Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutD-2 Staff Report - CA Grand Village Azusa Greens Continued Public HearingSCHEDULED ITEM D-2 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL VIA: SERGIO GONZALEZ, CITY MANAGER FROM: LISA BROWNFIELD, CONTRACT PLANNER MATT MARQUEZ, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: APRIL 15, 2019 SUBJECT: APPLICATION(S): CERTIFICATION OF THE CALIFORNIA GRAND VILLAGE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH. NO. 2018061063), CALIFORNIA GRAND AZUSA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-2017-02), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA-2017-02), ZONE CHANGE (Z-2017-01), SENIOR HOUSING DESIGN REVIEW (DR-2017- 20), GOLF COURSE DESIGN REVIEW (DR-2018-04), AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM-81336) LOCATED: 1100 NORTH TODD AVENUE AZUSA (FORMERLY 919 WEST SIERRA MADRE AVENUE) APPLICANT: CALIFORNIA GRAND VILLAGE AZUSA, LLC ___________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND: The proposed California Grand Village Project is located on portions of the existing Azusa Greens Country Club at 1100 North Todd Avenue (Assessor’s Parcel Number 8617-001-005) between West Sierra Madre Avenue and 10th Street, east of North Todd Avenue. Specifically, the project site encompasses the locations of existing golf holes 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the existing golf course. The site is divided into two areas: the 4.48-acre California Grand Village Azusa Greens Specific Plan area at golf holes 3 and 6, and a 14.88-acre portion of the Azusa Greens Country Club, specifically at golf holes 4 and 5. In total, the site encompasses approximately 19.36 acres. In order to implement the applicant’s request for reconfiguration of the site and development of their proposed project, the following entitlements are required: DENIED PROJECT CITY COUNCIL 4/15/2019 City Council Staff Report – California Grand Village Azusa Greens April 15, 2019 Page 2 of 4 1.A draft environmental impact report (DEIR) and mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) for the Project. The DEIR analyzed the Project and its environmental impacts and provides information showing that the Project will not have significant and unavoidable environmental impacts following implementation of mitigation measures shown in the MMRP and compliance with applicable Federal, state and local regulatory measures applicable to the Project. 2.A specific plan document [California Grand Village Azusa Greens Specific Plan (SP- 2017-02)] 3.A General Plan amendment (GPA-2017-02) to change from Open Space land use designation to Specific Plan. 4.A zoning amendment (Z-2017-01) to change from Recreation to Specific Plan. 5.A design review (DR-2017-02) for the senior housing development. 6.A design review (DR-2018-04) for the golf course reconfiguration. 7.A tentative tract map (TTM-81336) to subdivide the property to create a 4.48-acre parcel for the development of the senior housing. On March 15, 2017, the Planning Commission conducted a study session where the preliminary project concept was introduced; Planning Commissioners asked questions of City staff and the project applicant. On January 16, 2019, the Planning Commission once again reviewed the project and recommended approval of it to the City Council. On March 4, 2019 City Council meeting convened and continued a public hearing, received public comments, and viewed a descriptive project review presentation from City staff and the project applicant’s representative. After reviewing the presentation and hearing public testimony, the Mayor and City Councilmembers requested City staff to provide additional information at the April 15th City Council meeting. In addition to noting the questions during the meeting, City staff reviewed the March 4, 2019 City Council meeting video (as posted to the City of Azusa website www.ci.azusa.ca.us) to ensure all questions were identified. City staff prepared the Response to Council Questions Memorandum dated April 9, 2019 (Attached). Additional notice of April 15, 2019 City Council continued public hearing was mailed and published to all owners and occupants beyond the required 300’ radius as shown on attached radius map. The public notice was mailed on Thursday, April 4, 2019 and was published on Friday, April 5, 2019 in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune. City Council Staff Report – California Grand Village Azusa Greens April 15, 2019 Page 3 of 4 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council follow the order of actions shown below: 1.Receive an updated staff report from City staff; and 2. Reconvene the continued public hearing and consider any written/oral information from persons who have not previously testified regarding the proposed Project; and 3. Provide the applicant an opportunity to provide closing comments/rebuttal; and 4. Close the public hearing; and Council Deliberation & Options: Once the public hearing has been closed, the City Council may deliberate and consider the following options: 1.Project Denial. Should the City Council wish to deny the Project, the Mayor may entertain a motion to deny the requested amendments to the Azusa General Plan, Development (Zoning) Map and Specific Plan document and direct staff to draft Resolutions for denial of the Project and TTM based upon their inconsistency with the General Plan and Zoning Map. These Resolutions would be placed on the consent calendar of the following City Council Meeting agenda (May 6, 2019) for adoption. 2.Project Approval. Should the City Council wish to approve the Project, the Mayor may entertain a motion to direct staff to prepare appropriate Ordinances and Resolutions to implement the Project and continue the matter to the May 6, 2019 City Council meeting for adoption of these Ordinances and Resolutions 3.Additional Information Needed. Alternatively, the Mayor may entertain a motion to continue consideration of the Project to a subsequent meeting and direct staff to provide additional information needed to make a decision (Note: Depending on the reason for continuance, staff may be required to re-notice the Project). ANALYSIS: A detailed analysis and project description of the project is attached to this staff report for your reference. Additional information discussed at the March 4, 2019 public hearing and responses to questions and comments posed has also been attached to this staff report. The primary policy issues to be considered by the City Council remain. These include: 1.Whether it is appropriate to re-designate the Azusa General Plan land use designation of the subject site from “Open Space” to “Specific Plan” and the Zoning Map from “Recreation” to “Specific Plan;” and City Council Staff Report – California Grand Village Azusa Greens April 15, 2019 Page 4 of 4 2.If the City Council is comfortable with changes to the General Plan and Zoning Map, whether those changes should introduce the residential land uses allowed in the proposed Specific Plan. PUBLIC NOTICE: The project’s public hearing notice was sent to all owners within 300’ of the project, owners within Rancho Azusa and Villa Azusa neighborhoods, and owners and residents within the Le Med Apartments. The public notices were mailed on Thursday, April 4, 2019. The public notice was published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on Friday, April 5, 2019. Staff did not receive any comments regarding this notice. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Prepared by: Reviewed by: Lisa Brownfield Manuel Muñoz Contract Planner Senior Planner Reviewed: Reviewed and Approved: Marco Martinez Matt Marquez City Attorney Director of Economic and Community Development Review and Approved: Review and Approved: Talika Johnson Sergio Gonzalez Director of Finance City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1) City Council Memo – 4-9-19 2) California Grand Village Azusa Greens Project Description and Analysis 3)Public Notice Radius Map ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR ROCHA AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: LISA BROWNFIELD, CONTRACT PLANNER VIA: MATT MARQUEZ, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: APRIL 9, 2019 SUBJECT: PROPOSED PROJECT: CALIFORNIA GRAND AZUSA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN (SP-2017-02), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA-2017-02), ZONE CHANGE (Z-2017-01), SENIOR HOUSING DESIGN REVIEW (DR- 2017-20), GOLF COURSE DESIGN REVIEW (DR-2018-04), TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM-81336); AND CERTIFICATION OF THE CALIFORNIA GRAND VILLAGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH. NO. 2018061063) LOCATION: 1100 NORTH TODD AVENUE, AZUSA (FORMERLY 919 WEST SIERRA MADRE AVENUE) APPLICANT: CALIFORNIA GRAND VILLAGE AZUSA, LLC ___________________________________________________________________________ In the course of the March 4, 2019 public hearing for the proposed California Grand Azusa Village project, the Mayor and Councilmembers posed several questions. This memorandum provides responses to those questions. If after reviewing the responses, you have additional questions please ask Matt Marquez, Director of Economic and Community Development or Manual Muñoz, Senior Planner. Question 1: Is there another traffic control measure that can be installed at the Sierra Madre Avenue/Todd Avenue intersection that is more effective than pedestrian activated flashing yellow lights? Response: The Sierra Madre Avenue/Todd Avenue intersection is currently controlled by a 4-way stop sign with a crosswalk. As proposed, the intersection Attachment 1 2 will continue to have a 4-way stop sign with a crosswalk. In addition, the intersection would include a pedestrian activated flashing yellow light highlighting the crosswalk across Sierra Madre Avenue. Other traffic control measures can include a traffic signal, 4-way stop sign with a pedestrian signal, and pedestrian warning system at the crosswalk.  Traffic Signal – given the current and future traffic volumes and the traffic patterns, a traffic signal does not meet traffic signal warrants. If a traffic signal is installed and if it included one direction with an “all green” or “all green arrow” default position, it is probable that traffic speeds would increase on Sierra Madre Avenue.  4-way Stop Sign with Pedestrian Signal – if a pedestrian signal were to be installed to control the pedestrian movement and a 4-way stop sign controls vehicle movement, it is very likely that drivers will be confused. Drivers, at times, would see a “green” pedestrian signal telling them that they may proceed, immediately followed by a stop sign. Dr ivers may assume the pedestrian signal is permitting them to move through the intersection without stopping.  Pedestrian Warning System – a pedestrian warning system (red flashing light and/or red flashing warning strip) can be programmed to operate in two ways – always flashing red or flashing red when the pedestrian activation button is pressed. The pedestrian warning system would not include a green light. As such, drivers would see either an unlit signal or a red flashing light when it is pedestrian activated or see a red flashing light when the light is programed for continual flash. The pedestrian warning system works in conjunction with the stop sign; thereby, reinforcing the stop sign-controlled intersection and causing less driver confusion. The Applicant is willing to install a pedestrian warning system, pending City review. The applicant has provided a written response to this question and it is attached to this memorandum (Attachment 1) for your review. Question 2: What is the art in public places fee? Response: The Art in Public Places program (88.39) requires commercial, industrial, or residential projects with eight or more dwelling units or a total building project valuation of $750,000 to select, purchase, and install permanent outdoor art at the site. The art installation site needs to be accessible and visible to the general public from public streets. The required minimum art allocation is one percent of total building construction valuation; the maximum art allocation per project is $50,000. The proposed project will pay a $50,000 in lieu fee. Question 3: How do the proposed sidewalks interface with the Rain Bird site? Response: Along Sierra Madre Avenue, the project proposes to construct a 6’ wide, ADA compliant sidewalk from the Sierra Madre Avenue/Todd Avenue 3 intersection east to the proposed project’s property line. At the proposed project’s/Rain Bird property line, the sidewalk will terminate because the Rain Bird site does not have a public sidewalk along its westernmost street frontage. Question 4: Why was this site selected? Were other sites suitable? Response: Per the project applicant representative, the project applicant team selected this site because:  Downtown Azusa’s rebirth, proximity to transit, proximity to college/university, and appealing setting with immediate access to recreation (golf course).  A senior living village is not appropriate for single family residential nor retail/commercial areas. Other jurisdictions are hesitant to place senior living facility in multifamily zones due to employees and delivery trucks. Senior living villages are compatible with light industrial because senior living buildings can be attenuated for noise. This site is adjacent to one light industrial use, Rain Bird. The golf course and arterial roads provide a buffer.  Most golf courses are financially struggling and could use sale of property income.  Site location effort conducted three years ago, yielded no other available properties large enough for the proposed project; 4.5 acres minimum. A written response to this question from the applicant is Attachment 2 to this memorandum. Question 5: Will the $1 million be spent on the entire golf course or on the impacted holes? Response: Per the applicant representative, in addition to the purchase price of the 4.88 acres, California Grand Villages Azusa (CGVA) will pay Azusa Greens Country Club $1,000,000 for the reconfiguration of holes 3-6. The reconfiguration cost is estimated at $1,000,000. Question 6: Would this project’s approval set a precedent for the area? Response: If the question asks could the reconfigured holes 3-6, approximately 10-acres, be sold and developed with residential , commercial or industrial uses, the site would undergo a geologic investigation to determine if an active earthquake fault runs within it and if so, where is the fault located. The State Mining and Geology Boards” Geohazards Committee Executive Officer’s Report dated March 12, 2014 identifies three portions of the Upper Duarte Fault on either side of the site. Two portions west of the site are identified as approximate or inferred (based on “closely follow fault traces from the 1987 Crook et al. study” and “traces based on fault studies by Amec, PSE and LGC”). The portion east of the site is identified as “potentially active fault, but location 4 uncertain”. All the faults are trending towards the site but the fault type and specific location is not known. In addition, per the project applicant, a geological investigation (including boring) was conducted on the site in 2016. The applicant team drilled three deep wells to determine groundwater elevation. If a significant change in groundwater depths occurs, it may indicate a fault. (This method was used on the Lagunitas site). In the three wells, two holes had similar groundwater depth ; however, a third had an 82’ difference. Once the possible fault was located, the project applicant discontinued drilling and eliminated the site from further consideration. Attachment 3 shows the possible fault location between wells B-2 and B-3. Attachment 3 also indicates the fault trace noted in the study identified above. However, the project applicant geologist thinks that the fault may trend more east/west (possibly parallel to 10th Street) rather than southeast/southwest (possibly nicking the corner of the site and crossing 10 th Street) as thought in the 2014 report. If the holes 3-6 site undergoes further a geologic investigation and an active earthquake fault is more thoroughly located on-site, structures meant for human occupancy (i.e. residential units) could not be constructed on the active fault or within 50’ of the fault line (Alquist-Priolo zone). That being said, a 10- acre site is large; it is possible that a residential development proposal could be configured to avoid the Alquist-Priolo zones. If the development proposal were for commercial or industrial uses, the Alquist-Priolo zone does not apply. However, prudent site planning would locate buildings away from active fault lines. It is important to note that if a development application were to be proposed, the City of Azusa City Council would review the proposal as the proposed project would require a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Design Review, and other entitlements. If the question asks could the golf course area immediately north of the proposed California Grand Village Specific Plan site be redeveloped as residential, commercial, or industrial use, then the site’s Restrictions, Covenants, Conditions, and Agreement needs to be amended. The project applicant representative provided a copy of the site’s Restrictions, Covenants, Conditions, and Agreement, which is Attachment 4 to this memorandum. Attachment 4 documents that the site is to continue its use as a golf course as long as the Azusa Greens Golf Course is in operation. If the Azusa Greens Golf Course terminates its golf course use, the site is required to continue to to serve as a buffer from the rock processing plant. If the rock processing plant discontinues operations, it may be possible that the buffer use is no longer required and, as such, may be used for another use. 5 If the Azusa Greens Golf Course and the rock processing plant discontinue operations and the site is proposed to be redeveloped, the City Council would need to review and approve a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Design Review, and other entitlements. The entitlements needed to approve a project, such as the one described above and in this memo, require City Council approval via a public hearing/s. These require the City Council take a discretionary action to either approve or deny a project. Discretionary actions are those that require the exercise of judgement when deciding whether to approve or deny a project. To render a decision, Council must use their best judgement after reviewing the evidence provided to make specific findings (either in the affirmative or the negative) regarding a project. These findings are project specific, as each project is judged on its individual merit. These findings are not arbitrary in nature, but rather are set forth in State and Municipal law. If the question asks would the General Plan land use designation change and zone change set a precedent for the conversion of open space designation to a specific plan, staff has provided information on historic zoning in response to Question 7 below. The applicant has also provided related information in Attachment 8 to this memorandum. Question 7: What is the historic zoning for the site and the area over time? Response: While, the Azusa Greens golf course is comprised of eight parcels, all of which are currently zoned Recreation, the proposed California Grand Village Azusa Greens parcel is 8617-001-005. Its initial 1939 designation was Single Family Residential (R-1) with some portions zoned Commercial (C-3) and Light Manufacturing (M-2). Over the course of time, the parcel has been rezoned several times. The parcel’s zone has been water conservation (1949), water (1957), community facilities (1965), and recreation (2005). It is important to note, the area now known as Mountain Cove did not appear in zoning maps prior to its annexation in 1984. Once annexed, Mountain Cove was designated Community Facility (CF), Residential Agriculture (RA), and Water Conservation (W). In December of 1999, the zone designation was changed to Planned Residential Development (PRD). Eventually, the area was re-zoned and received a new zoning designation of Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) in 2005. The Rosedale Residential area has undergone a few changes as well. Originally, the area was designated Single Family Residential (R-1). By 1957, the area was designated Single Family Residential - 10,000 sf. (R1a) later changing to Residential Agriculture (RA) before the adoption of the Monrovia Specific Plan in 2003. Attachment 5 to this memorandum provides additional detail related to this question. 6 Question 8: What happened to the idea of a Gold Line shuttle for residents and employees? Will incentives be provided to encourage employee carpooling? Response: Per the applicant, regular transportation or car service will be provided to residents. As such, transportation service to the Gold Line station should be provided to residents as a matter of course. Per the applicant representative, employee parking is available on site. In addition, the applicant representative stated (but it is not within the Specific Plan) that the senior village’s management/operator will provide a shuttle to/from the Gold Line station during shift changes for employees. Shuttle service is anticipated to be provided by a van or other vehicle at the operator’s discretion. Employees will be provided with financial incentives to carpool. Incentives will be determined by the senior village management/operator; it may include gasoline gift cards. Given the Gold Line Station shuttle service and incentives are an operational issue and neither are discussed within the Specific Plan, conditions of approval would be appropriate if the City Council wishes to approve the project. The conditions of approval would require transportation service to/from the Gol d Line station 24-hrs/day 7days/week for all residents. The conditions of approval would require transportation/shuttle service for employees for 30-minutes before/30-minutes after shift change 24-hours/day 7 days/week. The conditions of approval would also require meaningful, ongoing incentives for each carpool employee and would establish what constitutes a “carpool”. The applicant has provided additional information on this item, and is Attachment 6 to this memorandum. Question 9: Are there plans to convert other parts of the Golf Course? Response: Per the applicant’s representative, the Azusa Greens Country Club does not have any plans to develop other portions of their property. If that changes, any proposed project would need to file a City of Azusa application for the project, a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Design Review, CEQA analysis, etc. All proposed projects would need to go through the entitlement process. Question 10: What does this cost? Response: The applicant representative has stated that the proposed project will rent at market rate and does not provide affordable housing. Currently market rate exceeds moderate income, low income, and very low -income rental rates. CGVA’s initial assessment is that Independent Living Studio units’ rent will start at $3,850/month and the average rent for Independent Living One- Bedroom units is approximately $5,000/month. The applicant representative did 7 not provide rent cost information regarding the Independent Living Two- and Three-Bedroom units, the Assisted Living units, nor the Memory Care units. The monthly pricing will be determined by the management/operator at the “pre - lease” stage. In addition, the applicant or facility operator may set/increase/decrease rates at any given time to attain the desired outcome. Additional information on this item was provided by the applicant; it is Attachment 7 to this memorandum. The project applicant provided additional information regarding Open Space and Land Use Compatibility. The information is provided as Attachments 8 and 9, respectively. Please let staff know if you have any questions regarding this memorandum, or any other questions related to the subject project. We will do our best to respond to any questions prior to your April 15th meeting. If we are unable to do so, we will attempt to address your questions at said meeting. Attachments (9): 1) Traffic 2) Site Selection 3) Geologic Map, Land Phases, Inc. 4) Declaration of Restrictions, Covenants, Conditions and Agreements Affecting Real Property, 5) Historic Zoning Information 6) Employment Transit & Carpool Incentives 7) Affordability 8) Open Space 9) Land Use Compatibility Traffic In response to Council Member Alvarez’s concern for safety at the intersection of Todd Avenue and Sierra Madre, we have consulted with the Traffic Engineer who prepared the Traffic Impact Analysis in the EIR and City’s Director of Public Works/City Engineer. We are providing a bullet-point summary of the findings from these consultations, which focused on the following three traffic issues: (1) congestion at the Todd Avenue/Sierra Madre intersection; (2) vehicle speed on Sierra Madre; and (3) pedestrian crossing safety at the Sierra Madre/Todd Avenue intersection. Congestion at Todd Avenue /Sierra Madre  A comprehensive Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared for the EIR and reviewed by City Staff and Consultants for accuracy.  Traffic counts (by machine and people) measured existing traffic, such as commuters from Mountain Cove, Rosedale, and Glendora.  Senior housing generates much less traffic than other uses because the residents don’t go to work or take kids to school during the busy morning and evening peak traffic times.  The traffic model started with existing traffic, added traffic from the Senior Village, added traffic from future projects like the Canyon City Industrial Park, and finally added an overall growth factor of 1% per year, to determine traffic impacts.  Traffic studies measure how much traffic can move through an intersection (the capacity of an intersection) and whether adding traffic from the project will cause the amount of traffic to exceed the capacity of an intersection.  The increase in delay (waiting time) at the Todd Avenue/Sierra Madre intersection attributable to the CGVA senior housing is less than ½ second as shown in the table below. Delay increase at other intersections is negligible. Table A. Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection Time Period Level of Service Increase in Delay (in seconds) Todd Avenue at Sierra Madre Avenue a.m. C 0.4 p.m. B 0.1 Source: Traffic Impact Analysis, February 6, 2018, by Linscott, Law, and Greenspan Traffic Signal at Todd Avenue / Sierra Madre  As shown in Table A above, congestion does not exist at Todd Avenue / Sierra Madre and the project’s incremental increase in delay is negligible. Given the level of service, a traffic signal at Todd Avenue/Sierra Madre would not meet warrants.  A traffic signal would either “rest” on green or red. “Rest” meaning that is the default setting. If red, the signal would stop traffic and act very similar to a stop sign. If the signal rests on green, the consequence could be increased speed on Sierra Madre.  A constant right turn green arrow on northbound Todd Avenue is a concern because 1) the intersection forms a right turn and a green arrow could increase speed resulting in a dangerous turning movement; and 2) the driveway to RainBird is in close proximity to the intersection with trucks turning left. A free right turn on a green arrow could cause a conflict with left turning trucks.  A constant left turn green arrow on westbound Sierra Madre is a concern because it would encourage higher speeds on Sierra Madre. The stop sign currently forces drivers to slow and stop, which helps control speed on the roadway. If drivers are not completely stopping, that is an enforcement issue, and not a roadway design issue.  Based on consultation with both the project Traffic Engineer and the City’s Director of Public Works/City Engineer, there is no indication a traffic signal would improve operations at Todd Avenue /Sierra Madre. Pedestrian Crossing  A striped pedestrian crosswalk current exists as part of the Todd Avenue / Sierra Madre intersection, which provides a crossing for pedestrians and golf carts.  Adding a pedestrian signal (red, yellow, green) at that crosswalk could cause driver confusion because the crosswalk is part of a stop-controlled intersection. The pedestrian signal would need to default to green when pedestrians are not present, which would place a green light right next to a red stop sign, likely causing driver confusion, resulting in drivers possibly not stopping at the stop sign because of the green pedestrian light. Therefore, a pedestrian signal at the Todd Avenue / Sierra Madre crosswalk is not advised. Instead of a pedestrian signal, the intersection would need to be signalized, which has potentially negative results, as stated above.  Enhanced Pedestrian Safety Measure. Adding a pedestrian warning system at the crosswalk at Todd Avenue / Sierra Madre is feasible, but recommended the warning system be red, not yellow, to coincide with the stop sign. A flashing red light and/or flashing red warning strip in the pavement, would reinforce a stop-controlled intersection when activated by a pedestrian/golf cart. A flashing red light could also be placed around the stop sign to enhance the visibility of the sign. Both the pedestrian warning system and enhanced stop sign are measures the Applicant is willing to install pending City review. Site Selection  A California Grand Village requires a minimum of 4.5 acres.  One of our target market areas is the San Gabriel Valley because of the low availability of senior housing and high demand for seniors to stay near family, friends, church, and medical care.  Of all the cities in the San Gabriel Valley, we focused on Azusa because of 1) the exciting rebirth of the Azusa downtown; 2) proximity to transit; 3) proximity to college/university, which we see as strategic partners; and 4) an appealing setting with immediate access to recreation.  Site selection is constrained by surrounding uses. A senior living village does not fit into or next to single-family residential. A senior living village is not appropriate in retail/commercial areas. We searched for multi-family land, but 4.5 acres was not available, and in our experience, cities are hesitant about placing a senior living facility with employees and delivery trucks in a multi- family zone.  Golf course property is an ideal site location for this type of use since the senior living village will be adjacent to golf course which naturally provides a recreation buffer between the senior living village and other residential uses.  Senior living villages are compatible with light industrial uses because the buildings can be constructed to attenuate for noise. And, we love the Azusa Greens site because it is not in a heavily industrialized area. The site is adjacent to only one light industrial use, which is Rain Bird Corporation. Otherwise the site is surrounded by golf course and arterial roadways, which naturally provide a generous buffer.  Most golf courses are struggling financially and could use the added income from sale of a portion of their property to offset current cost challenges while typically providing the operator the ability to enhance a long-standing community amenity.  The golf course location is ideal because we believe it will directly attract senior golfers.  At the time of our site selection (three years ago), and a current available property search has revealed there are no other sites within the City of Azusa that are large enough for a senior living village. Employment, Transit, and Carpool Incentives  The California Grand Village will provide 90 full time equivalent positions, with maximum per shift estimated at 57. Employment positions will be available for wait staff, housekeeping, security, property management, skilled nursing and many other types of jobs.  Azusa residents will be given priority for employment prior to the completion of project construction by opening the job recruiting process one month early for Azusa residents.  Employee parking will be available on site, within an enclosed and safe parking structure.  Management will provide shuttles to and from the Gold Line during shift changes for employees who arrive from other cities. Shuttle will likely be provided by a van or other vehicle at operator’s discretion.  Employees will be provided with financial incentives to carpool, which the Operator will determine, but could include a monthly gasoline gift card to carpoolers or other financial incentive. Affordability  The California Grand Village will offer Studio, One Bedroom, Two Bedroom and Three Bedroom units.  The monthly pricing will be finalized by the Operator as they begin pre-leasing.  The monthly pricing will be based on market rates.  The initial assessment is that Studio units will start at $3,850 per month, with the average rent around $5,000 per month for a one bedroom unit.  Studies show that seniors retiring in private facilities pay their monthly expenses with a combination of the following sources: o Retirement fund or plan from work o Social security o Personal savings (including investments) o Home equity o Assistance from adult children  To provide perspective on affordability, a senior with equity in their home, retirement savings and social security can afford the monthly rent. Example: $565,000 from home equity (average value of Azusa homes) + $400,000 in retirement savings = $965,000 o With 5% annual income, $965,000 provides $48,250 per year ($4,021/mo) o Monthly social security of $1,400 provides another $16,800 ($1,400/mo) o Total income $65,050 per year ($5,421/mo) o This example protects the $965,000 retirement savings  Many seniors have planned for retirement and desire the housing experience that California Grand Villages provides.  Senior Village monthly pricing includes: o Rent o All meals in the Gourmet Restaurant or Bistro o Meals/snacks/drinks from the grab and go café o Rooftop bar food and beverages o Utilities o Insurance o Housekeeping o Landscape/Grounds maintenance o 24-hour security o Valet parking o Access to chauffeured vehicle o Fitness center o Concierge organized activities and special events  Typical living expenses are very similar to the Senior Village monthly costs. Typical living expenses include: Typical monthly expenses: Mortgage/Assessments/HOA Dues $2,400 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Property taxes $471 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Utilities $150 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Homeowner’s Insurance $100 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Automobile (payment, gas, insurance, maint) $700 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Home Maintenance and Repairs $75 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Housekeeping $75 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Lawn, Garden and Pool Maintenance $100 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Security Services/Emergency Response System $30 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Food $800 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Entertainment, Social, Cultural Programs $100 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Fitness Center Membership $40 Cost Included in CA Grand Village Total $5,041 Open Space  The City has 1,750.76 acres of Open Space 1, not including the Azusa Greens Golf Course.  The Golf Course is private property used for a commercial recreation business.  The Golf Course is not public open space or open to the public without payment of a fee.  The Golf Course does not contain any sensitive biological resources on the project site.  California Grand Villages Senior Village would be constructed on 4.48 acres of golf course.  Currently the golf course has approximately 3.15 acres of unused area, consisting of: o approximately 1.84 acres around the bathroom structure located between the north/south holes 3 and 6 and the east/west holes 4 and 5 o approximately 1.31 acres located at the eastern boundary of the golf course, north of 10th St.  The loss of 4.48 acres of golf course equals approximately 0.25% of the total open space in the City, which is ¼ of 1 percent.  Accounting for the recapture of unused golf course area (3.15 acres), the net loss of open space would equal approximately 1.33 acres, or 0.07% of the total open space in the City.  Dedication of private property to new sidewalk totaling approximately 3,475 lineal feet, approximately a half-acre, creates new public pedestrian connections.  Approximately $1 million will be invested into golf course improvements for the reconstruction of golf holes 3-6, significantly upgrading their appearance.  The loss of the golf course land does not change the recreational value of the Azusa Greens Golf Course because the course maintains 18 holes and 70 PAR.  The Senior Village project EIR determined that payment of $325,000 into a City of Azusa fund for open space and recreation reduced the loss of Open Space to less than significant. 1 Azusa General Plan Table CD-1, less golf course and agriculture/nursery Land Use Compatibility General Plan Consistency  The demand for active adult senior housing is extremely underserved. In the next 10 years in the LA Metro Area, an additional 50,000 units of senior housing will only be capturing approximately 10% of the overall demand.  The City of Azusa General Plan envisioned the need for senior housing and includes the following objective: “Facilitate the development of alternative housing models suited to the community housing needs through the provision of flexible zoning regulations (Azusa Housing Element 2014 – 2021 Page 101 – 102).  General Plan Policy H3.7 supports “the provision of high-quality rental housing for large families, students and senior households”.  Policy H3.8 states “Provide incentives to facilitate the development of senior housing options” (Azusa Housing Element 2014 – 2021 Page 100). Surrounding Land Uses  The majority of the Azusa Greens Golf Course is adjacent to residential uses;  All of the land uses north of 10th Street and east of Todd Avenue are residential and golf course with the exception being Rain Bird. This location is superior for the California Grand Village because it is within a transition zone from residential to light industrial and provides many more benefits to the City than either traditional residential or light industrial uses. North of 10th Street and east of Todd Avenue has all residential and golf course land uses, except RainBird. See attached Figure. Site Design  The majority of the independent living units are located in the northern portion of the property, across from existing residential. Only 14 independent living units are located on the south perimeter of the property. The remaining units along the south perimeter are assisted living and memory care, which have shorter stays and a more controlled environment for patients.  The eastern property boundary is designed with a block wall up to 15 feet tall and heavy landscaping to provide sound buffering and visual screening and to create a lush landscaped amenity.  Common outdoor space is oriented inward rather than out to the adjacent streets. This design provides a physical buffer from surrounding land uses.  Windows will be dual glazed to ensure maximize noise dampening and walls will be fully insulated to ensure quiet interiors. Additional Environmental Studies  A Noise Study shows all interior residences will maintain less than 45 dBA noise level, consistent with City standards.  A Noise Study shows all exterior private spaces, i.e. balconies and patios, will maintain less than 65 dBA CNEL consistent with City standards.  An Air Quality study showed no impact to future residents from surrounding land uses or roadways. Each residence will have an air filter rated to one level below hospital grade as an extra layer of filtration. Operations  The residents of the Senior Village will rent their units. If a tenant finds the environs not suitable to their liking, they can move to an alternate location within the building.  The Senior Village will be staffed with on-site management 24-hours a day, seven days a week by a professional management company similar to how a luxury resort is operated.  Thorough disclosures will be provided to each prospective tenant that the Senior Village is located in close proximity to light industrial business uses.  We have prepared a covenant that requires each tenant to legally waive their right to challenge the operations of the surrounding businesses and not complain to the City. Compatibility with Light Industrial Areas  Active adult development projects are often placed in or adjacent to light industrial areas. There are many reasons for this: o These developments look and feel like a hotel and therefore do not fit in traditional single-family residential zones. o The California Grand Village will have 90 full time equivalent employees and deliveries by large trucks for food, linens, etc. which is not conducive to residential zoned land. o Industrial zoned land is cheaper than residential zoned land which allows the project to offer rich benefits while keeping the rent reasonable. o These projects are not typically desired in downtown areas where they would take away land from commercial development. o Figures 1- 4 are photographs of newer active adult projects located next to a Loews, a full- service car dealership, a retail center and the freeway and in the middle of a major light industrial area, demonstrating the unique siting of these types of projects. o These types of developments have higher Uniform Building Code standards for fire walls because of the senior population, thus making walls much thicker and noise attenuating. Additionally, dual pane windows and project designs easily mitigate noise from surrounding areas. Economic Benefit  The California Grand Village project easily outperforms light industrial** in number of jobs created and economic benefit to Azusa (source: Draft Fiscal Impact Analysis, Development Planning and Financing Group): o The California Grand Village would infuse $212,000 in cash to the Azusa budget annually, making up for more than 25% of the City’s annual structural budget deficit. A light industrial development is estimated to contribute $18,300 annually. o The California Grand Village project would be the second largest property tax producer in the City of Azusa, below Northrup Grumman and ahead of Rainbird. o The project supports the equivalent of approximately 90 full-time jobs and 550 construction jobs. Light industrial would support approximately 34 equivalent full- time jobs. o The California Grand Village residents are estimated to contribute $34.2 million in total earnings increases within the local economy over the next 30 years. Light industrial would provide only limited benefit in this regard. Active adult housing of this nature and in this location represents a paradigm shift from traditional housing and zoning. However, as evidenced above, the Azusa General Plan identified the need for flexible zoning and the California Grand Village outperforms industrial development in jobs created, property and sales tax revenues to the City and overall economic benefit for the local economy, making it a win-win for Azusa. **Note: The reason for a comparison to Light Industrial is two-fold. First, the Draft EIR included Light Industrial in the analysis of project alternatives and deemed light industrial as the environmentally superior alternative. Second, given the location in the West End Industrial District, some have suggested that light industrial would be a more appropriate use on the property, even though it is not proposed, and a similar General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would be required. California Grand Village Azusa Greens Project Description and Analysis Specific Plan (SP-2017-02) The California Grand Village Azusa Greens Specific Plan provides a comprehensive regulatory a visionary plan to repurpose a portion of the Azusa Greens Country Club to allow the development of an Independent Senior Village on 4.48 acres. Development of the Senior Village would occur in an area of the Azusa Greens existing golf course. This specific plan applies to the development of the Senior Village parcel only. Project Analysis Residential Units A maximum of 253 rental units are proposed with 199 being independent living, 28 assisted living, and 26 memory care units, see below. The maximum number of independent living units is 199; the number of assisted living and memory care units may increase as necessary to accommodate aging in place. Number of Units Minimum/Approximate Size (Square Feet) Independent Living Studio 50 400/504 1 Bedroom 21 675/710 1 Bedroom + Den 84 675/907 2 Bedroom 38 800/1,088 3 Bedroom 6 975/1,554 Subtotal 199 Assisted Living Studio 20 None/401 1 Bedroom 8 None/468 Subtotal 28 Memory Care Studio 26 None/380 Subtotal 26 Total 253 Attachment 2 California Grand Village Azusa Greens Project Description and Analysis Page 2 of 6 Each independent living unit includes an efficiency kitchen for optional in-residence dining. Most independent living units include a patio, balcony, or Juliet balcony. Patios and balconies’ size range is 9 square feet to 240 square feet (per unit), with the average being 40 square feet. Building/Site Design • “Colonial Revival” with architectural differentiation • Architectural features: o Color – off white based with sand and earth tone accents o Windows – arch, segmental, or half rounds at select locations o Tile Roof o Manufactured wood shutters o Decorative tile o Wood balconies w/metal rails; Juliet balconies w/metal rails o Rock or natural stone skirt at exterior wall base • Building height maximum - 45’ from finished grade to top plate line; projected roofs, roof decks, and architectural features may extend to a maximum of 58’. • Building setback - 10’ from rights-of-way. • Wall height maximum: o East property line, block – 15’ measured from the adjoining property finished grade o South property line, wrought iron – 8’ measured from the adjoining property finished grade o Within the setback along West Sierra Madre and North Todd Avenue – 42” o Community signage/identification - 7’ within setback Proposed Construction Timing and Phasing If approved, the project applicant proposes to be complete construction of the project in 21 months and occur in three phases: • Phase 1 (Approximately 3 months) – Site preparation, grading, retaining walls, and underground utilities • Phase 2 (Approximately 15 months) – Vertical construction of Senior Village (residential units, common areas, parking structure, infrastructure) • Phase 3 (Approximately 3 months) – Landscaping, signage, and fencing Vehicle Circulation and Parking North Todd Avenue provides both the primary vehicle and emergency/secondary vehicle access points. The primary vehicle access opens into a circular drop off area with a porte- cochere, which provides access to an Independent Living entry, a less prominent Assisted Living and Memory Care entry, and the parking structure. The main entry is not gated; however, the parking structure’s access is gated. The primary entry is 28’ wide. The secondary access occurs at the property’s southern boundary and provides access to emergency, trash, and delivery vehicles. This 28’ wide access serves as a fire lane, ending in a hammerhead turnaround on the east side of the resident structure. The secondary California Grand Village Azusa Greens Project Description and Analysis Page 3 of 6 access is gated and managed by the onsite management and security staff. A knox box or equivalent rapid entry system is proposed to be provided for emergency vehicle access. As proposed, parking is primarily provided within the 3-story, 4-level parking structure. The parking structure is proposed to be surrounded by residential units or other Senior Village uses; the parking structure will not be visible to the streets. The parking structure access is proposed to be through a transponder or key card system. A total of 253 parking spaces are proposed - - 250 spaces are to be located within the parking structure and three spaces (one handicapped, two guest) are to be located in the main entry drive. A total of 12 spaces are proposed to be handicapped and three spaces are proposed for vans. Seventy- four spaces are of tandem configuration, which are to be used for guest or resident valet parking or by residents who opt for additional parking space(s). The Senior Village management will assign resident parking spaces based on unit size and location. Residents may self-park in their assigned spaces or use the valet system. All guest parking will be serviced by the valet. Valet vehicle drop off is proposed at the main entry. Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Golf Cart Circulation Internal private pedestrian walkways are proposed throughout the Senior Village with gated pedestrian access to West Sierra Madre Avenue provided at the project’s northeast boundary. Two new 6’ wide curb-adjacent sidewalks are proposed; one will run along West Sierra Madre Avenue from North Todd Avenue to the eastern project boundary and the second will run along North Todd Avenue from West Sierra Madre to West 10th Street. Both sidewalks are proposed to be within the public right-of-way and in accordance with American Disabilities Act (ADA). A new 9’ wide golf cart path (accommodates two-way traffic) is proposed to be constructed outside of the public right-of-way and separated from the public sidewalk by a vegetated fence. The golf cart path is proposed to connect the golf course north of West Sierra Madre Avenue to the golf course south of the Senior Village. Removable bollards and signage are proposed at the sidewalk entrances along North Todd Avenue to avoid golf cart use of the sidewalk. An existing Class II bicycle lane runs along West Sierra Madre Avenue. While no bicycle paths are proposed within the Senior Village, residents may access the bike path via the Village’s eastern pedestrian gate and/or the North Todd Avenue primary access road. Bicycle storage is located on the first floor of the parking structure. The bicycle storage room is proposed to accommodate approximately 18 bicycles. Vehicle Circulation Public Improvements The following public improvements are proposed: • Two new 6’ wide curb adjacent sidewalks (see discussion above). Street trees are proposed to be planted adjacent to the sidewalks with a tree spacing of 30’ between trees. California Grand Village Azusa Greens Project Description and Analysis Page 4 of 6 • A new cart path crossing West Sierra Madre Avenue at the West Sierra Madre Avenue/North Todd Avenue intersection (thereby linking Holes #2 and #7 with Holes #3-#6 south of the Senior Village) • Replacement curb/gutter on West Sierra Madre Avenue, as necessary • Replacement curb/gutter on North Todd Avenue • Signage or painting “No Parking” along North Todd Avenue from West Sierra Madre Avenue to West 10th Street • Restripe North Todd Avenue to North Sierra Madre Avenue to provide a 12’ wide center turn lane, two 11’ wide interior through lanes, and two 14’ wide curb lanes. Golf Course Reconfiguration The second component of the proposed project is the overall reconfiguration of Holes #3-#6. The new area for Holes #3-#6 will be along 10th Street and the southern portion of North Todd Avenue. of the golf To accommodate the Senior Village, the Golf Course Reconfiguration Area would be reconfigured to accommodate four golf holes (#3-#6) instead of the two existing holes (#4 and #5). While the yardage of the golf play over these four holes would be reduced, the overall Azusa Greens Country Club golf course’s par is proposed to remain 70. The reconfiguration of the golf course is proposed to require relocation of tee boxes, greens, and obstacles. An existing restroom building is proposed to be relocated approximately 150 feet to the south. New cart paths are proposed to be constructed, trees would be removed and planted. Grading - Approximately 4,400 cubic yards of cut and 4,400 cubic yards of fill would occur. The areas of the deepest cut are approximately 10 feet and of greatest fill approximately four feet. Utilities - Overhead powerlines exist along the north side of West 10th Street; golf course reconfiguration will not alter these powerlines. The golf course has both water and sewer connections. The connections will not change with the golf course reconfiguration; however, some irrigation system reconfiguration will occur. In addition, the water and sewer lines will be reconfigured to accommodate the bathroom relocation; however, the restroom will continue to connect to the same sewer lateral. Golf Course Fencing/Netting – Existing netting is located on the golf course’s northside, along the Rain Bird and Le Med Apartments’ frontage. This netting will remain in place. New netting will be of similar size and style as existing. The netting is proposed in five locations: • Along the western portion of Rain Bird frontage near hole 3; • Along the eastern property line of the golf course from Le Med Apartments to 10th Street; • Parallel to West 10th Street in the eastern portion of the golf course, near the tee boxes for hole 5; • On a southeast to northwest angle from West 10th Street along the middle of the fairway for hole 5; and • Along North Todd Avenue east of hole 6. California Grand Village Azusa Greens Project Description and Analysis Page 5 of 6 Sidewalk Improvements – The golf course reconfiguration includes the construction of a sidewalk on the north side of West 10th Street. The new sidewalk will extend from the eastern golf course property line to North Todd Avenue. The new sidewalk will measure 6’ wide, avoid existing utilities, and comply with ADA standards. Along the north side of the sidewalk, a new eight-foot-tall wire mesh fence will be installed to provide additional safety for sidewalk pedestrians. Vines will be planted along the fence line to provide fence screening. DESIGN REVIEW-2018-04: GOLF COURSE RECONFIGURATION Tentative Tract Map (TTM-81336) A tentative tract map is proposed to subdivide the property to create a 4.48-acre parcel for the development of the Senior Village. Environmental Review The California Grand Village Azusa Greens Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2018061063) was published on November 28, 2018 for a 60-day public review. Public comments closed January 28, 2019. Six individuals, organizations, or agencies provided public comments. Reponses to the comments were overnighted to the comment authors on February 21, 2019 or review. The Environmental Impact Report identifies no environmental issue area to be significant and unavoidable. The Environmental Impact Report identifies ten environmental issue areas to have a less than significant impact with standard conditions of approval or mitigation incorporated. Briefly the environmental issues are: • Land California Grand Village Azusa Greens Project Description and Analysis Page 6 of 6 • Aesthetics/Light • Biological Resources • Tribal and Cultural Resources • Geology and Soils • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Traffic and Circulation • Air Quality • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Noise The Environmental Impact Report analyses three alternatives to the proposed project. They are: “No Project”, which retains the proposed project site in its current condition; “Light Industrial”, which considers the 4.48 acre site developed with approximately 68,000 square feet of industrial uses and the reconfiguration of the golf course to accommodate the industrial use; and Multi- family Residential”, which considers the 4.48 acre site developed with 121 market-rate multifamily residential units (27 du/ac density) and the reconfiguration of the golf course to accommodate the residential use. The No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative; however, per CEQA if the no project alternative is found to be environmentally superior, an EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. In this case, the Light Industrial Alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative. 8617-001-005Todd Ave.8th St. 10th St.Vernon Ave.9th St. 11th St.Sierra Madre Ave.Mountain View Cir.Ave ConejoCalle De Las Estrellas ´ 1 inch = 500 feet Path: C:\ArcGIS_Misc Projects 6\Lisa B\Golf on Todd updated 032019.mxd Date: 3/28/2019 J.Prado California Grand Village Specific Plan 300' Radius Map