| (Sept. 20, 2017, updated 10:35 a.m. from 9:40 a.m.) -- In a series of motions by 3rd district Councilwoman Suzie Price, with Mayor Garcia not taking a public position on the publicly polarizing Council item, the City Council voted The net result will allow commercial property owners/developers to increase building heights along parts of the west side of PCH (between Loynes and the Seal Beach city limit) to five stories, with seven stories allowed for hotels (to occupy a portion of the "Best Buy" and "Whole Foods" areas respectively north and south of 2nd St.) while disallowing development on the adjacent wetlands areas eastward of PCH.
[Scroll down for further.] |
The action effectively erases decades of protections against higher-rise commercial density along SE LB's PCH entryway enacted (as a result of public pressure) 40 years ago as a trade-off to allowing increased density in downtown Long Beach. All of the motions were supported by (and all but one were seconded by) Councilman Roberto Uranga, a member of the Coastal Commission...where SEASP now goes for final approval. The Council's action is additionally significant coming as city staff proposes that the Council revise land uses elsewhere citywide to invite areas of increased density. Under SEASP as approved by the Council, the City will allow up to five story buildings instead of the current three stories (red areas in map above) and with up to seven stories possible (for a hotel) on up to 20% of the area on the west side of PCH north of 2nd St. (Marina Pacifica area and "Whole Foods" area south of 2nd St.) but not the "Markeplace" on the east side of PCH adjacent to the westlands. Seven stories could be allowed in areas along the west side of PCH for buildings with roughly 20% of project areas [city staff text: "may be considered" for the following]: "Hotel or mixed use buildings containing hotel as a portion of their use, if it is demonstrated that significant community amenities are provided, above and beyond those that are required under the maximum height of five stories. Amenities can include plaza spaces, enhanced landscaping, public artwork, public parking, (See Section 5.7a Mixed Use Community Core height and FAR incentives.) Seven story buildings are intended to be an exception to the building massing for all structures within a project. The majority of the buildings within the Mixed-Use Community Core designations are intended to be constructed at or near the maximum base height. Building footprint of all buildings using seven stories cannot exceed 20% of the total acres in the MU-CC." Page 70 of the SEASP 2060 document (Table 5-4 Building Story Requirements) also indicates that "Architectural features up to an an additional 10 feet may be approved by the Site Plan Review Committee." [Under Muni Code section 21.21.105, the Site Plan Review Committee consists of LB's Dir. of Planning & Building plus two planning officers of his/her choice.] City staff publicly acknowledged (in the prior Planning Commission proceeding) that traffic impacts were the most common concern expressed by the public. Staff said its "reduced intensity alternative" results in "the least potential traffic increase between the existing PD-1 and SEASP. Through reductions in residential and particularly commercial development, the reduced intensity alternative results in impacts comparable to buildout with the existing PD-1 regulations.
City staff's agendizing memo is here with exhibits here and here. Under city staff's recommended "reduced intensity alternative," SEASP forecasts a capacity of 2,584 new dwelling units, an increased population of 4,018 persons and commercial employment of 307,071 sq. feet. Councilwoman Price said that after much community discussion, the resulting SEASP version is reasonable, balanced and modest. She repeatedly said it includes "reductions" in building heights and density (although SEASP as approved actually increases allowable building heights and will increase traffic (an impact the city acknowledges in the Council-approved EIR it can't mitigate below significance.) Councilwoman Price said SEASP will protect the wetlands and is a fair compromise, but wetlands supporters said SEASP was too high and too dense adjacent to the wetlands, calling it a development plan and not a wetlands protection plan. Some SEASP opponents supported retaining the area's current low-rise building heights, with one saying bluntly that clean air and open space are amenities. Mayor Robert Garcia, who as a Councilmember voted in Dec. 2011 in favor of a developer-sought, city-staff supported PCH/2nd (Seaport Marina Hotel site) project (failed Council passage 3-5) that proposed even taller buildings than SEASP will allow, stated no position publicly on SEASP during the Council item.
SEASP opponents outnumbered suppoters by over two to one. Supporters included retired LB Planning Dir. Robert Paternoster, LB Area Chamber of Commerce Pres/CEO Randy Gordon and some Naples Area residents, urging Council approval of SEASP on grounds it will invite amenities, create a more fitting entryway to LB, increase property taxes and sales tax revenue and draw shoppers from the south (OC.) Testimony in opposition came from retired 3rd dist. Councilwoman Jan Hall, Ann Cantrell (Citizens About Responsible Planning), Gordana Kajer, Melinda Cotton, Jeff Miller. Warren Blesofsky, President of LB Citizens for Responsible Development, filed an appeal to the Planning Commission's SEASP recommended approval, describing it as a gift to developers, objecting to "streamlining" future environmental review (making public opposition more difficult) and citing other items in a bullet point list. Councilwoman Price made some amending motions, but none sought revisions to building heights or density in city staff's final recommended SEASP elements, which recommended less intense building height increases than staff initially recommended. Price's amendments included a requirement that if the General Plan Land Use Element (currently pending) isn't completed within 5 years "the Dept. of Development Services will be required to return the SEASP plan to the Planning Commission for adjustments." In contrast, the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust sought a "baseline cap" on density that would increase if shown to be justified on the merits as the city updates its citywide Land Use Element. LCWLT detailed its "baseline cap" process in a letter from attorney Doug Carstens at this link. Price's amendments also included a LEED silver building requirement, reporting to government bodies and a meet-and-confer process on some items with the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust. A number of speakers in opposition (including the Council of Neighborhood Organizations via Robert Fox) said the city's outreach process had been poor and was flawed; Councilwoman Price responded by defending the city's outreach, saying it exceeded outreach in projects in any other Council district. Councilwoman Price said that during the process she met with multiple residents who sought various changes to SEASP, and said she'd worked to worked with them to accomplish this. Councilwoman Price voiced irritation, and in effect accused some opponents (whom she didn't name) of less than candid advocacy, saying they testified against the final result at the podium although "We spent a lot of time together, and your opinions and thoughts are reflected in this proposal...You know that what you asked for is in this proposal. I know it and you know it. You didn't say it at the podium, but that's OK. This is a great proposal and I ask my colleagues to support it."
In June, city staff told the Planning Commission that traffic impacts were the "most common concern expressed by the public." It said the reduced intensity alternative "results in the least potential traffic increase between the existing PD-1 and SEASP. Through reductions in residential and particularly commercial development, the reduced intensity alternative results in impacts comparable to buildout with the existing PD-1 regulations."
Under the "reduced intensity alternative," city staff predicts a capacity of 2,584 new dwelling units, an increased population of 4,018 persons and commercial employment of 307,071 sq. feet. The Planning Commission also approved an accompanying draft EIR that includes a "statement of overriding considerations" acknowledging that some environmental impacts of the SEASP rezoning, including traffic, will be significant but can't be feasibly mitigated.
[10:35 a.m. update] Within three hours of the Council's unanimous vote, Councilwoman Price's office sent a mass emailing (headlined "SEASP APPROVED A Smart Plan For Our Future") stating in part: [Price Sept. 19 10:48 p.m. email)...I am excited to announce that tonight my City Council colleagues supported my motion to approve a plan for future development in Southeast Long Beach that will get us through the next 40 years while preserving more wetlands habitat than ever before. The morning after, Ann Cantrell sent her own mass emailing, stating in part: [Ann Cantrell Sept. 20 email] In spite of the excellent appeal presentation given by Warren Blesofsky and the many supporting arguments given by members of public, the vote was 9 zip to bring more traffic, 2500 residential units and higher buildings to this already crowded part of Long Beach. blog comments powered by Disqus Recommend LBREPORT.com to your Facebook friends:
Follow LBReport.com with:
Contact us: mail@LBReport.com |
   
 Hardwood Floor Specialists Call (562) 422-2800 or (714) 836-7050  |
