~uol .,; . ..1 w_r.,-1 .. ''''t..thl ll1ereua Illd_ll ~ abUAt' _rea 01 '-rn-. .. "'f'l4" UllI,....l""'f1t ot "'" ,/ ~oI_u.".7 ... ~1J.1=. 11'111 UllI pRpO&.l ..a''IIlt n. fOl'_..,.~.or ...~thl .1tentlOll, to t". 1011__ Ul9IlUHt1.., ~ro"l'\It"r.1 ./ <I" ~ . e-loa"l-.. 'J'.t..~ .../ ...e..O ,/ .. _. " .-pt1e t..u~ -/ . 'tom .'Q;I' 4I'..u...., V- .. $o1111._t. aMI <lll,..d? -,/ ... "__..ltll. Will tMp~.1 r"Ulttll' .. er..U_ of .., ...ahll naw," 0.. pot...th1""'h.....urd (...,l...UIIll / __"-I ...dUlI? II. bpcI......"r -" to potlllthl .I IledUH.a*7 Date / / 1/~/o/ . .. J._tn.tl"~_ 11I1:: tJ\. ~ropooI.l :....;. ~tr..etlo"cl."y'C"IIlI" vL.u or VI_ open to tM puIIHc, :)r ....11 thlprGpOII.l....lIltlllt... "r.It.~on Qt III ...tlMtl.C:IU,. off_..... IIta 0'" to pablic v1..1 - ~ L ... ~..,n.h"". 11111 tile prepoad re..lt .n .n ....."t u;>OII tM ..-l1ty or 'Iuanti ty of ..uu.... r..:T_U-.a1 opportlll'l'U'I~ v " ~~:o-:~r~::~~:l~~O~":~t...:~~:'" ~~ , ~,-~\ '\('."1 .rcloeQ10'illcll or ~l" . .c. "..I.. .tlMlCtO.... ctl,.c:t or r,.u ldl"<; , .L " ~...wtol'Y "1t>41~1 or SlFt-tie._. '. D.... t'" pro .et ....... II. pot..tul 10d.qraa.tM'I"111tyofUl.."dr_lIt. .l:Ibltanll.Uy rall\ICI Ul."8obitatol. 11111 or "'ddllt. .pltu.., eaolla.!lltl c" .., :,'1, t~ pof>II1.UOfl to 4rOll bllC1l1 .~II..,..tdnln'l h....lI, tJlnUen to ~1."",,~..,.pllntotanl...~1t.... r..du"~ :I'l. n_.ror r.ltrict t'" ran'l' ~f I rar. or .nd....,.r.d plallt or .n1..1 or ~ll.llJl4t. I~rt.llt ."..-1." of t", "Jor p.rioda 01 C.UtOMll. lIutory "rprel'l'.tory' f I 0..-. th~ pro,aet 11._ tlM pot...uaj to .CI'IIlVl .I'lort.tlfll, to th. du..svlnta.. oflon<l~t.....nv'r_"t.lqo.1I1 r. .l'lort"t....,Ilp.Ct011 t"'.n"'r_'" " on.. ,,1I.ell occun ,n I r.1I0".1... or,..I. d.f""ov.....r'C<!o! t1.....rI111 :ono.t'... "",,'Ctl ..,ll .n<lun ...11 .nto t"~ 'Ul~" v [)Co... t"" pro~...,t n.w 'IIp.Cta ",..c~ .re 1ndl'l"dually lla.1t'd. but cllII'Ulu'''.ly cCflI1(1.arlb1l1 I. pro,.ct ..y 'lIf>Ic, on t...oor .or. ..,....t. r"lourl:e."".t"ltll.l~cton..d\ ...our". La "1.t1,,.Ly ...11, but ."'r. t II. . f!.c t 0 ~ "'. tot. I 0 f tho.. 111paCtl onth....n..'r_nt...1<;n1t'C.nt_' 0/ d. Doa'tll~proJ..,t".....nvlr_nt.1 .ft..CU"'I'l.CII",:I.,IIlI.,l,Ilnt.nu.l .dv.r.. .ff.cto :)n h.....n I>Iln'l" ~llh.. ,j1f.cIly or Ind".Ctly? ./ DISCUSl>l()tl':J,tlOVlJilOMKEI'tT"-LfV.u.uATlal D. Of:Tt:IUUMATlOiI ltObl"""",,I.t.dlloyt..~....ftC)'1 Dn.th.t\~.otthh l"1thl...llUlt101l' ~lndtbeP~pro'lCto;xlUl.W1f......et9l'1t!~ .ttlC1.ontM,"vl~"t.and..t:GATtVloaa...u.kTlar ...'ll.....pr.p.~. ~nd Ullt U~ tile prliflOl'eol. pNjICt _Ill 11_ a 11'i1.ufLeallt _ttaet .... lI\. .."vir_t, tMn .111 not b. I 11<;nlfleallt .fl.ct 1n thi. e... bee.... tM aiU,at!. _uura. d.',=r~b.d on..n Itt.clI.ll llIeat h.... lIeI. llIWeoI to t". pro,act. . llEGATtVl: tlEcu.u.TtOll IIILL lit 'aI'UII:Il. o 1 Httd t'" pt'OpO.... pr"'let "",t l\a... . 11'.1fi_t .It"," on U.a .nvi r_1It, In<l. .", DVt....,AL U.JlCT llIIJ'QI:T i. raqu,",d. ~.~ ,6 ~~",~'J -2- . . . CUP 84-19 lA, Band G. The sUbject site is located within the Alquist Priolo Special ~. Studies zone and is subject to said regulations. A geologic study was undertaken by the applicant. Said study indicates that the subject site has experienced several periods of movement duri ng the past few thousand years. However, the sUbject site, is unlikely to experience any problems from a fault rupture standpoi nt. The appl icant is proposi ng structural designs to accommodate said findings. 6. Noise. Although there may be an increase in existing noise levels as a result of this proposal, because of the nature of this type of development, it is not anticipated that the noise level will be significant. There will be a short tenn increase in noise levels, however, during the construction period. All construction must take place during the hours established by the City. 7. Light and Glare. Because this site is presently vacant, an increase in light and glare will result from this project. However, this light and glare should not be significant as to impact adjoining properties. 8. Land Use. This proposal will result in a significant change in the land use from retail to high density residential. However, a hotel as well as a residential use are permitted in the C-2 zone with an approved conditional use permit. 13. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking. Forty on-site parking spaces are proposed. It is staff's opinion that based on similar existing facilities in the City of Arcadia and in other surroundi ng citi es that 40 parki ng spaces are more than adequate for thi s type of use. 14. Fire Protection. Because of the age of the persons residing on the premises there may be a greater need for paramedic services to the site. This will not, however, result in a need for an increase in the Fire Department personnel. File No. Ct/"o M-/9 . ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM A. Applicant' s Name I B~rqer-Socoloske Address: 21515 Vanowen St., l{203. Canoga Park. CA. 91303 B. 't>roperty Address (Location): 601 Sunset Blvd. (Southeast corner of Sunset Blvd. and Michillinda Avenue) C. General Plan Designation: Neighborhood Commercial D. ZOne Classification: C-2 E. Proposed Use (State exactly what use is intended for the property, i.e., type, activities, employment): 97 unit Senior Citizen Retirement Hotel with 40 on-site parking spaces. Parkinq for employees will be provided in the und~rground parking area on the subject site. There ~i11 be a minimum of three and a maximum of 12 employees on staff. There . will be 3 work shifts of 8, 12, and 3 employees daily. F. Square Footage of Site: 50,000 square feet G. Square Footage of Existing Buildings: 1. To Remain: 8,000 square feet 2. To Be Removed: 1,000 square feet H. Square Footage of New Buildings: 44.500 square feet 1. Square Footage of Buildings to be Used for: 1. Collllllercial Activities: 2. Industrial Activities: 3. Residential Activities: 52,500 square feet Number of Units: 97 '. On a separate sheet, describe the following: . 1. The enviro~ntal setting of the project site as it exists. 2. The prOposed alterations to the project site. 3. The use and development of the surrounding properties. -1- . Environmental Information Form . K. Check the appropriate answers to the following. questions: 1. Will the proposed'project result in a substantial alteration of gro;md contours and/or alteration of existing drainage pattern? Yes No x 2. will the proposed project result in a change in groundwater quality and/or quantity? x 3. Will the proposed project result in an increase in noise, vibration, dust, dirt, smoke, fumes, odor or solid waste? x 4. Will the proposed project result in the use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials? x 5. Will the proposed project result in a substantial increase in demand for municipal services and/or energy consumption: x Explain in detail any "YES" answers to the above questions on additional sheets. L. ' Provide any additional information which would elaborate on the potential environmental consequences resultant from the proposed project. H. . Certification: I hereby certify tha~ the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of ~ ability, and that the facts, statements and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date: S- /1!/;4- I ;//<<) ;// /*h/~ Signature of ApPlicant . -2- . . . ADDITIONAL INFORMATION > . 3. During construction, an increase in noise, vibration, dust, dirt, fumes, odors, etc., is to be expected. Once completed, however, the Senior Citizen Hotel will not generate a lot of noise and by the nature of the project, traffic will be minimal. This proposed use will be less intensive than the gas station and tire/battery shop that previously existed on the site. 5. Once again, an increase in energy consumption is to be expec~ed during the construction period. Once complete, there will be adequate sewer facilities arid electricity to serve the site.