Source: City of LB Development Services Power Point slide

[Scroll down for further.]

The event, held in the Hughes Middle School cafeteria, was organized by the City of Long Beach/Development Services and presented with the contracted architectural firm John Kaliski Architects, as well as Dudek, an engineering firm.

Photo by Glennis Dolce

Representing the three entities were:

• City of Long Beach: Carrie Tai, Scott Kinsey, Maryanne Cronin and Fiahna Cabana
• Dudek: Ruta Thomas, Shannon Kimball
• John Kaliski Architects: John Kaliski, Wenchong Lai

Sponsor

Sponsor

Roughly 25 people (a mix of residents and business owners) attended the event, several of whom indicated they were present at the first Globemaster Corridor Specific Plan meeting in February. The meeting began at 6:00 p.m. with attendees invited to view display boards with visual representations of a Powerpoint presentation that followed at 6:15 p.m.

The Powerpoint presentation lasted roughly an hour and covered land use classifications, building height standards, yards and setbacks, open space, and circulation (translation- transportation modes and mobility). To view the Power Point slides, click here.

Sponsor

A number of residents expressed surprise when one of the architects suggested that a hotel might be located at the intersection of Wardlow Rd. and Cherry Avenue (which apparently wasn't part of the February presentation.) John Kaliski said in his presentation that with new development, the desire is to make sure that the plan includes amenities that would make business uses more attractive such as a hotel and food services. "Where would a hotel go?" he asked. "The idea was to cluster these services at this intersection" (Cherry Avenue and Wardlow Road.)

Sponsor

Sponsor

Another item that raised concern was allowing developers to build to additional height -- up to 7 stories -- if they provide what the City calls "community benefits" (not specifically defined at this point but might include new streets, pedestrian connectors, common open space, and accessory retail.)

Below are draft "Tier 1" and "Tier 2" height standards. This sheet isn't currently visible (June 30) on the June meeting information page of the City's website.

The presentation was followed by a breakout sessions in which each of the 4 groups was asked to consider three questions with a facilitator taking notes on large flip charts:

• Do the Concept Plans reflect the Community's Vision?
• Should the Concept Plans be improved or refined in any way?
• What should be written into the Specific Plan to help regulate and govern these areas?

Following the breakout sessions, the group reunited to hear the resulting comments and discussions of the four groups summarized by each of the facilitators.

Photo by Glennis Dolce

Three groups voiced general approval of the concept plans overall with the fourth group remaining somewhat neutral. Some of the salient, repeated comments included:

• Participants expressed the view that the City could do a better job directly contacting businesses and property owners in the affected corridor plan zone. Currently, notices are in the form of press releases, social media postings and email newsletters. Clarify that this is a concept plan and not a development plan.

• Increased traffic and parking issues in the area resulting from future development need to result in improvements to public transportation, parking options, as well as protections for the adjoining nearby neighborhoods, notably the Cal Heights Historic neighborhood.

• Any bicycle mobility plans should include consistency of surfaces and be safety driven.

• New buildings should have a net zero goal- providing all the energy they use as well as installing purple and grey water systems for all landscaping needs.

• Indicated that the City should work with existing businesses to help them transition to new and changing economy rather than see them replaced with new businesses.

• Adding design requirements that better integrate the new development into the existing character of the area.

• Add more greenscape along Cherry Avenue. Develop it so it is inviting to area residents and not just the businesses and employees that will occupy the buildings.

• The plan needs a parking study especially in light of the stated desire of the plan to narrow traffic lanes and remove parallel parking options along Cherry Avenue.

• The plan needs to have an additional overlay map that indicates the existing airport runway safety zones to better understand what can and can't be done in those areas affected.

The City will now take the suggestions from this meeting and other community input and return in September at another meeting with a new draft specific plan. City Development Services has a webpage with details and updates on the developing plan at this link.

LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.