HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem H •
er - )
August 28, 2000 (g C il
STAFF REPORT flet./1 (1 " (),,
To: Mayor Campbell and Members of the City CouncilOP el I
C
Attention: Don McIntyre, Acting City Manager
14 /
From: Lee Whittenberg,Director of Development Services
Subject: PUBLIC HEARING - BIXBY OLD RANCH
TOWNE CENTER PROJECT - PROPOSED
AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 15797 RE TIMING OF
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Introduce Ordinance No. 1467 and Adopt Resolution No. 4832, respectively, thereby deleting
Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 1440-A) and Condition Number
2, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, of City Council Resolution No. 4735 regarding Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 (VTTM), as requested by the applicant and recommended by the
Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION
Request of Bixby Ranch Company
Delete Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 1440-A) and Condition
Number 2, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, of City Council Resolution No. 4735 regarding
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 (VTTM). Deletion of these provisions and conditions
would remove the current project phasing restrictions that prohibit residential construction
within Development Area "D" (maximum of 75 single-family homes), prior to approval of
interior lath or drywall inspections for the commercial construction of certain specified portions
of Development Area A (identified as Retail "A", "B", "C", and "D").
AGENDA ITEM /1
C:Vviy Documents\Bixby Towne Center EIR\Development Agreement Amendment.CC Staff Report.doc\LW\08-21-00
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and VITM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
City Council Staff Report
August 28,2000
Planning Commission Recommendation:
The Planning Commission considered this matter at a public hearing on August 9, 2000. After
receiving all public testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the request on a 4-1 vote,
through the adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 00-31 (Attachment C). The Minutes
of the Planning Commission meeting are provided as Attachment D. Chairman Hood voted"no".
Please refer to the Planning Commission Staff Report of August 9, 2000 (Attachment E) for a
detailed overview of:
o the request
o existing provisions of the Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 1440)
o approved conditions of Vesting Tentative Tract map No. 15767 (City Council Resolution No.
4735)
o additional environmental evaluation conducted by Culbertson, Adams&Associates
o overview of the current project schedules for the commercial and residential components of the
project
o policy considerations regarding this request
o alternatives to the applicant's request, and
o impacts of a shortened construction schedule.
RECOMMENDATION
Introduce Ordinance No. 1467 and Adopt Resolution No. 4832, respectively, thereby deleting
Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 1440-A) and Condition Number
2, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, of City Council Resolution No. 4735 regarding Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 15797
NOTED AND APPROVED
e Whittenberg, Director ii:O/
Don McIntyre
Development Services Department Acting City Manager
Development Agreement Amendment.CC Staff Report 2
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and V7TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
City Council Staff Report
August 28,2000
Attachments: (5)
Attachment A: Ordinance Number 1467, An Ordinance of the City of Seal Beach
Amending the Development Agreement Between the City and the
Bixby Ranch Company, Deleting Section 3.1.2.7 — Project Phasing
(Timing of Residential Construction) Relating to the "Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center Development Plan"
Attachment B: Resolution No. 4832, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Seal Beach Deleting Condition Number 2 of City Council Resolution
No. 4735, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 15797 (Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Development)
Attachment C: Resolution Number 00-31, A Resolution of the Planning
Commission of the City of Seal Beach Recommending Amendment
to Development Agreement, Elimination of Section 3.1.2.7 —
Project Phasing (Timing of Residential Construction) and
Elimination of Condition Number 2, Prior to Issuance of Building
Permits, City Council Resolution No. 4735, Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 15797 (Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Development)
Attachment D: Draft Planning Commission Minutes, August 9, 2000
Attachment E: Planning Commission Staff Report, August 9, 2000, with all
Attachments
Development Agreement Amendment.CC Staff Report 3
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and V1TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
City Council Staff Report
August 28,2000
ATTACHMENT A
ORDINANCE NUMBER 1467, AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AMENDING THE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY AND THE BIXBY RANCH COMPANY,
DELETING SECTION 3.1.2.7 - PROJECT
PHASING (TIMING OF RESIDENTIAL
CONSTRUCTION) RELATING TO THE "BIXBY
OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER DEVELOPMENT
PLAN"
Development Agreement Amendment.CC Staff Report 4
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and V7TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
City Council Staff Report
August 28,2000
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION NUMBER 00-31, A RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING
AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,
ELIMINATION OF SECTION 3.1.2.7 - PROJECT
PHASING (TIMING OF RESIDENTIAL
CONSTRUCTION) AND ELIMINATION OF
CONDITION NUMBER 2, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMITS, CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 4735, VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 15797 (BIXBY OLD RANCH
TOWNE CENTER DEVELOPMENT)
Development Agreement Amendment.CC Staff Report 12
RESOLUTION NUMBER 00-31
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH
RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,
ELIMINATION OF SECTION 3.1.2.7 -
PROJECT PHASING (TIMING OF
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION) AND
ELIMINATION OF CONDITION NUMBER 2,
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING
PERMITS, CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO.
4735, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
15797 (BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER
DEVELOPMENT)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE:
WHEREAS: The City and Bixby Ranch Company entered into a development agreement
pursuant to Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5, and Article
27.5 of Chapter 28 of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, California with
respect to that certain real property commonly known as the "Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center Development Plan"area; and
WHEREAS: Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. § 15025(a) and §§ II.0 and III of the
City's Local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study and a Draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), to study the environmental impacts
arising from the proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development
Plan and related General Plan amendments. The DEIR was circulated for
public review and comment from April 15, 1998 to May 29, 1998, in
compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and the City's Local CEQA Guidelines. Upon completion of
the public review period, a Final Environmental Impact Report was
reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on
September 9, October 21, and November 4, 1998. After the public
hearing, the Planning Commission found, through the adoption of
Planning Commission Resolution No. 98-37 that the Bixby Old Ranch
Towne Center Development Plan Final Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) is adequate under CEQA. After considering the Final EIR and
C:My Documents\RESO\Bixby Development Agreement Amend.PC Reso.doc\L.W\08-10-00
Planning Commission Resolution No. 00.31
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center—Amendment to Development Agreement&
VTTM No. 15797—Development Phasing
August 9, 2000
public testimony thereto at a public hearing on November 9 and
November 17, 1998, the City Council adopted City Council Resolution
No. 4660, certifying the Final EIR and adopting a statement of overriding
considerations. On August 23, 1999, the City Council conducted a public
hearing to consider revisions to the EIR and a statement of overriding
considerations pursuant to the August 3, 1999 writ issued by the Orange
County Superior Court. The approval of the ordinance adopting the
development agreement was within the scope of the project analyzed in
the Final EIR, as revised, and City Council Resolution No. 4728 is hereby
incorporated by this reference; and
WHEREAS: On August 23, 1999, the City Council re-adopted all necessary ordinances
and resolutions regarding the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center development.
Ordinance 1440-A re-adopted the development agreement, setting forth
terms and conditions regarding the overall Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
project. City Council Resolution No. 4735 re-approved Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 15797 regarding the residential development on Area "D";
and
WHEREAS: On July 13, 2000 the City of Seal Beach received a request from Bixby
Ranch Company to undertake whatever actions are necessary to eliminate
Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement and condition 2 under the
heading "Prior to Issuance of Building Permits" on page 9 of Resolution
4735, regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797. Elimination of
these provisions and conditions would permit construction of the
residential project permitted within Development Area "D" to proceed
prior to any commercial development; and
WHEREAS: The City of Seal Beach has reviewed the proposed changes in the phasing
provisions of the Development Agreement for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne
Center project for compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutes and Guidelines and the City of
Seal Beach Environmental Procedures. The City has found that the Bixby
Old Ranch Towne Center EIR,previously certified by the City of Seal Beach
on August 23, 1999,and the Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for the
project adequately addresses the environmental effects of the proposed
changes;and
WHEREAS: The Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing on August 9,
2000, regarding the requested amendment to eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of the
Development Agreement and condition 2 under the heading "Prior to
Issuance of Building Permits" on page 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797, in accordance with the provisions
of Section 4.8, Modification, Amendment or Extension, of the adopted
Development Agreement;and
Bixby Development Agreement Amend.PC Reso 2
Planning Commission Resolution No. 00.31
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center—Amendment to Development Agreement&
VITM No. 15797—Development Phasing
August 9, 2000
WHEREAS: At said public hearing written and oral testimony was received by the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS: The City of Seal Beach, in consideration of the proposed changes in the
phasing provisions of the Development Agreement for the Bixby Old Ranch
Towne Center project, has reviewed the project for compliance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutes
and Guidelines and the City of Seal Beach Environmental Procedures. In
this regard, the City has reconsidered Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR,
previously certified by the City of Seal Beach on August 23, 1999, and the
Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for the project. Based upon its
review, The City finds that the proposed project falls within the scope of the
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR in compliance with Section 21166 of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code §
21000, et seq.) and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines based upon the
following:
(a) Substantial changes are not proposed in the project, which will
require major revisions to the environmental impact report. The Project
Description of the project has not been changed by the proposed changes to
the Development Agreement. Certification of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne
Center EIR considered the development of Development Area A for
commercial development and Development Area D for residential
development.
(b) Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the
circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which will
require major revisions in the environmental impact report. The changes in
the Development Agreement would not result in changes in the
circumstances surrounding the project per the certified EIR.
(c) There is no new information, which was not known and could not
have been known at the time the environmental impact report was certified
as complete, becomes available. The environmental effects of the certified
EIR and approved projects have not been changed by the proposed changes
to the Development Agreement. Moreover, the proposed changes to the
Development Agreement would not result in new significant effects not
previously identified; and
WHEREAS: The Planning Commission determines the requested amendment to eliminate
Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement and condition 2 under the
heading "Prior to Issuance of Building Permits" on page 9 of Resolution
4735, regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 are appropriate for
the following reasons:
Bixby Development Agreement Amend.PC Reso 3
Planning Commission Resolution No. 00.31
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center—Amendment to Development Agreement&
IITTM No. 15797—Development Phasing
August 9, 2000
❑ From a land planning standpoint, the Planning Commission can
determine no adverse impacts that would be created if the requested
amendments were to be approved.
o Adequate mitigation measures have been imposed by the City to
ensure that each of the various project components of the Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center Development Project will not be detrimental to
the environment on their own.
❑ The delays caused by the CEQA lawsuit have changed the
circumstances under which these conditions were imposed.
o The progress of the commercial development on the site makes it clear
that the approved commercial development will be completed almost
concurrently with the approved residential development.
o Elimination of the subject provisions would shorten the overall project
construction period if the requested amendment were to be approved
by the City. Shortening the construction period would result in
reduced impacts as a result of:
o A shorter time period of traffic disruption along Seal Beach
Boulevard;
o a shorter time period of dust generation if a more concentrated
construction period were to occur;
❑ a shorter time period of construction noise if a more concentrated
construction period were to occur;
o a shorter time period of air quality impacts if a more concentrated
construction period were to occur;
o Reduce the potential for construction conflicts with the new businesses
of the Old Ranch Towne Center project due to later construction of the
residential development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission hereby
recommends approval to the City Council the Elimination of Section 3.1.2.7 of the
Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 1440-A) and the Elimination of Condition
Number 2, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, of City Council Resolution No. 4735
regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the
City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the 9th day of August , 2000,
by the following vote:
Bixby Development Agreement Amend.PC Reso 4
Planning Commission Resolution No. 00.31
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center—Amendment to Development Agreement&
YITM No. 15797—Development Phasing
August 9, 2000
AYES: Commissioners Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, Sharp
NOES: Commissioners Hood
ABSENT: Commissioners
ABSTAIN: Commissioners
David Hood, Ph.D.
Chairman of the Planning Commission
i
�e Whittenberg
Secretary of the Planning Commis '•n
Bixby Development Agreement Amend.PC Reso 5
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and V7TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
City Council Staff Report
August 28, 2000
ATTACHMENT D
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES,
AUGUST 9, 2000
Development Agreement Amendment.CC Staff Report 13
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 9, 2000
1 7. Proposed Amendment to Development Agreement Section 3.1 .2.7 — Project
2 Phasing (Timing of Residential Construction) and to City Council Resolution
3 No. 4735, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797, Condition Number 2, Prior to
4 Issuance of Building Permits Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project.
5
6 Applicant/Owner: Bixby Ranch Company
7 Request: Eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement
8 (Ordinance No. 1440-A) and Condition Number 2, Prior to
9 Issuance of Building Permits, of City Council Resolution
10 No. 4735 regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
11 15797. Elimination of these provisions and conditions
12 would remove the current project phasing provisions and
13 conditions regarding the required approval of interior lath or
14 drywall inspections for the commercial construction of
15 certain specified portions of Development Area A
16 (identified as Retail "A", "B", "C", and "D") prior to issuance
17 of building permits for the residential project permitted
18 within Development Area "D" (maximum of 75 single-family
19 homes). Elimination of these provisions and conditions
20 would permit construction of the residential project
21 permitted within department Area "D" to proceed prior to
22 completion of any commercial development.
23
24 Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions, and adoption of Resolution
25 No. 00-31 .
26 <'
27 Staff Report • w
28
29 Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in
30 the Planning Department.) He provided some background information on this item
31 and stated that as part of the initial approvals of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
32 Project, there was a change in land uses proposed for the project to allow residential
33 development at the far north end of the property, between the shopping center and
34 the City of Los Alamitos. He stated that throughout the EIR process the use that had
35 been evaluated was for a church. He reported that during the last review by City
36 Council it was decided that the church use would not be allowed and a proposal was
37 accepted to allow for 75 single-family homes. Mr. Whittenberg stated that concerns
38 were expressed about the Bixby Ranch Company electing to go with a strictly
39 residential use, leading to the City losing some of benefits of the project. He noted
40 that as a result, a condition was placed upon the approval of the Tentative Tract Map
41 for the residential project, which states that building permits could not be issued for
42 the homes until certain levels of building were completed on the commercial venture
43 as a way to ensure that the commercial portion of the development would also be
44 constructed. He indicated that the Bixby Ranch Company was now requesting
45 elimination of that "tie-in" of the residential component to a certain phase of
46 completion of the commercial project. He stated that City Council Ordinance 1440
8
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 9, 2000
1 adopting the development agreement with Bixby Ranch indicates that the building
2 permits could not be issued on the residential uses until the interior lathe or drywall
3 inspections for the commercial shopping center areas A, B, E and F have been
4 completed. He reported that "Retail A" is the major tenant of the shopping center
5 and is a 135,000 square foot Target Store. He stated that the builders for Target
6 have already pulled the foundation permit and are in the process of trenching and
7 pouring the foundation, and are within 20-30 days of obtaining the building permit to
8 actually begin construction of the building. He said that "Retail B" is a 57,000 square
9 foot Ralph's Market whose representatives will appear before the Planning
10 Commission in September 2000 for conditional use permit consideration for alcohol
11 sales and to the market's 24-hour operation. He indicated that "Retail E" is the Sav-
12 On Drug Store previously approved by the Planning Commission and is waiting for
13 building permits. Mr. Whittenberg noted that "Retail F," which will be a linen and
14 bath store will not be coming before the Planning Commission, as it does not require
15 any discretionary approvals. He stated that the same provision was also added to
16 the Conditions for Approval for the Tentative Tract Map for the residential use so that
17 there would be consistency between the two approvals granted by the City.
18
19 Mr. Whittenberg stated that the basic purpose for requesting this amendment is
20 because the lengthy California Environmental Quality Agency (CEQA) litigation and
21 the referendum on the project put the commercial project behind schedule in
22 anticipation of the residential development. He indicated that some of the tenants
23 initially identified had decided that they did not want to wait through the CEQA
24 litigation and walked away from the project. Because of these delays, the
25 commercial and residential deadlines for completion have converged closer
26 together, and the residential builders would like to proceed with their deadlines as
27 initially anticipated without having to wait for rtioeitrvork on the commercial uses.
28 ,
29 Mr. Whittenberg reported that in ordrAu e out the possibility of this amendment
30 and conditions of approval for the tentative map creating new environmental
31 impacts, Staff had to review the original CEQA analysis and then contacted the
32 original EIR consultants and requested that they do an analysis. He referred to the
33 copy of the letter from the EIR consultants included with the Staff Report, which
34 states that the substantial changes do not result in any basic changes in the project
35 or create new information not evaluated under the EIR. He stated that based upon
36 these recommendations from the EIR consultants, Staff has determined that the
37 proposed change in the phasing of the project complies with the initial CEQA
38 analysis and does not require additional analysis by CEQA. He explained that the
39 conditions as originally imposed were to ensure the development of the commercial
40 component for the project, and Staff feels that this issue has been addressed. He
41 indicated that ownership of the 25-acre shopping center has been transferred to
42 Kitchell Development, and they have already transferred to Federated Department
43 Stores title for the Target Store property, with construction of the building scheduled
44 to begin within the next 30-60 days. He stated that as far as the plans for the rest of
45 the shopping center, Kitchell has notified Staff that they expect to submit all
46 remaining construction plans to the City by October 2000. He said that by
9
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 9, 2000
1 November Staff is hoping to get building permits for all of the buildings, which total
2 approximately 150,000 square feet of additional building space. He reported that the
3 projected date for opening for business is April or May 2001 .
4
5 Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff had been meeting with representatives of Centex
6 Homes who will be the builder of the residential homes, and they have also provided
7 their schedule for completion, a copy of which appears in the Staff Report. He said
8 that Centex Homes do not anticipate applying for building permits until
9 approximately February 2001 . He noted that with the shopping center permits
10 tentatively scheduled for November 2000, Staff expects the commercial site to be
11 fairly well completed before any construction would begin on the model homes for
12 the residential project. Staff presented several questions to be considered by both
13 the Planning Commission and City Council in making the determination to approve
14 this amendment:
15
16 • Did delays caused by the CEQA lawsuit change the circumstances under which
17 the original condition was imposed?
18 • Is it desirable for the residential to proceed without the completion of the major
19 portion of the residential/commercial tenant structures?
20 • Is it desirable for the residential development to proceed prior to and/or parallel
21 to the major commercial tenant structures?
22 • Does the progress of the commercial development on this site make it clear that
23 commercial development will be complet incurrently with the residential
24 development?
25 1)11 iSse
26 Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff does not see any adverse effects to approval of
27 this request. He recommended that if the Planning Commission or City Council feel
28 uncomfortable in eliminating the conditions altogether, they might still want to tie in
29 to getting the building permit for the major store in the shopping center, which is the
30 Target Store. He said that Staff believes that once Target is built, other tenants will
31 quickly be installed. He stated that if the compressed schedule is adopted, it could
32 benefit both Seal Beach and Los Alamitos in reducing the length of time that
33 residents will have to deal with noise, dust, and other construction activities.
34
35 Mr. Whittenberg reviewed the alternatives for voting on this request as follows:
36
37 1. Vote to approve the amendment as presented.
38 2. Change the phasing to the issuance of the building permit for the Target
39 Store.
40 3. Recommend no change to the existing provisions of the Development
41 Agreement and Tentative Map.
42
43 He noted that the decision of the Planning Commission tonight would not be the final
44 decision, but a recommendation, as this item will go before the City Council.
45
io
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 9, 2000
1 Commissioner Questions
2
3 Commissioner Sharp asked to view the schedule for building permits and completion
4 of the residential project, and questioned that the deadline of February 2001 was
5 only 6 months away. Mr. Whittenberg explained that these permits would initially be
6 for the model homes and for the first phase of 15 or 20 homes. After marketing and
7 selling the first phase, Centex would then go on to the next phase. Commissioner
8 Sharp asked what the result to the schedule would be if the project were delayed
9 until Target is complete. Mr. Whittenberg stated that because the residential
10 developers would not even want to take title to the property until they know they can
11 proceed to build, this would probably throw the schedule off by several weeks.
12
13 Commissioner Cutuli asked what the purpose of the phasing of the project was. Mr.
14 Whittenberg stated that the City Council had determined that in order to prevent
15 construction of a residential project only, they would condition approval of the project
16 to ensure construction of the commercial center first. Commissioner Cutuli asked if
17 the commercial center and the residential project would be ready at the same time.
18 Mr. Whittenberg responded that this would probably be the case. He explained that
19 once building permits are issued, it takes approF
Pately 5-6 months for completion
20 of each phase of homes. g
21 ?it22 Chair erson Hood stated that the resents of his District fear that if homes are built
23 along the runways of the nearby Air Force Reserve Center (AFRO), the base might
24 close down. He said that the residents do not want to see this happen, as this
25 property could then be used for further residential development. He explained the
26 reason for residents' fears by citing the incident when the railroad company in the
27 City of Los Alamitos gave up its land to the Bixby Company who then sold the
28 property to a lumber company or the school district. He said that this increased the
29 fear that Bixby would purposely build homes along the AFRO runways, the residents
30 would then complain, the base would close, and the land would revert to Bixby
31 Ranch.
32
33 Commissioner Lyon asked if the tour of the Centex Homes development was still
34 scheduled for Thursday, August 17, 2000. Mr. Whittenberg responded that it was
35 and that after tonight's meeting he would discuss this with the Commissioners.
36
37 Public Hearing
38
39 Chairperson Hood opened the public hearing.
40
41 Mr. Ron Bradshaw of the Bixby Ranch Company stated that the Staff Report
42 accurately provides all the information for making a determination. He stated that he
43 wished to emphasize that the residential component was added when the City
44 Council approved the ordinance in January 1999, when the Commercial Site Plan
45 was approved. He reiterated that the concern of the City had been whether there
46 would be a "bait and switch" situation because there had been a previous application
11
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 9, 2000
1 for the entire property being a residential development with a different golf course
2 configuration. He stated that at this point in time, the golf course is completely
3 graded and grassed in and will never be relocated, as there is a 30-year covenant
4 within the development agreement that no changes can be made during this time.
5 He also stated that the Bixby Ranch Company would relinquish any rights to the
6 Armed Forces Reserve Center (AFRC) property. Mr. Bradshaw assured the
7 Commission that the final approvals of the Site Plan ensure that the commercial
8 development is moving forward as discussed. He emphasized that the Target Store
9 anticipates opening for business in March 2001. He stated that Kitchell
10 Development has submitted plans for the Ralph's Market and Say-On Drugs
11 projects, and all of the intended users for the commercial development are "in the
12 pipeline," and should be open and operating prior to the residential development.
13 Mr. Bradshaw explained that when the change was made from a church use to a
14 residential use, the Bixby Ranch Company had no problem in agreeing to this, since
15 a commercial development would be more advantageous. He stated that,
16 unfortunately the CEQA lawsuit against the City, which was directed only at the
17 commercial and not the residential component, caused delays in beginning
18 construction on the commercial site. He explained that meanwhile the Bixby Ranch
19 Company was seeking a development partner for the residential side. He noted that
20 with the subsequent appeal of the CEQA lawsuit, this allowed ample time to secure
21 Centex Homes as the developer for the residential component. Mr. Bradshaw stated
22 that Centex is ready to move forward with grading, site work development, etc., but
23 they cannot acquire building permits. He said that he believes the intent and the
24 spirit of the condition have been met, and the City should not have any concerns
25 regarding the commercial development coming to completion. He stated that he
26 believed it was important that amending the agreement will allow all of the off-site
27 construction work along Seal Beach Boulevard in particular, to be completed in one
28 phase, rather than stringing it out. He emphasized that if Centex Homes has to wait
29 until the beginning of 2001 to submit their plans, by this time the commercial
30 component will be complete. He stated that all street improvements must be
31 complete by early 2001 in order for the commercial tenants to receive their
32 occupancy permits and open for business. Mr. Bradshaw also explained that work
33 on the community police facility and cable facility, which are to be located on the
34 residential site, cannot begin until permits are issued for the entire residential site.
35 He stated that everyone on the developer side has demonstrated a good working
36 relationship with the City, and it just makes good sense to have the project proceed
37 as quickly as possible. He noted that this would shorten the time of physical
38 disruption in the traffic right-of-ways that must be modified and will provide some of
39 the financial funding for traffic mitigation for the Seal Beach Boulevard overcrossing.
40 Mr. Bradshaw stated that amendments to the development agreement are to be
41 expected, and this proposal is a legitimate and firnable one that will keep the
42 project moving forward.
43 Dil�
44 Chairperson Hood asked if grading for the residential would be beginning in
45 November, would building permits for the Target Store be issued in November. Mr.
46 Whittenberg responded that it is anticipated that the building permits for Target
12
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 9, 2000
1 would be available within the next 30 days. He stated that all other building permits
2 for the commercial site are anticipated in November. Mr. Bradshaw interjected that
3 he felt that this was reasonable, and because Target would be the closest neighbor
4 to the residential component, he believed that it would work best to issue the
5 building permits to Centex before the commercial component is complete.
6 Chairperson Hood stated that grading for the residential would not begin until
7 November, which would not slow down the actual construction. Mr. Bradshaw
8 stated that in order to meet the timeline, Centex must own the property, and there is
9 concern that Centex Homes may begin to question their involvement in a situation
10 over which they had no control. He said that in order to begin grading plans in
11 September, Centex Homes wants reasonable assurance that they will be able to
12 take title of the property and begin building in February. Chairperson Hood stated
13 that construction would not be slowed down if this condition were imposed upon
14 them. Mr. Bradshaw assured the Commission that construction would be slowed
15 down, because Centex would not spend the money to close the sale of the property.
16 Mr. Whittenberg interjected that he schedule for completion used in Staff's
17 presentation does not reflect the alternative to Staff's recommendation, but was
18 prepared assuming the Commission would approve elimination of the condition
19 altogether, so that Centex could close escrow on the property and acquire it now
20 instead of waiting until after building permits have been issued to Target. Mr.
21 Bradshaw reiterated that the plans for Target are in for the third set of corrections,
22 and the building permit could be issued before the 30-day projection. He said that at
23 this point there should be no concerns regar•Ncompletion of the commercial
24 component. DR'
25
26 Commissioner Sharp asked if title to the land has been transferred to Target. Mr.
27 Bradshaw responded that it has been transferred. Commissioner Sharp stated that
28 because the Planning Commission was strictly making a recommendation to the City
29 Council to amend this agreement, he believes that the Commission should approve
30 issuance of the building permits for the residential component. He stated that he
31 would like to make a motion to approve this request. Chairperson Hood explained
32 that the public hearing was not yet over.
33
34 Ms. Sue Corbin said that it was obvious that the Planning Commission was "just
35 going to roll over for Bixby." She stated that after a lengthy time of hearings
36 culminating in a compromise and an agreement, suddenly the Bixby Ranch
37 Company does not want to abide by the agreement, but wants "special rights." She
38 exclaimed that this took a lot of audacity. She said that due to an inadequate traffic
39 study, which held up progression of the development, Mr. Bradshaw now wants
40 some kind of benefit to make up for lost time. She commented that Mr. Bradshaw's
41 negligence was not the City's emergency. She alluded to Staff holding up the plan
42 check in order to continue partaking of "very rich lunches," which she said are
43 provided by the contractors. Ms. Corbin stated that it is unfair to the public to make
44 special allowances for the Bixby Ranch Company, as there were still no guarantees
45 that the commercial development would be built. She said that the plan of
46 compromise should not be thrown out by approving this request, and Bixby Ranch
13
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 9, 2000
1 should abide by the original agreement. She noted that the City could not just take
2 Mr. Bradshaw's word that the commercial project would, in fact, be constructed. She
3 submitted her letter of objection for the record.
4
5 Ms. Janice Shackle, Project Manager for Centex Homes stated that it is their belief
6 that this will be a very successful project, and they are anxious to begin. She
7 reviewed the schedule for completion and noted that Centex is anticipating
8 completion of the model homes by June 2001, which is prime selling season. She
9 stated that if Centex were held to some of the commercial sites, this would delay
10 their schedule for completion. She reported that Centex will be doing some shared
11 improvements with Target Store, and Centex may not be willing to go forward with
12 this until they know the completion dates for the other commercial projects. She
13 stated that she was available to respond to questions.
14
15 Commissioner Lyon asked how many units would be built at a time. Ms. Shackle
16 reported that the homes would be built in 4-5 phases ranging from 15-20 homes per
17 phase for a total of 75 units altogether.
18
19 Chairperson Hood closed the public hearing.
20 gl
21 Commissioner Comments
22
23 Chairperson Hood stated that what the Planning Commission decides really doesn't
24 matter since this item will be going before the City Council. He stated that removing
25 the conditions entirely does make sense in one way, however, keeping them also
26 makes sense, as the City is concerned about sales tax and otherwise has no hold
27 over the Bixby Ranch Company's agreement. He said that Staffs compromise is a
28 reasonable one that will probably be appealed after review by the City Council.
29
30 Commissioner Brown stated that he regards Target's purchase of the land as a
31 major commitment, and he has no doubt that the commercial project will go to
32 completion. He said that if the City Council has already approved this project, it
33 makes sense for the Planning Commission to not unduly delay progression of the
34 project. He stated that he had no objections to dropping this condition and to issuing
35 the building permits to allow Centex to proceed.
36
37 MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Sharp to Eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of the
38 Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 1440-A) and Condition Number 2, Prior to
39 Issuance of Building Permits, of City Council Resolution No. 4735 regarding Vesting
40 Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 and to adopt Resolution 00-31.
41
42 MOTION CARRIED: 4 — 0 — 1
43 AYES: Brown, Cutuli, Lyon, and Sharp
44 NOES: Hood
45 ABSENT: None
46
14
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes of August 9, 2000
1 Mr. Whittenberg advised that the action of the Planning Commission is a
2 recommendation to be considered by the City Council at a future Public Hearing.
3
4 STAFF CONCERNS
5
6 Mr. Whittenberg noted for the record that the following items were provided for each
7 of the Commissioners:
8
9 1. Memorandum presented to the City Council on June 14, 2000, regarding the
10 status of contamination at the corner of Seal Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast
11 Highway, which impacts the Shore Shop property.
12
13 2. The most recent issue of The Planning Commissioners Journal.
14
15 3. A legal update regarding land use law.
16
17 Dg
�
18 COMMISSION CONCERNS
19
20 Chairperson Hood noted that the Agenda Forecast did not reflect the status of the
21 Study on Retaining Walls. Mr. Whittenberg apologized for the omission and stated
22 that Staff would revisit this issue within approximately 3 months.
23
24 Chairperson Hood asked if there was a final payment made by Brief. Mr.
25 Whittenberg stated that he could not recall but would look into this matter.
26
27
28 ADJOURNMENT
29
30 Chairperson Hood adjourned the meeting at 10:50 p.m. to the August 17, 2000 field
31 trip to a Centex Homes Development.
32
33
34 Respectfully Submitted,
35
36
37
38
39 Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secretary
40 Planning Department
41
42
43
44 APPROVAL
45
15
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and V7TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
City Council Staff Report
August 28,2000
ATTACHMENT E
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT,
AUGUST 9, 2000, WITH ALL ATTACHMENTS
Development Agreement Amendment.CC Staff Report 14
August 9, 2000
STAFF REPORT
To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
From: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
Subject: BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER
PROJECT - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SECTION
3.1.2.7 - PROJECT PHASING (TIMING OF
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION) AND TO
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 4735,
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15797,
CONDITION NUMBER 2, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE
OF BUILDING PERMITS
SUMMARY' OF REQUEST
Eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 1440-A) and Condition
Number 2, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, of City Council Resolution No. 4735 regarding
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 (VTTM). Elimination of these provisions and conditions
would remove the current project phasing restrictions that prohibit residential construction within
Development Area"D" (maximum of 75 single-family homes), prior to approval of interior lath or
drywall inspections for the commercial construction of certain specified portions of Development
Area A (identified as Retail "A", "B", "C", and "D"). Elimination of these provisions and
conditions would permit construction of the residential project permitted within Development
Area "D" to proceed prior to completion of any commercial development.
DISCUSSION
Elimination of these provisions and conditions would remove the current project phasing
restrictions that prohibit residential construction prior to approval of interior lath or drywall
inspections for the commercial construction of certain specified portions of Development Area A.
CAM)DonrrnentsSig1>Towne Center EIR Development Age AmendmaraPC staff Reportdoc'1.WOOS-03-00
•
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 17TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission.SiafIReport
August 9, 2000
Provision of Development Agreement, Ordinance Number 1440:
Section 3.1.2.7, Project Phasine, states:
"3.1.2.7 Project Phasing. Building permits for residential construction in
Area D shall not be issued by City until City's inspectors have approved interior lath or
drywall inspections for the commercial construction of Retail "A", Retail "B", Retail
"F", and Retail "F" structures in Development Area A."
This provision was agreed to by Bixby Ranch Company and the City of Seal Beach to address the
concern that Bixby Ranch Company would not proceed with the construction of the commercial
development on Area A, the 26-acre commercial shopping center site, and would just construct the 75
single-family homes on Area D. This provision insured that substantial construction would be
underway on the major tenant structures of the shopping center site prior to the beginning of
construction of the homes.
Provision of City Council Resolution No. 4735, Vestin. Tentative Tract Map
Number 15797, Conditions of Approval, Prior to the Issuance of Building
Permits, Condition No. 2:
"2. Building permits for residential construction in VTTM 15797 shall not be
issued by City until City's inspectors have approved interior lath or drywall inspections
for the commercial construction of Retail "A", Retail "B", Retail "C", and Retail "D"
structures in Development Area A (VTTM 15767). (Department of Development
Services Condition of Approval)"
This provision was imposed as a condition of approval of the vesting tentative tract map (V!'TNT) for
the residential development to ensure consistency with Condition 3.1.2.7 of the Development
Agreement, discussed above.
Request for amendment by Bixby Ranch Company:
Bixby Ranch Company indicates in their letter of July 13, 2000.
"The CEQA lawsuit and subsequent appeal held up the entire Old Ranch Towne
Center development for over 18 months. With the CEQA appeal, that focused mainly
on the commercial development, now dismissed, the commercial development Areas A
and B are moving ahead. The delays caused by the attack on the commercial
development now make the conditions restricting the commencement of the residential
Development Agecrnent Amendment PC Staff Report 2
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 177M 15797 re
Phasing of-Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
development unacceptable. The residential map condition without amendment would
needlessly delay development of the residential Area D an additional 6 to 12 months, a
result which was not intended by the City Council in granting the residential
development in Area D. (Letter dated July 13, 2000, page 2)"
Review of EIR "Project Timing"Discussion/CEOA Analvsis:
The certified EIR for the project contained the following discussion regarding"Project Timing":
"F. PROJECT TIMING
The project applicant has indicated that the proposed reconfiguration of the Bixby Old
Ranch Golf Course (Development Area C) will comprise the initial phase of project
development and will require a 15 to 18 month construction period. Development of
the proposed commercial/retail, hotel, restaurant, senior care and institutional
components of the proposed project will occur in response to market demand.
Development Areas A, B and D will require 6 to 8 months for site grading which will
be conducted concurrently with the proposed golf course reconfiguration. Project
development will concurrently with, and in some cases after, the installation of all
required on- and off-site infrastructure."'
The City has contacted the consultant that prepared the EIR for this project, and requested a
memorandum report regarding the potential for environmental impacts to be created by the requested
amendment that were not identified or mitigated to a level of insignificance in the certified EIR. The
letter report from Culbertson, Adams, & Associates indicates:
"(a) Substantial changes are not proposed in the project, which will require
major revisions to the environmental impact report The Project Description of the
project has not been changed by the proposed changes to the Development
Agreement. Certification of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR considered
the development of Development Area A for commercial development and
Development Area D for residential development.
(b) Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the
circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which will require major
revisions in the environmental impact report. The changes in the Development
Agreement would not result in changes in the circumstances surrounding the
project per the certified EIR.
"Bixby Old Ranch ToXllle Center Environmental Impact Report", SCH No. 97091077,page II1-11
Development Agreement Amendment PC Staff Report 3
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and IVTTAl 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
(c) There is no new information, which was not known and could not have
been known at the time the environmental impact report was certified as complete,
becomes available. The environmental effects of the certified EIR and approved
projects have not been changed by the proposed changes to the Development
Agreement. Moreover, the proposed changes to the Development Agreement
would not result in new significant effects not previously identified."'
Based on the recommendations and determinations of Culbertson, Adams & Associates, staff has
determined that the Cite of Seal Beach has reviewed the proposed changes in the phasing provisions of
the Development Agreement for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project for compliance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutes and Guidelines and the
City of Seal Beach Environmental Procedures. The City has found that the Bixby Old Ranch Towne
Center ER, previously certified by the City of Seal Beach on August 23, 1999, and the Mitigation
Monitoring Program prepared for the project adequately addresses the environmental effects of the
proposed changes.
Discussion of Requested Amendments:
The above-referenced conditions were placed on the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project with the
consent of the applicant to ensure to the community the intent of constructing the commercial center,
and not of wishing to undertake a "bait and switch" program to allow for the construction of the
residential component of the project only. Kitchell Development Company, the shopping center
developer, has taken title to Areas A and their portions of Area B, have proceeded with processing
various grading, infrastructure, and major tenant plans through the City. Kitchell Development has
subsequently transferred title for the Target structure to Federated Department Stores, Inc., and the
city has issued a "foundation only" permit for the Target store, with the building permit anticipated to
be issued within 30 days,upon final plan check correction.
Kitchell has indicated they anticipate filing construction plans for the other major tenant structures
(Ralph's Market, Say-On Drugstore, Bed, Bath and Beyond, and the shop buildings) as follows:
o Submission of Construction Plans October 2000
o Issuance of Building Permits November-December 2000
o Opening of Stores April/May 2001
2 Memorandum re: Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR— Analysis of Elimination of Commercial/Residential
Phasing Provisions. prepared by Culbertson, Adams& Associates. August 2, 2000,pages 3-4.
Development Agreement.Amendment PC Staff Report 4
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and i7T,k1 15797 re.
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
Centex Homes, the developer of the residential project has indicated the following anticipated schedule
for the 75-home residential project:
❑ Submission of Grading/Improvement Plans September 5, 2000
❑ Commence Grading November 15, 2000
❑ Submission of Building Plans for Plan Check November 15, 2000
❑ Issuance of Building permits for Model Homes February 1, 20001
❑ Issuance of Phase l Building Permits February 15, 2001
The Planning Commission, and ultimately the City Council, have been requested by Bixby Ranch
Company to approve the deletion of these two provisions to allow the development of the residential
component to proceed whether or not the commercial development proceeds. In reviewing the
resolution of the City Council regarding the environmental impacts of VTTM 15797, the City Council
made the followng findings in approving the VTTM:
"Section 5. Based upon substantial evidence in the record of the hearing,
including the facts stated in § 4 of this resolution, and in the revised environmental
documentation prepared in conjunction with this project, and pursuant to §§ 28-
2600 and 28-2602 of the City's Code, the City Council hereby finds:
1. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 15797 is consistent with the General Plan in that
the map would allow the construction of a maximum of 75 single family homes
and a community park area, in compliance with the land use entitlements
approved through the adoption of General Plan Amendment 98-1 Zone Change
98-1 - Development Area D, and the adopted Development Agreement, on a
15.64-acre parcel.
2 The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development, in that
residential development will be limited to that portion of the property
previously evaluated within the Revised Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR,
certified by the City Council on August 23, 1999.
3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development and is
consistent with the development standards of the Residential Medium Density
Zone, District 1, which would allow a density of 17.4 units per acre as
compared to 9.9 units per acre approved herein. Proposed park area is
approximately 99,000 square feet (2.27 acres), approximately 73% more land
dedication than required by the provisions of the Code of the City of Seal Beach
Development Agreement Amendment.PC Staff Repon 5
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and I7TAM 15797 re
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
4. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental
damage because all mitigation measures contained in the EIR certified for this
project have been incorporated as conditions of approval and will be
implemented.
5. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health
problems because all necessary utilities and services are available to serve the
project.
6 The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the
public at large for access through, or use of, property within the proposed
subdivision because all easements will be adequately preserved, maintained
and/or abandoned with new easements created.
7. The discharge of water from the subdivision into the existing community sewer
system will not violate existing requirements prescribed by the local regional
water quality control board.
8 Pursuant to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, a revised EIR has been
prepared and has been certified by the City Council, along with a Statement of
Finding's and Overriding Considerations. This subdivision is within the scope
of the certified EIR, which adequately describes the general environmental
setting, of the project, its significant environmental impacts, and the
alternatives, and mitigation measures related to each significant environmental
effect, and that no additional environmental documentation is needed."
From an environmental standpoint, based on the memorandum report of Culbertson, Adams &.
Associates, and the above discussed determinations regarding the environmental effects relating to
the subject development agreement and vesting tentative tract map, the requested amendment to
the Development Agreement and conditions of approval of VTTM 15797 would have no adverse
environmental impacts.
Policy Determinations of the Cite:
The issues before the Commission and ultimately before the City Council are policy
determinations:
0 Did the delays caused by the CEQA lawsuit change the circumstances under which these
conditions were imposed?
Development Agreement Amendment PC Staff Report 6
Brzbv Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and I7TA1 15797 re
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
o Is it desirable for the residential development to proceed without the completion of a
major portion of the major commercial tenant structures?
D Is it desirable for the residential development to proceed prior to and/or parallel to the
construction of the major commercial tenant structures?
❑ Does the progress of the commercial development on the site make it clear that
commercial development will be completed concurrently with residential development?
From a land planning standpoint, staff can determine no adverse impacts that would be created if the
requested amendments were to be approved. Adequate mitigation measures have been imposed by the
City to ensure that each of the various project components of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Development Project will not be detrimental to the environment on their own. Staff views the request
as fully a policy issue, determined by the answers to the questions posed immediately above.
As an alternative to the request by the applicant for a complete deletion of the subject provisions of the
Development Agreement and the VTTM, the Commission could consider recommending a different
performance indicator to be achieved that would trigger the ability of the residential development to
proceed, such as an earlier construction phase of the Area A commercial development. If the
Commission were to consider recommending this alternative, staff would suggest consideration of
modification of the subject provisions of the Development Agreement and the VTTM to address
withholding building permit issuance for the residential development until the building permit for
"Retail A' of"Area A" (Target store) has been issued by the Building Department.
It would shorten the overall project construction period if the request or Alternative 2 were to be
approved by the City. Shortening the construction period would result in:
❑ a shorter period of traffic disruption along Seal Beach Boulevard,
❑ a shorter period of dust generation if a more concentrated construction period were to occur,
❑ a shorter period of construction noise if a more concentrated construction period were to
occur,
o a shorter period of air quality impacts if a more concentrated construction period were to
occur,
o reduction in the potential for construction conflicts with the new businesses of the Old Ranch
Towne Center project due to a later construction period for the residential development.
RECOMMENDATION
Pleasure of the Commission Staff has prepared resolutions for Planning Commission consideration for
each of the alternatives discussed above:
Development Agrerment Amendment PC Staff Report 7
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 177M 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
O Alternative I — Recommend amending Development Agreement and V7TM to eliminate
conditions regarding phasing;
o Alternative 2 — Recommend amending Development Agreement and VTTM to tie conditions
regarding phasing to issuance of a building permit for"Retail A' of"Area A" (Target Store); or
o Alternative 3 — Recommend no change to current language of Development Agreement and
VTTM.
The adopted resolution of the Planning Commission will be Resolution 00-31.
/,(-)
Whittenbere. Director
Development Services Department
Attachments. (5)
Attachment 1: Resolution Number , A Resolution of the Planning Commission
of the City of Seal Beach Recommending Amendment to Development
Agreement, Elimination of Section 3.1.2.7 — Project Phasing (Timing
of Residential Construction) and Elimination of Condition Number 2,
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, City Council Resolution No.
4735, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 (Bixby Old Ranch
Towne Center Development)—Alternative l
ATTACHMENT 2 Resolution Number , A Resolution of the Planning Commission
of the City of Seal Beach Recommending Amendment to Development
Agreement, Amendment of Section 3.1.2.7 — Project Phasing (Timing
of Residential Construction) and Amendment of Condition Number 2,
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, City Council Resolution No.
4735, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 (Bixby Old Ranch
Towne Center Development)—Alternative 2
ATTACHMENT 3: Resolution Number , A Resolution of the Planning Commission
of the City of Seal Beach Recommending No Amendment to
Development Agreement Section 3.1.2.7— Project Phasing (Timing of
Residential Construction) and No Amendment of Condition Number 2,
Development Agreement Amendment PC Staff Report 8
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 17TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
Prior to issuance of Building Permits, City Council Resolution No.
4735, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 (Bixby Old Ranch
Towne Center Development)—Alternative 3
ATTACHMENT 4: Letter from Bixby Ranch Company to City of Seal Beach re:
Modification of Conditions Relating to Residential Development— Old
Ranch Towne Center Development Plan, dated July 13, 2000
ATTACHMENT 5: Memorandum re: Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR — Analysis of
Elimination of Commercial/Residential Phasing Provisions", prepared
by Culbertson, Adams& Associates, August 2,2000
Development Agreement Amendment.PC Staff Report 9
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 17TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NUMBER , A RESOLUTION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, ELIMINATION OF
SECTION 3.1 .2.7 - PROJECT PHASING (TIMING OF
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION) AND
ELIMINATION OF CONDITION NUMBER 2, PRIOR
TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS, CITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 4735, VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15797 (BIXBY OLD
RANCH TOWNE CENTER DEVELOPMENT) -
Alternative 1
Development Agreement Amendment.PC Staff Report 1 0
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and I7T.AI 15797 re.
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
RESOLUTION NUMBER
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING
AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,
ELIMINATION OF SECTION 3.1.2.7 - PROJECT
PHASING (TIMING OF RESIDENTIAL
CONSTRUCTION) AND ELIMINATION OF
CONDITION NUMBER 2, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMUS, CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 4735, VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 15797 (BIXBY OLD RANCH
TOWNE CENTER DEVELOPMENT)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE:
pR PF
WHEREAS: The Cite and Bixby Ranch Company entered into a development agreement pursuant
to Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5, and Article 27.5 of Chapter 28
of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, California with respect to that certain real
property commonly known as the "Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development
Plan" area; and
WHEREAS: Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. § 15025(a) and §§ II.0 and III of the City's
Local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study and a Draft Environmental
Impact Report (DEW), to study the environmental impacts arising from the
proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development Plan and related General
Plan amendments. The DEIR was circulated for public review and comment from
April 15, 1998 to May 29, 1998, in compliance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's Local CEQA
Guidelines. Upon completion of the public review period, a Final Environmental
Impact Report was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing held
on September 9, October 21, and November 4, 1998. After the public hearing, the
Planning Commission found, through the adoption of Planning Commission
Resolution No. 98-37 that the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development Plan
Development Agreement Amendment PC Staff Report 11
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 17Th!15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is adequate under CEQA. After
considering the Final EIR and public testimony thereto at a public hearing on
November 9 and November 17, 1998, the City Council adopted City Council
Resolution No. 4660, certifying the Final EIR and adopting a statement of
overriding considerations. On August 23, 1999, the City Council conducted a
public hearing to consider revisions to the EIR and a statement of overriding
considerations pursuant to the August 3, 1999 writ issued by the Orange County
Superior Court. The approval of the ordinance adopting the development
agreement was within the scope of the project analyzed in the Final EIR, as
revised, and City Council Resolution No. 4728 is hereby incorporated by this
reference, and
WHEREAS: On August 23, 1999, the City Council re-adopted all necessary ordinances and
resolutions regarding the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center development. Ordinance
1440-A re-adopted the development agreement, setting forth terms and conditions
regarding the overall Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project. City Council Resolution
No. 4735 re-approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 regarding the
residential development on Area"D"; and DR AFT
WHEREAS On July 13, 2000 the City of Seal Beach received a request from Bixby Ranch
Company to undertake whatever actions are necessary to eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of
the Development Agreement and condition 2 under the heading `Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits" on page 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 15797. Elimination of these provisions and conditions would permit
construction of the residential project permitted within Development Area "D" to
proceed prior to any commercial development; and
WHEREAS: The City of Seal Beach has reviewed the proposed changes in the phasing provisions of
the Development Agreement for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project for
compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Statutes and Guidelines and the City of Seal Beach Environmental Procedures. The
City has found that the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR, previously certified by
the City of Seal Beach on August 23, 1999, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program
prepared for the project adequately addresses the environmental effects of the
proposed changes; and
WHEREAS. The Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing on August 9, 2000,
regarding the requested amendment to eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development
Agreement and condition 2 under the heading "Prior to Issuance of Building Permits"
on page 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797, in
Development Agreement Amendment.PC Staff Report 1 2
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and I TTA1 15797 re.
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
accordance with the provisions of Section 4.8, Modification, Amendment or Extension,
of the adopted Development Agreement, and
WHEREAS. At said public hearing written and oral testimony was received by the Planning
Commission, and
WHEREAS: The City of Seal Beach, in consideration of the proposed changes in the phasing
provisions of the Development Agreement for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
project, has reviewed the project for compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutes and Guidelines and the City of Seal
Beach Environmental Procedures. In this regard, the City has reconsidered Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center EIR previously certified by the City of Seal Beach on August
23, 1999, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for the project. Based
upon its review, The City finds that the proposed project falls within the scope of the
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR in compliance with Section 21166 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code § 21000, et
seq ) and Section 15)62 of the CEQA Guidelines based upon the following
(a) Substantial changes are not proposed in the project, which will require major
revisions to the environmental impact report. The Project Description of the project
has not been changed by the proposed changes to the Development Agreement.
Certification of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR considered the development
of Development Area A for commercial development and Development Area D for
residential development. D^ 1F1'
(b) Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances under
which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the
environmental impact report. The changes in the Development Agreement would not
result in changes in the circumstances surrounding the project per the certified EIR.
(c) There is no new information, which was not known and could not have been
known at the time the environmental impact report was certified as complete, becomes
available. The environmental effects of the certified EIR and approved projects have
not been changed by the proposed changes to the Development Agreement.
Moreover, the proposed changes to the Development Agreement would not result in
new significant effects not previously identified, and
WHEREAS: The Planning Commission determines the requested amendment to eliminate Section
3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement and condition 2 under the heading "Prior to
Issuance of Building Permits" on page 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding Vesting
Development Agreement Amendment PC Staff Report 13
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Pr41ect
Amendment to Development Agreement and 177;11 15797 re.
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 are appropriate for the following reasons
o From a land planning standpoint, the Planning Commission can determine no
adverse impacts that would be created if the requested amendments were to be
approved.
o Adequate mitigation measures have been imposed by the City to ensure that
each of the various project components of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Development Project will not be detrimental to the environment on their own.
o The delays caused by the CEQA lawsuit have changed the circumstances under
which these conditions were imposed.
o The progress of the commercial development on the site makes it clear that the
approved commercial development will be completed almost concurrently with
the approved residential development.
o Elimination of the subject provisions would shorten the overall project
construction period if the requested amendment were to be approved by the
City. Shortening the construction period would result in reduced impacts as a
result of
o A shorter time period of traffic disruption along Seal Beach Boulevard;
o a shorter time period of dust generation if a more concentrated construction
period were to occur,
o a shorter time period of construction noise if a more concentrated construction
period were to occur,
o a shorter time period of air quality impacts if a more concentrated construction
period were to occur,
o Reduce the potential for construction conflicts with the new businesses of the Old
Ranch Towne Center project due to later construction of the residential
development
DR PkFuT
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval to the City Council the Elimination of Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement
(Ordinance No. 1440-A) and the Elimination of Condition Number 2, Prior to Issuance of Building
Permits, of City Council Resolution No. 4735 regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal
Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of , 2000,
by the following vote:
Development Agreement Amendment PC Staff Report 1 4
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 117M 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
AYES: Commissioners
NOES: Commissioners
ABSENT: Commissioners
ABSTAIN: Commissioners
DR
David Hood, Ph.D.
Chairman of the Planning Commission
Lee Whittenberg
Secretary of the Planning Commission
•
Development Agreement Aniendment.PC Staff Report 1 5
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and V TH 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NUMBER , A RESOLUTION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AMENDMENT OF
SECTION 3.1 .2.7 - PROJECT PHASING (TIMING OF
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION) AND
AMENDMENT OF CONDITION NUMBER 2, PRIOR
TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS, CITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 4735, VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15797 (BIXBY OLD
RANCH TOWNE CENTER DEVELOPMENT) -
Alternative 2
Development Agreement Amendment.PC Staff Report 3.6
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and I 77A1 35797 re.
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
RESOLUTION NUMBER
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING
AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,
AMENDMENT OF SECTION 3.1.2.7 - PROJECT
PHASING (TIMING OF RESIDENTIAL
CON STRUCTION) AND AMENDMENT OF
CONDITION NUMBER 2, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMITS, CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 4735, VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 15797 (BIXBY OLD RANCH
TOWNE CENTER DEVELOPMENT)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE:
DR g
WHEREAS. The City and Bixby Ranch Company entered into a development agreement pursuant
to Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5, and Article 27.5 of Chapter 28
of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, California with respect to that certain real
property commonly known as the "Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development
Plan" area, and
WHEREAS: Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Regs. § 15025(a) and §§ WC and III of the City's
Local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study and a Draft Environmental
Impact Report (DEW), to study the environmental impacts arising from the
proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development Plan and related General
Plan amendments. The DEW was circulated for public review and comment from
April 15, 1998 to May 29, 1998, in compliance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's Local CEQA
Guidelines Upon completion of the public review period, a Final Environmental
Impact Report was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing held
on September 9, October 21, and November 4, 1998. After the public hearing, the
Development Agreement Amendment PC Staff Report 1 7
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 177TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
Planning Commission found, through the adoption of Planning Commission
Resolution No. 98-37 that the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development Plan
Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is adequate under CEQA. After
considering the Final EIR and public testimony thereto at a public hearing on
November 9 and November 17, 1998, the City Council adopted City Council
Resolution No. 4660, certifying the Final EIR and adopting a statement of
overriding considerations. On August 23, 1999, the City Council conducted a
public hearing to consider revisions to the EIR and a statement of overriding
considerations pursuant to the August 3, 1999 writ issued by the Orange County
Superior Court. The approval of the ordinance adopting the development
agreement was within the scope of the project analyzed in the Final EIR, as
revised, and City Council Resolution No. 4728 is hereby incorporated by this
reference; and
WHEREAS On August 23, 1999, the City Council re-adopted all necessary ordinances and
resolutions regarding the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center development. Ordinance
1440-A re-adopted the development agreement, setting forth terms and conditions
regarding the overall Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project. City Council Resolution
No 4735 re-approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 regarding the
residential development on Area"D"; and AFTDR
WHEREAS On July 13, 2000 the City of Seal Beach received a request from Bixby Ranch
Company to undertake whatever actions are necessary to eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of
the Development Agreement and condition 2 under the heading "Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits" on page 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No 15797. Elimination of these provisions and conditions would permit
construction of the residential project permitted within Development Area "D- to
proceed prior to any commercial development, and
WHEREAS: The City of Seal Beach has reviewed the proposed changes in the phasing provisions of
the Development Agreement for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project for
compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Statutes and Guidelines and the City of Seal Beach Environmental Procedures. The
City has found that the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR, previously certified by
the City of Seal Beach on August 23, 1999, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program
prepared for the project adequately addresses the environmental effects of the
proposed chances, and
WHEREAS: The Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing on August 9, 2000,
regarding the requested amendment to eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development
Development Agreement Amrndmcnt.PC'Starr Report I 8
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 177-Af 15797 re,
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
Agreement and condition 2 under the heading "Prior to Issuance of Building Permits"
on pace 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797, in
accordance with the provisions of Section 4.8, Modification Amendment or Extension,
of the adopted Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS. At said public hearing written and oral testimony was received by the Planning
Commission, and DRtF
WHEREAS: The City of Sea] Beach, in consideration of the proposed changes in the phasing
provisions of the Development Agreement for the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
project, has reviewed the project for compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutes and Guidelines and the City of Seal
Beach Environmental Procedures. In this regard, the City has reconsidered Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center EIR previously certified by the City of Seal Beach on August
23, 1999, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for the project. Based
upon its review, The City finds that the proposed project falls within the scope of the
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR in compliance with Section 21166 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code § 21000, et
seq ) and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines based upon the following
(a) Substantial changes are not proposed in the project, which will require major
revisions to the environmental impact report. The Project Description of the project
has not been chanced by the proposed changes to the Development Agreement
Certification of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR considered the development
of Development Area A for commercial development and Development Area D for
residential development.
(b) Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances under
which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the
environmental impact report. The changes in the Development Agreement would not
result in changes in the circumstances surrounding the project per the certified EIR.
(c) There is no new information, which was not known and could not have
been known at the time the environmental impact report was certified as complete,
becomes available. The environmental effects of the certified EIR and approved
projects have not been changed by the proposed changes to the Development
Agreement. Moreover, the proposed changes to the Development Agreement
would not result in new significant effects not previously identified; and
WHEREAS: The Planning Commission determines the requested amendment, as recommended for
De‘'clopment Agreement Amendmcnt.PC Stnf Report 19
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 17TA1 13797 re
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
modification by the Department of Development Services, to amend Section 3.1.2.7 of
the Development Agreement and condition 2 under the heading "Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits" on page 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 15797, to not issue building permits, except for model home s, for the
residential development on Area "D" until the building permit for "Retail A' of"Area
A" (Target store) has been issued by the Building Department, are appropriate for the
following reasons:
o From a land planning standpoint, the Planning Commission can determine no
adverse impacts that would be created if the requested amendments were to be
approved.
o Adequate mitigation measures have been imposed by the City to ensure that
each of the various project components of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Development Project will not be detrimental to the environment on their own.
o The delays caused by the CEQA lawsuit have changed the circumstances under
which these conditions were imposed.
o The progress of the commercial development on the site makes it clear that the
approved commercial development will be completed almost concurrently with
the approved residential development.
o Elimination of the subject provisions would shorten the overall project
construction period if the requested amendment were to be approved by the
City. Shortening the construction period would result in reduced impacts as a
result of:
o A shorter time period of traffic disruption along Seal Beach Boulevard,
o a shorter time period of dust generation if a more concentrated construction
period were to occur;
o a shorter time period of construction noise if a more concentrated construction
period were to occur;
o a shorter time period of air quality impacts if a more concentrated construction
period were to occur;
o Reduce the potential for construction conflicts with the new businesses of the Old
Ranch Towne Center project due to later construction of the residential
development. DRAFT
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval to the City Council the Amendment of Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement
(Ordinance No. 1440-A) and the Amendment of Condition Number 2, Prior to Issuance of Building
Permits, of City Council Resolution No. 4735 regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797, as
set forth below.
Development Agreement Anlendin nt PC Staff Report 2 0
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 177TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
A. Development Agreement, Section 3.1.2.7,Project Phasing, is amended to read:
"31.2.7 Project Phasing. Building permits for residential construction in
Area D shall not be issued by City until '
., " _ • - -' " " . - '- - - - __ • - - . .. - p building permit has been
issued for the commercial cons-truction of the Retail 'A" structure in Development
reLesLA."
B. City Council Resolution No. 4735, Vesting Tentative Tract Map Number 15797,
Conditions of Approval, Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits, Condition No. 2, is
amended to read:
"2. Building permits for residential construction in VTTM 15797 shall not be
issued by City until C.-4414—ift5reete —I ove approved interior lath or drywall
inspections for the commercial construction of Retail "A", Retail "W', Retail "C",
g budding permit has been issued
for the cotnn_'rcial ernt.vtructirn . he : 'tai "; " yu tur• it I v•1.. •,t ;r•. ;
(VTTM 15767). (Department of Development Services Condition of Approval)"
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal
Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of
2000, by the following vote:
DR
AFS
AYES: Commissioners
NOES: Commissioners
ABSENT: Commissioners
ABSTAIN: Commissioners
David Hood, Ph.D.
Chairman of the Planning Commission
Development Agreement Amendment.PC Staff Report 21
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and l TTM 15797 re.
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
Lee Whittenberg
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Development:Agreement.Amendment.PC StaffReport 22
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 17TM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
ATTACHMENT 3
RESOLUTION NUMBER , A RESOLUTION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING NO AMENDMENT
TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SECTION 3.1.2.7 -
PROJECT PHASING (TIMING OF RESIDENTIAL
CONSTRUCTION) AND NO AMENDMENT OF
CONDITION NUMBER 2, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMITS, CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
NO. 4735, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
15797 (BIXBY OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER
DEVELOPMENT)- Alternative 3
Development Agreement Amendment.f C Stiff Report 2 3
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and I7TMM 15797 re
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
RESOLUTION NUMBER
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH RECOMMENDING
NO AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT SECTION 3.1.2.7 - PROJECT
PHASING (TIMING OF RESIDENTIAL
CONSTRUCTION) AND NO AMENDMENT OF
CONDITION NUMBER 2, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMITS, CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 4735, VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 15797 (BIXBY OLD RANCH
TOWNE CENTER DEVELOPMENT)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE:
DR A
WHEREAS: The City and Bixby Ranch Company entered into a development agreement pursuant
to Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5, and Article 27.5 of Chapter 28
of the Code of the City of Seal Beach, California with respect to that certain real
property commonly known as the "Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development
Plan" area; and
WHEREAS: Pursuant to 14 Calif. Code of Res § 15025(a) and §§ II.0 and III of the City's
Local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study and a Draft Environmental
Impact Report (DEW), to study the environmental impacts arising from the
proposed Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development Plan and related General
Plan amendments. The DEIR was circulated for public review and comment from
April 15, 1998 to May 29, 1998, in compliance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's Local CEQA
Guidelines. Upon completion of the public review period, a Final Environmental
Impact Report was reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing held
on September 9, October 21, and November 4, 1998. After the public hearing, the
Planning Commission found, through the adoption of Planning Commission
Resolution No. 98-37 that the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development Plan
Development Agreement Amendmem.PC Sutti Report 2 4
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 17TM 15797 re.
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is adequate under CEQA. After
considering the Final EIR and public testimony thereto at a public hearing on
November 9 and November 17, 1998, the City Council adopted City Council
Resolution No. 4660, certifying the Final EIR and adopting a statement of
overriding considerations. On August 23, 1999, the City Council conducted a
public hearing to consider revisions to the EIR and a statement of overriding
considerations pursuant to the August 3, 1999 writ issued by the Orange County
Superior Court. The approval of the ordinance adopting the development
agreement was within the scope of the project analyzed in the Final EIR, as
revised, and City Council Resolution No. 4728 is hereby incorporated by this
reference, and
WHEREAS: On August 23, 1999, the City Council re-adopted all necessary ordinances and
resolutions regarding the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center development Ordinance
1440-A re-adopted the development agreement, setting forth terms and conditions
regarding the overall Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center project. City Council Resolution
No 4735 re-approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 regarding the
residential development on Area"D"; and 1.
DR
On July 13, 2000 the Cityof Seal Beach received a request from Bixby Ranch
WHEREAS. � e9
Company to undertake whatever actions are necessary to eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of
the Development Agreement and condition 2 under the heading "Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits" on page 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 15797. Elimination of these provisions and conditions would permit
construction of the residential project permitted within Development Area "D" to
proceed prior to any commercial development, and
WHEREAS: The proposed amendment is within the scope of the previously certified EIR; and
WHEREAS The Planning Commission has conducted a public hearing on August 9, 2000,
regarding the requested amendment to eliminate Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development
Agreement and condition 2 under the heading `Prior to Issuance of Building Permits"
on page 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15797, in
accordance with the provisions of Section 4.8, Modification, Amendment or Extension,
of the adopted Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS: At said public hearing written and oral testimony was received by the Planning
Commission; and
WHEREAS: The Planning Commission determines the requested amendment to eliminate Section
Development Agreement Amendment PC StiflRecon 2 5
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and 17T,4l 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement and condition 2 under the heading "Prior to
Issuance of Building Permits" on page 9 of Resolution 4735, regarding Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 15797 are inappropriate for the following reasons:
o These provisions were agreed to by Bixby Ranch Company and the City of Seal
Beach to address the concern that Bixby Ranch Company would not proceed with
the construction of the commercial development on Area A, the 26-acre
commercial shopping center site, and would just construct the 75 single-family
homes on Area D.
o The intent of these provisions was to insure that substantial construction would be
underway on the major tenant structures of the shopping center site prior to the
beginning of construction of the homes.
o Even with the delay in the initiation of the commercial development on Area "A"
due to a CEQA lawsuit, the City of Seal Beach still determines it is appropriate to
withhold the issuance of the residential development building permits on Area "D"
until substantial progress in the completion of the commercial development on
Area "A" is completed, in accordance with the agreed upon terms of the
Development Agreement and the conditions of approval of Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 15797.
DR PkI.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission hereby recommends to
the Cin' Council the denial of the requested elimination of Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development
Agreement (Ordinance No. 1440-A) and the denial of the requested elimination of Condition Number
2, Prior to Issuance of Building Permits, of City Council Resolution No. 4735 regarding Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 15797.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal
Beach at a meeting thereof held on the day of , 2000,
by the following vote.
AYES: Commissioners
NOES: Commissioners
ABSENT: Commissioners
Development Agreement Amendmeni.PC staff Repon 2 6
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and LTTM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
ABSTAIN: Commissioners
DR
AF1
David Hood, Ph.D.
Chairman of the Planning Commission
Lee Whittenberg
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Development Agreement Amendrntnt.PC Staff Report 2 7
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and ITTAM 15797 re:
Phasing of Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
ATTACHMENT 4
LETTER FROM BIXBY RANCH COMPANY TO
CITY OF SEAL BEACH RE: MODIFICATION OF
CONDITIONS RELATING TO RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT - OLD RANCH TOWNE CENTER
DEVELOPMENT PLAN, DATED JULY 13, 2000
Development Agreement Amendment.PC Stiff Report 2 8
FILE CGPY
BIXBY RANCH COMPANY Fred H Bixby,Founder• 1875-1952
• C • l i f o r n ►•r t n e r• tt i►
Ronald A Bradshat+
Senior lire President
Real Estate Development
July 13, 2000
Mr. Lee Whittenberg
Director of Planning
City of Seal Beach
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Re: Modification of Conditions Relative to Residential Development
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Development Plan, Seal Beach
Dear Lee:
On August 23, 1999, the City Council of the City of Seal Beach adopted a series of
Resolutions and Ordinances to effectuate the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
Development Plan. Those actions implemented land use controls for property owned
by Bixby Ranch Company to permit a variety of uses ranging from residential and
park uses in Area D through reconfiguration of the Golf Course in Area C, and
commercial use in Areas A and B.
The CEQA lawsuit filed challenging the adequacy of the EIR prepared by the City of
Seal Beach and the subsequent appeal have substantially impacted the residential
development planned for Area D. Under Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development
Agreement, adopted by Ordinance No. 1440-A, building permits for residential
construction in Area D may not be issued until the City's inspectors have approved
interior lath or drywall inspection for the commercial construction of certain specified
portions of Development Area A (identified as Retail "A," "B," "C," and "D").
Although that phasing was not related to any design issues arising from the residential
development, similar language was also included as Condition 2 of Resolution No.
4735 under the heading "Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits" on Page 9.
Resolution No. 4735 approved Vesting Tract Map 4735.
As you are aware, the conditions were imposed when the zoning for Area D was
changed from church/school to residential. The purpose of placing the drywall
3010 Old Ranch Parkway, Suite 100•Seal Beach.California 90740.2750.562-493-1475•FAX 562-493.1477
Mr. Lee Whittenberg
Page Two
July 13, 2000
condition was to ensure that the commercial development in Area A was given the
highest development priority; in other words, because of the income-producing
potential,the City wanted to see commercial development well underway prior to the
residential development in Area D. The spirit of that condition has been substantially
met with the Planning Commission's approval of the Area A site plan and the
subsequent grading and site work performed on the 25-acre site. More importantly,
the direct sale of 10 acres to Target, the issuance of a building permit for
construction, and a projected opening of Target Store in March 2001, solidify the
commitment for commercial development. The City's Building Department has been
notified that Ralph's will bring in building plans for plan check in July. It is very clear
that the City has its assurance that the commercial development in Area A is far ahead
of any residential development.
The CEQA lawsuit and subsequent appeal held up the entire Old Ranch Towne
Center development for over 18 months. With the CEQA appeal,that focused mainly
on the commercial development, now dismissed,the commercial development Areas
A and B are moving ahead. The delays caused by the attack on the commercial
development now make the conditions restricting the commencement of the
residential development unacceptable. The residential map condition without
amendment would needlessly delay development of the residential Area D an
additional 6 to 12 months, a result which was not intended by the City Council in
granting the residential development in Area D.
We request that the City undertake whatever actions are necessary to eliminate
Section 3.1.2.7 of the Development Agreement and Condition 2 of Resolution No.
4735 under the heading "Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits" on Page 9.
We understand this letter will suffice as a formal application for these actions. Please
advise us immediately if this is not the case and if you require additional information
from us.
Very truly yours,
Ronald A. Bradshaw
Senior Vice President
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center Project
Amendment to Development Agreement and l77M 15797 re:
Phasing of-Residential Development
Planning Commission Staff Report
August 9, 2000
ATTACHMENT 5
MEMORANDUM RE: BIXBY OLD RANCH TOVVNE
CENTER EIR - ANALYSIS OF ELIMINATION OF
COMMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL PHASING
PROVISIONS", PREPARED BY CULBERTSON,
ADAMS & ASSOCIATES, AUGUST 2, 2000
Development Agreement Amendment.PC Sufi 2 9
F E rc. ‘g
CULBERTSON, ADAMS &ASSOCIATES
PLANNING CONSULTANTS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 2 August, 2000
TO: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
City of Seal Beach
FROM: Raymond H.C. Brantley
Senior Vice President of Environmental Planning
SUBJECT: Bixby Old Ranch Town Center EIR — Analysis of Elimination
of Commercial/Residential Phasing Provisions
This letter report is written in response to the subject request dated July 27,
2000. Specifically, you requested that CAA perform a CEQA analysis of the
proposed deletion of the commercial/residential phasing provisions of the Bixby
Old Ranch Towne Center Development Agreement. The phasing provision
requires that the development of Development Area A (commercial development
area) reach the point of drywall inspection prior to the issuance of a building
permit for Development Area D (residential development).
The applicant, the Bixby Ranch Company, maintains that the condition is no
longer acceptable due to an 18-month delay in the project caused by the CEQA
lawsuit. The lawsuit, which focused on the commercial development, has now
been dismissed.
Culbertson, Adams & Associates, Inc. has completed its review of your request,
including a thorough review of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR, the
Mitigation Monitoring Program previously prepared by CAA for the project, and
building permit data generated from construction activities in Development Area
A. Following is a summary of our review:
Background and Analysis:
The initial EIR did not expressly establish a timetable dictating how and when the
different phases of the project would be implemented. Project timing was
scheduled to commence with the reconfiguration of the Bixby Old Ranch Golf
Course, Development Area C, which was slated to take between 15 and 18
months. Development Areas A, B, and D require six months of grading, which
would occur concurrently with the golf course reconfiguration. It was originally
proposed that the commercial development would take place based on market
demand. However, the City of Seal Beach and Bixby Ranch Company entered
8.5 Argonaut,Suite 220,Aliso Viejo,Cahfornia 92656-4105 • (949) 581.2888 • Fax (949) 581.3599
10IF / \
into a Development Agreement that prohibited the distribution of development
permits for residential units in Development Area D until development in Area A
was well under way. The city wanted to ensure that the revenue-generating,
commercial development would be constructed before the residential
development. In addition, the City wanted to ensure that future residents would
have clear knowledge of the presence of the shopping center.
The phasing restriction had no basis whatsoever in CEQA. Since mitigation
measures were structured for the whole of the project's impacts, there is no
dilution of their effectiveness by the proposed phasing change. However, now
both the City of Seal Beach and Bixby Ranch Company would like to eliminate
the Development Agreement phasing requirements and proceed with the
development of both areas simultaneously.
As development of Development Area A has already begun, the developer has a
vested interest in the commercial area based both on the financial expenses
already incurred from acquiring permits and the money already expended on
erecting the structures to date. Third parties are also involved in the
development of Development Area A, in particular Target and Ralph's. The
involvement of a third party is an increased incentive for the developer to
continue constructing the commercial area. Based on such vested interest, it
would be highly unlikely that the developer would abandon the commercial area
as soon as permits are granted for the residential area.
Conclusions and Findings:
1. Essentially, the idea of constructing the shopping center and
residential together is the same as the project considered in the EIR.
The phasing restrictions in the Development Agreement were driven by
economic reasons, not environmental issues. Therefore, the
adjustment of the phasing has no has no effect on the conclusions in
the EIR.
2. To the extent that anyone relied on the phasing to diminish
unexpressed concerns about construction impacts, the adjustments in
phasing will still not produce significant changes to the temporary
construction impacts.
3. The phasing did not require that the shopping center be completed
prior to the commencement of residential construction. Therefore,
simultaneous construction was always contemplated.
4. The shopping center is only at the point of foundation, which, given its
length of time for construction, will make the shopping center and the
residential roughly coincident in construction schedule. In fact, an
2
earlier start for the residential construction essentially means that the
term of both construction schedules will be shorter in duration than if
they were pursued in sequence.
RECOMMENDATIONS
CEQA Statement For Staff Report
Based upon the preceding, Culbertson, Adams & Associates recommends that
the City of Seal Beach include the following CEQA statement in the Staff Report:
The City of Seal Beach has reviewed the proposed changes in the
phasing provisions of the Development Agreement for the Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center project for compliance with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutes and Guidelines and
the City of Seal Beach Environmental Procedures. The City has found
that the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR, previously certified by the
City of Seal Beach on August 23, 1999, and the Mitigation Monitoring
Program prepared for the project adequately address the environmental
effects of the proposed changes.
Finding By The City
Based upon the preceding, Culbertson, Adams & Associates recommends that
the City of Seal Beach adopt the following CEQA finding for the project:
The City of Seal Beach, in consideration of the proposed changes in the
phasing provisions of the Development Agreement for the Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center project, has reviewed the project for compliance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Statutes and Guidelines and the City of Seal Beach Environmental
Procedures. In this regard, the City has reconsidered the Bixby Old
Ranch Towne Center EIR, previously certified by the City of Seal Beach
on August 23, 1999, and the Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for
the project. Based upon its review, the City finds that the proposed project
falls within the scope of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR in
compliance with Section 21166 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA, Pub. Res. Code §21000, et seq.) and Section 15162 of the CEQA
Guidelines based upon the following:
(a) Substantial changes are not proposed in the project, which will
require major revisions of the environmental impact report. The
Project Description of the project has not been changed by the
proposed changes to the Development Agreement. Certification
of the Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center EIR considered the
3
development of Development Area A for commercial development
and Development Area D for residential development;
(b) Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the
circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which will
require major revisions in the environmental impact report. The
changes in the Development Agreement would not result in changes
in the circumstances surrounding the project per the certified EIR.
(c) There is no new information, which was not known and could not
have been known at the time the environmental impact report was
certified as complete, becomes available. The environmental effects
of the certified EIR and approved project have not been changed by
the proposed changes to the Development Agreement. Moreover,
the proposed changes to the Development Agreement would not
result in new significant effects not previously identified
If you have questions regarding the above discussions, or if you require
additional assistance, please contact me at (949) 581-2888.
RHCB:rhcb
4