Neighbors’ recent queries re PDR-1723012 to the Planning Division on the status of
the hotel project were informed September 17 that the redesigned plans had already
been submitted for staff review again, prior to moving on to the Design Review
Board agenda, which on June 14 turned down the Applicant’s plans 5-0, with robust
input by residents during oral comments.
After review by planner Dennis Joe (DJoe@GlendaleCA.gov), the public will receive
a 10-day notice of the DRB meeting date via sign on the front of the 1633 S. Victory site, and via email from the Glendale Rancho Neighborhood Association. The developers initially did no public outreach regarding the project, and only a handful of neighbors were
informed after the DRB ordered them to do so.
Residents have taken it upon themselves to do what the Applicant’s developers have neglected to do adequately; to inform residents, businesses, the school, and concerned parents about the proposed hotel. We’ve kicked off an effort to distribute information fliers about the development to residents and are circulating a petition for those interested in expressing their opposition to the proposed hotel which residents feel is:
- excessive in scope and size despite zoned for three stories,
- conflicts with intense traffic volume and lanes at the Western-Victory intersection,
- would make use of a public alley that is sole access for carports and garages
behind residences on Western and Winchester, - would encourage alley and street cut-through traffic in this quiet modest-home
neighborhood, - is incompatible in design for the equine, historic, and park-like Riverside Rancho,
- and inappropriate in its proximity to popular, respected Benjamin Franklin
Elementary School.
Applicant’s first proposal rejected by the Glendale Design Review Board and local residents:
View facing Victory Blvd
View from public alleyway where cars would line up to enter subterranean parking
View from Winchester Ave. with pool next to R-1 residential home and driveway (facing Benjamin Franklin Elementary School) – visible to local residents, school students, parents, and anyone using the public sidewalk.
Below is the Applicant’s second design proposal, with color revision and more ‘urbanized’ appearance.
The design rendering below was presented to only a few local residents who rejected it for many reasons including those cited above.
The greater local Rancho community remains uninformed about this proposal due to the Applicant’s failure to inform residents, school, and businesses – including the majority of those located within a 500 foot radius.
View from Winchester Ave. with pool next to R-1 residential home and driveway (facing Benjamin Franklin Elementary School)
In this revision local residents, school students, parents, and anyone using the public sidewalk are presented with two box-like structures intended to block the view of the swimming pool, which increase the scope of the development. The two screening structures resemble a pair of old stereo speakers or computer monitors.
Ways you can help:
- Share your concerns now by contacting planner Dennis Joe. U. S. mail to: Planning Dept., 633 E. Broadway, Glendale 91206. Or contact him via email DJoe@GlendaleCA.gov —and “cc” PLanzafame@GlendaleCA.gov!
- Sign the petition.We now have a new online petition located in our right sidebar. Signatures of those opposed to the hotel development will be presented to the Design Review Board along with a recently circulated paper petition.
- Spread the word. Tell your friends, neighbors, and parents whose children attend Benjamin Franklin Elementary School. Post links to this site on your Facebook, Twitter, and other social media accounts.
- Click here for our contact form. Join our mailing list for more information, new posts, and development updates. You will be notified of the next DRB agenda for PDR 1723012, which you are urged to attend and speak (they’re held at 5 pm on 2nd and 4th Thursdays in Rm. 105).
This actually looks pleasant and modern. I don’t get how people are opposed to this. Have you seen all those junky cars that are pilled up in the current auto lot? It is disgusting and definitely doesn’t belong in the neighborhood. A boutique hotel that is roughly the same size as a modest apartment complex fits in much better.
I can understand not wanting to bulldoze the stables–that makes sense. But saying a new hotel is “inappropriate” because it’s close to a school is silly. The current auto service yard is inappropriate; it should have been demolished long ago or at least relocated to San Fernando Blvd with the other ones.
This is how people are opposed to this:
Our choice is not merely between the current owner/developer neglected eyesore and what the developer thinks is good for the Rancho.
We have a say in what goes there and have a right to point out what is so completely wrong about the proposed development.
You call it a “boutique” hotel. But 64 units is not a “boutique” hotel.
Do you know how the 64-unit number was obtained? It is a number determined by a loan officer based on profitability without any regard for the neighborhood or surrounding Rancho area. And what you describe as “roughly the same size as a modest apartment complex” is not what the developer’s proposed plans show. The footprint of the hotel is expected to take almost the entire area of the lot. They have to do this to meet their 64-unit return on investment study. With two similar hospitality businesses nearby that don’t come close to meeting their own 12-unit capacity, it’s clear that this is an unneeded development of convenience and developer profit with zero consideration for the surrounding area. The design requires any lines waiting to get into the hotel to line up in the alleyway, not their own property. It also includes three story building adjacent to R-1 residential properties. Property Owners on Winchester Ave. and Garden St. simply don’t want the invasion of privacy. They also don’t want a business running 24/7/365 in an area/lot where all previous other commercial establishments ran primarily only during regular business hours 9:00-5:00.
If you want to make further comparisons to apartment buildings, the one nearby holds only 29 units vs. the proposed 64 units. Also, apartments and hotels are fundamentally different. One holds neighborhood residents, paying rent month to month. The hotel brings in a transient population, unknowns with no ties to the neighborhood. That’s a risk factor that neighborhood parents and Benjamin Franklin Elementary School parents don’t want. You can call that “silly,” but concerns for child safety are not “silly” to the parents involved. Additionally longtime residents are aware of the years of illegal dumping of auto fluids and toxins into the ground into which they want to dig a two-story underground parking complex. Research into the proposed hotel shows that their environmental studies overlooked/neglected to test the areas of the lot in question. The environmental concerns of the neighborhood and nearby school are not “silly” either.
We are in full agreement with you that the junk cars need to go and the lot needs to be cleaned up. For 19 months the current owners have neglected to do so for the sake of saving money on a lot that they are not yet sure they can develop. Their neglect of the lot has also resulted in the population of MANY feral cats who are attracted to the rodents on the property, a health hazard.
But this is more than an either/or decision about which is the better eye-candy. Just because something looks better (and that’s only an artists rendering, not reality) doesn’t mean it’s right for the Rancho or its residents.
Those opposed to the hotel development are correct to do so in favor of something that really serves the community. The hotel will bring ZERO services to local residents (including hotel rooms for those unwilling to spend $220 and up per night). No shops, no professional services, no restaurants, and NO JOBS. The hotel developers claim they will have only a staff of one or two.
Unfortunately, what neighbors can look forward to is alley congestion for ALL apartment and private home residents along Western Ave. and Winchester Ave. who use it to access their parking areas. They can also expect noise and congestion from various supplies delivery, vendors, Uber drivers dropping off passengers, and hotel services at any given time of the day or night. Victory Blvd. and Western Ave. – which serve as major traffic arteries between the 5 and 134 freeways – will become even more congested. Auto accidents will become more frequent (and we’ve already seen several traffic deaths at Victory and Western). To prevent accidents caused by hotel clientele trying to make left turns into the alley from Victory Blvd, or left from the alley onto Victory Blvd., will require several new traffic restrictions and signage (which will likely often be ignored by many drivers for convenience).
Again, we agree with you that the current condition of the lot is unacceptable. However we want future development to be something that serves the community, not something that serves the the developers and hotel owners exclusively at the neighborhood’s expense. We want a development that enhances the Rancho, benefiting its residents and school, not a project that merely exploits the Rancho for profit.