The nonconforming status of a proposed senior living facility will return to the Board of Zoning Appeals at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday in a call for review.
Pasadena Senior Villa Living wants to open a residential care facility at 1811 N. Raymond Ave., the previous location of the Pasadena Recovery Center.
However, senior living facilities are no longer zoned for the area, which means an assisted-living facility cannot operate there without first acquiring a nonconforming status.
The city revoked the site’s previous nonconforming status in 2018 after the Pasadena Recovery Center shut down. The nonconforming use designation has not been used for 12 months.
But the zoning administrator later determined that the nonconforming use had not expired.
“This call for review is in response to a Zoning Administrator’s determination that the residential care, general land use did not lose its nonconforming status and the use was not discontinued for a period of more than 12 months,” according to a staff report.
Nonconforming uses were established before the codes and policies that are in place today were approved and allowed businesses to operate outside of current regulations, including zoning codes.
An overconcentration of these types of facilities currently exists on North Fair Oaks Avenue, near Washington Boulevard, according to a city staff report.
In January, the City Council unanimously approved an amendment to the city’s zoning code that allows the city to terminate a local business’ nonconforming use status in the event of the revocation, termination, or suspension of any license or permit that is required in order to operate a nonconforming business.
The center was made famous by the reality television show “Celebrity Rehab With Dr. Drew.” On June 8, 2018, the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) suspended the license required to operate the facility after investigating the death of a patient and several other violations.
In February, the Planning Commission called for a review of the zoning administrator’s determination that a senior living facility did not lose its nonconforming status.
At that time Planning Commissioner David Coher told Pasadena Now that he asked to have the issue decided by the Planning Commission to ensure full transparency of the details leading to the decision.
“When a decision is steeped in procedure, like here, it’s especially important that everyone have a chance to see and understand the ‘why’ behind it, to ensure both that the right decision has been made and that the community has comfort with the decision,” Coher said.
Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.
Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m.
One thought on “Board of Zoning Appeals to Review Senior Living Facility’s Nonconforming Use Status”
Omitted from the article are crucial facts: The facility has operated since the 1960’s. In the mid-1980’s the zoning was changed, rendering the use “non-conforming.” But the facility always served disabled people, and state and federal law prohibits zoning decisions which adversely impact services to disabled persons. In 2006, when the City of Long beach closed down a similar facility, that violation of state and federal ADA laws resulted in a jury verdict in federal court of $21 million against that city and against two city officials. On appeal, the City of Long Beach paid $20 million to avoid an appellate precedent. It is false and defamatory to state that the Pasadena Villa Senior Living facility stopped operating for more than 12 months. Undisputed facts in the BZA Staff Report prove there was never a 12 month gap in operation. The mid-1980’s zone changed illegally targeted services to disabled persons, and that ordinance continues to violate state and federal ADA laws. If the zone change had sought to end services to persons based on their race or religion or gender the invidious and illegal discrimination would be obvious. In 2021, a City of Pasadena cannot treat disabled persons with less dignity by invoking a discriminatory “non-conforming use” status. The result in McClure vs. Long Beach awaits Pasadena if it sustains such an overtly discriminatory practice.