HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1998-10-21
-fe
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA for OCTOBER 21, 1998
7:30 P.M." City Council Chambers
211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA 90740
Next Resolution: 98-34
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. ROLL CALL
III. AGENDA APPROVAL
By Motion of the Planning Commission, this is the time to:
(a) Notify the public of any changes to the Agenda;
(b) Re-arrange the order of the Agenda; and/or
(c) Provide an opportunity for any member of the Planning Commission, staff, or public
to request an Item is removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
IV.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
.
At this time, members of the public may address the Planning Commission regarding any
items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, provided that the
Planning Commission may undertake no action or discussion unless otherwise
authorized by law.
V.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and are enacted by one
motion unless prior to enactment, a member of the Planning Commission, staff or the
publiC requests a specific item be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate
action.
1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 7, 1998
2. Plan Review 98-7
Address:
Applicant:
53 Riversea Road
Bruce Grossman
Request:
To construct a second-story cabana at an existing
mobile home within the Seal Beach Trailer Park.
Recommendation:
Approval, through the adoption of Resolution No. 98-
_' subject to Conditions of Approval.
.
1
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Agenda of October 21, 1998
3. Plan Review 98-8
Address:
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Request:
1641 Seal Way
Konstro Design
Humphrey Laurent
To convert the second floor, two-unit apartment area into
8 Single living unit and to allow 8 second-story deck and
a roof deck at .Unit D., the second story unit. This will
result in the reduction in the number of living units on
this property trom four to three.
Recommendation:
Approval, through the adoption of Resolution No. 98-
_' subject to Conditions at Approval.
4. Receive and File: Staff report to City Council, dated October 12, 1998, re Receipt of
OCCOG1 Draft Report re: .Smart Growth Strategies To Accommodate Orange
County's Future".
5. Receive and File: Staff Report to City Council, dated October 12, 1998, re Seal
Beach Weapons Support Facility, Installation Restoration Program, Status Report re
RAB Project Update.
6. Receive and File: Staff Report to City Council, dated October 12, 1998, re Receipt
of City of Huntington Beach Report re Bolsa Chica Annexation Study-
Questions/Comments.
7. Receive and File: Staff Report to City Council, dated October 12,1998, re Receipt
of California Coastal Commission Status Report re Bolsa Chica Wetlands
Restoration Plan and Draft E/S/EIR by the FederaVState Bolsa Chica Steering
Committee.
8. Receive and File: Staff Report to City Council, dated September 28, 1998, re Seal
Beach Weapons Support Facility Installation Restoration Program - Site
Management Plan.
9. Receive and File: City letter, dated September 29, 1998, to U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Los Angeles District from Mayor George E. Brown re Public Notice /
Application No. 98-00638-YJC, Bolsa Chica Channel, Orange County, CA.
10. Receive and File: City letter, dated September 29, 1998, to George Britton,
Manager, Environmental & Project Planning Services Division from Mayor George E.
Brown re City of Seal Beach Comments re: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration - Bolsa Chica Channel (C02) Improvements.
VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS
1 Orange County Council of Governments
2
.
VII.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of October 21, 1998
PUBLIC HEARINGS
11. Conditional Use Permit 98-14
Address:
Business:
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Request:
12071 Pacific Coast Highway
Union 76 Service Station
Tait & Associates, Inc.
Century National Properties
To remodel the existing cashier, waiting and bathroom
areas; to install a new 250-gallon waste oil tank within
the existing trash enclosure; and to install a new 6-foot
masonry trash enclosure at an existing service station
located at the southwest comer of Seal Beach Boulevard
and Bradbury Road.
Approval, through the adoption of Resolution No. 98-
_' subject to Conditions of Approval.
Recommendation:
12.
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
[Continued from 1017/98]
o Certification of Final ErR
o General Plan Amendment 98-1 to:
Land Use, Open Space/ConservationIRecreation, Bicycle Route, Housing, Circulation and Noise
elements
o Zone Change 98-1
o Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-165
o Tentative Tract Map No. 15767
o Development Agreement
Address:
3900 and 3901 Lampson Avenue
Old Ranch Golf Course and Tennis Club
Bixby Ranch Company
Bixby Ranch Company
Applicant:
Property Owner:
Request:
Consideration of the proposed mixed-use project
consisting of commercial, recreational, institutional and
open space uses as submitted by the applicant. General
Plan amendment 98-1 proposes modifications to the
Land Use, Open Space/Conservation/Recreation,
Bicycle Route, Housing, Circulation, and Noise
Elements. The site is approximately 218 acres in size
with the following allocation of existing and proposed
General Plan and Zoning designations:
3
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Agenda of October 21, 1998
Land Use Existing Existing Proposed
Desianation General Plan Zonina General PlanlZonina
R_G2 203.01 acres 196.31 acres 158.00 acres
C-~ 15.3 acres 22.0 acres 33.97 acres
PLU4 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 27.24 acres
TOTALS: 218.31 acres 218.31 acres 218.31 acres
Recommendation:
Approval through the adoption of Resolutions Nos.:
98-_ for Certification of Final EIR
98- _ for General Plan Amendment 98-1
98-_ for Zone Change 98-1
98-_ for Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-165
98-_ for Tentative Trad Map No. 15767
98-_ for Development Agreement
VII. STAFF CONCERNS
IX. COMMISSION CONCERNS
X. ADJOURNMENT
2 Recreation/Golf
3 General Commercial
4 Public Land Use
4
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of October 21, 1998
I
.
1998 AGENDA FORECAST
o NOV 04
o Revocation of Valiance 87-2 (City Council action of 10/12/98)
o Study Session: Noise Standards in C2 Zones (P. Campbell 7/27/98)
o Study Session: Permitted Uses & Develop. Stds. in Commercial Zones [From 5/6198]
o Staff Report: Undergrounding of Utilities
o Staff Report: Update on Decks along Crestview Avenue
NOV18
o ZTA on issue of side-yard setbacks along stub streets in the Gold Coast area of
Ocean Avenue (from 3-4-98)
o Study Session: Three-story structures on Main Street
o Study Session: Height Limits in Commercial Zones (P.Campbell 7/27/98)
DEC 09
o Study Session: Seal Beach Boulevard (from 10-7-98)
o Study Session: Anaheim Bay Villas (from 10-7-98)
DEC 23
.
.
5
, .'
~-
.~~.
. 1 City of Seal Beach
2 Planning Commission Minutes of October 21, 1998
3
4 Chairman Brown called the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of
5 October 21, 1998 to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was held in the City Council
6 Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag.
7
8 ROLL CALL
9
10 Present: Chairman Brown
11 Commissioners Cutuli, Hood, Larson, Lyon
12
13 Also Department of Development Services
14 Present: Lee Whittenberg, Dir~ctor
15 Craig Steele, Assistant City Attorney
16 Joan Fillmann, Executive Secretary
17
18 AGENDA APPROVAL
19
20 Mr. Whittenberg asked that items #2 and #3 be removed from the Consent
. 21 Calendar for separate review as staff had received communications, which
22 warrant this separate consideration.
23
24 MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Cutuli to approve the Agenda as amended.
25
26 MOTION CARRIED: 5-0
27 AYES: Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Larson, Lyon
28
29
30 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
31
32 Dorothv Whvte * Collece Park East
33 Ms. Whyte said things need to be cleared up when the Planning Commission
34 gets to the Public Hearing on the Bixby proposal. She has been told that the
35 Planning Commission and City Council have stated they would vote on the Bixby
36 proposal in one meeting. This would not serve the public, especially since there
37 are other Agenda items tonight. The ECCB held five meetings on the Bixby
38 proposal. She hoped the Commission would not pass this proposal tonight, in
39 one meeting.
40
41 Colonel Bill Weir * Chief Counsel of the CA National Guard and the Militarv Dept.
42 Colonel Weir explained he had to catch a flight back to Sacramento and said he
43 appreciated the Commission's allowing him to testify out of order. Colonel Weir
. 44 spoke on item #13, the Bixby proposal. He said the California National Guard
45 and the California Military Department are not on anyone side. There is a great
46 deal of confusion however about the AICUZ study. It is their position that the
"-
'P-
~
....--~
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
. 46
47
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1994 AICUZ study, along with a recent sound study appended to it, gives the CA
National Guard, the California Military Department's and the Department of the
Army's statement on land use within the facility and its impact on any areas
outside it. The criteria for establishing the clear zones was done in accordance
with standards approved by the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the
Air Force. This was recently reaffirmed to this Planning Commission by the
Secretary of the Army's office. The latest sound study is incorporated into that
and it hasn't done anything but reduce the sound contours that previously
existed. There are no changes in any of the flight tracks that appear in the
diagrams or the maps in that study. All this has been sent to all the public
agencies in this area prior to the AICUZ' adoption. The sound study has recently
been submitted. He hoped this would clarify any questions the Planning
Commission might have.
Walt Miller * 231 Seal Beach Boulevard. Seal Beach
Mr. Miller spoke on the Anaheim Bay Villas project proposal. He did a limited
survey of the business people on Seal Beach Boulevard. These people have
worked hard to get their businesses established on Seal Beach Boulevard and
want to keep them there. They feel there is opportunity in this location. He had
prepared a plan and left it with the Commission. He asked when the study
session would take place re Seal Beach Boulevard?
Mr. Whittenberg said he was uncertain of the scheduling. The Agenda Forecast
is based on having an Assistant Planner on staff to help with these projects. To
date this position remains unfilled and the recruitment is ongoing.
Mr. Miller said he wanted to have his 290-word plan with the Commissioners to
study in case he is not present at the time of the study session.
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Cutuli to approve the Consent Calendar:
1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 7,1998
4. Receive and File: Staff report to City Council, dated October 12, 1998, re Receipt of
OCCOG1 Draft Report re: "Smart Growth Strategies To Accommodate Orange
County's Futuren.
5. Receive and File: Staff Report to City Council, dated October 12,1998, re Seal
Beach Weapons Support Facility, Installation Restoration Program, status Report re
RAB Project Update.
6. Receive and File: Staff Report to City Council, dated October 12, 1998, re Receipt
of City of Huntington Beach Report re Bolsa Chica Annexation study-
QuesffonslComment~
1 Orange County Council of Governments
2
"1-
"'
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
. 25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
. 48
49
50
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
7. Receive and File: staff Report to City Council, dated October 12, 1998, re Receipt of
California Coastal Commission Status Report re Balsa Chica Wetlands Restoration
Plan and Draft EISlEIR by the FederaVState Balsa Chica Steering Committee.
8. Receive and File: staff Report to City Council, dated September 28, 1998, re Seal
Beach Weapons Support Facility Installation Restoration Program - Site
Management Plan.
9. Receive and File: Staff Report to City Council, dated September 28, 1998, re
Comments on "Mitigated Negative Declaration - Balsa Chica Channel
Improvements~ County of Orange and "Public Notice / Application No. 98-00638-
Y JC~ U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District.
10. Receive and File: City letter, dated September 29, 1998, to U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Los Angeles District from Mayor George E. Brown re Public Notice /
Application No. 98-00638-YJC, Balsa Chica Channel, Orange County, CA.
11. Receive and File: City letter, dated September 29, 1998, to George Britton,
Manager, Environmental & Project Planning Services Division from Mayor George E.
Brown re City of Seal Beach Comments re: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration - Balsa Chica Channel (C02) Improvements.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Larson, Lyon
Item #2 was separately discussed next:
2. Plan Review 98.7
51 Riversea Road
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg presented the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning
Department for inspection]. The applicant, Bruce Grossman, applied to build a
two-story cabana at an existing mobile home in the Seal Beach Trailer Park.
The staff report contained 13 Conditions of Approval in order to approve the
request in compliance with the City's standard requirements.
Staff spoke with the applicant regarding his application. The main issue of
contention is the City's requirement that the existing trailer be moved to a point
where it meets setback requirements. The existing trailer is about 4" from the
trailer space line. The applicant wants to keep his trailer at its existing location
which in staff's opinion, would not conform to existing policies of the Planning
Commission.
A number of years ago the City started enforcing the setbacks based on trailer
space lines instead of the separation distance from trailer-to-trailer which is a
State requirement under Title 25 of the California Administrative Code.
Chairman Brown asked if it is City policy that every-ather-trailer may have a two-
story cabana?
3
"
<;
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
. 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
46
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
Mr. Whittenberg said no, the policy is that there cannot be a two-story cabana
within 20' of another two-story cabana. There is another two-story cabana
directly across the street from this project. The street itself is 20' wide so it would
automatically be 20' away.
Bruce Grossman * 51 Riversea Road
Mr. Grossman said he started his application process in Mayor June 1998. He
and his wife have made approximately 5 - 6 revisions to their drawings. They
have been trying to learn the laws and requirements. They feel they have been
given decent guidance by staff. They have been trying to eliminate all
discrepancies and any issues before they submitted the package for the
Commission's formal consideration. They were surprised that when the got to
read the staff report there were new issues and unresolved old issues. The new
issues are conditions #7, #8 and #9.
Regarding #7, requiring authorization from the appropriate flood control district
prior to installation of fences, decks, patios or other landscape treatments, he
said U I don't see any problem with ... we need to deal with the flood control
people. I don't see this as a problem because we're not talking about bringing
anything out over the easement".
Regarding #8, requiring a new 100 AMP electrical panel to be installed, Mr.
Grossman said he thought it was obvious they already had 120 AMPs in there.
But it was later clarified that no, a new panel inside the house was needed.
Regarding #9, the need to relocate the water heater, had not been discussed.
He said it was fine, however, they could relocate it.
The old conditions really concern him, #2, #10, #11 and #12.
Regarding #2, requiring the overall structure to meet the 3' setback from the
trailer spaces lines, this does not meet with his understanding of what he had
been told. He said he had numerous discussions with staff at City Hall about this
and it has always been his understanding that an existing non-conforming
structure can continue to exist in its non-conforming location as long as you don't
propose to change it or demolish/rebuild it. He plans to leave what's there and
not touch it. They're applying to build a second story on top of what's there. "It
was a great surprise that we saw that all of a sudden the rules changed. We
didn't think that was quite fair".
Regarding #10, requiring the existing first-story rear deck has to be removed
from the setback. It has been an understanding in the Park for years that an
existing non-conforming structure does not have to be moved if you're not
adjusting it or changing it. They are not changing this deck at all.
4
"'
~
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
-- 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
. 44
45
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
Regarding #11, not allowing the second-story side yard deck if it encroaches into
the mandatory 3' side-yard setback. Mr. Grossman said Planning Department
staffer Kyle Kollar had gotten this approved. The side deck to the south, which is
directly in line with the existing non-conforming cabana, is extending that line in
space up and to the existing structure. To see that this is not acceptable written
in the staff report was a surprise.
Regarding #12, requiring a professional survey, he said he was told at various
times in this process that a survey is not necessary. He has seen all kinds of
things going on in the Park that surveys have not been required for. He
wondered why a survey would be required for his application.
He requested revisions to the language of Conditions #2, #10 and #11 to allow
the existing structure to remain. Also, to allow the second-story deck above the
existing structure to be built in accordance with his approved plans. He
requested revision to the language of Condition #12, to allow the Building
Department to make measurements from prior existing survey markers. He felt
he should not be required to go to that expense when they don't believe that
everybody else has to go to that expense. Surveys have been done in the Park
and he thought the Building Inspectors could accurately measure from those
markers. He asked the Commission to approve his request. He said they've
been trying to comply with the letter of the law, he and his wife have been
working well with the City, and they feel that "all of a sudden things have
changedR and that confuses them. They want new consideration given to this
application.
Mr. Whittenberg addressed the issues the applicant raised. The primary issue is
moving the trailer from its non-conforming location. For a number of years, the
City did not enforce any setback distances between trailer space lines. The only
enforced distance separations were those involving the Administrative Code,
which require certain separations between trailer-to-trailer or trailer-to-cabana. In
1993 the City's Redevelopment Agency required the Park owners to provide the
City with a space map to establish boundary lines between the different trailer
spaces. The map was submitted and since 1994 the City has been using that
map when reviewing applications. The City has required all proposals to provide
the minimum 3' side yard separations. In this case, the existing trailer is within
that 3' area. Based on previous recommendations to the Planning Commission
staff recommends the existing trailer and cabana be shifted over so it's outside
the 3' area.
Additionally, regarding Condition #12, the requirement for a professional survey
came from the City's Building Department. The Building Inspectors went out to
51 Riversea Road and made some recommendations. It's within the Planning
Commission's discretion to waive Condition #12. However, if the Building
Inspectors are not certain they know where the trailer space lines are, they will
5
.
.
.
..
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 require a professional survey. Again, the survey requirement could be waived by
2 the Commission but could still be required by the Building Department later on.
3
4 Mr. Whittenberg advised the Planning Commission and the audience that SBTV3
5 was not able to transmit this meeting live. He indicated it was being broadcast to
6 the audience outside City Hall however.
7
8 Regarding #10, the Code allows a patio deck within the setback area as long as
9 they are no more than l' above grade level. If this situation is more than l'
10 above grade, this is why the condition was placed on the application. They could
11 lower the height down l' and meet Code requirements.
12
13 Chairman Brown asked about Condition #2. He wanted to know what is involved
14 in moving the trailer and cabana. Would it damage the home?
15
16 Mr. Whittenberg said it would depend on the support system. He didn't know
17 how much it would cost.
18
19 Mr. Grossman said the cabana is attached to the side of the trailer. He felt it
20 would destroy the trailer to be moved. It's supported by piers but is made of
21 aluminum with windows all around. It would be very expensive. He referred to
22 his previous comments that non-conforming structures did not have to be
23 removed.
24
25 Mr. Whittenberg said this condition is based on previous decision made by the
26 Planning Commission. There is flexibility to waive that condition if the
27 Commission feels it's appropriate but staff would recommend the Commission
28 continue to follow City policies.
29
30 Chairman Brown said that for the five years he's been on the Planning
31 Commission nothing like this has come up. He thought this has been the policy
32 in the past.
33
34 Mr. Whittenberg said it has been the policy in effect since early to mid-1994. In
35 all applications involving mobile homes in the Park if they have something that is
36 within the 3' setback area their proposal included moving it over. In this
37 particular case there was some miscommunication in staff meetings regarding
38 that issue and he didn't realize this until he sat down to write the staff report.
39
40 Mr. Grossman that after-the-fact he was told that there was no way, he had to
41 move the existing non-conforming structure.
42
43 Commissioner Cutuli asked if there were safety issues with regarding to the close
44 proximity of the trailers?
45
6
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 Mr. Whittenberg said one issue to be faced is if the unit next door, at 52
2 Riverside, wanted to enlarge their existing trailer and come out to the 3' trailer
3 space line - there would only be a 3' separation between the walls of the unit at
4 51 Riversea and 52 Riversea. If that becomes an issue, you'd have to deal with
5 fire issues.
6
7 Commissioner Cutuli commented on correspondence from neighbors who said
8 this proposal would destroy their views. He asked if there were precedent on
9 this?
10
11 Mr. Whittenberg said those comment letters were addressed on page 3 of the
12 staff report. In the past the Commission has not considered view-blocking issues
13 in the Park. In other areas of the City when that issue has come up, the only
14 time the Commission has looked at it is when the view is directly from the front of
15 the property and not a tangential view off to the side.
16
17 Commissioner Larson said he knows the Planning Director has been on vacation
18 and he knows his assistant quit, and then the next assistant quit, and the third
19 assistant declined the job offer. But in the last four meetings the Commission
20 has had instances where there is clearly a miscommunication between
21 applicants and the staff. He thought something must be done to take care of this
22 problem so the applicant knows, before he gets to the Commission hearing, there
23 is a disagreement between what he/she thought the rules were and what the
24 rules are supposed to be. He said he was not willing to vote on this until it goes
25 back to find out who's giving "bum" information to the applicants. They come
26 before the Commission to get their application approved and they come up
27 against something that wasn't what they were told. He wanted a report on how
28 this is happening.
29
30 MOTION by Hood; SECOND by _ to approve Resolution 98-34, thus
31 approving Minor Plan Review 98-7 as proposed by staff.
32 MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF SECOND.
33
34 Chairman Brown said that for him it's not an issue of what staff said or what the
35 applicant understood. It's like saying, "I didn't know the speed limit is 55 MPH".
36 The fact remains the speed limit is 55 MPH. He did agree with Commissioner
37 Larson that this has happened time and again and it puts the Planning
38 Commission in an awkward position. It would be much nicer if this applicant
39 understood the regulations and built his plans on that basis. It's one thing if an
40 applicant just doesn't agree with a staff report but another if you've seen the staff
41 report and it's not what you were told.
42
43 MOTION by Brown; SECOND by Hood to approve Minor Plan Review 98-7,
44 through the adoption of Resolution No. 98-34.
45
7
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
Before the vote, Chairman Brown explained his action is to be consistent with
past policies and maintain consistency. This reduces confusion. An applicant
can come before the Planning Commission and know this is the way things have
always been done.
Commissioner Larson this is not that you didn't know the speed limit was 55
MPH, it's that the applicant was told it was 65 MPH and then given a ticket for
speeding.
MOTION FAILED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
2-2-1
Brown, Hood
Lyon, Cutuli
Larson
Commissioner Cutuli said this is a tough question. The problem is, is a trailer
with its cabana easy to move or is it not? He said he wanted to change his "NO"
vote to "ABSTAIN".
Mr. Whittenberg suggested the Commission could continue this matter to its next
meeting at which time staff could provide background on previous Commission
actions and give cost estimates on what it would take to move a trailer to meet
the setback requirements.
MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Cutuli to continue Minor Plan Review 98-7 to the
Commission's November 4, 1998 meeting.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Larson, Lyon
***
3. Plan Review 98-8
1631 Seal Way
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning
Department for inspection]. The applicant, Konstro Design for Humphrey
Laurent, initially applied to convert the second floor, two-unit apartment area into
a single living unit and to allow a second-story deck and a roof deck at Unit 0,
the second story unit. This would result in the reduction in the number of living
units from four to three. On October 15, 1998, staff received a letter from Mr.
Laurent confirming a telephone conversation with the Director in which he stated
he intent to keep his property a four unit property and apply only for a roof deck
and a second story deck.
8
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
. 1 Mr. Whittenberg received a FAX from Tom Greeley of 1629 Seal Way. Mr.
2 Greeley says approval of a roof deck would allow people to look into his master
3 bedroom. He would not be opposed to the project if the roof deck were moved
4 back.
5
6 Chairman Brown asked what the municipal Code says on the decks?
7
8 Mr. Whittenberg said the Code allows a structure to go out to the front property
9 line on Seal Way. That would include the roof deck.
10
11 Chairman Brown asked about the staircase.
12
13 Mr. Whittenberg said the staircase is proposed to go to the roof deck. Staff
14 suggested that if this were an issue the Commission would want to address, the
15 Commission could mandate the roof deck project out from the landing area for
16 the stairway and the rest of the deck be in line with the residence itself.
17
18 Chairman Brown said he had received a telephone call from a neighbor, Chi
19 Kredel, who had questions on this application. Mr. Kredel can't speak because
20 there is no Public Hearing on a Consent Calendar item, however he brought up
21 the follow points:
. 22
23 [J The water heater is in the setback.
24
25 Mr. Whittenberg said the water heater is allowed to be in the setback,
26 also air conditioning equipment, compressors etc.
27
28 [J Plans submitted show no kitchen in one of the units on the first floor
29 and no bedroom in another unit.
30
31 Mr. Whittenberg said the plans are incorrect. There are bedrooms and
32 kitchens in each unit. The architect has been advised on this problem.
33 He was working off information he had received from the applicant.
34
35 [J The resolution mentions 3 units and it is a 4-unit structure.
36
37 Mr. Whittenberg said that would be corrected.
38
39 Nancy Kredel * 1633 Seal Way
40 Ms. Kredel asked to address the Commission.
41
42 Chairman Brown asked for legal advice, as this is a non-Public Hearing matter.
43 Mr. Steele said speakers would be at the Commission's discretion. The
. 44 Commission asked Ms. Kredel to speak.
45
9
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
Ms. Kredel said there are several discrepancies in the staff report: incorrect
address, incorrect side yard measurement. She said the property at 1631 Seal
Way is an eyesore and showed the Planning Commission photos she had taken.
She asked about the enclosure for the water heater being allowed in the setback.
When she and her husband built their home, it was their understanding that the
City would not extend the life of any of these overbuilt properties. This unit has 5
parking spaces that are not covered. If the Commission approves this proposal it
will extend the life of this eyesore property. This doesn't seem fair. If the roof
deck is built, they will able to look into her windows. She would like to see it
continued to get all the correct information.
Chairman Brown said the staff report should be revised to correctly reflect the
issues. For example, the staff report says the application is to go from four units
to three units but that has been canceled by the applicant. The report should
include any non-conforming issues.
MOTION BY Larson; SECOND by Lyon to continue Plan Review 98-8 to the
Commission's November 4, 1998. Staff is to revise the staff report to correctly
reflect the issues.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
5-0-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Larson, Lyon
PUBLIC HEARINGS
12. Conditional Use Permit 98-14
12071 Seal Beach Boulevard * Union 76 Service Station
Staff Report
Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning
Department for inspection]. The applicant, Tait & Associates, Inc., has applied to
remodel the existing cashier, waiting area and bathroom. The bathroom area
would meet ADA requirements. Also, to convert the existing enclosed trash area
to an enclosed area for a new 250-gallon waste oil tank. And to install a new 6'
masonry trash enclosure at an existing service station.
Commission Questions
Commissioner Lyon said he has driven by the Union 76 Service Station and
noted it has its concrete already torn up. How did they start work already?
Mr. Whittenberg said he inspected the site prior to his vacation, and at that time
nothing was going on then.
10
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission'" Minutes of October 21, 1998
Public Hearina
Craia Haas '* Tasca Murphv & Companv. Operator of Union 76 Station
Mr. Haas said he works for Tait & Associates, a consulting engineering firm.
They do a lot of work for Unocal. The site needs to be brought up to EP A
compliance by the end of the year with a December 22nd deadline for the fuel
system upgrade. That involves the fuel dispensing tanks themselves. Along with
that, one of the problems is the underground waste oil tank needs to be
upgraded. The work being done now is for the underground fueling system
upgrade, for the tank top upgrade, new dispensers and bravo boxes. All that
work is approved through the Orange County Fire Authority and Environmental
Health. That work is going ahead while they wait for the Commission to rule on
the aboveground waste oil tank.
Commissioner Larson said the station was open yesterday and they were selling
gas for $ .99 per gallon.
There were no persons wishing to speak further for or against this application
and the Public Hearing was closed.
Commission Deliberations
There were no deliberations or comments.
MOTION by Lyon; SECOND by Hood to approve Resolution 98-34, thus
approving Conditional Use Permit 98-14 for 12071 Seal Beach Boulevard.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Larson, Lyon
Mr. Steele advised the applicant of the ten-calendar-day appeal period to the City
Council.
11
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1
2 13. Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center
3 3900 & 3901 Lampson Avenue
4
5 Chairman Brown indicated this is a continued Public Hearing from October 7,
6 1998.
7
8 Staff Report
9 Mr. Whittenberg delivered a brief staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning
10 Department for inspection).
11
12 Mr. Whittenberg reviewed recent materials given to the Planning Commission:
13
14 a Supplemental Staff Report, dated October 21, 1998
15 a Supplement Staff Report #2, dated October 21, 1998
16
17 Mr. Whittenberg said the basic proposal is to reconfigure and expand the size of
18 the golf course from 117 acres to 158 acres. As part of this reconfiguration, the
19 proposal is to establish a 15-acre parcel at the north end for a proposed church
20 use. To the south of the 15-acre parcel would be a 25-acre parcel for a shopping
21 center to accommodate 286,000 square feet of building. Also, to reconfigure the
22 zone and land uses at Lampson and Seal Beach Boulevard to accommodate a
23 proposed Marriott Senior Care facility, a hotel and two restaurant pads. The
24 number of commercial zoning in that area would increase from 5.5 acres to 8.5
25 acres. The remaining 5 acres would be setaside for greenbelt areas. Also, the
26 dedication of the Old Ranch Tennis Club to the City as a recreation facility.
27
28 The City's Environmental Quality Control Board (EQCB) review of the project
29 yielded additional modifications based on public comments. These
30 recommendations have been incorporated into the documents before the
31 Commission. Mr. Whittenberg discussed the EQCB's review and determinations,
32 and those of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC).
33
34 Commission Questions
35 There were no Commission comments or questions.
36
37 Public Hearina
38
39 Ron Bradshaw * Bixbv Ranch Company
40 Mr. Bradshaw introduced himself and the consultant team accompanying him.
41 He noted Director Whittenberg has now delivered two staff reports on the project
42 proposed. He gave a brief overview of the 220 acres, saying it is a remnant of
43 the old Rancho Los Alamitos which has been in the Bixby family for over 100
44 years. Until 1960, this site was primarily agricultural. In the mid-1940's 76 of the
45 220 acres were controlled by fee and/or lease by the Federal Government for the
46 benefit of the Los Alamitos Naval Air Station. The Air Station pulled out in the
12
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 late 1960's. When that lease expired in 1985 it was not renewed or purchased
2 by the Federal Government. That same situation existed in the northeast portion
3 of the Air Base and that lease was not renewed either. In the late 1960's Bixby
4 built the Old Ranch Country Club and golf course. They constructed the tennis
5 club a bit later. They exist in their original locations. The balance of the property
6 allocated an additional 23 acres to commercial development. The tennis club
7 was on 7 acres, 5.5 acres at the corner of Lampson/Seal Beach Boulevard, 9.8
8 acres in the northern part next to the Los Alamitos city line. In 1989 Bixby Ranch
9 Co. made the decision to come up with the final land use for its remaining
10 property in Seal Beach. Over those 9 years they have worked with City Planning
11 Department staff, elected City officials, citywide citizen groups, local community
12 groups.
13
14 They came before the Planning Commission with an application for a primarily
15 residential project. That plan was withdrawn in 1995 because they didn't believe
16 there was enough support. In fact, the Planning Commission was recommending
17 denial of that project.
18
19 Subsequently, they started looking at the 23 commercially zoned acres and put it
20 up for sale. Marriott purchased 4.3 acres of the tennis club, which is zoned
21 commercially, for a senior care facility. Arco purchased 1 acre to go back on the
22 original Arco site. They had a contract with a hotel operator for 2 acres for the
23 southern-most part of the property south of Lampson Avenue. At that time,
24 Marriott filed an application with the City.
25
26 At that time the City Council re-thought their position and took a pro-active
27 position in terms of planned development. They asked that Bixby Ranch Co.
28 study primarily a commercial plan. That plan had a number of objectives they
29 were hoping to achieve. Some of the significant objectives were:
30
31 Cl Put the commercial uses in the most appropriate locations.
32 Cl Have additional benefits, via a Development Agreement, to the City.
33 These benefits could not be garnered under an EIR.
34 Cl Have the site re-studied from the EIR standpoint.
35
36 The plan before us is consistent with the program laid out in the Memorandum of
37 Understanding (MOU). This plan has 23 acres of already zoned commercial
38 property. The plan seeks approximately 10 acres of commercial property and 15
39 acres of institutional commercial uses.
40
41 Mr. Bradshaw discussed some of the issues the City was trying to resolve, either
42 through mitigation and/or as contemplated in the Development agreement:
43
44 Cl Ensure the project would be consistent with the continued operations
45 of the AFRC Los Alamitos.
13
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 lJ The historical Eucalyptus grove be preserved on Seal Beach
2 Boulevard, primarily it would be impacted in front of the commercial
3 center.
4 lJ Desire to have the tennis club gifted to the City for a community center.
5 a To have a north City police sub-station on this site. This has been
6 expanded to include housing the community cablevision facilities.
7 a Maintain a gateway into the College Park East area. They put the
8 development on Lampson Avenue and Seal Beach Boulevard within a
9 5-acre island of landscaping.
10 a Flood retention and flood runoff onto Lampson Avenue were
11 addressed in the EIR and Development Agreement.
12 a A 12' wide off-street bicycle path and sidewalk along Lampson
13 Avenue. It would come from the potential community facility to the 25-
14 acre commercial center.
15 a Sufficient traffic impact fees to be generated by this project to mitigate
16 the actual impacts required by the traffic engineer for the surface
17 streets. Also to provide the matching funds the City needs to rebuild
18 the overpass at Seal Beach Boulevard and the 405 Freeway.
19 a The City would gain 7 acres from the tennis club site, 5 acres of the
20 buffer area at Lampson /Seal Beach Boulevard, 2 acres in a 40'
21 setback along Seal Beach Boulevard from Lampson to Rossmoor
22 Way.
23
24 Chairman Brown said the Planning Commission would now open the comment
25 period for public testimony. He asked the commentors not to repeat previous
26 speakers, and noted each speaker would have as much time as he/she needed
27 to deliver their testimony. The following 37 persons spoke:
28
29 Gary Marshall * Rowena Drive. Rossmoor
30 Mr. Marshall asked for a clarification on the latest proposal for the 40' setback
31 from Lampson Avenue to possibly St. Cloud Drive,
32
33 Jim Moblev * Heather Street. Colleae Park East. Seal Beach
34 Mr. Mobley said his biggest concern is traffic, noting this plan would bring in more
35 traffic than any other plan he's looked at. He said there's a lot of commercial
36 development going on at Katella Avenue in Cypress. Where do those people go
37 when they have to get to the 405 and 22 freeways? They would come down
38 Seal Beach Boulevard or Valley View Street. He said it's unacceptable to
39 choose the project with the most traffic. College Park East has always been the
40 orphan of Seal Beach and the City itself is not too affected unless you live in
41 College Park East. Sales tax revenue is what's driving this project.
42
43 Jim Sartain * Rowena Drive. Rossmoor
44 Mr. Sartain said Rossmoor has a homeowners association that works hard but
45 has no "teeth", no governmental representation. He said that this year someone
46 wanted to open a tattoo parlor in Seal Beach. It was reported in the newspaper
14
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 that the Commission was told a tattoo parlor was not appropriate for Main Street,
2 it's much more appropriate for the Rossmoor Shopping Center.
3
4 Additionally, his calculations show his family spends $25,000 in the City of Seal
5 Beach. Threatening an economic embargo, Mr. Sartain said his family wouldn't
6 spend another penny in Seal Beach if this proposal were accepted. They will
7 shop elsewhere.
8
9
10 Ruth Anisman * Rossmoor
11 Mrs. Anisman discussed the changing business climate in the area, saying that
12 with the advent of big box retailing the smaller stores are being swallowed up and
13 small businesses are closing. These businesses have been lifelines for this
14 community's families for years.
15
16 Mrs. Anisman discussed the impact of this project proposal on the Rossmoor
17 Center, saying she has not heard one Rossmoor resident in support of this big
18 box plan. Nobody in this area will shop at the proposed big box retailers and the
19 proposal will only create headaches for area residents. College Park East is not
20 looking forward to more traffic. With access only off Seal Beach Boulevard why
21 would people come from surrounding communities? There would be lack of
22 visibility from the 405 freeway so there won't be many random shoppers. Why
23 would you want another big box center? She said we don't know the future of the
24 Rossmoor Shopping Center, there are rumors condos will be built there. What
25 will happen to our lifeline? She thought it would make more sense to work
26 together with the Rossmoor Center rather than building a big box project, which
27 nobody supports. Rossmoor residents are not behind this project.
28
29 Mrs. Anisman discussed emergency response issues, saying that with access
30 only from Seal Beach Boulevard, what would happen if there should be an
31 emergency, a fire, and an earthquake? How would the injured be handled, the
32 fire trucks, the ambulances? It would be utter panic and chaos.
33
34
35 Ken Seith * Hazelnut. Colleae Park East. Seal Beach
36 Mr. Seith said the following items couldn't be mitigated:
37
38 CJ Traffic along Lampson Avenue
39 CJ Cut-thru traffic in Rossmoor
40 CJ Loss of Eucalyptus trees
41
42 The builder needs to give up something for better mitigation. He felt the
43 Responses to Comments were not adequate and that it's inappropriate for staff
44 to make recommendations until the public is gets to be heard. He felt the
45 Department of Development services should be more professional.
46
15
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 Irwin Anisman * Rossmoor
2 Mr. Anisman introduced himself as representing the Rossmoor Homeowners
3 Association (RHA). He presented approximately 18 slides to the Planning
4 Commission and audience. [Copies on file for inspection in the Planning
5 Department].
6
7 The unincorporated community of Rossmoor consists of 3,800 homes and
8 12,000 residents. The sheer size of this project proposal is staggering. Almost
9 50 acres with a half million square feet of development and 3100 parking spaces.
10 This will affect the image and character of Rossmoor/Seal Beach and will
11 negatively affect property values and quality of life.
12
13 Mr. Anisman said concerns are environmental impacts and land use issues. A
14 balance must be struck between the objectives of the City and the community.
15
16 Speaking to the concerns which the Planning Commission is charged to consider
17 as part of the approval process he said:
18
19 IJ The EIR has unavoidable impacts: socio-economics. oeolooy. air Quality.
20 transportation/circulation and aesthetics. The project does not provide a
21 sufficient job/housing balance. The geology results in the removal of 78 acres
22 of prime farmland. This project will increase the CO concentration and
23 adversely affect the local air quality. The carbon monoxide will exceed the 8-
24 hour concentration threshold. The proposed Senior Care facility will be
25 located within a significant air quality impact zone, which cannot be mitigated
26 because it's next to a freeway. The long-term emissions will exceed
27 thresholds of significance, which will create a significant, unavoidable air
28 quality impact. The traffic at Los Alamitos/Katella and Bloomfield/Katella
29 cannot be mitigated. Removal of 20% - 30% of the Eucalyptus trees is an
30 adverse aesthetic impact.
31
32 IJ The RHA identified other adverse impacts in their review of the EIR that were
33 not adequately addressed by the consultants. These are:
34
35 IJ Higher traffic volumes
36 IJ Increased cut-through traffic
37 IJ Increased noise
38 IJ Decrease in air quality
39 IJ Airport safety zones
40 IJ Los Alamitos
41
42 This project has the potential for much higher traffic than was disclosed in the
43 EIR. The EIR used an average figure for the traffic projections. But in reality it
44 could be 70% greater and they acknowledged this at the EQCB meeting.
45
16
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 The issue of increased cut-thru traffic into Rossmoor is of great concern. Those
2 residents would have to live with the consequences, which include increased
3 accidents and injuries. The consultant did not correctly apply the data for their
4 figures. At the present time this is a significant problem. Through Wallingsford
5 about 18% of the traffic through there is cut-thru and at St. Cloud it's 27%. The
6 consultant's response to the EQCB on cut-thru traffic said the project would not
7 increase cut-thru traffic. That incredulous and therefore he has not confidence in
8 the consultant's analysis. It's very obvious that this project would affect cut-thru
9 traffic. Their analysis has shown that by the year 2001 they would have 1,080
10 cars per day that are cut-thru traffic; this needs to be mitigated.
11
12 The level of service (LOS) at St. Cloud was a Level "En in the EIR. It was 8.95,
13 which should have been .9. The EIR did not address mitigations to this. This
14 should be required.
15
16 Regarding increased noise, the combination of airport and freeway noise are
17 unacceptable as they exceed the 65db standard and get as high as 118 db with
18 some jet takeoffs.
19
20 Regarding air quality, RHA has also identified particulate matter contamination,
21 which was not properly addressed in the EIR. The proposed project is not
22 consistent with the General Plan or the AQMD Plan. The emission of toxic air
23 contaminants associated with the gasoline station has been ignored. The cancer
24 risk associated with the gas station is significant and must be mitigated. Such
25 mitigation measures could include removing the gas station or limiting the
26 amount of gasoline that can be sold.
27
28 Environmental Audit Inc. for RHA generated these comments that he's using.
29 That letter was sent to Lee Whittenberg but was not included in the
30 Commission's staff report.
31
32 Other concerned respondents are the City of Los A1amitos, Orange County
33 Planning, Rossmoor Center, Caltrans. He described the issues they raised.
34
35 CJ The City of Los Alamitos' concerns were flood hazards, traffic impacts
36 and noise impacts.
37 [J The Orange County Planning Board raised issues on mitigating landfill
38 gasses hydrology, flooding, and traffic/circulation.
39 [J The Rossmoor Center responded to the EIR by commenting on the
40 significant loss of business that would ensue.
41 [J Caltrans had serious concerns re LA AFRC standard safety zones.
42 They were concerned with the adequacy of the short and clear zone
43 and lack of accident potential zones. The ALUC may not have
44 jurisdiction over the base, it does have authority to safeguard the
45 welfare of those people living in the vicinity of the airport. They were
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 Mr. Anisman commented on the issue of land use and how it relates to the staff
18 report and the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan. The key issues are
19 sweeping and drastic amendments to the General Plan are of questionable
20 \ legality. The staff report, page 19, states the General Plan is a constitution of all
21 future development. The California Supreme Court confirmed the General Plan
22 is the single, most important document of the City. It would seem a constitution
23 is not something easily tampered with or amended at will. The City Council is
24 authorized to make amendment to the General Plan if it deems the requested
25 amendment is in the public interest. The General Plan states "a more suitable
26 use of the area would be a combined residential use, owner occupied". The
27 proposed project violates the underlying principles and specific goals of the
28 General Plan. It violates community goals and College Park East park plan
29 goals. A big box development, a mega church, an economy motel are obviously
30 not consistent with a friendly, small town, village environment.
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
particularly concerned with the proximity of the assisted care facility to
the LA AFRC.
Mr. Anisman continued that in August 1995 the Seal Beach Planning
Commission said of the Bixby mixed-use plan "Existing traffic in the area is
already congested. Cumulative traffic impacts of other approved projects in the
region would further exacerbate the situation. The additional traffic generated by
the proposed project will only intensify those future demands ... likewise the
project operational missions would have a significant unavoidable adverse
impact upon air quality. Approval of the application would, therefore, not be in
the public interest and would seriously degrade the quality of the environment
and quality of life in the community".
For these reasons, the RHA asks the Planning Commission to deem the EIR
inadequate until corrections are made.
Past development concerns by the City have been development of the
Department of Water and Power (DWP) property. The Planning Commission
limited the size of a hotel for that site. In Long Beach, this City was concerned
about development on Pacific Coast Highway and its traffic. The Commission
was very concerned about development on the Hellman Ranch and it was scaled
back. RHA hopes that Seal Beach shows the same kind of consideration for this
project proposal.
Regarding size, the scope of this project is out of scale. It's 48.5 acres with
566,317 square feet of retail space and 3,100 on site parking spaces. The uses
are inappropriate, especially the big box retail, the mega church and the senior
care facility. It would directly compete with the Rossmoor Center and lead to
further decline of that center. The area residents will still have to travel outside
the area for quality shopping because the type of businesses planned for this
project are not the type area residents want.
18
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
The church would be welcome if it were a normal sized church. It's completely
out of scale with the community. He noticed that Bixby did not put the church on
its display board. It's the size of two football fields in size with 3570 seats. It
would be a 7 -day-per-week-activity church that would spill over and adversely
affect the community. He recommended switching the senior care facility with
the proposed church site and scaling the size of the church back to a normal
size. The location of the senior care facility is indefensible due to noise and air
quality exceeding standards with no mitigation's offered. When he asked the
consultants about this at the EQCB meetings they told him that there patients
would be kept inside so they wouldn't have to deal with the outside pollution and
noise.
This project is inappropriate and not in the best interest of the community and its
residents. The RHA asked the Planning Commission to not recommend this
plan. RHA asks the City to work with Bixby Ranch Co. to find alternatives, which
would find acceptance by all the parties, involved.
RECESS:
RECONVENE:
9:35 P.M
9:45 P.M.
Johanna Rosserman · Rossmoor
Ms. Rosserman reviewed the proposed uses for the Bixby project and countered
their need by mentioning similar retailers in the neighboring community. She
questioned why we had to make "a cement jungle" out of every single unfilled
area. She was opposed to a home improvement center, a mega church, the
senior care center and loss of trees. She urged the Commission to vote no on
this project.
Gordon Triaa. Elder Avenue. Seal Beach
Mr. Trigg said that City government has held that "small" is better and "small" is
Seal Beach. Small means Seal Beach if you live south of the 405. North of the
405 it's not small. He hoped the Commission believed in "small" for the entire
City. Planning means looking to the future. To what degree has the Planning
Commission been able to study this project, the Rossmoor Center and other area
centers? He spoke about lease arrangements at the Rossmoor Center noting
that several small businesses have no contract beyond the year 2000, Ace
hardware's lease is to 2004 and Lucky's lease is to 2008. In the next ten years
what will happen to Rossmoor if this project is approved? What's the future for
Rossmoor, College Park East and the school district? The Bixby Old Ranch
mixed use plan would bring $153,000 to the school district and the commercial
plan close to $1,000,000
19
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 Helene Halperin * Kempton Drive. Rossmoor
2 Ms. Halperin said she was opposed to the plan because it's over built and an
3 over use for the land and the community. Getting onto LampsonlSt. Cloud at
4 night would be prohibitive. Can this City absorb a Crystal Cathedral? Can the
5 Commission turn this down, noting Bixby has the right to develop, and go forward
6 to something better?
7
8
9 Ace Yeam * Colleae Park East. Seal Beach
10 Mr. Yeam said he is opposed to this plan and supports a residential plan. He
11 said the AFRC does not revert back to the Bixby Ranch Co. if the base closes.
12 He read a letter from the Secretary of the Navy, James B. Forestall. The
13 Federal Government obtained this land from seven different owners, not Bixby
14 only. The Colonel from the AFRC, their lead consultant, plus the Judge
15 Advocates, wrote a letter dated February 6, 1998, which said:
16
17 "It is the position of the California National Guard that any development
18 proposed on properties surrounding the AFRC which is compatible with
19 the conclusions reached in the AICUZ study will not in any way hinder or
20 detract from the operations of the air field. The mission of the AFRC is
21 stated in the AICUZ study and it is still that on today... foreseeable
22 future".
23
24 He asked the Commission to reconsider this plan and go back to the mixed-use
25 plan.
26
27
28 Nancy Gibbs * Davenport Road. Rossmoor
29 Ms. Gibbs urged the Commission to be good stewards of the land.
30
31
32 Susan Taylor * Weatherbee Road. Rossmoor
33 Ms. Taylor said she was against this project. She said she felt this is the wrong
34 use for this land and said the Commission must look to the future. Some
35 compromise must be met here.
36
37
38 Larry Madison. Senior Associate Pastor * Cottonwood Christian Center.
39 3311 Sausalito Street. Los Alamitos
40 Pastor Madison said they happen to be included in the Bixby Ranch plan and
41 wanted to set the record straight. They are not a mega church, although they are
42 a large church with 3,600 members. They are in the City of Los Alamitos already
43 so moving to the Bixby site would just be going down the road a few miles. They
44 are not like the Crystal Cathedral- 150' in the air with glass - that's based on
45 speculation. They would not operate 7 days a week. They have services on
46 Sunday and Wednesday. He felt they had been misrepresented. They don't
20
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 pose anything threatening to the community. They have been in Los Alamitos 15
2 years and they have a good track record. There are other churches which have
3 larger memberships, for example, the Saddleback Community Church with
4 12,000 members.
5
6
7 Sid Rhodes * Yellowtail Drive. Rossmoor
8 Mr. Rhodes said he was opposed to this project. He didn't think this is a good
9 project or a good deal. He thought single family houses might be better. He said
10 that about one month ago he came to a Planning Commission meeting and Mr.
11 Whittenberg said there was no applicant or interested party for a church. He
12 asked when did you know about Cottonwood? Now that Pastor Madison came
13 forward, what else and who else is interested?
14
15
16 Barbie Mever * Seal Beach
17 Ms. Meyer said she is a member of Cottonwood Christian Center and felt the
18 comments have been mean spirited. She suggested people come see the
19 existing church on Sausalito Lane in Los Alamitos.
20
21
22 Phillip Fife * Ironwood Avenue. Seal Beach
23 Mr. Fife spoke about the church. People in Council District 4 are not opposed to
24 a church in the abstract. But in hearings on the mixed-use plan they have heard
25 about the horrors of an air crash into a residential structure with deaths on the
26 ground. Historically this has not been the case. He talked about the PSA crash
27 in San Diego and the crash in Taiwan. The number of deaths on the ground has
28 always been fairly minimal when in residential areas. When a crash occurs in a
29 commercial area there are many deaths. He cited the example of the air crash
30 into the Farrell's ice cream parlor at Sacramento Airport; 19 mothers and children
31 died. If you buy into the thought that the air base represents some huge danger
32 to structures underneath, it seemed to him that a 3,500 seat church would be
33 ridiculous in comparison to 98 homes and possibly 110 townhomes further away
34 from the flight paths. Suddenly the people who were wringing their hands about
35 air crashes had nothing to say about the church. If that argument had any
36 validity, the church would compound grossly the danger that was presented
37 before.
38
39 Regarding the church, Mr. Fife said College Park East loves rumors and one
40 rumor that circulated was that that church would not be there and would be
41 replaced with something else. What would go there if not a church? This City
42 has postponed and pushed off its obligation to build low/moderate income
43 housing forever. If that site does not become a church, it should become the
44 repository for the entire City's low/moderate income-housing obligation. The
45 Housing Element has always provided that some part of the Bixby land would be
46 built for housing to meet the City's housing obligations; that's not addressed
21
.
.
.
(r
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 anywhere. Instead, is it better to rebuild this as something else? If you're going
2 to rezone R-G land C-2, are you going to create this new fictional thing called
3 Public Land Use for a church and change the actual Code language to redefine
4 what Public Land Use is? Presently, PLU does not allow for churches.
5 Churches are built in C-1 and C-2 zones. This would allow government function
6 land to hold a church.
7
8 Regarding the tennis club as a benefit to the City. Under the mixed-use plan it
9 was going to come to the City along with $750,000 to change it from a tennis club
10 to a multi-use community center. There aren't too many older residents of
11 College Park East that play tennis. The $750,000 was to refurbish the building to
12 make it available to the whole age spectrum that lives in College Park East.
13 What we get now is a worn out building with no money to refurbish or maintain it.
14 The MOU has the answer to that - it reverts back to the developer in the event
15 we cease to use it as a public recreational facility. . When you evaluate the
16 addition of the Tennis Club as some benefit to the community, I think that's
17 nonsense under this plan.
18
19 Regarding the traffic on Lampson Avenue, it's ridiculous as it is and we now
20 propose the most dangerous set of conditions he could imagine. Around a blind
21 curve we'll build a public golf driving range. People will now be crossing traffic in
22 both directions around a blind curve. There's no room on Lampson to widen the
23 street. It's impossible for that street to mitigate traffic. Seven people have died
24 behind his house in 25 years. How many more will be killed along that stretch of
25 dangerous highway?
26
27 Regarding the extended stay hotel, like Extended Stay America, they are
28 designed for people who need a place to stay for 30 days to six months. Those
29 people will stay there for months. If they have children, those children will need
30 parks to play in. They will go to our local schools. One of the school mitigation
31 money will accompany that kind of impact for the additional students, and there is
32 no genuine money for the additional parks.
33
34 Bixby has approached the community, after years of work, to develop a fair and
35 decent plan. This is the City's plan because the City wants it for the revenue and
36 College Park East will suffer because it's too apathetic and doesn't realize what's
37 being done to it. He said the Commission should follow here what it did a few
38 weeks ago for the Anaheim Bay Villas proposal. Then Bixby would come up with
39 something new and better for the community.
40
41
42 Pattie Kav Alexander * Tiaertail Drive. Rossmoor
43 Ms. Alexander said she is against the big box commercial development. She
44 would like for Seal Beach to think they get a lot of things from Rossmoor and the
45 activity that Rossmoor homeowners generate. As an example, the excellent
46 school system. If something like this proposal is built and it hurts Rossmoor and
22
.
.
.
"
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 its property values, people will begin to move away. She said Rossmoor keeps
2 Seal Beach's borders neat and tidy with high-income property. If Rossmoor
3 "goes down", so will Seal Beach and so will Los Alamitos.
4
5
6 Joe Siler * Birchwood. Colleae Park East. Seal Beach
7 Mr. Siler said in 1982 he was asked to be the Chairman of a committee to work
8 with Bixby Ranch Company to try to work out some kind of an agreeable plan
9 which would be acceptable to College Park East and to Bixby Ranch Co. The
10 result of those meetings was the mixed-use plan, which was rejected by this
11 Planning Commission in 1985. Why was it rejected? It was compared to the
12 land as it is now. Everyone would like to see the status quo stay but that's not
13 possible. Because it was compared to the status quo, its benefits were not seen.
14 However, this project is too big with too much traffic. It's a huge commercial
15 project, which will kill the residential feeling. Everyone in our area likes the look
16 and feel of that area - the residential nature. We already have a large office
17 project in our area and a large retail center, the Rossmoor Center. We have
18 enough and we don't need any more in our area.
19
20 When you analyze what's good for our area the first thing you should look at is
21 traffic. With traffic comes almost all the bad things --- the air pollution, the
22 congestion, the crime. In the EIR contends 14,000 trips per day will be
23 generated. If one looks at data from California, and not from nation-wide data
24 that the EIR used, you wind up with 26,000 trips per day. Fortunately we don't
25 have to resolve how many trips per day it is, to know that it's not a good plan. It's
26 a bad plan. The competing golf course homes plan only generates 4,900 trips
27 per day. Those people in Rossmoor who are worried about cut-thru traffic will
28 have their concerns reduced by a residential plan.
29
30 What do we have today on Seal Beach Boulevard? A beautiful grove of trees,
31 out onto a golf course with fairways. All of that would be preserved with the golf
32 course home plan. The large commercial plan would give a view of parking lots
33 and commercial buildings. No just a few parking spaces but 3,100 spaces.
34 That's about 30 acres of asphalt. The golf course will become abysmal. The
35 only advantage to the commercial plan is money - sales tax revenue. But
36 analysis of this would show the differences are far less than they appear. The
37 financial report evaluates the sales tax revenue at the highest level of any top
38 center in Orange County. If you drop back to an average of those top 25 centers,
39 suddenly lots of that revenue disappears. Most of that sales tax revenue will be
40 stolen from other taxable sales in Seal Beach. We have not taken into account
41 these stolen sales. Analysis will show the difference between the two project is
42 approximately $300,000 per year between the commercial and primarily golf
43 course homes plan. With the homes plan comes some $750,000 for recreation
44 at the tennis club site and an additional $750,000 over and above to the school
45 district - $1.5 million dollars to our community. This covers the shortfall for a
46 five-year period.
23
.
.
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1
2 Regarding compatibility with the AFRC, it took the committee a long time to
3 realize that development would be compatible with the AFRC. He reiterated
4 some of the problems of building near the base: "We can't build at the end of a
5 runway", "This is an incompatible land use", "We can't build in a crash zone, it's
6 too dangerous", "It's too noisy to build there", "The land will revert to Bixby", "The
7 City will be liable". "Each and every one of these concepts have been analyzed
8 and found to be false".
9
1 0 Many of us are concerned about property rights. What are the rights of this
11 property owner? His first choice was to build a golf course home project. It
12 would be the best plan for our community too. It would be the highest and best
13 use of the land. The assessed valuation of a golf course home project is about
14 $120,000,000. The assessed valuation of the commercial project is
15 $60,000,000.
16
17 The real difficult we face is if this Planning Commission decides to reject the
18 Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center plan. What would happen? Bixby has publicly
19 said they would move for the default plan. The default plan is where Bixby builds
20 out its 22 acres of commercial property. That in turn would generate traffic. It
21 would be twice as many people and twice as much traffic as a residential project.
22 Bixby is not precluded from coming back to this Commission and asking for more
23 development. Under the default plan they retain the right to apply for future
24 development. The other two plans restrict Bixby from coming back for more
25 development.
26
27 This Commission has a choice. The alternate is the golf course home plan. He
28 suggested that would be far preferable. If we could stop Bixby and leave this
29 land status quo, as it is now, he would be urging the Commission to reject
30 everything. But since he believes Bixby has pre-existing rights to develop their
31 22 acres of commercial property he would suggest the Commission consider the
32 alternate plan.
33
34
35 Julie Goodman * Cottonwood Christian Center. Los Alamitos
36 Ms. Goodman said Cottonwood Christian Center would be a better land use than
37 having low income housing on that site.
38
39
40 Cary Hardwick * SpaQhettini Restaurant. Seal Beach
41 Mr. Hardwick introduced himself as the managing general partner of Spaghettini
42 Restaurant. He said if there is going to be a church on the 15-acre parcel you
43 couldn't find a better group of people than those who attend Cottonwood Center.
44 It is not a mega church. He hoped it would get a fair shot.
45
46
24
.
.
.
:.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 Mike Sanders * Christie Lane. Rossmoor
2 Mr. Sanders spoke against the commercial plan, stating the mixed-use plan is
3 beUer. He asked the Commission to consider the impacts on Rossmoor Center.
4 He said there has been no effort on the part of the developer to find out what the
5 community would support. He suggested the community could use a sporting
6 good store, gourmet markets the kinds of uses for this community that other
7 communities with comparable demographics have. It would take no effort to
8 come to this community and find out what we need and what we would support.
9 Rossmoor is the primary trade area for this center. This is a center designed to
10 draw people from a very wide geographic area. People who live in this area
11 travel elsewhere to shop. He'd like to spend his dollars in Seal Beach, but he
12 doesn't because the things I need are not here. If there were some effort to
13 develop something that would be supported by the community you would
14 eliminate some of these traffic concerns. Rather than having hoards of people
15 coming from outside the area, you'd be able to provide shopping for the people
16 who go elsewhere to spend their money. The proposed center would directly
17 compete with the existing Rossmoor Center. The Rossmoor Center already has
18 problems and the proposed center would cause it more problems.
19
20
21 Dorothv Whvte * Colleae Park East. Seal Beach
22 Ms. Whyte talked about community surveys favoring a residential project. She
23 said three separate surveys have been taken, Bixby has tried to please the
24 community, it's the City of Seal Beach that will not listen. The three surveys
25 asked residents whether they preferred residential of commercial development
26 on the Old Ranch golf course. The results overwhelmingly showed residents
27 preferred residential development. Like the residents of Rossmoor, the residents
28 of College Park East don't have representation because we live too far away.
29
30 She said she learned something disturbing to her -- on November 4, 1998, the
31 Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing on CUP 98-15, an application by
32 Marriott Corporation for a senior assisted living facility. This is proposed for the
33 corner of Seal Beach Boulevard/Lampson Avenue.
34
35 As Joe Siler said, this has been a long process. Bixby has tried to work with the
36 community. Unfortunately, every plan they bring forth somebody is against it.
37 They go back to the drawing table and try something else. She said that many
38 people have tried very hard to come up with a plan that is beneficial to the
39 community and that doesn't mean they're employed by Bixby Ranch Co. They
40 are very concerned about losing the tennis club.
41
42 In closing, Ms. Whyte said that nobody wants commercial building as the
43 gateway to their community - not the Hellman Ranch, not the Department of
44 Water and Power property and not College Park East via Bixby Ranch Co. She
45 asked the Planning Commission to go back to the mixed-use plan.
46
25
.
.
.
"
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 Don Brown * 1 at Street. Seal Beach
2 Mr. Brown said he is a part-time City resident. He is in agreement with the
3 comments on Cottonwood Christian Center and said it is "a very sleepy church",
4 busy only on Sundays, and is not a 7 -day intense use.
5
6
7 Jim Alexander * Tiaertail Drive. Rossmoor
8 Mr. Alexander said it seems like everyone would prefer residential development
9 on the Bixby land. He felt the traffic problems would never be mitigated. If we
10 get the residential development we get the same intersection concerns at St.
11 Cloud/Seal Beach Boulevard. Several problems in the traffic area will never be
12 mitigated: When winter comes and the rains start we lose one southbound lane.
13 If houses are built, that would mean a lot extra paving and a lot of water runoff, it
14 will end up in the road. Any changes to the road may cause us to lose another
15 lane as the water tries to get to the flood control. The EIR mitigation didn't
16 address the problem and if we're ever going to get the problem fixed, now is the
17 time. Mr. Bradshaw said something about the overpass being widened. If that
18 doesn't happen, we'll end up with more traffic --- whether it's residential or
19 commercial construction.
20
21
22 Chairman Brian Brown
23 At 10:45 p.m. Chairman Brown referred to Planning Commission Resolution No.
24 94-20 saying the Planning Commission is to determine what it's going to do with
25 the rest of the Agenda. The only new items are the Staff Concerns and
26 Commission Concerns. The Commission may not consider new items after
27 11 :00 a.m. He requested a show of hands from the audience as to how many
28 more people wish to speak. He noted about 5 or 6 people.
29
30 Mr. Steele said the Commission could vote to waive the time requirement to end
31 at midnight. He referred to Section 4, item 5 of Planning Commission Resolution
32 No. 94-20. He indicated the Commission did not have to decide on this now and
33 could wait until the end of the meeting.
34
35
36 Charlene Alstrum * Old Mill Road. Rossmoor
37 Ms. Alstrum spoke in opposition to the commercial project. She asked the
38 Commissioners to imagine living in Rossmoor or College Park East. "How would
39 you feel about this being built across the street from your community, the
40 increased traffic, and would you vote for it?" She asked if money was the issue,
41 saying she believed it is because this commercial project is not compatible with
42 either of these communities.
43
44
45
46
26
.
.
.
"
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 Matt Stein · Christy Lane. Rossmoor
2 Mr. Stein presented several slides during his comments [On file in the Planning
3 Department for inspection]. He said he is against the proposed Bixby big box
4 retail center because:
5
6 CI Bixby is offering a retail center that is replicated at least nine
7 times within a 4 to 6 mile radius.
8
9 He showed a slide of a Thomas Bros. Map with circles drawn at
10 4 miles and 6 miles. Each of the 9 centers was represented
11 with a number. Seven are within 4 miles of the Bixby site:
12
13 1. Home Depot Center @ Westminster Blvd.lGolden West in Westminster;
14 2. Home Depot Center @ Cherry Ave./Willow in Long Beach;
15 3. Home Depot Center @ Studebaker/Pacific Coast Highway in Long
16 Beach (proposed);
17 4. Home Base Center @ Carson/Norwalk Blvd., in Hawaiian Gardens.
18 5. Home Base Center @ Chapman/Beach Blvd., Stanton
19 6. Ross Dress for Less Center @ Katella/Golden West in Cypress.
20 7. Long Beach Mall @ Carson/60S Fwy.
21 8. K-Mart Super Center@ Willow/Bellflower Blvd.
22 9. Ganahl Lumber & Hardware @ Los Alamitos Blvd, in Los Alamitos.
23
24 CI Bixby is offering a "destination oriented big box retail center"
25 that caters to regional needs, not local needs. By definition, this
26 is a center that draws from a 4 to 6 mile radius.
27
28 This project is proposing to draw from the cities of Los Alamitos, Buena Park,
29 La Palma, Cerritos, Artesia, Hawaiian Gardens, Garden Grove, Westminster,
30 Cypress, Stanton, Anaheim, Lakewood, Long Beach, Seal Beach and
31 Huntington Beach. What is going to be offered at the Bixby Center that is not
32 already offered closer to the residents of the cities that they intend to draw
33 rrom?
34
35 CI Bixby if offering a retail center that is in direct competition to the
36 existing Rossmoor Center.
37
38 The new retail center will compete directly with the Rossmoor Center. The
39 Rossmoor Center's General Manager has stated that the impacted
40 businesses comprise more than 50% of their gross leasable area. When
41 comparing the proposed uses one to one with the existing Rossmoor Center,
42 it is hard to understand how these centers will not be in direct competition
43 with one another.
44
45 CI Bixby is asking for a drastic zone change that is unprecedented.
46
47 Before the Planning Commission grants a zone change there is a desperate
48 need for a plan between the current Rossmoor Center and whatever you
49 finally decide to do with retail growth along Seal Beach Boulevard. If
50 Rossmoor Center owners upgrade their center, then another retail center
51 across the street is not needed. If the owners of Rossmoor Center decide
27
.
.
.
"
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 not to upgrade and go in another direction, then we may want to consider
2 new retail. With these uncertainties regarding the Rossmoor Center, it would
3 be best to wait to see before approving any new retail development.
4
5 0 Public opposition to the project is not adequately represented in
6 Attachment 11 of the staff report.
7
8 Staff Report, dated September 9, 1998, does not voice project opposition. Missing
9 from both the September 9th and September 21st is the detailed letter from the RHA's
10 letters. Staff chose to include form letter support a church use.
11
12 In closing, Mr. Stein said we don't need another big box retail center in this area,
13 we need to work out a plan for Seal Beach Boulevard that ties together all future
14 growth and he highly encouraged the Commission to listen to the public's
15 concerns.
16
17
18 Mike Joseph * Bridaeport, Seal Beach
19 Mr. Joseph said he is on the Board of Governors at the Old Ranch Country Club.
20 Their 500+ members of this club that are concerned about this project. They
21 would like to see the facility upgraded into a first class, world class golf course.
22 That would be good for Seal Beach.
23
24 Bixby Ranch Co. owns this land and they have the right to develop it. If we don't
25 come up with a plan, they will go ahead and develop their land. He heard these
26 same arguments in 1995 when everybody seemed to think nothing would happen
27 to this land. It was assumed it could be left alone, we'd just keep turning down
28 applications and Bixby won't do anything. That's not going to happen this time.
29 Therefore, it's up to the Planning Commission and to the other leaders in this
30 community to sit down and get the plan that's best for all of us.
31
32 Karen Schultz * Midwav Drive. Rossmoor
33 Ms. Schultz said she opposed this project, preferring the mixed-use plan.
34
35
36 Bob Urich * Board of Directors. Old Ranch Country Club
37 Mr. Urich supports the mixed-use plan and agreed with Mike Joseph's
38 comments. He supports the 500 members of the Old Ranch Country Club.
39
40
41 Susan Urich * Ironwood Drive. Seal Beach
42 Mrs. Urich said their house backs to Lampson Avenue. They are members of the
43 Old Ranch Country Club. She is the Women's Golf Coach at Long Beach State
44 University and serves on the women's committee for the United States Golf
45 Association. She said Bixby Ranch Co. has supported the community in many
46 ways, noting U.S. Amateur qualifier, the Women's Open qualifier, both men's and
47 women's golf teams and high school teams practice on this course. She is
48 thankful Bixby Ranch Co. has done this. She said Bixby has been working with
28
.
.
.
.
"
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 the community and they are trying their best to come forward with a plan.
2 Somewhere along the way the lines of communication are getting cut off. Where
3 is the communication breaking down? It's not with Bixby because they are doing
4 what they have been asked to do. They come up here, they present their project
5 and they get it shot down. She is beginning to think that the problem is stems
6 from the City of Seal Beach.
7
8
9 Ron Boudreau * Rossmoor
10 Mr. Boudreau spoke in opposition to this project, primarily basing his objections
11 to increased traffic. St. Cloud will open up and rush traffic through the heart of
12 Rossmoor. Vote no on commercial development and yes on a mixed-use plan.
13
14
15 Delores Sartain * Rossmoor
16 Ms. Sartain spoke in opposition to this plan and in favor of a mixed-use plan.
17 About 3% years ago she was handed a brochure with a nice picture of houses,
18 trees and lakes - this was supposed to be the development along Los Alamitos
19 Boulevard (sic) and across from Rossmoor Center. It seemed everybody liked
20 it. Two years later, she read in the newspaper the plan had changed to a
21 commercial project. This is when the opposition began to this plan.
22
23
24 Miles Standish * Ocean Avenue. Seal Beach
25 Mr. Standish said he favors other land uses such as a theater of the arts, an
26 equestrian center, senior centers, churches -- things that would bring beauty and
27 charm to the community. "I really feel this is like a horse and carriage town and
28 that's why I'm attracted to this town".
29
30
31 Barbara Ybaben * Colleae Park East. Seal Beach
32 Ms. Ybaben spoke on confusing comments from Councilperson Campbell, on her
33 opposition to the present project and on favoring a mixed-use plan.
34
35 Ms. Ybaben agreed with Mrs. Urich's comments, wondering if the City of Seal
36 Beach wasn't pulling shenanigans. The City told us that a mega church was
37 going to be built. Now we find out that the Cottonwood Christian Center has bid
38 for this space. It's not that we have anything against Cottonwood or any other
39 church - it's just the size and the magnitude that was scaring everyone. Also, a
40 Councilperson is now going around talking to people and saying there is not
41 going to be a church - that the base is going to close and that it's going to revert
42 back to Bixby Ranch Co. Why are our politicians telling lies? Our own
43 Councilwomen claims there was never any plan, there was no such thing. She
44 has confused and lied to our neighbors. As you can see, there are very few
45 College Park East neighbors here, it's mostly Rossmoor residents. Not only are
46 our people a little apathetic, they are totally confused and they are not here. She
29
.
.
.
..
t
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 urged the Planning Commissioners to please not penalize our neighborhood for a
2 few shortsighted and misguided people. We need what is best for our whole
3 community and that envelopes Rossmoor and Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Garden
4 Grove. She urged the Commission to work with Mr. Bradshaw and discuss the
5 mixed-use plan.
6
7
8 Eulalee Siler * Colleae Park East. Seal Beach
9 Ms. Siler spoke in favor of a mixed-use plan, on statements of Councilperson
10 Shawn Boyd regarding residential versus church uses and mis-information from
11 Councilperson Patty Campbell.
12
13 Ms. Siler said most of the good things have already been said about the mixed
14 use plan except for the fact that it has 31 acres of extensive course homes
15 behind Eucalyptus trees versus the Towne Center Plan which has 40 acres of
16 commercial in the same location. Also, the mixed-use plan has less traffic. This
17 is probably why the Hellman project in south Seal Beach will have only homes
18 and only 20,000 square feet of commercial development. We need to compare
19 that 20,000 square feet to the 567,00 square feet of commercial development
20 that this plan proposes... Also, the commercial plans would have 39,000 cars at
21 the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard/St. Cloud Dr. over a 24-hour period.
22 4,500 of those cars travel at rush hour. The Towne Center plan will add an
23 additional 14,000 cars to that 39,000 cars already there. The mixed-use plan will
24 only add an additional 5,000 cars.
25
26 Councilmember Shawn Boyd has been talking to Rossmoor residents, telling
27 them an alternate plan has been proposed for where the church is located. He
28 told those people that the City has taken out the church and there will be low to
29 moderate income housing. This isn't going to solve the traffic problems, even if
30 the church is removed, the traffic will still be 13,500 cars per day.
31
32 The residents north of the freeway prefer homes on the golf course. There are
33 2,200 signatures of residents who prefer residential. They think the 42-acre
34 Rossmoor Center is enough commercial. We don't need another 48 acres.
35
36 We have two current Council members who have been trying to change the
37 minds of College Park East and Rossmoor residents. They've been telling us
38 false stories and you've heard some of them this evening. They told us the
39 homes will close the AFRC. They told us the AFRC will revert to Bixby or
40 become a general aviation airport and the City will be sued when the planes
41 crash. Wouldn't the same stories be doubly true for the Bixby Towne Center
42 Plan since it places twice as many people in harm's way?
43
44 Other points to consider about the mixed use plan are it saves the Eucalyptus
45 trees, it gives 8 times more money to the school district, it will enhance our
46 property values, it permanently locks in the golf course and protects us against
30
.
.
.
..
.'
~
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 future development. It's been pointed out that the extra $300,000 to the City
2 each year is not enough to justify compromising our quality of life in north Seal
3 Beach. She requested the Planning Commission deny the commercial Bixby
4 Towne Center and to recommend to the City Council the previous mixed use
5 plan.
6
7
8 Scott Miller * Rossmoor
9 Mr. Miller spoke in opposition to this project and in favor of the mixed-use plan.
10 He said it's inappropriate for Bixby to come in and minimize what they're asking
11 for. A 3,400-seat church is not a buffer between a commercial facility and a
12 residential area. How will this commercial center going to help the Rossmoor
13 Center, Main Street merchants and local restaurants. The restaurant next to
14 Spaghetti's has been vacant for some time and adding two restaurants across
15 the street wouldn't help existing restaurants. The traffic issue is self-proving.
16 Why is it necessary to improve the 405 overpass? It's necessary because of the
17 increase in traffic. Where will the money come from? It will come from the fees
18 from this increased traffic. Regarding the cut-thru traffic in Rossmoor, this will
19 effect Seal Beach too, especially on Montecito and an elementary school.
20 Thousands of additional cars going by a highly populated elementary school
21 would substantially increase the risk of injury or worse to those children. The
22 numbers in the EIR are highly suspect. Who is support his plan? Not Rossmoor
23 residents. It must then be supported by the local residents of Seal Beach -
24 except we haven't heard them testify tonight. This project would an inappropriate
25 use of this facility and the mixed-use plan would be much better.
26
27
28 Brian Gibbons * Century National Property & Manaaer. Rossmoor Center
29 Mr. Gibbons said he has taken no position on the commercial project or the
30 mixed-use project. Something needs to be done with the property.
31
32 Regarding economic issues, Mr. Gibbons said impacts to the Rossmoor Center
33 are a complex issue. Century National Property purchased the Rossmoor Center
34 in 1983. Since that time they have had three architectural firms study their
35 property. Rossmoor Center has existed since the 1960's. It has paid more to
36 this city in real estate taxes, sales tax revenues, Mello Roos fees to the school
37 districts than any other entity. If the owners wanted to develop Rossmoor Center
38 to its highest and best use he didn't believe the residents would support it. The
39 architectural studies showed he could add 100,000 to 115,00 square feet more of
40 building area; we have almost 40 acres of land. The question he had is, is this a
41 forum to discuss the economic impacts outside of what's addressed in the EIR?
42
43 Chairman Brown said the Commission is not allowed to answer questions.
44
45 Mr. Gibbons said expects it isn't because he has made two written responses to
46 each of the EIR's that have come out and he has not addressed the economic
31
.
.
.
..
"
.
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
1 issues. He has asked Lee Whittenberg to advise him at the time it's appropriate
2 but he has not heart anything yet.
3
4 Mr. Gibbons expressed concern re median divider impacts. The median divider
5 along Seal Beach Boulevard, which allows shoppers to come into the Rossmoor
6 Center, has been closed off. There is no thru access into the Rossmoor Center
7 except at Rossmoor Center Way/St. Cloud Dr. His letter asked the consultants to
8 look at this. Their response is that no driveways would be closed on our side of
9 the street. The median definitely has an impact on current or.future development
10 of the Rossmoor Center.
11
12 Regarding square footage and traffic issues, he looks at it differently. If the
13 commercial, as is shown, is built across the street and the additional traffic that
14 will be generated as it has been put forth in the traffic studies --- I understand
15 technically they don't have to consider that and they haven't. However
16 everybody seems to say they want Rossmoor Center to be redeveloped, we want
17 more, something greater than is there. I've asked you to consider in your
18 planning process the impact of adding the additional square footage and the
19 traffic would be associated with it. So that when the time comes and we're able
20 to expand I won't be shortchanged. My property is zoned to do that right now. If
21 later I come down and say we're ready to expand, we've got our tenants in
22 position, I don't want to hear that you can't do that now, we've given that traffic
23 allotment to Bixby because technically you didn't file your plans when we did our
24 report. He would like the Planning Commission to address this issue if this goes
25 to the City Council.
26
27 His recommendations were that the median design is not left to the Engineering
28 Department after this approval process and, the median assures the Rossmoor
29 Center has access through it.
30
31 He would like staff to consider if the EIR process, if it does not already consider
32 it, the Impact on the future expansion opportunities of Rossmoor Center and
33 those traffic impacts.
34
35 Mr. Gibbons said he looked at the commercial project's financial projections as
36 put forth by the RSG group. He took issue with them because the comments
37 they made could not be backed up by any financial studies he could find to back
38 them up. There would be a great economic effect on the Rossmoor Center
39 merchants. For example, Lucky market has already met with him and expressed
40 their interest to move across the street but their leases won't let them. Another
41 supermarket will go there. He took issue with the fact that two markets can
42 coexist. The problem at the Rossmoor Center is it has long term leases, which
43 have been in place for quite awhile. They do not permit us to build out in front of
44 those buildings as they exist to Seal Beach Boulevard. We've got a tremendous
45 underground network of public utilities and storm drain systems. Its not like they
46 can wave a magic wand and say we could redevelop the shopping center. I'd
32
~~
"
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Minutes of October 21, 1998
-
. 1 love to build something like that now. If the commercial project is built it will
2 definitely affect the type of tenant mix we have at the Rossmoor Center. In order
3 to compete, we would have to reposition the big box retail uses, pushing them
4 back, closer to the residences that are there right now. But he didn't think that's
5 what the community wants and that wasn't what their long-range plan was. But
6 when you look at competing and being able to keep the tenants we have
7 consider what we can do to survive and protect the investment we have. As far
8 as the technical aspects addressed in the EIR, I've made to comments on those.
9 The economics, he assumed, was not the forum here tonight because he hasn't
10 seen it addressed. He'd be surprised if the Planning Commission could make an
11 informed decision based on the economics, as it would affect the Rossmoor
12 Center and the community.
13
14 Chairman Brown asked if anyone else wished to speak? Nobody came forward.
15 He noted it was 11 :30 p.m. and time for the applicant to rebut. Or the Public
16 Hearing could be continued to November 4th.
17
18 Mr. Steele said that issue is up to the Commission. They could continue to
19 Public Hearing and take no public testimony but for applicant's rebuttal and staff
20 responses only.
21
. 22 Commissioner Hood suggested it be continued, as everyone is tired tonight.
23 There has been a lot to absorb. Others may wish to speak more on November
24 4th. There is no way to conclude this matter in 25 minutes.
25
26 Chairman Brown said the issue is whether the Commission wants to continue the
27 Public Hearing or to allow the applicants to rebut and close the Public Hearing.
28
29 Commissioner Larson said nothing could be decided at this time but, on the other
30 hand, did the Commission want to take an additional four hours of public
31 testimony?
32
33 Commissioner Lyon said he would like to read the material first, before he makes
34 a decision.
35
36 Commissioner Cutuli said he would like to hear the applicant's rebuttal but not
37 close the Public Hearing to discussion. The Commission could hear a few
38 additional, discreet speakers.
39
40 Chairman Brown asked Mr. Bradshaw if he wants to rebut tonight or November
41 4th?
42
43 Mr. Bradshaw said it would be nice to get this process over with. However, the
. 44 fact of the matter is, if the public hearing is to continue their rebuttal and ability to
45 respond would be better to come back on November 4th.
46
33
.
.
.
,~
...
~\
City of Seal Beach Planning Commission * Minutes of October 21, 1998
Mr. Steele said if it's the Commission's decision to take public testimony at the
November 4th meeting, it should allow the applicant to rebut those comments
also.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 ~
23 Qoa-. )
24 Joan Fillmann
25 Planning Department
26
27
28
29
30
Mr. Whittenberg said there are a number of study session items for the
Commission to work on but these are best postponed until the Planning
Department hires an Associate Planner to prepare the studies. The only item on
the November 4th calendar is the Marriott application for the senior care facility.
MOTION by Hood; SECOND by Cutuli to continue the Public Hearing on the
Bixby Old Ranch Towne Center to November 4, 1998.
MOTION CARRIED:
AYES:
5-0
Brown, Cutuli, Hood, Larson, Lyon
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Brown adjourned the meeting at 11 :45 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
----~
---
APPROVAL: The Planning Commission Minutes of October 21, 1998 were
approved by the Commission on November ...1-, 1998. ~
34