HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental Information Received After Posting Agenda - Item I (3)Robin Roberts
From
Sent:
Sunday, September 10, v17 12:14 PM
To-
Sandra Massa- Lavitk Mike Vadpapa; Ellery Deaton; Thomas Moore; Schelly Sustarsic
Cr
Robin Roberts
Subject:
Fw: LA Fitness Final EIR
Attachments:
LA FITNESS FINAL EIR SUMMARY.docc July 25, 2016, City Council Meeting Minutes.pdf;
Supervisor Steel - County Letters Regarding LA Fitness.pdf, 2012 Parking Estimate.pdf,
2012 Site Plan.pdf
Dear City Council:
This email is regarding the LA Fitness project you will be reviewing on September 11, 2017. Below for your
review is the email I provided to the Planning Commissioners on June 26, 2017, regarding the same topic. In
addition to the attachments to that email, I am attaching my LA Fitness Final EIR Summary that I provided to
the Commissioners on June 27, 2017, and the July 25, 2016, City Council Meeting Minutes of the Public
Hearing regarding LA Fitness.
At the June 27, 2017, Planning Commission meeting, applicant's representative Mr. Marty Potts
misrepresented the July 25, 2016, City Council Public Hearing by saying: "As you know we are here for a
second time. Last summer we withdrew our application after the City Council indicated its intent to deny our
application because the concerns of the community had not been fully evaluated..." This is absolutely
incorrect. The attached meeting minutes of July 25, 2016, Indicate Councilwoman Deaton, Councilman Sloan
and I found LA Fitness not compatible with the neighborhood.
As I identified below in my email to the Planning Commissioners, my initial January 27, 2017, comments
regarding LA Fitness were not included or addressed in the Draft EIR and my April 24, 2017, comments on the
Draft EIR were not included or addressed in the Final EIR. My attached April 24, 2017, letter that I hand
delivered to Steve Fowler on April 24 was not included in the Final EIR. My comments were not addressed in
the Final EIR regarding parking, possible Rossmoor City Way modifications, and the northbound left -turn lane
(pocket) on Seal Beach Blvd. at Rossmoor Center Way.
Since I will not be in attendance at your September 11 meeting, in particular I ask that you review my attached
LA Fitness Final EIR Summary. There you will see issues addressed regarding surplus parking, parking
requirements, traffic, and community contributions. One point that does not standout in the Summary is that
the Seal Beach Municipal Code is deficient because it does not adequately address this size and type of facility.
I do not believe the proposed LA Fitness facility is compatible with the neighborhood, but at a minimum the LA
Fitness EIR should readdress parking and traffic. I remind the City Council this is a quality of life issue for
Districts 2 and 4. Don't forget these two Districts strongly supported District 1's quality of life issue related to
3 story strictures.
Thank you for your consideration,
Gary Miller
---- Forwarded Message---- -
From:
Sent: Jun 26. 2017 2:52
To:'
CC: RRoberts @sealbeachca.gov
Subject: lA Fitness Final EIR
Chair Machen, Vice Chair Thomas, Commissioners Aguilar, Campbell, Klinger
i am writing this email to provide you with my attached comments on the LA Fitness Final EIR, which
should have been included the Final EIR but they were not. My January 27, 2017, comments regarding
LA Fitness should have been in the LA Fitness Draft EIR but they were not. Unfortunately, others did
not have the benefit of reading my comments as they reviewed the Draft EIR. My January comments
were included in the Final ERR, but all comments were not addressed and my comments were not
properly placed in the Final ERR.
My comments on the Final EIR included my comments of January 27, 2017, but I inadvertently left off
the last item, i.e., Alternate Plan that suggested a possible alternate use of the project site for an office
building. Fist, in my Final EIR comments I addressed the Final EIR is not complete since a parking
analysis was not performed as part of the EIR. A parking analysis needs to be completed and included
in a reissued EIR. The parking analysis in the mitigated negative declaration from last year is no longer
valid because the developer pulled the conditional use permit application; additionally, it was not
approved by the City Council and it was not made a part of EIR. I had issues with the mitigated
negative declaration. There are parking issues I will address below.
The developer is concerned enough about parking to not want to lose parking for an ingress and egress
location on Seal Beach Boulevard north of the Verizon Wireless store. Additionally, it is proposed to
have curb barriers to separate the north and south sections of the parking lot to encourage patrons
visiting the Home Goods and Pet Smart not to park near LA Fitness. Also, the developer proposes to
reduce the width of Rossmoor Center Way to add eight parking spaces.
I suggested Rossmoor Center Way have two westbound traffic lanes from Seal Beach Boulevard and
two eastbound lanes from Montecito Road with both having one of those lanes becoming a turning lane
into LA Fitness. At the LA Fitness club, the two west bound lanes would become one westbound lane
and the two eastbound lanes would become one eastbound lane. Thus, there would be essentially a total
of three lanes between the Pei Wei - Sprouts intersection and Montecito Road. This would mean the
developer could not add eight parking spaces by reducing the width of Rossmoor Center Way from
Montecito from 40 feet to 36 feet.
It appears to me the developer is only proposing to add 90 feet, not 145 feet, to the northbound left -turn
lane (pocket) on Seal Beach Boulevard at Rossmoor Center Way, which would improve an already
existing problem at that intersection. Currently, at times the left turn lane backs up three or four vehicles
into a through Seal Beach Boulevard traffic lane. La Fitness will exacerbate this problem. However, if
this is done as part of the project, the City of Seal Beach should be reimbursed for the cost of the
recently improved median.
I concur with Supervisor Michelle Steel's attached June 22, 2017, letter where Supervisor Steel and the
County Public Works Department asked for traffic studies of at least two similarly LA Fitness clubs. I
would recommend the 24 Hour Fitness in Cypress be studied too. I say this because the LA Fitness
parking is significantly underestimated using the Seal Beach Municipal Code that calls for 124 parking
spaces for the proposed LA Fitness (37,000 sq. ft.) facility in Seal Beach. The Seal Beach Code would
call for 133 parking spaces at the Cypress 24 Hour Fitness (- 40,000 sq. ft.) and 150 parking spaces at
the Garden Grove LA Fitness (- 45,000 sq. ft.). However, the Cypress 24 Hour Fitness has over 300
parking spaces available and the Garden Grove La Fitness has at least 270 parking spaces available to
it. This indicates to me the functionality of the proposed LA Fitness would require much more than 124
parking spaces. On the morning of June 17, 2017, there were approximately 260 vehicles parked at 24
Hour Fitness and 190 vehicles parked at the Garden Grove LA Fitness. To me, the more parking spaces
needed means more traffic; thus, there is a need for traffic studies of similar facilities and those studies
should be reflected in the traffic analysis of the proposed Seal Beach LA Fitness club.
In 2011 and 2012, it was estimated by Seal Beach staff (see attached 2012 Parking Estimate) that The
Shops at Rossmoor had well over 200 parking spaces surplus and the site plan has not changed since
2012 (see attached 2012 Site Plan). Now the developer indicates there will be 336 surplus parking
spaces after LA Fitness is completed along with its required parking spaces. Adding the LA Fitness club
to the Shops at Rossmoor increases surplus parking? Again, parking needs to be addressed in the EIR
for the entire shopping center and LA Fitness.
I have commented the LA Fitness club would be a hardship on Seal Beach and Rossmoor residents if
they are not allowed to continue to use the surplus parking at The Shops at Rossmoor. It is not
uncommon for developers to provide community benefits to gain support for their projects, for example,
Bixby gave the City of Seal Beach the Tennis Center and $1 million as pan of the approval process for
the Old Ranch Town Center, Old Ranch Plaza, and modifications to the Old Ranch Country Club.
I urge you not to approve the LA Fitness Final EIR unless there are no traffic issues, noise issues, and
parking issues, and adequate surplus parking is made available to Seal Beach residents living adjacent to
The Shops at Rossmoor.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 562 -596 -9057
Regards,
Gary Miller
Seal Beach City Council Member 2008 - 2016
LA FITNESS FINAL EIR SUMMARY
Gary Miller
An Environmental Impact Report for such a project should include a parking analysis, the LA
Fitness Ent does not.
SURPLUS PARKING
2011 -12 Seal Beach staff indicated well over 200 surplus parking spaces available for The Shops
at Rossmoor site plan of today.
Developer indicates 330 surplus parking spaces after LA Fitness is constructed with 124 required
parking spaces.
Thus, the developer's analysis would indicate there are 541 surplus parking spaces available for
The Shops at Rossmoor site plan of today.
Is it well over 200 surplus parking spaces today or 541 surplus parking spaces?
The developer concerned enough about parking:
- Not lose parking for an ingress and egress on Seal Beach Blvd. north of Subway
- Propose curb barriers to separate the north and south sections of the parking lot to
encourage patrons visiting Home Goods and Pet Smart not to park near LA Fitness
- Propose adding eight parking spaces to the northeast comer of the parking lot by
reducing the width of Rossmoor Center Way
The parking needs and surplus of The Shops at Rossmoor need to be analyzed in detail.
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
SB Municipal Code would require Cypress 24 Hour Fitness to have 133 parking spaces, over 300
parking spaces available ( -260 parking spaces used morning of June 17).
SB Municipal Code would require Garden Grove LA Fitness to have 150 parking spaces, at least
270 parking spaces available ( -190 parking spaces used morning of June 17).
SB Municipal Code requires proposed Seal Beach LA Fitness to have 124 parking spaces
LA Fitness will require more than 124 parking spaces.
The EIR should addressed functional parking needs of LA Fitness.
TRAFFIC
Supervisor Steel and the Orange County Public Works realize the functionality of the proposed
LA Fitness potentially has a higher trip generation rate than analyzed, when they recommend the
developer conduct traffic studies of at least two (2) similarly located LA fitness clubs. Cypress
24 Hour Fitness should be considered too.
A higher LA Fitness parking requirement than analyzed would indicate a higher trip generation
rate than analyzed.
The traffic burden on Seal Beach Blvd. could be reduce by having two eastbound lanes on
Rossmoor Center Way from Montecito Road to LA Fitness.
Extending the northbound left -turn lane (pocket) 90 feet on Seal Beach Blvd. at Rossmoor
Center Way will mitigate traffic issues today, but do little or nothing to mitigate traffic issues
associated with LA Fitness.
There needs to be additional traffic studies and analysis.
COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTION
The LA Fitness club would be a hardship on Seal Beach and Rossmoor residents if the Seal
Beach residents are not allowed to continue to use the surplus parking at The Shops at Rossmoor.
It is not uncommon for developers to provide community benefits to gain support for their
projects, for example, Bixby gave the City of Seal Beach the Tennis Center and $1 million as
part of the approval process for the Old Ranch Town Center, Old Ranch Plaza, and modifications
to the Old Ranch Country Club.
CONCLUSION
The LA Fitness Final EIR should not be approved without additional traffic and parking studies
and analysis. The parking studies should consider the possibility of making parking available to
Seal Beach residents living adjacent to The Shops at Rossmoor as a community contribution.
A decision on the Conditional Use Permit 16 -7 needs to be delayed until EIR is certified.
aMICHELLE STEEL
CHAIRWOMAN. SECOND DISTRICT
ORANGE COUNTY HALL OF ADMINISTRATION
333 W. SANTA ANA BLVD., SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701
PHONE (714 ) 834 -3220 FAX (714( 834 -6109
Miohelle.Steel®ocgo,com
June 22, 2017
Seal Beach City Council
City Hall
211 Eighth Street,
Seal Beach, CA 90740
RE: LA Fitness Project at the Shops at Rossmoor, St. Cloud Dr./ Seal Beach Blvd. — Traffic
Concerns
Dear Honorable City Council Members,
I write to you in regard to the proposed LA Fitness Project at the Shops at Rossrown As the
directly elected representative for the residents of Rossmoor, T have heard many concerns
regarding this project and its possible traffic impacts. I asked our Public Works department to
review some of these concerns, and that resulted in the attached letter of additional findings.
Public Works recommends that the applicant conduct a traffic study of at least two similarly
located LA Fitness clubs to ascertain the average daily treffic for this facility. I respectfully ask
that you consider these recommendations, as well as the concerns of Rossmoor residents, and
ensure average daily traffic is accurately and fully analyzed before proceeding with this project.
Sincerely, 2�
MICHELLE STEEL
Chairwoman, Second District
Orange County Board of Supervisors
cc: Jill Ingram, City Manager
Jim Barham, Community Development Director
L C Pub1icWorks
Integrity, Accountability, Service, Trust
Shane L. Silsby, Director
a
June 1S, 2017
City of Seal Beach
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Attention: Mr. Jim Basham, Community Development Director
Subject: LA Fitness Project at the Shops at Rossmoor, St. Cloud Dr. /Seal Beach Blvd. — Traffic Concerns
Dear Mr. Basham,
Thank you forthe opportunity to comment on the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) forthe Health
Club within The Shops At Rossmoor. Subsequent to our initial comments on the EIR, we received
communication from Mr. Kevin Pearce (Coalition against LA Fitness) via email (attached) on May 19,
2017. In conjunction with discussions with City of Seal Beach staff on June 13, 2017, County staff
provided the following findings based on further research and review of the traffic study forthe EIR of
the subject project:
• The Average Daily Traffic within the traffic study in the EIR is based on ITE trip generation rate of
32.93 trips per thousand square feet. Due to a small sample size provided by the ITE Trip
Generation Manual (attached) for health /fitness clubs used in the EIR (see attached page 18
from EIR), County recommends that applicant Conduct a traffic study of at least two (2) similarly
located LA Fitness clubs to ascertain the average daily traffic for this facility.
• In regards to the concern of the subject project trip distribution which shows 10% of the trips
generated using Montecito /St. Cloud and 90% of Rossmoor Center Way, County has reviewed
the traffic analysis in the EIR and is in concurrence with the trip distribution layouts. Montecito
would provide an indirect route to Seal Beach Boulevard whereas Rossmoor Center Way would
provide a direct access. In addition, Rossmoor Center Way is projected a better Level of Service
(LOS) than Montecito /St. Cloud Drive.
Please contact myself at (714) 647 -3213 or lames Tyler at (714) 667 -3210 if you have any questions.
Sincerely, y-(LLy�jy,M_' /DIY''
Khalid Bazmi, P.E.,
Assistant Director /County Engineer, OC Public Works
300 N. Fbeer Street, Santa Ms. CA 92703 vnvx.ocpudicwerks.com
P.O. Box 4048, Santa Ana, CA 927024MB 714.887.8800 1 Inro@OCM.ocgov.wm
cc: Shane L. Silsby, P.E., Director, OC Public Works
Nardy Khan, Deputy Director, OC Infrastructure Programs
James Tyler, P.E., Manager, Development Support Division
Fiona Man, P.E., T.E., Manager, Traffic & Design
Attachments:
Email from Mr. Kevin Pearce on 5/19/17
ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9t° Edition, Page 940
EIR, Traffic Analysis, Page 18
300 N. Flower Saest, Santa Ana, CA 92703 www.acpuGicwrka.can
P.O. Box 6068, Santa Ana, CA 92902 -4048 714.887.8800 1 Info @oCPvvoogo¢mm
RE: Shops at Rossmoor
From:
"Rafferty, Jana L. @ Oranae"
To:
Cc
John Millet
Subject:
RE: Strops at Rossmoor
Date:
Feb 17, 2012 2:55 PM
Attachments:
Site plan,oaf
Gary,
Attached please find a copy of the site plan for the Shops at Rossmoor. I believe this is the document Mike
Maynard referred to.
Please let me know if you have any further questions.
Jana Rafferty I Real Estate Manager
CBRE, Inc, I Asset Services
ROrange, CA 92868
1
L
At I Seal Beach, CA 90740
www.cbre.00m
Please mngder the environment before panting this email.
This email may contain information that is confiden9al or a tomeyciient privileged and may constr um inside information. The contents of this email
are intended only for the recipient(s) listed above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are directed not to reed discbse, distribute or otherwise
use this transmission. If you have received this email in error, please notify me sender immediately and delete the transmission. Delivery of this
message is not intended to waive any applicable privileges.
From: John Miller [mailM
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 1:48 PM
To:
Cc: Rafferty, Jana L. @ Orange
Subject: RE: Shops at Rossmoor
Councilman Miller,
Good afternoon.
I just asked Jana to send the information over to you and would like to discuss any questions you may have. I
also understand the Seal Beach committee added six more sites to the affordable housing initiative. I am
hopeful one is able to replace the Shops location which we do not support for affordable housing.
I also will be back in Seal Beach on March 7 and 8 and would like to schedule some time to meet - possibly for
coffee- either at the property or I can come to City Hall.
I look forward to speaking with you.
Thanks, John
C. John Miller, IV I Vice President I AEW 4Wtel MwaamanI. L.P.
http: / /webmail.earthlink- net /wam/printable jsp9msgid--2599 &x= 1549273875 626/2017
d
E
n
0
d
u
11
r<
_ _71111
ou
_!fM7] rIr j�R—
H *lm .,.
� #HdfllFl}IB ��, ' df u
y li b
m
BINNNIIHI9 r J[
Imnlllllllllrtlllll Wi1i111.1�u'Iw I1pmN i It ��
- _j •' , gm{ J WMI TI,FffTiI1" �L
-Y
W f+I H Fh10
_
5HINNIN+17
xa
Tj g
Page 3 - City Council 7 /25/16
CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Jill Ingmm had nothing to report.
Council Member Deacon provided an update on the Little Blue House noting that funds
have been donated tot ms project.
' Mayor Pro Tem Vanpapa commented on the successful Junior Lifeguara Program
which his daughter is attending and commented on me recent sewage spill.
Council Member Sloan thanked Recreation Manager Tim Kelsey for the work being
completed at Edison Park.
Mayor Messe-Lavitt commented on the successful Lions Club Fish Fry and thanked the
"ni for all that they do for the community.
Council Member Miller urged everyone to give their support to our outstanding Police
Department, which is very community oriented.
PUBLIC HEARING
L. Appeal of Planning Commission Decision CUP 15.7 - Hold a de novo hearing
regarding CUP 15-7 and after considering an evidence and testimony presented,
adopt Resolution No. 6670 approving CUP 15 -7 to construct and operate a
37,000 square foot ihness club at an existing shopping center at 12411 Seal
Beech Boulevard Minn the Commercial General (CG) zoning area and
approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
' City Attorney, Craig Steele announced that a letter addressed to all Council Membem
was received late Monday afternoon requesting a 60 day continuance of the hearing
requested try several Seal Beach and Rossmoor residents noting the Seal Beach
Municipal Code requires that a hearing on an appeal must be within 40 days of the date
of the appeal. However, the applicant did not consent to the continuance; therefore, the
City is unable to grant mat request.
Assistant Planner, Steve Fowler provided a presentation with a comprehensive
background of the project.
Mayor Maeda -Lavilt opened the public hearing and disclosed she had an experts
meeting with the developer regarding the project. Council Member Denton indicated
she received all of the letters, mad both sides, met with me apploifnrs representative
and found no new information given, also watched the Planning Commission meeting.
Council Member Miller expressed his concern regarding the proposed extended left
hand lure lane. Sceakem: Many Potts gave an overview of the proposed IA Fitness
project indicating that their project is compliant and meets or exceeds development
standards. Mr. Polls indicated the neighborhood impacts are conditioned through the
proposed resolution and addressed each issue as staled in the appeal by Margret
Parker.
' Councilwoman Deacon inquired about the median and landscaping that MII be removed
as a result of the rernmal of the medlar. Mr. Potts also addressed her question
regarding discretionary approvals Indicating by right he can build the same size building
as proposed. Councilwoman Deaton also inquired about me noise mitigation. Mr. Potts
responded indicating mere was no found nose impact
Mayor Pro-Tam Varipapa had questions regarding security, landscaping, and it signal
timing MII charge. Mr. Potts indicted they're obligated operebonally to monitor the
signals after completion. Details related to security have not been discussed at this time
and the cost for landscaping wasn't a figure he knew off hand. Additionally, Nick
Roberts addressed Councilman Verpmpas questions regarding how LA Fdness
Page 4— City Council 712&2016
determines where to pd a gym, hours. signature clubs, height of clubs, loading area
and ADA compliance.
At the inquiry of Mayor Massa -Lavin regarding signal timing at the intersection where
they are making the left hand turn pocket lane longer, Director Restart commented
mat the length of time could be up 10 10 asoonds longer.
Council Member Miller had quash" for Dawson Lue regarding the amount of cars
traveling on Rossmoor Center Way to Seal Beach Boulevard. Mr. Lue commented that ,
results from the study indicate Mere were 135 vehicles traveling during the peak 60
minutes after work hours.
Council Member Sk en inquired es to how many trips per day are made inbound and
Outbound of the center. Mr. Lue indicated 1,218 tips in a 24 hour period.
The appellant Margret Parker, President of the Rosamoor Park Condominiums,
addressed Ma Council with the (diming concerns; She feels the City of Seal Beach has
set a low bar for determining development with substantial or significant impact; limited
main gate access for emergency vehicles noting Mat her source from the Fire
Dapamnent Informed her that May cannot use Rosemcor Center Way because of the
traffic congestion and congestion caused by In -N0ut Burger; concems of the location
of a 20 toot fire lane; and concems of a lack of responsiveness when looking for City
records.
The 10110401119 people spoke an behall of the appellant requesting Council to uphold the
appeal and reject Resolution 6670 and overturn the Planning Commission Resolution
16-13. Craig Mongers spoke regarding traffic safety; Thomas Cdpps spoke regarding
traffic modeling and expressed his concerns regarding utility taxes; Melissa
Kalivalmstancm expressed her concerns regarding the quality of lie for residents that
live in close proximity to the proposed LA Fitness and the noise ordinance; Rebecca
Alley read the definition of a descriptive easement requesting that Council consider '
allowing the residents in Rosemoor to confine using the parking lot at the proposed LA
Fitness site; Kevin Pierce spoke regarding parking Issues, Safety concems, and lower
property values Of homes because the owners can't park in the parking lot; and a
speaker who did not provide her name expressed concerns regarding CEQA
requirements being circumvented, cumulative effects of the development, safety and
believes the numbers are flawed and that the data keeps charging.
Staff informed Council Member Miller and Council Member Deaton that the Information
Provided W Margret Parker sa lier that day was in compliance with the Public Records
Act Request and all information wee similar to whet was provided in the staff report.
Therefore, receiving the information the same day as the meeting would have no impact
on the public hearing.
Mayor Massa -Lavin asked the appellant, Margret Parker, who she Spoke to at the Fire
Department Ms. Parker indicated she would rather not say names because he Is afraid
of retaliation.
Speakers in opposition Include: Beth Harbor, Thomas Moore, Enn Jones, Robert Zato,
Mike Reeder, Jerry Gotley, Ron Casey, Aries Ostridge, Joseph Birds, Dave Bergius
and Joy Lipton.
City Clerk Robin Roberts received apprexlmately 16 pages of signatures in opposition '
taken on Next Door from the appellant during the public hearing.
The applicant, Marty Polls, then had an opportunity to rebut some of the Issues. Mr.
Potts then introduced John Miller, Me Director of Retail Asset Management for AEW
who spoke In support d the project.
Having no further requests to speak, Mayor Massa -Lavig closed the public hearing.
Page 5 - City Council 7125/16
Council Member Deaton indicated she has been through this before at the tamer only
last Ume U was regarding housing. She commented that she thinks housing would have
been great, would have added more parking and be more compatible with the
' neighbortaods. She explained mat this project needed a Conditional Use Pert due to
ms use Of me building, Council Member Deal stated LA Fitness is rot compatible
with the neighborhood and she wouldn't want a in her neighborhood. She commented
that one feels that it should already be mitigated for the amount of traffic at the center.
She indicated she lammed to all me testimony, agreed it is not a compatible use and
' feels U is gracious of the center to allow residents to use it (parking). Concerns include:
the bottleneck at Sprouts and Pei Wei and thinks mitigation should be done now, school
time conflict is realty Important, cleared up the misconception that the City is receiving
tax money, explained that Me Planning Commission is appdnted and respects the work
that they have done. Deaton urged the shopping center to think about housing again
and the City would be able to collect tax money from that
cal Council Member Miller agreed with Council Member Deaton that school Issues are very
Important and the peak hour is really congested. He noted that there are issues related
to me residents Parking in the center due o the City allowing deem to modify apartments
having one unit and one parking spot and allowing them a park at the center. Council
Member Miller men commented that he believes the parking and raise issues have not
been adequately addressed. He indicated that the facility would function differently than
the other commercial uses in the center and doesn't want another Bella Tema which is
Overbuilt He concluded by saying he doesn't support the project.
Council Member Sloan Indicated he doesn't feel to project met opens early in me
morning and closes late at night is compatible with me neighborhood and cannot
support the project
Mayor Pm-Tern Vari noted concerns with the noise and landscaping on the west
side of the project. He then commented that the mitigation traffic impacts are good at
the egress at Rossmoor Way and Seal Beach Boulevard and believes may should have
been done a long time ago. Council Member Vadpapa noted soma concerns regarding
taffy around children and can relate as he lives near a whom. He concluded that he
feels the project has morn for improvement; however, the traffic issues and mitigation
have been addressed.
Mayor Massa -Levitl believes the project is appropriate for its location. She commented
that it's a retail center with a retail zone that happens to be surrounded by residential.
She stated that ma center has been there for a long time and although it has been
underutilized in the past doesn't mean it has to stay that way. She stated mat ate
supports LA Fitness and believes after Its in and settled that the residents won't be
experiencing the issues they thought they would be experiencing. Mayor Massa -Levitt
would like to revise condition four on page six which states that me applicant has
agreed to contribute $50,000 for the cost of landscaping. She doesn't want a limit
contribution and would like full cost recovery. She stated she would like to see
enhanced landscaping on to West facing pan of the building facing the apartments
since they will be looking at a wall. Overall, she is in favor of me Project
Sloan moved, second by Miller, to uphold the Appeal of the Planning Commission
approval of Conditional Use Permit 15 -7 and direct staff ro place a resolution indicating
such findings on me next City Council meeting agenda.
'
AYES: Casten, Sloan, Miller
NOES: Massa- lavin, Vanpapa
ABSENT: None
Motion cameo
M. Appeal of Planning Commission Decision Minor Use Permit, 26 A Sudside —
Hold a de now hearing regarding MUP 16.4 and after considering all evidence
and testimony presented, adopt Resolution No. 6671 denying the appeal and
approving MUP 164 to allow the extension of an existing deck and me
construction of a second poor balcony on a single family residence that Is
RE: Shops at Rossmoor Parking Studies Page 1 of 4
RE: Shops at Rossmoor Parking Studies
From: Jill Ingram <jingramlileealbeachoil
To: Gary Miller
Coo _ _ Mark Persico
Subject: RE: Shops at Rommoor Parking Studies
Date: Jan 25, 20126:33 PM
Attachments: imme002.1op
HI Gary, just wanted to update you that staff is still working on this request. As a side note, the 200 parking
places identified in the staff report was a staff estimate, so there was not a parking study nor is there a master
parking plan; however, we'll provide additional information for the basis of the estimate as soon as possible to
hopefully clarify this issue further for you.
Jill R. Ingram, City Manager
City of Seal Beach - 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA 00740
(562) 431 -2527 Ext. 1300
`J
For Information about Seal Beach, please sce our city webeile: htto://www.sealbeachca.ti
NOTICE: This communication may contain prwileged or Wher confidential information. if you ere not the intended recipient of this
communication, or an employee or agent nownsible for deliw,rirg thu communication to the intended recipient, please adWss the sender
by reply email and Immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or dieclasing the diameter Tbank you
From: Gary Miller [mailto
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 2:03 PM
To' fill rnnr m
Cc:
Subject: FW: Shops at Rossmoor Parking Studies
Jill,
I have been asking for parking studies related to the Shops at Rossmoor since October 31, 2011 (see
email below). After your recent referral to the Planning Commission meeting of Aprit 20, 2011, I
read the agenda staff reports related to Rite Air and In- N-Out.
Page four of the Rite Aid staff report indicated the project plan calls for 51 parking spaces to be
provided. It is indicated, at last count, the entire shopping center had a surplus of well over 200
puking spaces. Two things here, there was a parking study associated with Rite Aid project, and
there must be a master parking oleo to be able to indicate a surplus of over 200 parking places It is
even identified the City has been aware of a parking deficiency for this building and there needs for
parking agreement with an adjacent office building. Thus, there must have been a perking analyses of
this situation.
http:// webmail .ear0ilink.wt/wam/pnntable.isp ? msgid= 2355 &x = 618606329 626/2017
RE: Shops at Rossmoor Parking Studies
Page 2 of 4
The Linscott Law & Greenspan April 11, 2011 letter to Ms. Madelyn Jackrel that is attached to the In-
N-Out staff report indicates a sequirement of 38 parking spaces. Thus, here again parking was
addressed. Also, it is conbeming that no business existed here before and now 1,395 daily trips are
expected. This will mean additional traffic on Seal Beach Blvd.
If I ever receive the 2006 document that resulted in the Notice of Exemption (NOE) for the Shops at
Rossmoor, I expect to see more information on parking.
Please provide the document(s) that allowed the statement that there is a surplus of wall over 200 parking
spaces
Thanks,
Gary
April 20, 2011
STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Chairwoman and Members of the Planning Commission
From Department of Development Services
Subject: Conditional Use Permit 11 -2
12541 Seal Beach Boulevard (Rite Aid)
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
MPA INC. ION BEHALF OF ROSSMOOR SHOPS, LLC)
ROSSMOOR SHOPS, LLC
12541 SEAL BEACH BOULEVARD
GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC)
FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A DRUG STORE AND PHARMACY WITH
A DRIVE - THROUGH; ALCOHOL SALES; AND 24 -HOUR OPERATION.
THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM CEQA
REVIEW.
11.2.10; 11.4.05.015; 11.4.05.050; 11.4.05.070; AND 11.5.20
OF THE SEAL BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE.
APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11 -2, SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, AND
AS MAY BE FURTHER REVISED BY THE COMMISSION AFTER
CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY, THROUGH THE
ADOPTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 11-4.
Planning Commission Staff Report
Conditional Use Permit 11 -2
12541 Seal Beach Boulevard
April 20, 2011
at the drive - through, and that the internal drive aisle widths, driveway widths, parking
stall widths, off -street loading spaces, and overall on -site traffic circulation is acceptable
The City's Public Works /Engineering department has reviewed the LLG study and City
Staff agrees with its findings.
Drive - Through
The proposed Rite Aid will occupy the lease space formerly occupied by a Chevron
gas/service station and the lease space now occupied by KFC and a vacant
commercial building. This particular Rite Aid is proposing to offer the drop -off and pick-
up of prescriptions via the drive - through window. Drive- through windows are a service
that many pharmacies offer and they provide added convenience to their customers.
The proposed drive - through appears to be adequately sized and provides an adequate
queuing length, roughly four cars, for the designated purpose. Because of its location
away from major activity within the center, as well as the reconfigured layout of the
ingress and egress points along Seal Beach Boulevard and St. Cloud Drive, the
proposed drive- through is not anticipated to adversely impact traffic circulation within
the center or create traffic impacts along the adjacent streets. Residential uses are of
an adequate distance from the drive- through so that automobile or speaker noise is not
anticipated to adversely impact residential areas.
Staff is recommending that certain conditions be added to the drive- through approval,
including restricting the opening of the drive- through exit to a maximum of fifteen (15)
feet; "STOP" and "No U -tum" signs being placed at the drive - through exit; and that all
on -site traffic signage be approved by the City's Public Works/Engineering department.
Staff is also recommending that bollards, or a raised curb, be placed along the exterior
wall of the building where the drive- through is located, to prevent vehicles from
inadvertently damaging the exterior wall of the building.
Parking
Per the Seal Beach Municipal Code, the proposed project would require one (1) parking
space per 300 square feet of gross floor area. As the project proposal is for an
approximately 17,400 square foot building, the required on -site parking would be 58
parking spaces. Within the defined lease area, the plan shows a total of 51 parking
spaces provided. However, the applicant is proposing to merge this parcel with the
remainder of the shopping center and since, at last count, the entire shopping center
had a surplus of well over 200 parking spaces, the parking provided within the shopping
center is adequate to meet the requirements of the proposed new construction.
Page 4