Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1326 . PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 1326 A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86-14 TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A 110 ROOM BOARD AND CARE FACILITY AT 607-611 WEST DUARTE ROAD WHEREAS. on October I. 1986. an application was filed by Goldrlch. Kest & AssocIates to construct and operate a 110 room board and care fac111ty, PlannIng Department Case No. C.U.P. 86-14, on property located at 607-611 West Duarte Road. more partIcularly descrlbed as follows: Lot 44, Tract 3430 In the City of Arcedle. County of Los Angeles, State of CalifornIa, as per Map recorded In Map Book 42, Page 321n the County Recorder's Office WHEREAS. public hearlngs were held on November 12 and November 25. 1986. at whIch time ell Interested persons were gIven full opportunIty . to be heard and to present evidence; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: ~ That the factual data submitted by the PlannIng Department In the attached report Is true and correct. ~ ThIs CommIssIon fInds: 1. That the grantIng of such Conditional Use Permit will not lle detrlmental to the public health or welfare, or lnJurlous to the property or Improvements In such zone or vicinity because the proposed board and care fac111ty Is an approprlate use In the R-3 zone and that It Is a less Intense use than a multiple famUy development. 2. That the use applied for at the location IndIcated Is properly ~ne for whIch a Condlt1onel Use Permit Is authorlzed because of the reasons set . , '. e . . forth In NO.1 and because condItions have been applied to mitigate potential problems end concerns pursuant to Section 3 below. 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. The Commission noted that based upon studIes submttted of eldsting facUlties In other communities and the el<lsttng fec111tles In the City, that the 40 parkIng spaces Is adequete to serve the facility. 4. That the site abuts streets and hIghways adequate In wIdth and pavement type to carry the kInd of traffic generated by the proposed use. It was determIned that this type of use does not generate a large amount of . traffic. Duarte Road Is a major arterlal and Arcadia Avenue has been recently wIdened to accommodate the traffic generated by the multlple- famUy uses on the street. 5. That the granttng of such ConditIonal Use PermIt will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan. 6. That the use applied for will not have a substantIal adverse Impact on the environment. The CommissIon determined that the proposed use would not have a slgnlfleent effect on the envIronment and that the use would not be more Intense then a multIple-famIly use which Is permttted In the R-3 zone without e condItional use permit. ~ That for the foregoIng reasons this CommIssIon grants a Condittonal Use Permit to construct and operate a 110 room board and care fac111ty subject to the followIng condItIons: 2 1326 . . . 1. That the condItIons listed below from the Department of Public Works shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. a. SubmIt gradIng and draInage plan prepared by a regIstered clvl1 engIneer subject to the approval of the DIrector of Public Works. b. Plant parkway trees at locations determined by the DIrector of Public Works per City of Arcadia Standard S-13. c. Close existIng drlveways not to be used and reconstruct curb, gutter and sidewalk to match existIng. d. Construct P.C.C. drlveway apron according to Arcadia Standard DrawIng No. S-II. e. All survey monuments, centerline ties and survey reference points shall be protected In place or re-establlshed where disturbed. This work will be the responsibility of the permittee and shall be at the permittee's expense. 2. That fire safety shall be provided to the satIsfactIon of the FIre ChIef. 3. That a modIficatIon be granted for 40 parkIng spaees. 4. That a modIfIcation be granted for a density of one unIt per 582 ,square feet of lot area. 5. That the mInImum age for resIdency In thIs facilIty shall be 60 years and that a covenant or other agreement as deemed approprlate by the City Attorney shall be filed guaranteeing that the minimum age of residents shall be 60 years. 3 1326 e . . 6. That the maxImum heIght of the building shall be 35'-0. with the exceptIon of the bell tower whIch may be 40'-0. If It serves as access to the roof area. 7. That the plans shall be In substantial compliance wIth the plans on me In the subject case. 8. That dense landscaping shall be provided along the easterly and westerly property lines. Said plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for Its review and approval. 9. That dellverles shall be restrlcted to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Mondays through Frldays. No dellverles shall be allowed on the weekends. 10. That the maximum density shall not exceed 1.2 residents per room wtth a total of 132 residents. No room shall have more than 2 occupants. The developer shall be required to provide a covenant or other agreement as deemed necessary by the City Attorney to Implement this condition. II. That the easterly drlveway shall be restrlcted to Ingress only and egress shall be from the westerly driveway. That the drlveways shall be posted with .Rlght Turn. signs. 12. That the guest parking area shall be Increased from 7 to 13 spaces. 13. That C.U.P. 86-14 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. 14. Noncompliance with the provisions and conditions of this , Conditional Use permit shall constitute grounds for the Immediate suspension or revoeatlon of said Permit. 4 1326 . ~ The decision, findings and conditions contained In this ResolutIon reflect the Commission's action of November 25, 1986 and the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Amato, Fee, Hedlund, Kovacic, Papay, Szany None Commissioner GalinskI NOES: ABSENT: ~ The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause a coPy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of ArcadIa. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at IS regular meeting of the Planning CommIssion held on the 9th day of . December, 1986 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Amato, Fee, Galinski, Hedlurrl, Kovacic, Papay, Szany N:>He None Chairman /, Planning Comm sslod,tlty of Arcadia ATTEST: ~1~~ Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcsdla . 5 1326 /' ~ . . . November 25, 1986 TO: FROM: CASE NO.: ARCADIA CIn PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING DEPARTMENT DONNA L. BUTLER, SENIOR PLANNER REVISED C.U.P. 86-14 GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: LOT AREA: FRONT AGE: Goldrich, Kest & Associtltes 607-611 West Dutlrte Rotld Conditiontll use permit to construct and opertlte 13 110 room botlrd tlnd ctlre ftlcility with ptlrking tlnd density modifi Ctlti ons 64,038:. SQutlre feet ( 1.47 tlcres) 146.66 feet on Dutlrte Rotld tlnd 145.18 feet on Arctlditl Avenue EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING The subject site is developed with-the Utter McKinley mortutlry; zoned R-l (zone change to R- 3 pendi ng) SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North: South: Etlst: West: Developed with multiple family units; zoned R-3 Developed with 13 medictll complex; zoned C-O D & H Developed with multiple ftlmi1y un1ts; zoned R-3 Developed with 13 sing1e-ftlmi1y dwelling and medictl1 offices; zoned R-l tlnd C-O D & H respectively GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Multiple-family residentitll (13+ du/tlc) . HISTORY' The Utter McKinley Mortuary WtlS constructed in 1958 and is 13 legal nonconforming use. The mortutlry WtlS constructed prior to the time 13 conditional use permit WtlS required tlnd was 13 permitted use In the R-l zone. Today mortuaries tlre only allowed In 13 C-O or any less restrictive commercial or Industrial zone with tln tlpproved conditional use permit. On November 18, 1986, the City Council approved Zone Chtlnge Z -86- 3 for 13 zone chonge on the Subject property from R-l (slngle-faml1y residentitll) to R-3 (mu!tiple-ftlmlly residential). PROPOSAL The tlpplictlnt is proposing to construct 13 110 room botlrd tlnd ctlre ftlcility. Building . The building will be three stories, 35 feet in height tlnd conttlin 72,500 square feet. The "bell tower" is proposed to be 40'-0" in height. The sttlirwtlY is loctlted in the bell tower. The R-3 zone tlllows 13 mtlximum building height of 35'-0". The first floor will conttlin 22 rooms (25 rooms in the origintll pltlns), 13 lObby tlrea, living room, library, sitting room, business offices, extlmintltion room, 13 multi-purpose recretltion room, dining room, kitchen tlnd ltlundry ftlcilities The second floor will conttlin 51 rooms (54 rooms in the origintll pltlns) tlnd two stortlge rooms. The third floor will conttlin 31 rooms (49 rooms in the orlgintll pltlns) with 13 betluty tlnd btlrber ftlcility and tlrts and crtlft room. Fourteen of the rooms on the third floor tlre double suites. These suites conttlin a bedroom tlnd living room. The rooms rtlnge in size from 350 SQ. ft. to 750 SQ. f1. Etlch room htls 13 pri vtlte btl 1 cony or ptlt i 0 tlretl. The project density will be one room per 582 square feet of lot aretl. Code tlllows a density of one bed for etlch 800 sQutlre feet of lot aretl. . REVISED C.U.P. 86-14 November 25, 1986 Ptlge 2 . The tlpplicant htls indicated thtlt the mtljority of rooms tlre privtlte; however, btlsed upon the resi dency in thei r other f aci 1 i ties, they htlve 1.2 persons per room. In 13 discussion with the applictlnt, Mr. Hirsch htls indicated thtlt "bectluse of firltlncing" they would be comforttlble with limiting the occuptlncy to a minimum of 1.5 persons per room. This would tlllow 13 mtlximum of 165 residents. The design of the building is "contemporary mission" with pltlster walls and a clay tile roof. There will be a minimum 38'-0. setbtlck from Duarte Rotld. The first tlnd second story of the building will be set btlck 10'-0" from the easterly property line. The third story of the building will be set btlck 22'-0. from the etlsterly property line. There will be 13 52'-0" to 58'-0" setbtlck from Arceditl Avenue The building will be 28'-0" from the westerly property line. Btllconies tllong the etlsterly property line will encrotlch 4'-0" into the ten foot side ytlrd setbtlck. The R-3 zone tlllows btllcony encrotlchments of 5'-0" into the side ytlrd setbtlck. . A 4,560 SQ. f1. courtytlrd is proposed on the etlsterly side of the building tlnd e 3,200 sq. f1. courtyerd will be Joctlted on the westerly side of the building. The trash tlretl is 10ctlted inside the building tldjtlcent to the kitchen. Ptlrki ng tlnd ltlndsctlQi ng. Forty ptlrking $ptlces are proposed (41 were provided in the origintll pltlns) Code requires one spece for every two beds. At this time we do not know ~IOW meny beds tlre proposed; however, if two beds were proposed per room, 110 ptlrking sptlces would be required btlsed upon the requirements for convalescent end botlrd tlnd ctlre ftlcilities. The reduction in one ptlrking sptlce is in the visitor ptlrking tlretl. In the previous application, the tlpplictlnt htld provided an entrywtly into the courtytlrd aretl through parking sptlce 34. The new pltln provides for 13 septlrtlte wtllkwey tldjtlcent to sptlce 34 tlnd the size of the westerly courtyerd aretl htls been incretlsed from 2,800 sq. ft. to 3,200 sq. f1. . Seven visitor ptlrking spaces will be loctlted tldjacent to the southwest corner of the building tlnd htlve tlccess to the lobby tlretl through a hallway. Thirty-three ptlrking sptlces tlre provided for tenants tlnd employees. This REVISED C.U.P. 86-14 November 25, 1986 Ptlge 3 . ptlrking is located along the west side of the building tlnd tldjtlcent to Arctldia Avenue. This ptlrking area will be enclosed with gtltes. All ptlrking will be loctlted on grtlde. Access to the ptlrking will be from Duarte Rotld tlnd from Arctldia Avenue. A 25'-0" wide drivewtly interspersed with sttlmped concrete Is proposed tllong the westerly property line. A sttlmped concrete circultlr drivewtly is proposed fronting on Dutlrte Rotld which would allow visitors tlnd residents to be dropped off tlnd picked up tlt the front of the buil di ng. A 2'-0' to 5'-0' landscape buffer Is proposed tldjacent to the westerly property line. An 9'-0" to 20'-0" ltlndscape buffer Is proposed tldjtlcent to Dutlrte Rotld. A 5'-0"ltlndsctlpe buffer is proposed between the ptlrking tlrea and the property line tllong Arctlditl Avenue. A 3'-0" high wall is proposed tllong Arctlditl Avenue and 13 6'-0" high wtlllls proposed tllong the westerly property line. There is tln existing 6'-0" high wtlll tllong the etlsterly property line. A 5'-0" ]tlndsctlpe buffer is proposed between ptlrking sptlces 1-5 tlnd the etlsterly property line. . SPECIAL INFORMATION The tlpplictlnt htls indictlted there will be a mtlximum of 12 employees on the dtly shift. The evening shift will htlve four employees. According to the tlpplictlnt the tlvertlge tlge of residents will be from the mid to ltlte 70's. The ftlCility will provide full housekeeping services, furnished rooms, centrtll dining with three metlls plus 13 24 hour sntlck btlr, tlnd 13 vtln service for residents for shopping trips, doctor's appointments ond socitll events. Prop.osed Project ComDtlrison Ori gi ntl I Ap.p.1i Ctlt ion Revised Ap'p'lictltion Rooms Ptlrking Sptlces Unit Density Pkg. Density Courtytlrd Areas West Etlst 128 41 1 unit! 492 SQ. ft. 1 sptlce/3.1 rooms 110 40 1 unit/582 sQ. ft. 1 space/2.75 rooms . 2,800 SQ. ft. 2,700 sQ. ft. 3,200 sQ. ft. 4,560 sQ. ft. ,- REVISED C.UP. 86-14 November 25, 1986 Ptlge 4 . . . The ki tchen htls been re] octlted to the wester] y si de of the bui I di ng. The following is II summary of the two existing, one tlpproved pending construction tlnd the proposed retirement/botlrd tlnd ctlre ftlcilities within the Ci ty: ArnPill Retirement Hotel (Dutlrte Rotld) Lot Size: Rooms: Room Size: Ptlrking: Ptlrking Density: Unit Density: Ratio of Parking Sptlce to Room: 27,648 sq. f1. 60 165 sQ. f1. 24 on-site ptlrking sptlces I ptlrking sptlce for etlch 2.5 rooms 1 room per 547.45 sQutlre feet .40 sptlce per room Arctlditl Gtlrdens Retirement Hotel (Ctlmino Retll) lot Size: Rooms: Room Size: Ptlrki ng Ptlrking Density Unit Densi ty: Rtlti 0 of Ptlrki ng Sptlce to Room: 67,327 SQ. ft. 105 Minimum 377 sQ. ft. with severtll double suites 57 on-site ptlrki ng sptlces 1 ptlrking sptlce for etlch 1.84 rooms 1 room per 83 1.68 square feet .54 sptlce per room Regency Retirement Hotel (Sunset tlnd Michillinda - construction pending) lot Si ze: Rooms: Room Size: Ptlrking: Parking Density: Unit Density: Rtltio of Ptlrking Space to Room: 50,000+ SQ. f1. 97 370 SQ. ft. 40 on-site parking sptlces 1 parking sptlce for etlch 2.42 rooms 1 room per 515.46 sQutlre feet .41 space per room REVISED C.UP. 86-14 November 25, 1986 Ptlge 5 . . frQoosed Project (Dutlrte Rotld) lot Size: Rooms: Room Size: Parking: Parking Density: Unit Densi ty: Ratio of Parking Space to Room: 64,038 sQ. ft. 110 350 to 750 sq. f1. 40 on-site ptlrking sptlces 1 ptlrking sptlce for etlch 2.75 rooms 1 room per 582 sQutlre feet .36 sptlce per room The tlpplictlnt htls submitted two ptlrking studies. One of the studies WtlS completed in July 1986 tlt existing botlrd tlnd ctlre/retirement ftlcilities opertlted by Goldrich, Kest tlnd Associtltes (Exhibit A). The other is tln independent study on retirement hotels tlnd senior citizen aptlrtment complexes preptlred by Dontlld Frischer & Associtltes (Exhibit B), trtlffic consulttlnts, Based upon the Goldrich, Kest & Associtltes study of 13 of their ftlcilities, their tlvertlge rtltio of parking sptlces to rooms is 0.31, with 13 survey rtltio of sptlces used per room of 0.15. . The study preptlred by Dontlld Frischer & Associtltes surveyed 12 retirement hotels in Ortlnge County tlnd los Angeles County. The study concluded thtlt the typictll petlk ptlrking demtlnd tlt retirement hotels is fewer thtln 0.25 ptlrking sptlces per occuQied room for residents, employees tlnd visitors. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION In 1966 the City tldopted the current regultltions for convtllescent homes tlnd bOflrd and Ctlre ftlcilities. These regulfltions were established based upon 13 proposed convtllescent ftlcility which WtlS being reviewed by the City. At the time these regultltions were adopted, the concept of 13 "Retirement Hotel/Home. did not exist. When the first retirement ftlcility WtlS proposed I n the City (1976) sttlff conducted extensi ve resetlrch to determi ne how these facilities were opertlted, the necesstlry parking, density, etc. Since 1976 we htlve received two others requests (excluding the current request). The City has reviewed each of these projects, projects in other cities tlnd htls determi ned btlsed upon our experi ence tlnd the experi ence of other ci ti es . REVISED C.UP. 86-14 November 25, 1986 Ptlge 6 . . . thtlt the City's parking tlnd density standtlrds for Botlrd tlnd Ctlre tlnd convtllescent facilities are not tlppropritlte for retirement facilities. The three approved tlpplications for retirement ftlcilities htlve been grtlnted modifictltions to the regultltions set forth in the Arctlditl Municiptll Code. We have not had tlny compltlints from tldjoining residents regtlrding the two existing opertltions. The Fire Department htls reviewed the pltlns tlnd will require (1) 13 hydrtlnt midway in the drivewtly (2) a sprinkler system, and (3) llutomtltic door closers on any doors normtllly in use opening onto the corridor. ANAL VSIS A "botlrd tlnd cere/retirement ftlcility" is 13 permitted use in the R-3 zone with tln tlpproved conditiontll use permit. The proposed project does not comply with the density tlnd ptlrking requirements set forth for "Convtllescent tlnd Board and Ctlre" ftlcilities, ond there has been much concern expressed by tldjoining residents regarding the project density, ptlrking, noise, etc. It is sttlff's opinion thtlt the proposed retirement ftlCility is tln tlppropritlte use for this site. Btlsed upon the studies presented tlnd sttlff's observtltions of similtlr ftlcilities, the project is one of the letlst intensive uses thtlt is permitted (with or without 13 condit i ontl 1 use permit) in the R- 3 zone. As per the tlpplicanrs tltttlched letter, they tlre willing to commit to 13 tottll of 1.5 residents per room. No other residentitll home has 13 limittltion on the number of residents tlnd it is sttlff's opinion thtlt it would be very difficult to monitor this condition. Any long term noise associated with this project would be noise generated by the residents tlnd vehicles to and from the site. Bectluse of the age of the residents and the type of ftlcllity there will be mlnimtll noise and traffic genertlted tlt the proposed f acil ity. The Code limits deliveries to the hours of 7 tl.m. to 10 p.m. Sttlff would would recommend thtlt deliveries be restricted to the hours of 7 tl.m. to 7 p.m. The building height complies with the 35'-0"limit set forth in the R-3 zone with the exception of the "Bell Tower". Section 9282.1.3 of the AMC sttltes: REV I SED C.UP. 86- 14 November 25, 1986 Ptlge 7 . . . "mechanicel equipment including elevtltors, sttlirwllYs, ttlnks...for the operation of or mtlintentlnce of buildings mtly exceed the height limit prescribed in this Chtlpter; provided however, thtlt in no event shtlll tlny such item extend more than (10) feet tlbove the roof..: If the stairctlse in the bell tower is utilized for tlccess to the roof, the Pltlnning Department would recommend tlpprovtll of the 40'-0. height limit. Pursutlnt to the provisions of the Ctllifornitl Environmenttll Qutllity Act, the Pltlnning Deptlrtment has preptlred an inititll study for the proposed project. Stlid inititll study did not disclose any substantial or potentially substtlntitll tldverse change in tlny of the physictll conditions within the aretl tlffected by the project including ltlnd, tlir, water, minertlls, flortl, ftluntl, tlmbient noise and objects of historictll or tlesthetic significtlnce. Therefore, 13 Negtltive Decltlration htls been preptlred for this project. RECOMMENDA T I ON The Pltlnnlng Deptlrtment recommends tlpprovtll of C.U.P. 86-14 subject to the following conditions: 1. Thtlt conditions tlS outlined in the tltttlched report from the Deptlrtment of Public Works shtlll be complied with to the stltisftlction of the Director of Public Works. 2. Thtlt fire sofety shtlll be provided to the stltisftlction of the Fire Chief. 3. That 13 modification be grtlnted for 40 ptlrking sptlces 4. Thtlt 13 modifictltion be grtlnted for 13 density of one unit per 582 sQutlre feet of lot tlretl. 5. Thtlt the minimum age for residency in this ftlcility shtlll be 60 yetlrs tlnd thtlt a coventlnt j n 13 form and content to be tlpproved by the City Attorney shtlll be filed gutlranteeing thtlt the minimum age of residents shtlll be 60 yetlrs. 6. Thtlt the maximum height of the building shtll1 be 35'-0. with the exception of the bell tower which mtly be 40'-0. if it serves tlS tlccess to the roof aretl. REV I SED C.U.P. 86-14 November 25, 1986 Page 8 . 7. Thtlt the pltlns shtlll be in substtlntitll complitlnce with the pltlns on file in the subject ctlse. 8. Thtlt dense 1 tlndsctlpi ng shtl 11 be provi ded 131 ong the etlsterl y tlnd westerly property lines. Stlid pltlns shtlll be submitted to the Pltlnning Oeptlrtment for its review tlnd tlpprovtll. 9. That deliveries shtlll be restricted to the hours of 7 tl.m. to 7 p.m., MondtlYs through Fridtlys. 10. Thtlt C.U.P. 86-14 shtlll not take effect until the owner tlnd tlppllctlnt have executed 13 form tlyailtlble tlt the Pltlnning Deptlrtment indictlting tlwtlreness tlnd tlccepttlnce of the conditions of tlpproytll. 11. Noncomplitlnce with the provisions tlnd conditions of this Conditiontll Use permit shtlll constitute grounds for the immeditlte suspensi on or revoctlti on of stli d Permi 1. FINDINGS AND MOTIONS . AQQroval If the Planning Commission intends to ttlke tlction to tlpprove this project, the Commission should move to tlpprove tlnd file the Negtltiye Decltlrtltion ond fi nd thtlt the project wi 11 not htlve 13 si gni fi ctlnt effect on the environment and direct sttlff to preptlre the tlppropriate resolution incorpOrtlting the specific findings tlnd conditions of tlpprovtll set forth in the staff report (or tlS modified by the Commission). Denial If the Pltlnning Commission intends to ttlke tlction to deny this project, the Commission should move to deny and direct sttlff to preptlre tln tlppropritlte resolution incOrportlting the Commission's decision tlnd findings in support of thtlt deci si on. . REVISED C.U.P. 86-14 November 25, 1986 Ptlge 9 GOLDRICH, KEST & ASSOCIATES BUILOEtRS AND DEVEL.OPERS .RTNERS NA CilOLORICH SOL KEST ROBERT HIRSCH . . '15233 VENTURA BOULEvARD. SUITE 816 SHERMAN OAKS, CAUFORNIA 91403-2380 (91B) 9BI-8233 . (213) B72-'741 November 19, 1986 Ms. Donna L. Butler Senior Planner City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, California 91006 .,~ C' "'OV ~ , " co,/). ~ () lOn_ ~ () '\f: 0,..1 "Vb' .~~ Re: Proposed Retirement Home at 607 Duarte Road Dear Ms. Butler: Following the long discussion at the Planning Commission meeting of November 12, we have revised our plan to basically decrease the number of rooms to 110 with 40 parking spaces, and have increased the open space of both courtyards substantially. If you will particularly look at the third floor of the plans that are being delivered to you. directly by the architect, you will notice that we have made that floor extremely deluxe and incorporated primarily suites, with 14 of them containing one-bedroom suites of 750 square feet - which is a departure from anything we have done in our 30 prior guest homes - but meets, I feel, the suggestions expressed at the Planning Commission meeting. After long discussions with my partners, and although we have researched the City Public Health Licensing Directory and have not found either the Arcadia Retire- ment Hotel or the Arcadia Gardens currently licensed, we are willing to commit to a total of 1.5 people per room, or a maximum of 165 residents in this development. This was a tough decision, especially as it affects our financing as I explained previously. Our architect has been in touch with your City Building Department in the matter of our "Bell Tower" being 40' tall, and since this encloses a stairway which is permitted under the Uniform Building Code to exceed the the general building heights and would be required to extend above the roof line of the remainder of the building, we would ask you to verify that 40' would be . Ms. Donna L. Butler November 19, 1986 Page Two permissible for this structure only, with the rest of the building being 35' maximum height. Yours very truly, GOLDRICH, KEST & ASSOCIATES By: RH/lp . . GOLDRICH, KEST & ASSOCIATES BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS ~RTNER9 NA GOLDRICH L KEST . ROBERT HIRSCH 15233 VENTURA BOULEVARD, SUITE 816 SHERMAN OAKS. CALIFORNIA 91403-2380 (ale) ge'-5233 . (213) 872-1741 November 19, 1986 "'~ (- .tOV ~/" ~'''lo .eO ltm.. ~ 0 "tf",,~ -0' #15 ."t:~ Mr. Earl Waynick 585 West Duarte Road, Unit Arcadia, California 91006 Re: Proposed Retirement Home Westerly of Your Development Dear Mr. Waynick: Sorry that you and I have not had the chance to meet, although you will recall that we did have one telephone conversation and I did meet a number of your neighboring condo owners last week at a meeting I hosted at the Santa Anita Inn on November 11, and again at the Planning Commission meeting November 12. . I am enclosing herewith the revised plan for this develop- ment that will be heard at the Planning Commission meeting of November 25. Please note we have reduced to 110 rooms with 40 parking spaces, and have made our third floor into predominantly suites with deluxe rooms thereon. We have increased the open space of the courtyards, and after a long deliberation with my partners are agreeing to limit our maximum occupancy to 1.5 people, or a total maximum of 165 people in this development. I would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you and any of your interested condo owners, to explain the plan and review any further concerns they may have before the November 25 meeting. I will call you to see if it can be possible - even this weekend. Yours very truly, GOLDRICH, KEST & ASSOCIATES By: Robert Hirsch Partner . RH/lp enc. . . . A. O. BOLLER (IQO?-1877) JOHN S. PETERSON ,JOHN E.. CAVANAUGH BOLLER, SUTTNER & PETERSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW SO NOiltT... "IRST AvENUE POST O,.,.ICE BOX 0478 P"S.AOENA OF"I"'ICE. 3S NORTH LAKE AVENUE S!:VENTt-I "..OOR f=lASAO!:NA, CALIJI'OANIA gllDI TELEPHONE (BIB) .05-29&0 ARCADIA, CAI.IFOllNlA 91006 TELEI='HONE (818'''.''-8107 PLEAoSE REPLY TO Arcadia O"C::OUNSItI.. THOMAS A. SUTTNEF=! November 21, 1986 RECEIVED NOV 211986 HONORABLE MEMBERS Arcadia City Planning Commission 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, California 91006 CfTY fW AItCADlIA Pl.A""'NCi D&Pr. Re: C.U.P. 86-14 Application of Goldrich, Rest & Associates Date of Hearing: November 25, 1986 Honorable Members of the Planning Commission: As you know, we represent the Silvergate Condominium Homeowners Association. We have noted the changes made by the applicant to its plans for the development of a board and care facility. The changes made, specifically decreasing the number of units from 130 to 110, are certainly a step in the right direction. However, we submit that even at 110 per unit, the use of the land next to the Silvergate Condominiums remains far too dense for an appropriate use of the property. The density is further exacerbated by the fact that with the potential of two residents per unit, the property may still be inhabited by up to 220 residents. While the argument has been submitted that this type of use of the property would likely result in no more residents than a condominium project would, you should note that the Silvergate Condominiums consist of 44 units with a total of 75 residents. Based on that comparison, it is unlikely that a condominium constructed next door to the Sil~ergate Condominiums would come close to having the density or occupancy of the proposed board and care facility, even as redesigned. Applying the letter of the law concerning density requirements for board and care facilities, the possibility remains for too many beds in the instant project and the project as proposed involves . . . HONORABLE MEMBERS Arcadia City Planning Commission Page Two November 21, 1986 a use of land that is too dense. For the foregoing reasons, the application must be denied. Very truly yours, ~9!,.LER i.. /'" >1! ERSON ./ // // g// ,// JOhn-t~>~eterson i JSP:jaf cc Earl Waynick ./ / .. ------ ;.. I~'. t , . . October 17. 1986 TO: PLANNING DEPARTMENT FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARlMENT SUBJECT: CUP 86-14 - 607-611 W. DUARTE ROAD 130 ROOM RETIREMENT HOTEL This department has reviewed the subject CUP and recOlllllends the following conditions of approval: 1. Submit grading and drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works. 2. The existing parkway widths are ten (10) feet on Duarte Road and six (6) feet on Arcadia Avenue. 3. Plant parkway trees at locations determined by the Director of Public Works per City of Arcadia Standard S-13. 4. Close existing driveways not to be used and reconstruct curb. gutter and sidewalk to match existing. 5. Construct P.C.C. driveway apron according to Arcadia Standard Drawing No. S-ll. 6. The subject property is served by a sewer line that has the capacity to transport sewage flows generated in accordance with land use reflected in the City's current general plan to CSD's system. 7. All survey monuments, centerline ties and survey reference points shall be protected in place or re-established where disturbed. This work will be the responsibility of the permittee and shall be at the permittee's expense. 8. This department has no objection to the proposed encroachment. 9. The above items are to be complied with to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works in accordance with the applicable provisions of .the Arcadia Municipal Code. I ak?t~ CHESTER N. HOWARD Director of Public Works CNH:RGB:rk , r r t. i. .. , , ;. '. { . 1 . 10' '1:';,;)~9., ~ " ~' 2~M , ~,2) C-Od D " et~ (:ll~ \. '-MedIcAl '1 ,R-3 v'J ~c.-O ~~[rH~~: ~ <>{fiee J 0 H 1" '\ _. B\~,~ AND USE AND ZONING . , I I I fO I . R-:3 o 31 I .1 n. ,tr.'S . - "" 114.1. 7S. PARk 12." 12.10 R-3 8 '4 .1' . n," AVE. (J:J5) " "4""'( 3 Q) - .J) J !1~,!lO II ~ 7&." , I I I I r , I :r I I . 0" 0 iiI 'C-zr:! H ~ ~ ...... S:I '1 ".,,'" '"'I .or 0 III \) I , I CA~O I I (~n) ,/.~) I ("/~'I .all I '11 DUAFrrE. RD. . Z-8G~3 ~ CUP BG- 14 ,11:0100' . o. w . . . ~. . . . -- -_. ~.~.::t-... .;:61= . ---- --- "'--" -- .....-..... . ... .......... --- .,,- .. ~...,~ -- ..,-..- .-~ -....,.........", .--.... ....,.....~ ......-,., --- ---" ..........-.... - --- .... i I ---- -- -- .... -e " I .....- -- e I ......- -- 1___........."1 - ""'...... \ !,I \ ._._---_..!!!::.._-~- Ii'?_~t- -.,,-:-.,;--- ~~ "" I ~I . ~. i I i 8~ '" . e I \ ...,.. , , ~: j \1 --' \ \ -- ....,--t ..- i" ~ - ~ ~--~ 'Am -...- -_. .1 -e . It . It 'I ".t. -. \f'~-- ~ j 1 . .. ~ -::1..- . -.---- - ~-- ..,.,- -* i--J .' -*- ~-'.I- ==:r~ ....-- ll!P'JlIJ" .... 1----....... I . i I! I: ! i . . . -...... ~- ..6'- r...... .... ._- DJi DDJIiiIiiII ..,.,...., ) 'I " , ,,~D D CJ o 0 !9.~' ...., - ---.---- r-f_...7-~---~_.-.._'._-- --- DO DO " 00 '........ DO DO DO o D o D o 0 IMI.~....... . 1 i 1 000 - ....1 ... . Total Rooms Alhal!lhra Royale 88 Alhambra Joanna King (213) 289-3871 Chatsworth Royale 136 Los Angeles Mona McGee (818) 341-2552 Clairemont Royale llO San Diego aty Dabbert ~9) 292-8044 Concord Foyale 125 Concord Joan Jackson (415) 676-3410 Coronado Royale 92 Coronado Pam Morgan (619) 437-1777 Channel Islands Royale 105 oxnard Annette Brown (P05) 487-5341 Duke Royale * San Diego 56 Kay Miller (619) 222-ll09 .~: Now approved for 18 room addition with no additional parking: 74 EXHIBIT A GOLORICH, KEST & ASSOCIATES GUEST HOMES PARKING STUDY . ,Juty, 1986 Total Parking Spaces 28 38 28 33 35 25 28 28 Ratio of Spaces to Rooms 0.32 0.28 1).25 0.26 0.38 0.24 0.50 0.38 Total I of 'rotal . Rcsidents'of Staff Cars Cars 16 9 10 6 5 12 4 10 7 9 1 6 1 4 At Survey . Total Cars in Lot 20 19 10 19 16 4 6 At Surve Ratio of Spaces Used Per Room 0.23 0.13 0.10 0.15 0.17 0.04 O.ll PARKING STUDY , JULY, 1966 PAGE TWO r--, At Survey At Survey Ratio of i. ':qta1 Ratio of Total!! of Total I Total Spaces Total . Parking !'paces Residents' of Staff Cars Used Per Rooms Spaces to Rooms Cars Cars in Lot Room 'La palma Royale 131 35 0.21 6 4 9 0.07 Anaheim Toni Johnson (714) 991-3243 . Magnolia Royale 109 39. Q.35 15 3 16 0.15 Long Beach Monica Triana (213) 595-1559 Northridge Royale III 22 1l.2/) 6 a 12 0.11 Los Angeles Bernadette ~medY ( 681-1415 Pacifica Royale 66 21 0.32 10 2 13 0.20 Orange County Carol Newman (714) 892-4446 Sunrise Royale i'a1m Springs 813 40 0.45 12 7 21 0.24 Richard Carlson (619) 327-83S1 \~estborough Royale a6 29 0.33 5 5 11 0.13 30uth San Francisco .larbara Lipka (415) 872-0400 . :...060 EXHIBIT B . A STUDY OF SENIOR CITIZEN .RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS INTRODUCTION The average vehicle ownership of senior citizens is lower than that of younger people, and, therefore, the parking needs at senior citizen residences are lower than those at residences of younger .people. Most senior citizens are not regularly employed, and many do not drive because of physical disabilities. . To determine the parking needs at senior citizen retirement hotels and senior citizen apartments, Donald Frischer & Associates surveyed the parking demands at several existing senior citizen residences. The objectives of the. survey were to determine appropriate parking indices (number of spaces per dwelling unit) for hotels and for apartments that are occupied exclusively by retired, senior citizens, DATA ACQUISITION For purposes of this report, the hotels and apartment complexes are identified by alphabetical d~ignation and location. Retirement Hotels . In December 1985 and February 1986, three retirement hotels in Orange County, California and nine retirel1llent hotels in Los Angeles County, California were surveyed. Managers at each hotel were interviewed to obtain information about the numbers of rooms that were occupied at the time of the study and any other applicable information. From those interviews, it was found that the afternoon is the time of day when the most vehicles are parked at a retirement hotel. All of the hotels were surveyed during a weekday afternoon. The survey was then repeated at three of the hotels after 5:00 p.m. on a weekday and during a Sunday afternoon to verify if the peak parking demand does occur during a weekday afternoon. . DOOm IRlmlR t mOCIRm ,; 'I . At each retirement hotel, all vehicles parked in the parking lots were counted. There were unoccupied'on-site parking spaces at all of the hotels. At nine of the retirement hotels, vehicles were parked on the streets adjacent to the hotels. During the weekday afternoon at one of those hotels, It could not be determined if all of the vehicles that were parked on adjacent streets were associated with, the hotel. Therefore, the total number of vehicles parked at. that hotel during a weekday aflernoon could not be determined. At the other'times when that hotel was surveyed and at all times when the other hotels were surveyed, it appeared that all vehicles parked on adjacent streets were associated with the retirement hotels, and those vehicles were counted. , Senior Citizen Apartments In February 1986, 14 senior citizen apartment buildings in Los Angeles County, California and one senior citizen apartment building each in Ventura County, Orange County, and San Diego County, California were surveyed, Managers at each building were interviewed to obtain information about the numbers of apartments that were occupied at the time of the study, the numbers of residents and employees who were parking vehicles at the build ings, the parking facilities, and any other applicable information. . Fifteen of the apartment buildings were visited in the late afternoon or early evening to obtain a count of visitor vehicles parked at each site or on the streets adjacenl to each building. An accurate count of visitor vehicles could be obtained al only three of the apartment buildings. At those three buildings, the on-site visitor parking spaces were fully occupied. At seven buildings, there were no on-site visitor parking accommodations. It was assumed thaI some of the vehicles that were parked on ,the streets adjacent to those nine buildings belonged to persons visiting at the senior citizen apartments. However, it was impossible to determine how many of the vehicles thatwere parked on the Slreet belonged to those visitors, and how many were owned by residents of the senior citizen apartments or were associated with adjacent developments. Al the other three senior citizen apartment buildings that were visited, the visitors share on-site parking spaces with the residents and employees, and the number of visitors' vehicles parking on the site could not be determined. . Two of the surveyed senior citizen apartment buildings were not visited. However, at one of those buildings, there are no on.site visitor parking accommodations, and, according to the manager at the other building, the ten on-site visitor parking spaces that are provided are not sufficient for the needs of visitors. Therefore, an accurate count of visitor parking demands at those buildings probably could not be obtained. 2 oonAlO JAII[HIA t 0110[101[1 ! . FINDINGS . .. Retirement Hotels The retirement hotels Ihal were surveyed arc lisled in Table 1 with applicable data and informalion: The number of occupied rooms at Ihe hotels ranged from 39 10 192, and Ihe number of vehicles parked at each hOlel ranged from eighl vehicle$ al Holel H (40 occupied rooms) 1026 vehicles al HOlel F (139 occupied rooms). The number of parked vehicles per occupied room . ranged from 0.05 100.41, At '11 of the 12 hOlels, there were fewer than one vehicle parked for each four rooms on a weekday. Although alone of the hOlels there were more parked vehicles on a Sunday afternoon Ihan on a weekday afternoon, the number of parked vehicles per occupied room on a Sunday ahernoon at thai hotel was 0.26, approximately one vehicle for each four rooms. . The surveyed parkin!: index of 0.41 parked vehicles per occupied room al HOlel Lwas 58-percent hi!:her than Ihe highest index of the olher hotels and about two and one.half limes Ihe average of Ihe olhers. There arc several factors thaI could account for the higher number of vehicles per occupied room, Hotel L opened October 1, 1985, and was only 50.percent occupied at Ihe time of the field survey, Initially, employee vehicles account for a large percentage of the vehicles parked at a retiremenl hOlel, Aher the facility is open for a while and Ihe occupancy increases. Ihe percenla!:e of employee vehicles parked at Ihe hOlel decreases. As a resull, Ihere is a decline in the tOlal number of spaces required in relalion 10 the number of occupied unilS. When HOlel L is fully occupied, the parking demands will probably decline to less than one space for each four dwelling unilS. :1:1 FUrlhermore, the residents at relirement hotels who own vehicles when they rirst move in, oflen will sell their vehicles when Ihey realile Ihey no longer need.lhem, At the retiremenl hOlels Ih.ll h,IVe been ntablished for a while, few of the residenls own vehicles" . 3 DOORID IRIIlAIR t lilO[lRliI . FINDINGS Retirement Hotels The retirement hotels that were surveyed are listed in Table 1 with applicable data and information. The number of occupied rooms at the hote.ls ranged from 39 to 192, and the number of vehicles parked at each hotel ranged from eight vehicles at Hotel H (40 occupied rooms) to 26 vehicles at Hotel F (139 occupied rooms). The number of parked vehicles per occupied room. ranged from 0,05 to 0.41. At 11 of the 12 hotels, there were fewer than one vehicle parked for each four rooms on a weekday. 'Although at one of the hotels there were more parked vehicles, on a Sunday afternoon than on a weekday afternoon, the number of parked vehicles per occupied room on a Sunday afternoon at that hotel was 0,26, approximately one vehicle for each fou r rooms. . The surveyed parking index of 0.14 parked vehicles per occupied room at Hotel L was 58-percent higher than the highest index of the other hotels and about two and one-half times the average of the others. There are several factors that could account for the higher number of vehicles per occupied room; Hotel L opened October 1, 1985, and was only 50-percent occupied at the time of the field survey. Initially, employee vehicles account for a large percentage of the vehicles parked at a retirement hotel, After the facility is open for a while and the occupancy increases, the percentage of employee vehides parked at the hotel decreases. As a result, there is a decline in the total number of spaces required in relation to the number of occupied units. When Hotel L is fully occu~ied, the parking demands will probably decline-to less than one space for each four dwelling units. Furthermore, the residents at retirement hotels who own vehicles when they first move in, often will sell their vehicles when they realize they no longer need them. At the retirement hotels that have been established for a while, few of the residents own vehicles, . 3 ODDAlO IAIHNlA E Ammll\ V;: .. , . -v . ;:: .Y ..~....-: - .< ", , . :.~~ .~"~. ';'" ~;.. ~:.;\:'-'~~: .:'/:f~\ ~t"A" . -'" . " ~ ~ ,"- . J~ ?~ ~~;. Senior Citizen Apartmen'ts The 17 senior' citizen apartment buildings that were surveyed are listed in Table 2 with applicable data and information. At Apartment 0 and at Apartment P, t~ere is not enough parking provided on the site for the residents.. and the number could not be obtained of residents who have to. park elsewhere, Although there is sufficient on.site parking at Apartment Q, employees and some of the residents park in areas that are also used by visitors, and the manager did not know the numbers of residents' and employees' vehicles that are regularly parked on the site. At the other 14 senior citizen apartment buildings that were surveyed, sufficientinfor. mation was available to assess the parking needs of residents and employees. Although, according to the building managers, there is a shortage of on-site parking for residents and employees at four of those buildings, the managers of those buildings knew the numbers of residents and employees that were parked elsewhere, . . ~.: :~'~~~~f ~'~.::: ". ':; /\i; :.....: . The 14 apartment buildings for which the parking needs of residents and employees could be determined range in size from 32 to 200 apartments, and the parking needs for residents and employees at those buildings ranged from 16 spaces at Apartment K (31 occupied apartments) to 104 spaces at Apartment L (200 occupied apartments). The number of parked resident and employee vehicles per occupied apartment at the 14 senior citizen apartment buildings ranged from 0.32 to 0.59. At nine of the apartment buildings, the number of parked resident and employee vehicles per occupied apartment was fewer than 0.50. Eight of those nine buildings are located either near a Central Business District or in a densely developed area with shopping and services within walking distance, and public transportation is available. At the other one of those nine buildings, the dinner meal is served each day, and the residents need to do less shopping and have less need for their own'vehicles than do residents at buildings where no meals are provided. Meals also are served at two of the other apartment buildings where fewer than 0.50 parking spaces per apart- ment are used by residents and employees, At five apartment buildings, the number of parked resident and employee vehicles per occupied apartment was 0.50 or greater. All of those buildings are located in areas with low development densities, where few shopping and servite facilities are within walking distance, and where no meals are served. . 4 ooDOlo 101\[0[0 t R\\o[IOI[\ /., r. " At the three senior citizen apartment buildings where usable visiior parking. information was obtained, fewer than one visitor parking space for every len apartments ,was occupied at the time of the field investigations, , . ' Three of seven visitor parking spaces were occupied at both Apartment l (200 occupied apartments) and Apartment J (50 occupied apartments), and seven of 12 visitor parking spaces were occupied at Apartment H (110 apartments), However, at Apartment N, where.complete information about visitor parking was not available, one visitor space is provided for every ten apartments, and, according to the manager, that number of spaces is not adequate. Apartment J and Apartment Q are the only apartments listed in Table 2 that are not subsidized with government funding.' However, that fact did not appear to have an effect on resident vehicle ownership at Apartment I as compared with vehicle ownership at the other senior citizen apartment buildings that were surveyed. Resident vehicle ownership at Apartment Q could not be determined. . CONCLUSIONS Based on the surveys that we conducted, it was concluded that the typical peak parking demand at retirement hotels is fewer than 0.25 parking spaces per occupied room for residents, employees, and visitors. At senior citizen ~partment buildings that are located in densely developed areas with convenient shopping, services, and public transportation, the demand for resident and employee parking is fewer than 0.50 spaces per occupied apartment. For senior citizen apartment buildings located in areas. with low development densities with few convenient stores and services, the parking demand for residents and employees is between 0.50 and 0,60 spaces per occupied apartment, unless meals are provided, Meals are not typically provided at senior citizen apartment buildings, However, on the basis of the limited data that was collected, it is concluded that if meals are provided, the resident and employee parking demand is fewer than 0,50 spaces per occupied apartment. . Although data about visitor parking at senior citizen apartment buildings was limited, 0.1 5 visitor parking spaces per apartment appears to be a reasonable amount of visitor parking to provide, That amount would be added to the spaces required for residents and employees of the apartments. s mALO IAIItHIA E A\\DWII5 ~' 'll." ~..~, "";- "... ' '. '," t ~ . , . . . ~ TABLE 1 RETIREMENT HOTEL PARKING J' HOTEL DAY DATE TIME NUMBER OF NUMBER OF PARKED VEHICLES NUMBER OF PARKING INDEX ., PARKING SPACES DWELLING UNITS VEHICLES PER ON THE SITE ON THE SITE ON THE STREET TOTAL OCCUPIED DWELLING UNIT A WednlSdl' Februory 19, 1986 5:00 p.m. 28 8 2 200 192 0,05 B WednlSdey Februlry 19. 1986 4:30 p.m, 60 12 3 104 104 0.14 C WednlSdey Februlry 19. 1986 4:15p.m. 35 10 1 125 115 0,15 D Mandl' De.ember 9, 1985 2:30 p.m. 20 9 2 15 69 0,16 E Thundey DllCember 12. 1985 3:30 p.m, 51 13 0 13 12 0.18 Sundl' DllCember 15, 1985 2:30 p.m. 51 19 0 13 12 0.26 Wednesdey Februlry 19, 1986 5:40 p.m. 51 12 0 13 12 .0.11 F WednlSdey DllCember 11, 1985 3:45 p.m. 40 22 4 150 139 0, 19 G Thundl' DllCember 12. 1985 3:45 p.m. 38 24. 1 136 129 0.19 Sundl' Dl<ember 15, 1986 2:45 p.m. 38 21 3 136 129 0.19 WednlSdl, F.brulry 19. 1986 5:30 p.m. 38 11 3 136 129 0.16 H WednlSdl, Februlry 19, 1986 3:45 p.m. 43 6 2 100 40 0.20 I Mandl' December 9, 1985 3:30 p.m. 28 13 0 60 60 0.22 J WednlSdlY December 1,. 1985 1:40 p.m. 32 15 0 61 66 0.23 K Sundey December 15. 1985 2:05 p.m. 19 9 4 82 71 0.18 WednlSdey Februlry 19, 1986 6:05 p.m. 19 1 6 82 18 0.11 l Mandl'( December 9. 1985 1:45 p.m. 25 15 1 66 39 0.41 :;;: Hot,ls 0,1. Ind L Ir. in o,lnge CaU"ly. The alhers Ire all in Los Angeles Caunly. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ . . "..>,..,~-.,-"" . ,-. . TABLE 2 SENIOR CITIZEN APARTMENT PARKING APART1\'IENTS SUBSIDIZED MEALS LOCATED IN NUMBER OF APARTMENTS NUMBER PARKING OEMAND PARKING 'NOEX DENSELY OF NUMBER OF VEHICLES VEHICLES PER DEVELOPED PARKING OCCUPIED APARTMENT AREA SPACES TOTAL OCCUPI ED ON THE SITE RESIDENT EMPLOYEE VISITOR RUIDENT VISITOR PLUS EMPLOYEE A Yes No Yes 95 95 70T 30 . No' KnoWn 0.32 .0' Known B Yes Yes VIS 183 183 65 R plus E 57 8 ;"2 0,36 -... 0,01 2V C Yes No VIS 89 89 30 R plus E 32 . NOI Known 0.36 NOI Known 0 VIS One per DIY No 198. 198 75 R plus E 65 8 NOI Known 0.37 NOI Known E Yes No VIS 98 98 38 R plus E 36 2 ..4 0.39 ... 0.04 4V F Yes No Vis 46 46 22 R plus E 18 . NOI Known 0.39 NOI Known G VIS No VIS 167 167 42 R 65 2 NOI Known 0.40 Nol Known H Vii No VIS 110 110 48 R plus E 44 4 7 0:44 0.06 lZV VIS One per Oay VIS 150 150 37 R 62 6 Nol Known 0.45 NOI Known 2 E J No No No 50 50 30 R plus E 25 . 3 0.50 0.06 7V K Yes No No 32 31 3ZT 16 . NOIKnown 0,52 NOIKno"" L VIS No No 200 200 104 R plus E 102 2 3 0.52 0.02 7V M VIS No No 54 54 30 R plus E 32 . Nal Known 0.59 NOI Known N VIS No No 100 100 60 R plus E 57 2 >10 0.59 > 0.10 ~ 10V ~ ~ 0 VIS No No 68 68 25 R plus E > 25 . NOIKnown > 0.37 NOIKnown - ~ P VIS One per Day Yes 169 169 42 R plus E > 39 3 No. Known > 0.25 NOIKnown - Dplionll - ~ 0 No Three per Day No 331 318 257 T > 91 NOI Known NOI Known > 0.29 NOIKnown ~ ~ Dpliona! - ~T Tot" perking lIPICes tor ,"ide"1I. employeel, and .,isitors ;::: R Resident parking spece' ~E Employee parking spaces =V Visitor p8,kirtl'Paces ~ . The or'lly employees ere ,"iden. manegers. ~ Apanmenl G i. in S.n Diego County. Apertm'"' N illn Orange County. Apartment Q i. in VenNr. County. All other ~.rtmentl.re in Los Angeles County, . . . File No. ....?'/.P~ .# . CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA A. Description of project: /'.h mdm.lLAL ~~ ./')J:::tpU/'r R::Jp A ~ , /A//7'" /i""~~"""" ~AP.n I t:"Agp ~/-7 B. Location of project: ~C>7,t'J,// u/. LJ/./AR7E P/) C. Name of applicant or sponsor: ft1Y ..o"vq r.P5r" ~/4~S 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 Ini tial Study. E. Mitigation measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects: Date: /q/~~ ~~ Date Posted: [fqg~ R~M~ T tle , .........,-- . i- File No. c~p~-14 . ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM A. BACKGI'lOUND y~r~ ril;,.=, f! A~t:;/Y./A,~~ 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent /."1?;J..fJ V8.H7~ &'V4 .rJ'~/~ AK... 1. Name of Proponent .JIIR?MAt.1 ~ t14 (~) 9~/'52~ 9/do':1!. - B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all ~yes ~ and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) !!! !!!!1 .!2. !!! !!!!!! .!!!!. 1. !!!!:!!.. W111 Uw p~a1 rn'GU UII .. .ulIltUlUal ndllt"tlan in the _t of ..tar OtMrvi.. .....U...i>l. ..u a. Ulutable ..rtlI eondltiOftI or in ~ for public ",atar 1\11'I'11_1 cbaD9.. 1n '101091e .~t~......, "" 1. bpollln of pellpla or prvperty II' .. Dhrvpt.lon., dbpla_au._ t.o ".tar lrllated lula.ara IlIch .1 ~cticm or over_ring of the 1011? - floodiD9? e. Cb.a1I,. in t.opoqraphy or ,round L ,. 'lant Lif.. Will t.M propGllIl n...lt 'a. lv.rheeJ'dief f..tlln'" a. OlanlJ4l 1n the 4iv~1tJ' of epeel... . ,. The "'atrllcUOll, _d.n, or ~ or nUllbtlr of any apeda. of planu -.4iUcuion of ."y \11I1'11'\11 'II'.o1091e liocludiftt tlr_., ahrllba, 91".... crop., .Jf or ptlylical f..tuna? aicrotlon aDd aquatic pleul? a. J\IIy UICT.... in wind Dr ..tar ~ .. ..Curtlon of t.M !l1IIIben of UI)' ./ .rostol'!. of 10UI, either on or off unique. I'UI 01" .notang.r.ot lpee1.1 thO! -.it.? o[ planu? f. ChUl91' ln 111UUon. otlpM1Ucn e. Intnll1uetlcn o[ n_ .peel.. of I or.J"Olicm..hl<::h..y.....sUYth. L pl&lltl lnto .,. area, or r.lult in . <::h&nn.l ot a rlv.r or .u.... blnl.: to thl norul npl.nl."-"t ot ...hUng apeehl? ,. bpoIura of people or property to 9.010;1<:: baz.rcb .u<::h al ..rthquak.., I ,. Aniall 1.1f.. W111 tbI pzopo..l nnIt lanot.Uot... IIlUd.Uot.., VJ"Ound 'aUlU'a. lnl or limIer bU'J"U1 a. ChlnV' ln t:he 4.1..nity of ,,.ci_. 1. !!!.. V111 tbI PJ"DPClSal n.olt :1.D1 OJ" Eu=b.u of &IIy 'p.c1.. of eniJu.le (b1rot.. 11'Nl an.1AA1I 1ncllKU.D9 ItIJltU.... .. S~tantb.l lir ea1..icna or L fiab IEld .b,l1ft,b, benUl1c 0I"i!uo1_. .L _t.rioJ"aUcm of emIli.nt lir lpIlUt:r? 1.lcU or IUcrorlUDII1 .. Ttle CSWlt10n or objlct1o~l. I .. ..otuction of tha nUlllben of Ul)' V """" un.1q1ll. ran or .ndIn9.twd epec1., of anial1.e7 o. Alt;Irlt;10nof 11r_ot;. _1,t;un or tISllpeJ".t;ur.. or Ul}' I e. lllU'Odu.c1:1on of _ ~.1a. of cblll9' in cU..ta. aitblr,locall:r uo:t.ale 1nto III ana. OJ" rIIlllt io ,/ OJ" r"91oaally1 a b&J"r1.r to t:he IUVrlti_ or ___ _toflQlJ.alola? 1. !!!!.E.. w111 tbI p~ll re'1l1t inl d. DltariorlUoo to P.1It.U19 .UOIUI L a. Cbln9" 1n eurr.nta or tba courea I hlbi tat? of 41nctiOll of .at.r __U in f~b..tlJ"l' .. VOila. .111 tJte p~1l ~olt 1111 .. CbIll9" in abaorpticn rlt.., a. trier..... ~ _lnia9 EIOi.. 1_117 V 4r11lll9' pat.t.t11I. or the rlt. uaot ., _to of lurtl~ vater runcU' .. ~IU'I of peapu to ..".,.. ,/ ,; DOha l...u? e. lUt.IJ"aUone t.o tbI __. or 1'1.0" ot flood .IUn? 7. ~S~:z':,=l~r;ht :1;~?Pros-Il I V ,. Chan9' in the __to of lartlca ..t'J" in lIlY .'tlr body? .. t.not tI... W111 t.M prcpoa.l ranlt ... i'""'iiiliitir.t1al Ilt..rltion cf th. ,/ a. IlbCMI'91 1Ilto 'urflel .Iun. or pn.""t or plt.Drl14 llEld III' of _ are.? in Illy .1t..r:r.tlon ot' .u.rt'.c. .Iter qu.l1q, .1nclwHn9 but not l1a1t.ad t.o I .. .atlU'd ".Ol.IrClI. Will t.bI pnpo.a1 r.e:=p.ntur., 01..01...., -n- or ~1u.tllU t.vrbl4.1t:y? I f. A.It'J"It.ion of the 4.1rect.ion or I I. Iner.... UI tbI rlU of _. of ara:r ...twIl ra.ourc:eat rltl of flow ot' 9rounO .Itan? L b. SIlbUUlthl o!Ilpl~l... of IfI7 'II. C\MIJI in thl quanUt;y or ,~lIfto!l ELCInre_eb11 naturll ruoa.rc.? . ..tu'a. a1t;b... througb 41reC1; l1S4iUona L or "J.tbd:rav.lI. or thJ"oU\Jft iJlurC:lpUon of any aquifer by cuU cr .xr:....tionaf -1- . Date n. !!! laTH ..E. ... ~~:t;:~~;..~ ~~~Illt 'd." 01' Yi_ op.n tAl ~ public, _ .U1 t.be 'nlpOIIal ....ult h tM enauOll of all ...th.tJ~llJ' off_:L". .ita op.n t.o pubUc Wi_? "'l:rflItion. _Ul t:Jw ~a1 ....u1t. 1.0 all 1....et. "CIpllIl t;h. qu,lhy IDI' quaaUty of -.d.aUD; ~.t.1_1 opportlm1t.1_l' ~ L zo. ~~~r~;~1::~e:~t.r:~~ c:; .. dpHicUlt udulol091cal en b1n.orical a1", a'tr1lrtlUW. object. Dr bu.114J.1l91' lIaA""'ton rlnlunJI of ,lcmlficanClJ. . e. Doee~ pro act b'W UMI pot~tl.1 t.o _'IiIra. t.ba qllAUtJ' af t.hII .nri~t. aubet_UaUy r..sllce 'the hah1tat 01 .. tin Dr .U41U. .,.,e1", ca.. .. fLa!l CIl' "U411f. populatioa to 4zvp be1_ ..U-.uu1a111.9 1_1.1:, Unat._ to .lillinat. .. ,lUlt 01' _1_1 ~1tJ'. r9du.ce lb. 1l~1' or ....uict. t.be 1'_91' of .. ra... or eIU!IllI,.~ p1&Zlt or ant-l . or .1J.lliftAU 1arport&Jlt .~l.. of tba _jor periocb of CAlif~. hbtorJ,' o:t !:,rMllt.oQ'7 b. Doa tt1. project; ...,ve t.be pcrteaUal to acb1_ abort-t"",, to t:hII dJ...dv1mta.. of loftrt.,. etIvi.r'olmUlul voa1l1' (A abort-t.... i..ct 011 t:lIe hY1~t U 011. wb1cl1 OCClUa 1:1 .. ...uti_!,. bd.f, def1D.iU.. period of t1_ nU.. 101l;-t.~ 1~eu will ..,'1", ....11 1At.o t:be futv.n.1 c. Dl>n the project. ..... UipaiC'U "tlich an 11ldiviClWllly l1a1tR. but C1l:IIUlaU_ly condClaraJ:.tla7 II. projact Ny iapeet on tvCI or .,n aapAlrua realllU'_' wtIan tha 1l1lp11c:t on aach .,..1l1U'e. 1a rahU'HIly a_11. but "Mn Uta affaet of tha tatal of thOlla 1lIIp&c1:tI em lba uv1r_t i. ,1p1fiC&Dt., d. Dca Uta projaet. "'va allvi~t.ll .ffaeu wtI1dl will C&alia allblt.&Il.Ual eCIvana affaeu 011 b_ _illp. .1d1er 41nctly or 1a4i1raet.ly7 '" / ,/ n. ,/ ~ C. DIacosaI(lIII or EllVIacMJIP"lAL BVlU.OATICIl D. DZT&DLUIATlCll lto IMI cClIIplated by t.M Lead .\9IIICY' CiII .... baai. of thll 1.za1t.11l ...luatiOlB 61 UDCl tIla propoaaCl projact. COOUl !lOT u.. a d,niUCIlIt aU.et on tba 'lI.vi~t. Ul4 . .BGA'!'IVE DEClAMTICIl "ill M pnparet!. C I Und tIllt althllL>9h t.M propo.ad plrojac:t. could h._ . ,i9nif1c'll.t .ffact 011. tIla ,",vb_nt, tIl'lra will not IMI a d9llificant affact in t.bb cua MC...... tJla aiU9'UOIl _.auraa d..cIr1baCl 011. lOll attachad ,haat hava "an .Mad to .... project. A llJ:~nVl DECLUATI(lIII ifILL IE PJlUAIlZtl. C I finel t.M propasa4 projaet MAl' h._ . ai9'liUcant athC't on tM _Vircmaent. aJId an DrVI_IItIITAL llOACT' ItEPOft b raqvJ.lr'K. . . /'7~~ "-.. -2- . ENVIRONMENT Al CHECKLIST FORM C.U.P. 86-14 613. Increllses in existing noise levels. The proposed 130 unit botlrd llnd care facility could increase the noise levels as compllred to the existing mortutlry. However, this noise would be noise tlssocitlted with tlny residentialareallnd should not be a significant imptlct. 7. Will propostll produce new light and gltlre. Any chtlnge to the subject property will produce new light, however, the proposed project should not substantitllly incretlse the light in the aretl and tllllighting would have to comply with the City's requirements, one of which is thtlt all light and gltlre must be shielded from adjoining properties. . a. land Use. The propostll is a substtlntialalteration from the existing mortutlry land use. If the zone chtlnge is tlpproved to R-3, the proposed Itlnd use would have a greater density than the normal R-3 development. However. beclluse of the type of ftlcility, II botlrd llnd ctlre is a permitted use in the R-3 zone with tln tlpproved conditiontll use permit. 11. Will the propostll alter the loclltion, distribution. density... of the humtln population. The proposed botlrd and care will increase the density on the subject property. A board and ctlre facility, genertllly cretltes less traffic than 13 multiple-ftlmily complex because the persons residing tlt such 13 ftlcility tlre older tlnd most residents do not drive. Although the density mllY incretlse, it is sttlff's opinion that this would not cretlte an adverse' imptlct on the environment. . ... " ~-... " " , , , , . ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION File Ho. Z_~'--"'2,.d ~4'P 8~ -/4 FORM A. Applicant's HUlll,'.(;oldrich. Kest & Associates Address. 15233 Ventura Boulevard. Suite 816. Sherman Oak~. CA . 91403 B. Property Address (Location). 607 - 611 W. Duarte Road C. General Plan Desi9rlation: Multiple Family D, ZOne Classit1cation: Requesting change from R-l to R3-H B. Proposed Use (State exactly what use is intended for the property. 1. e., type,. acti vi ties. 8IIIploYlDBnt): The applicant proposes to construct, use and maintain a State licensed 130 room senior citizen b::Iard:arrd'.care retirement facility with 42 parking spaces. . F. Square Footaqe of Sites fl1.c;RO:!:. ~qn;:!TP 'f,:lo,:lo+ G. Sq1aze Footage of Existing Buildings: 1. To Rema1n. N/1I 2. 'ro Be Removed: 10.000 + square feet B. Sq1aze Footage of New Buildings. 79.425 + square feet I. Square Footage of Buildings to be Used for. 1. "Ccaaercial Activities. N/A 2. Industrial Activities. N/A 3. R.es1dent:1al Activities, Hlllllber of Uni ta . 79.425 + square feet 130 rooms '. On a separate sheet, describe the following. . 1. '!'be 8llvirOl1lllllntal setting of the project site as it exists. 2. '!'be proposed alterations to the project site. 3. 'ftIe use and development of the surrounding properties. -1- r , r:e , . . -.i' -.... , Bnvirolllllllntal Information Pom 11:.. Oleck the appropriate answers' to the following questions, 1. will the prcposed project result in a substantial alteration of ground contOurs and/or alteration of existing drainage pattern? 2. Will the proposed project result in a chan9ll in groundwater quality and/or quantity? 3.* Will the proposed project result in an increase in noise, vibratiOl:l, dust, dirt, s1llOke, f'\llDes, odor or solid vaste? 4. Will the proposed project result in the use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials? 5. Will the proposed project result in a substantial increase in demand for ~icipal services and/or energy consu=ption, Yes. .!!2.. - ~ ~ * .L - ..L 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. M. Certification, I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of rrrj ability, and that the facts, statements and informatior> presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.' Oatel ~~v-rpmh~T r 1 qRF; . ES !Solid waste will be increased due to normal use and occupancy upon completion of proposed development. Amounts generated will not cause a significant adverse effect on the environment. -2- t ~, ". f ~' .. t. THE ENVIROt-tlENT Al ~ETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE AS IT EXISTS The subject parcel,ls 63,580:. square feet (1.46:. acres) with a depth varying from about 474 feet to about 487 feet. The frontage Is about 146 feet along Duarte Road, ami about 145 feet along ArcadIa Avenue, The site Is currently being used as a mortuary operation, although the present owners have deemed the site to be surplus and not needed In the contInuing operatIon of their business, There Is a medIcal, professIonal, offIce orIentation to the uses along Duarte Road In the Immediate neIghborhood of the sIte both Westerly and Southerly. There are also condomIniums and apartments adjacent to the East ami Southerly. THE PROPOSED AlTERATIONS TO THE PROJECT SITE .' It Is proposed to redevelop the sIte completely by demolIShIng the eXIsting structures and replacing them with the proposed 130 room State licensed senior citizen board and care retIrement facility with 42 parkIng spaces. The facilIty will be attractively desIgned by a professional llcensed archItect. The replacement landscapIng wlll also be attractIve and professionally desIgned and maIntaIned. The fac1llty wlll be 3 stories, but will maintain the 35 foot heIght llmlt consistent wIth City lImitations regarding heIght allowed for 2 story structures. THE USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The use and development of surroundIng propertIes Is or1ented to medIcal, professional and office commercial, wIth some multHam1ly condomInIums and apartments, These uses will not be SIgnIfIcantly affected by the , ,proposed senIor hoUSing, .