By Brian CHERNICK

After more than four hours of hearings, deliberations and two hold-out votes, a new hotel in the heart of downtown Glendale was approved with a number of exceptions that go beyond the city’s land use ordinances and standards.

Hotel Louise – the proposed new hotel on the southwest corner of Louise and Wilson – is planned to accommodate 147 units, each with kitchen facilities, within its six-story building.

Three variances to the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) included a 76-to-81-foot wall height for a paseo that exceeds the city’s existing 60-foot limit. Also included was the allowance of kitchens within each of the hotel guest rooms and an exception allowing for greater density, or mass, of the structure.

Current land use standards allows for a floor-area-ratio, or FAR, of 3.0. The FAR measures the useable floor area of the project against the total plot of land. The original request by the developer was to permit a 3.4 FAR, but concessions were finally made to attempt to bring it to 3.2.

These limits on city development were formulated in 2006 and set physical standards and guidelines, along with land use regulations, in order to “preserve and enhance the aspects which provide each district its unique character, while improving the attractiveness and livability of the Downtown area.” Typically incentives, or exceptions, are provided to projects that provide additional public benefits from affordable housing, open space or the reuse of existing buildings. The development agency R.D. Olson argued the creation of construction and hotel jobs and additional revenue to the city would justify making the exceptions.  

Contention with the project went beyond the request for variances. Concerns about local hiring and wages were expressed by both members of the council and attendees, including members from the UNITE HERE labor union. Union members demanded better accountability and transparency with wages and the hiring of local community members, also citing congestion and parking issues, which already exist inside the city and that residents fear will only be exacerbated by the hotel.

“We want a neutral path forward for labor union agreements,” said Danielle Wilson, UNITE HERE’s research analysis for the Local 11. “We hope council would go back and analyze the report,” which had been released that previous Friday afternoon.

The vote did not pass without considerable negotiation. Council members and the developers reached a number of agreements, including a promise to hire 15% of hotel workers from the local community, a commitment to $15 per hour wages for full time housekeepers and a 30-day limit on stays by guests.

The lot is currently a flat surface parking lot and sits across the street and south of the First Baptist Church of Glendale and across from the YMCA, to the east, which expressed objection to the project in a written letter.

Councilmember Zareh Sinanyan recused himself from the discussion and votes per the recommendation of City Attorney Michael Garcia due a potential conflict of interest because he sits on the YMCA board.

The speed with which this was processed through council also concerned union members, as the developers had produced the proposal only four days prior to the council meeting and public notice of the hearing had been less than 10 days.

Councilmember Najarian also noted the rushed process, noting that the council was “full steam” in this project more than any previous one, including the Americana at Brand.

Councilmembers Paula Devine and Najarian held out on a yes vote partly due to the large number of variance requests. Najarian expressed that “something just doesn’t feel right” about the project, something he states to have never felt on any previous project in his 16 years on City Council.

When the initial vote ended in a 2-2 tie – Councilmembers Vrej Agajanian and Mayor Vartan Gharpetian voting in favor, Devine and Najarian against – Garcia recommended bringing Sinanyan back into the discussion to settle the motion. Najarian was visibly taken aback by the suggestion, at one time standing behind his chair and arguing that the initial conflict of interest stood and, if there hadn’t been one to begin with, “then why wasn’t he [already] there?”

After an extended recess, during which City Manager Scott Ochoa and Garcia spoke to Sinanyan, who had been in a separate conference room watching, Sinanyan said that he felt the councilmembers were likely to come to an agreement with the developers without his involvement.

Devine and Najarian eventually came around to voting yes along with Gharpetian and Agajanian after additional concessions were made. The developers met Devine and Najarian halfway on the FAR and settled on 3.2, a reduced kitchen size and the addition of art to the design of the building.

“I realized that if I had kept my ‘no’ vote they would have just brought in Sinanyan,” Najarian said. “This way we were able to get more concessions.”

  Brian Brian CHERNICK