Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 2003-06-18 . . . CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA for June 18, 2003 7:30 p.m. District 1 - Ellery Deaton District 2 - Jim Sharp District 3 - Gordon Shanks District 4 - David Hood District 5 - Phil Ladner Department of Development Services Lee Whittenberg, Director Alexander Abbe, Assistant City Attorney Mac Cummins, Associate Planner Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secretary l:I City Hall office hours are 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday and Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Closed noon to 1 :00 p.m. l:I The City of Seal Beach complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you need assistance to attend this meeting please telephone the City Clerk's Office at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting (562) 431-2527. l:I Planning Commission meetings are broadcast live on Seal Beach TV3. They are rebroadcast on Sunday evenings, Channel 3 at 4.00 p.m. l:I Videotapes of Planning Commission meetings may be purchased from Seal Beach TV3 at a cost of $20 per tape. Telephone: (562) 596-1404. l:I Copies of staff reports and/or written materials on each agenda item are on file in the Department of Development Services and City libraries for public inspection 1 . . . Cdy of Seal Beach Planmng Commission · Agenda of June 18, 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET The following is a brief explanation of the Planning Commission agenda structure: AGENDA APPROVAL: The Planning Commission may wish to change the order of the items on the agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, only on items not on tonight's agenda, may do so during this time period. No action can be taken by the Planning Commission on these communications on this date, unless agendized. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: Public Hearings allow citizens the opportunity to speak in favor of or against agendized items. More detailed information is found in the actual agenda attached. If you have documents to distribute, you should have enough copies for all Planning Commissioners, City staff and the public. Please give one to the secretary for the City files. The documents become part of the public record and will not be returned. CONSENT CALENDAR: Consent Calendar items are considered routine items that normally do not require separate consideration. The Planning Commission may make one motion for approval of all the items listed on the Consent Calendar. SCHEDULED MA TIERS: These items are considered by the Planning Commission separately and require separate motions. These transactions are considered administrative and public testimony is not heard. STAFF CONCERNS: Updates and reports from the Director of Development Services (Planning and Building Departments) are presented for information to the Planning Commission and the public. COMMISSION CONCERNS: Items of concern are presented by the Planning Commissioners and discussed with staff. All Droceedinas are recorded. 2 . . . City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Agenda for June 18, 2003 7:30 p.m. 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 June 4, 2003 2 Minor Plan Review 03-9 42 Rlversea Road AppllcanVOwner Request Frank BoychucklLlNC Housing LLC Architectural Review of a new 2-story cabana The projected structure Will provide a total of 1,081 square feet of living area Recommendation Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 03-22 (Continued from June 4, 2003 ) 3 Minor Plan Review 03-10 48 Rlversea Road AppllcanVOwner. Request Edward & LOri Welz Architectural Review of a new 2-story cabana The projected structure Will provide a total of 1 ,640 square feet of living area. Recommendation Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 03-23 VI SCHEDULED MATTERS 3 . . . City of Seal Beach Planmng Commission · Agenda of June 18, 2003 VII PUBLIC HEARINGS 4 Review of Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (BIDS) Specific Plan Seal Beach Boulevard and Westminster Avenue ApphcanUOwner Request Recommendation VIII STAFF CONCERNS IX COMMISSION CONCERNS X ADJOURNMENT Boeing Realty Corporation Amend the Land Use, Open Space/Recreation/Conservation, Housing, and Circulation Elements of the General Plan, adopt the Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (BIDS) Specific Plan, amend the ZOning Map, and adopt a Precise Plan to accommodate the proposed land uses descnbed In the Staff Report, and approve a vesting tentative tract map The BIDS Specific Plan proposes a mixed-use business park on 107 acres consisting of a vanety of commercial/retail, hotel, restaurant, and business park uses. Recommend approval of subject requests to City Council with any amendments determined appropnate and adoption of Resolutions 03-25, 03-26,03-27, and 03-28 (Continued from June 4,2003 ) 4 . . . July9 July 23 Aug 6 Aug 20 Sept 3 Sept 17 OctS Oct 22 Nav5 Nav 19 Dee 3 Dee 17 TO BE SCHEDULED: [J Study Session. [J Staff Report [J Study Session [J Study Session' City of Seal Beach Planning Commission · Agenda of June 18, 2003 2003 Aaenda Forecast Height Vanatlon 03-4 - 894 Surf side Permitted Uses and Development Standards In Commercial Zones (5/6/98) Undergroundlng of Utilities ADA Handicapped-Accessible Restrooms Parking Issues In Old Town 5 ~ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 t 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 June 18, 2003 Chairperson Hood called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Planmng Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 18, 2003. The meeting was held In the City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag 1 ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Hood, Commissioners Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp Also Present. Department of Development Services Lee Whittenberg, Director Alexander Abbe, Assistant City Attorney Mac Cummins, Associate Planner Absent None. AGENDA APPROVAL Mr. Whittenberg recommended that Item No.2, Minor Plan Review 03-9 be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion. He noted that a copy of a letter received regarding thiS item has been provided to each of the Planning Commissioners. Commissioner Deaton requested that Item No.1, the Planmng Commission (PC) minutes of June 4, 2003, be removed from the Consent Calendar. MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Shanks to approve the Agenda as amended. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp None None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairperson Hood opened oral communications 1 These Minutes were transcribed from audiotape of the meeting Page 1 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Meeting Minutes of June 18, 2003 There being no one wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood closed oral communicatIons CONSENT CALENDAR 3. Minor Plan Review 03-10 48 Rlversea Road Applicant/Owner Request: Recommendation: Edward & Lori Welz Architectural Review of a new 2-story cabana. The projected structure will provide a total of 1,640 square feet of living area Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 03-23. MOTION by Deaton, SECOND by Shanks to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp None None 1. Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 4, 2003. CommiSSioner Deaton stated that as she remembered, at the PC meeting of June 4, 2002 the CommiSSion had made a motion and voted to require that all Minor Plan Review (MPR) for the Boeing Project come before the PC. Mr. Whittenberg stated that thiS was proposed more as a Commission directive to Staff regarding the resolutions that are to be presented tOnight, but he did not recall a motion being made to this effect. For the benefit of those members of the public who were waiting to speak, Commissioner Shanks noted that Item No.3, Minor Plan Review 03-10 had already been approved MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Shanks to approve the Minutes of June 4, 2003, as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp None None Page 2 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Mr. Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No 03-23 begins a 10-day calendar appeal penod to the City CouncIl. The Commissioner action tomght IS final and the appeal penod begins tomorrow morning. 2 Minor Plan Review 03-9 42 Riversea Road Applicant/Owner Request: Frank BoychucklLlNC Housing LLC Architectural Review of a new 2-story cabana. The projected structure will provide a total of 1,081 square feet of living area Recommendation: Approval subject to conditions and adoption of Resolution 03-22 (Continued from June 4,2003.) Staff Report Mr Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report IS on file for inspection In the Planning Department) He provided some background Information on this item and noted that this item was continued due to an insufficient notice period and that the item had been re-noticed He said that the structure as proposed complies with all of the Title 25 setback requirements and with City distance separation standards. He noted for the record that the letter received is from Penm Peddicord, whose residence IS on the adjoining property. He Indicated that most of the concerns presented In Ms. Peddicord's letter deal with issues not related to PC consideration or approval. He noted that some of the concerns deal with process issues with the City's housing consultant, which IS a separate matter, and a number of questions are also raised with regard to the level of detail of the plans presented He stated that the level of detail of plans that the PC reviews are basic site plans, floor plans, and elevations, and are not construction level drawings of a project. He Indicated that the plans provided in the agenda packet are generally in conformance with what is usually presented for other construction projects or for 2-story cabanas within the City. He said that Staff recommends approval of the application as submitted, subject to conditions. Commissioner Questions Commissioner Deaton asked If an applicant is required to hire a licensed architect? Mr. Whittenberg said that this is not necessarily true. He noted that there are certain types of engineers that are licensed to do construction drawings, so an applicant could hire either a licensed architect or an engineer. Commissioner Deaton then asked about the comment that the bathroom does not meet BUilding Code requirements. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this IS an issue that IS reviewed through the Plan Check Process. He explained that what the PC IS reviewing is the location of the project on the property, setbacks, and architectural design He said that compliance of the Interior of the project to Code is a BUilding Plan Check function Page 3 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 i 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 , City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Commissioner Shanks asked if the existing trailer is to be removed. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the applicant has the option of keeping the floor of the existing trailer and remodeling from the floor up, or now under State law you can physically remove the entire Unit and replace it with a manufactured home. Public Hearina Chairperson Hood opened the public hearing. Mr. Frank Boychuck said he has been a resident of the Seal Beach Trailer Park (SBTP) since approximately 1980 and the size of his current home is approximately 8 ft. x 25 ft., which leaves him approximately 200 sq. feet of living space. He said he is excited about being able to build a more suitable and larger residence. He stated that the SBTP has approximately thirty 2-story cabanas, built primarily from the travel trailer on up. He thanked the City of Seal Beach and noted that the PC decisions up to this date have approved most of the 2-story cabanas. He said his intent is to comply with all requirements for completion of this project. Ms. Penni Peddicord stated that she lives next door to the applicant. She said the week of May 5, 2003, Civicstone told her that she would have to get her own licensed architect to prepare her plans for a second story addition, and her plans would have to be approved by the City prior to issuance of any permits. She indicated that Mr. Boychuck has also applied through the Civicstone program and should be required to follow the same guidelines. She stated that Mr. Boychuck's plans had many errors and missing information and he should not be approved for any permits until these errors are corrected. She said the Director of Development Services told her that he has had these plans for several years, so they should have no errors on them. She said that she feels she is being discriminated against, as Mr. Boychuck is not required to fulfill the same requirements. Ms. Peddicord proceeded to review the concerns as outlined in her letter to the PC accompanied by photographs she had provided to the Commissioners. She Indicated that the applicant plans to construct a wooden deck within the 3-foot setback area from the retaining wall and she is concerned about this becoming a fire hazard and with the potential affects of a major earthquake. She stated that the comer of the retaining wall near Mr. Boychuck's home is falling down and must be repaired by the City before any construction on this property takes place. Ms. Peddicord then noted that a 17 -inch drainpipe that runs from the SBTP into the pump station is located within Mr. Boychuck's 3-foot setback from the lot line, leaving approximately 18 inches for the house. She questioned what impact the weight of the house would have upon the drainpipe. She noted that when the drainpipe is not working there is flooding in that section of town. She said that the plans show the foundation sitting on top of the street- level retaining wall and they also show a 3-foot setback that is on the street and not on the property. Ms. Peddicord then stated that there is not sufficient space to accommodate the utility meter. She said she would like to see Mr. Boychuck get hiS new home, but there are many problems that must be resolved. She reiterated that the same strict regulations should apply to both her project and his; otherwise there is gross discrimination occurring. Page 4 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Ms. Pat McCormick said she has lived in the SBTP since 1984. She said she loves living in the park and conveyed her thanks to Staff and the City for making It possible for residents to remain In the trailer park She expressed her support of Mr. Boychuck's application. She said it is wonderful to see all of the bUilding going on In the park as It makes the trailer park better for everyone Mr. Bob Latta stated It was nice of Ms Peddicord to worry about Mr Whittenberg's job He said that the position of Director of Development Services should be eliminated from the City payroll He said he has very little faith in Mr. Whittenberg. Ms. Linda Copeland spoke In support of Ms Peddicord's statements about safety regulations regarding Mr. Boychuck's project. She said she is concerned about how the drainpipe SitS under the applicant's property and the flooding that can occur. She indicated that residents have been told that the pump station IS to be replaced and the drainpipe worked on. She said she does not see how permits can be Issued to Mr. Boychuck until the issues with the drainpipe and the pump station are resolved Ms. Renee Ruchon of 41 Riversea Road said she has lived In the SBTP for 33 years and currently lives next door to Mr. Boychuck. She said she feels very positive about the Improvements taking place In the park and she is hopeful that Ms. Peddicord will be able to bUild on her lot. She said she also applied through Clvicstone and was not told of the requirements that Ms. Peddicord reported. She recommended approval. Ms. Rita Brenner said she agreed With Ms. Peddicord and Ms Copeland regarding the safety Issue. She stated that there is already a lot of damage to the park as far as electrical and water, and she was hoping that the issue of the drainpipe could be corrected prior to bUilding She said she is happy about the improvements to the park. She noted that she IS concerned about equality and feels there has been a discrepancy as far as permission and loans and information are concerned. She stated that this Issue should go back before the Redevelopment Agency and City Council (CC) for further review. Ms. Joyce Parque stated that these projects should not be approved Without a deed restriction. She noted that 62% of Redevelopment Agency funds should go to families with children. She said that only the families living Within the SBTP were notified of the availability of funds, and all residents of the City should have received this notice. Mr Glenn Clarke spoke in support of Minor Plan Review 03-9 He said he sees nothing wrong With the plans, and the Director of Development Services has done an excellent job In revieWing the plans. He said that Redevelopment Agency funding should not be a factor in the deliberations at all. He said Mr Boychuck is not asking for anything different than what has already been built In the trailer park by other residents He recommended approval. Mr. Paul Jeffers said Mr. Boychuck's plans are fine and he would like to see him build hiS project. He noted that Mr Boychuck sat on the Board of the Seal Beach Resident Page 5 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Owner's Association (SBROA) and is on the board of L1NC Housing, and this is why people are speaking out about this project. He commented that although Mr Boychuck is on the board for L1NC Housing he has not reported back to the present SBROA for 2 years regarding these loans, and the board would like to hear from him on thiS. He said that thiS IS why these residents would like to see thiS application go back before the Redevelopment Agency and CC to see If there IS any partiality In the way the loans are dlstnbuted and how projects are approved so that all the infighting can stop. He Indicated that apparently Mr. Boychuck was married to Ms Renee Ruchon, and there IS some question as to whether they are stili married as residents can only own one property Within the trailer park. He reported that In 2001 when Mr Boychuck sat on the board, another resident had wanted to build and was told that he had to get the approval of SBROA, and have Mr. Boychuck sign his approval and it was also necessary to have the project approved by L1NC Housing Mr Jeffers stated that Mr. Boychuck has not come to the SBROA to have hiS project approved. He said that the process must be fair for all residents of the park. Ms Penm Peddicord referred to the document mentioned by Mr. Jeffers and stated that Mr. Hunter Johnson of L1NC Housing did not approve for a cabana, but approved for Improvements to mobile homes only on the Owner's Affidavit. She noted that Mr. Whittenberg had failed to mention thiS. Mr. Charles Gillard, a resident of Leisure World, stated that he is a licensed contractor and is retired as a bUilder/developer. He said that he IS not an architect, but for 29 years he designed all of the umts that he constructed. He said that State law requires that If a bUilder deSigns hiS own plans, he must have a structural engineer sign off on the plans. He said that many homeowners are under a lot of misconceptions regarding what IS reqUired, even when they are given the appropriate Information. Ms. Patricia Clark said she endorses the project She stated that Mr. Boychuck was on the onglnal SBROA and worked very hard to get Richard Hall out of the trailer park She said she would always be grateful for this. She commented that It appears that many of the trailer park residents have forgotten what the Situation was in 1999 when Mr. Hall owned the park. She said had It not been for the onglnal board, the City, Redevelopment Agency, the State, and bond Investors, the residents would not be standing here tonight. She noted that because of the board's hard work and perseverance she IS able to stand before the PC tomght and ask that a long time trailer park resident be allowed to bUild a 2-story cabana. She said that thiS has been allowed for the homes along the greenbelt, which are the smaller spaces In the park. She noted that there probably isn't a mobile home bUilt that would fit on the L-shaped lot where Mr. Boychuck lives She said approving thiS application would not only improve the applicant's quality of life, but would also Improve the overall aesthetic of the park She recommended approval of MPR 03-9. Mr. Mike Berry commented, "What a difference two weeks makes." He said that two weeks ago everyone spoke in favor of a similar project. He stated that the Civlcstone program IS made available through the City of Seal Beach and not through L1NC Page 6 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Housing He spoke In favor of MPR 03-9 and stated that Mr Boychuck had put a lot of hard work Into the SBTP acquisition and 200 square feet IS a very small space for living. Mr Frank Boychuck provided a bnef visual presentation to the Commission in which he displayed slides of several of the 2-story cabanas that have been constructed in the trailer park He said that 90% of these projects began with small travel trailers similar to the one In which he resides and were totally demolished with part of it then buned underground to accommodate the cabanas. He noted that the cabanas have been allowed in the park for the last 20 years. He stated that Clvlcstone simply administers the City's redevelopment funds and they have not told any of the residents what they need to do He then reported that although the retaining wall does have a few cracks In It, the City would repair them He stated that Terry Atkinson who drew the concept plans for this project has been a licensed architect for 25 years. He noted that the SBTP Resident Owners Board was a grass roots effort to free the park from Rich Hall and was Instrumental In providing some stability for the trailer park for the next 30-55 years. He noted that because the Issue of equality was introduced, he had to ask why he was singled out tonight when another similar project was passed without being removed from the agenda for discussion. He clanfled that he has no Intention of beginning to bUild within 4 days, as was mentioned earlier. He said that his plans had been submitted years before he participated on any board related to the SBTP He commented that he could not comprehend how people could make statements Without checking the facts first. He emphaSized that it was never a requirement for residents wanting to bUild have to bnng their project before the SBROA for approval He extended hiS appreciation to the Director of Development Services and his staff for their assistance In processing hiS application. There being no one else Wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood closed the public heanng. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Shanks stated that he received two telephone calls in favor of approving this project He said that finanCing IS not within the purview of the PC, and If anyone has any complaints they should present them to the Redevelopment Agency He noted the PC already approved one of these projects tonight, and approved another at the last PC meeting. He said that after looking at all of the Information, he sees no reason to not approve MPR 03-9. He commented that he was chairman of the relocation committee when the trailer park was relocated from the old site in 1979. Commissioner Sharp commented that whether someone receives approval on a project or not is not a matter of populanty. He noted that in the 16-17 years he has served on the PC, he cannot remember stalling or turning down an application for a 2-story cabana in the trailer park and he sees no reason why this one should not be granted Commissioner Deaton asked the Director of Development Services if there has ever been any discrepancy between one neighbor over another In the way that the permit process has been conducted. Mr Whittenberg reported that there has not been any Page 7 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 , City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 1 B, 2003 discrepancy. He said that Staff has discussed with Ms Peddicord what she understood she was told to do by Clvlcstone, and he believes there IS Just a disagreement there He said that the Staffs position IS that when an application IS filed for presentation before the PC, the applicant should talk with Planning Department Staff and not with Clvicstone, as they process only the loan application and have nothing to do with plan approvals Commissioner Deaton asked If one neighbor bUilding up would keep another neighbor from dOing so Mr. Whittenberg stated that under the current standards It does have this Impact because of the current separation distance requirement of 20 feet between 2-story cabanas. He said that the Redevelopment Agency and CC have Instructed Staff to look at modifying these standards for the mobile homes that are located within the greenbelt area, and specifically for Mr. Boychuck's and Ms. Peddicord's spaces, to eliminate the 20-foot separation and allow a 3-foot setback from the lot line, which is generally what IS seen in Old Town from the property line to a structure He stated that Staff IS commencing to prepare the reports that will eventually come before the PC and CC to amend that particular provision of the Zoning Ordinance. MOTION by Shanks; SECOND by Sharp to approve Minor Plan Review 03-9, subject to conditions, and adopt Resolution No. 03-22. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp None None Mr Abbe advised that the adoption of Resolution No. 03-22 begins a 10-day calendar appeal penod to the City CouncIl. The Commissioner action tonight is final and the appeal period begins tomorrow morning. Chairperson Hood called for a short recess The Commission recessed at 8'30 p m. The Commission reconvened at 8:35 p.m. SCHEDULED MATTERS None. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4 Review of Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (BIDS) Specific Plan Seal Beach Boulevard and Westminster Avenue Applicant/Owner: Boeing Realty Corporation Page 8 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Request Amend the Land Use, Open Space/Recreation/ Conservation, Housing, and Circulation Elements of the General Plan, adopt the Boeing Integrated Defense Systems (BIDS) Specific Plan, amend the Zoning Map, and adopt a Precise Plan to accommodate the proposed land uses descnbed In the Staff Report, and approve a vesting tentative tract map. The BIDS Specific Plan proposes a mixed-use business park on 107 acres consisting of a vanety of commercial/retail, hotel, restaurant, and business park uses Recommendation: Recommend approval of subject requests to City Council with any amendments determined appropnate and adoption of Resolutions 03-25, 03-26, 03-27, and 03-28 (Continued from June 4,2003.) Staff Report Mr Cummins delivered the staff report. (Staff Report IS on file for Inspection in the Plannrng Department.) He provided a bnef summary of the previous proceedings related to this project and Indicated that Staff has prepared the draft resolutions for the proposed General Plan (GP) and Zone Text Amendments (ZTA) for adoption of the proposed Specific Plan (SP) and these are included in the agenda packet He stated that tonight the PC would review the Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) and the proposed Precise Plan (PP), which under the SP is required to make sure that the proposed development would be in accordance with the SP. Vesting TentatIve Tract Map (VTTM): Using a visual presentation he briefly descnbed the project site with ItS four Planning Areas He then explained that the California Legislature passed the SubdivIsion Map Act, which regulates Tentative Tract Maps (TIM) and how a property owner may subdivide a large portion of land Into smaller parcels. He said that this allows a developer to apply for Vested Rights, which Impose specific development nghts at the time of application In case a city should subsequently change ItS zoning or development standards He stated that In this case the developer is requesting this right and t~e proposal before the PC tonrght is a VTTM as opposed to a TIM. He said that this process allows cities to place conditions of approval on the TIM, which ensure that the city gets the necessary public Infrastructure (roads, sewers, water lines) and other public needs addressed through the TIM process. He reported that the number assigned to this VTTM IS 16375 and It proposes to split the one large parcel Into 20 smaller parcels, and 3 non-buildable lettered lots, which would be located along the rear portion of the property where the water quality basins were to be located and another lot near Seal Beach Boulevard (SBB). He indicated that each of the lots is less than 10 acres, except for the eXisting Boeing core campus area He noted that this IS Important Page 9 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 because under the proposed SP there are different standards relating to the height and bulk of the allowable bUildings on a lot If it is larger than 10 acres Mr Cummins explained that when the application for VTTM 16375 was first made Staff drafted a number of the conditions that appear In the draft resolutions. He said there are a standard set of engineering conditions and a number of specific conditions proposed by City Staff, which he outlined as follows 1 Due to the City's current and future financial forecast, Staff has looked at a number of mechamsms to help fund long-range maintenance of roads, landscaping, sewers, etc. 2 Incorporated language on compliance with water quality NPDES requirements and a proposed condition for dealing with the flooding along SBB dunng a heavy rainstorm. 3 Provide new landscaping along Westminster Avenue and an altogether new median along SBB with installation of sidewalks where none currently exist on Westminster Avenue along the north end of the existing Boeing campus and along Planning Area 3 (PA3), should it be developed 4. Install three (3) new traffic signals to be constructed at both main entrances to the project on Apollo Dnve at Westminster Avenue and SBB, and also at SBB and Adolfo Lopez Dnve. 5 Provide signal upgrades at the remaining signalized intersections that front the Boeing property to allow for better timing of the signals to enhance traffic flow. 6. Install deceleration lanes on SBB and Westminster Avenue 7. Two of the existing buildings extend beyond the proposed property line and under State law the City would not allow this with new construction, however, there are provIsions that allow subdivision of land and placement of a property line under an eXisting building Staff proposes that any buildings that straddle the newly divided property line must be demolished before two separate lots can be sold to separate owners. Mr. Cummins noted that In working through these conditions with the applicant team, there were several areas of disagreement regarding policy, with no consensus reached on the final conditions of approval. He reviewed these areas as follows. 1. The Future of Apollo Dnve - Concerns that Boeing campus would be split In two with the new road, and some line of sight satellite Issues, with satellites on top of buildings in PA2 that convey information to buildings in PA 1 Staff worked on internal circulation Issues for the project assuming that if the bUildings In PA2 were to be demolished, there could be a full cut-through road between Westminster Avenue and SBB, and conditioned the approval so that If PA2 IS bUilt out, this would be when The Boeing Company would constructed Apollo Dnve. The Boeing Team, citing security concerns related to the existing Boeing buildings, feels that they should have sole discretion to determine whether or not Apollo Dnve would be constructed. 2 City policy has always been to require that all non-66Kv transmiSSion lines such as cable and telephone lines be undergrounded. The Boeing Team feels that since Page 10 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 the 66Kv lines that run along Westminster Avenue and onto the property need to remain above ground, any additional lines should be able to remain above ground Undergroundlng of these types of lines were conditions of both the Hellman and Bixby projects 3 The Boeing Team would like to have the conditions of approval on the VTTM apply only to PA 1 after some threshold of new development has occurred on that site. Staff proposes that all condItIons should apply to any new construction. At a minimum the existing bUilding should have the ADA, water quality, and public safety conditions apply. 4 Timing In construction of medians and landscapIng along SBB and Westminster Avenue. Staff proposes that these improvements be constructed With the issuance of the first bUilding permit anywhere on the project, With the applicant responsible for long-term maintenance of landscaping Within that median. The Boeing Team proposes that these medians, sidewalks, or landscaping should only be constructed in front of areas where final maps are proposed or some sort of development occurs. As Staff views the phaSing of the project, there are several areas that mayor may not ever have development In that particular planning area, and as such, there would be no landscaping or construction of medians or sidewalks. 5. TraffiC signal upgrades and timing synchronization. The Boeing Team feels that Signals should be upgraded only as development occurs In PA 1 or PA4. 6 Staff proposes that the drainage issue along SBB be addressed as soon as possible The Boeing Team proposes that thIS issue be addressed when development in PA4 takes place. Staff had requested that a feasibility study for this repair be done, but the report was not provided. 7 Deceleration lanes, specifically at Adolfo Lopez Drive and SBB Staff believes that this lane should be provided on southbound SBB turning right onto Adolfo Lopez Drive. The Boeing Team feels that thIS lane IS not needed. 8. Landscape Improvements to the frontage along Westminster Avenue to include a typical subdivIsion condition that any dying trees be replaced In kind to maintain umform landscaping. The Boeing Team feels that these types of Improvements should not be required Precise Plan (PP): Mr Cummins stated that a PP was submItted for PA2 and PA3, and under the proVISions of the proposed SP the PP must Include a deSCription of all of the lot areas, proposed bUilding square footages, architectural detail, different types of sign programs, landscape plans, etc. He noted that Boeing has submitted quite a bit of detail related to these proposed development areas. He said that the lot configurations, If approved as ' proposed, are In compliance with the VTTM and the SP, and all of the proposed buildings would meet currently proposed setback and height restrictions and required parking proVISions He indicated that the buildings would be light beige concrete tilt-up buildings WIth some design features added. He noted that there were some proposed projections that would extend beyond the height limit, and in accordance With direction Page 11 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 I 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 from PC, Staff has drafted a SP resolution recommending that CC require PC approval on these types of architectural features. The Associate Planner reported that with regard to the Sign Program, free-standing garden walls are proposed for the east side of the project entry He referred to the rendenngs for these walls and noted that they would be 4 feet high x 25 feet long walls that curve around the main entrances to the project He Indicated that the center I D. sign would be a freestanding 4-foot high x 8-foot long monument sign at Westminster Avenue. He said that each business would be permitted a uniform 7-foot high (or 49 square foot) sign at the major entrance to the bUilding, With directional signs and business directory signs also provIded He Indicated that temporary signage would also be allowed during the construction phases to advertise space for sale or lease. He said that wall signs would be allowed at 1 per tenant and a maximum of 2 per bUilding elevation He noted that a separate landscape plan has been submitted for each bUilding lot. He stated that the public area planting proposes extensive use of 24- and 36-lnch, box trees, and 60-lnch coral and fig trees along each of the Apollo Dnve entrances He explained that Staff did provide additional conditions on the PP approval from what was originally submitted by the developer as listed below: 1. Trash compactors should be located Inside the building or In close proximity to the dock area. 2 Some of the dnveway width should be reduced to make It apparent where truck traffiC should and should not go. 3. Provide solid landscape planters or buffers along the length of parking lots rather than the proposed diamond-shaped planters. Mr. Cummins then outlined the options available to the PC at this point as follows' ~ Recommend to CC that project and the SP be adopted With conditions as proposed by Staff and adopt all of the draft resolutions as presented. ~ Modify conditions or sequencing of conditions. ~ Recommend to CC that the project and the SP not be adopted. Commissioner Questions Chairperson Hood stated that before the PC voted on the EIR they had asked Staff If the EIR was tied to anything else, and the response was that it was not. He noted that some of the documentation appears to imply that if something is not mentioned In the EIR It cannot be conditioned. Mr. Whittenberg stated that in the opinion of Staff and the City Attorney's office the conditions for Implementation of the VTTM and the PP as proposed by Staff are appropnate conditions under the provisions of State law He said that there are mitigation measures in the EIR that are In some cases incorporated Into those land use approvals, but additional project-specific conditions can also be added as part of a subdivIsion map or a PP approval for issues that may not have been directly Page 12 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 evaluated or discussed In the EIR. He noted that an EIR document is an evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project and the decision of whether the document adequately addresses those impacts does not preclude either the PC or the CC from making a decision to either approve or deny He noted for the record that Staff delivered to the Planning Commissioners a packet from Boeing Realty Corporation dated June 16, 2003, that outlines Boeing's posItion on the Items addressed by the Associate Planner. Commissioner Deaton asked if the EIR IS a finished document or if CC has yet to act on It. Mr Whittenberg responded that the document requires certification from CC and this action has not taken place. Commissioner Deaton then referred to the document from Boeing with the responses to the Staff Memorandum and noted that she was troubled by the section on undergroundlng of eXisting electncal lines and the fact that Boeing states that the EIR gave no indication of an aesthetic problem. She said that she believes the City just assumed that should any development take place, the same development processes would take place on this site as would at any other development site within the City. She said she IS troubled with Boeing not wanting a Development Agreement (DA) but Instead choosing to go with the VTTM, which then gives them all of the standards in cement so that they won't have to worry about any changes that the City might wish to make She commented that 3 meetings ago "we were all In this together trying to find ways to mitigate the EIR," and after the PC found the Impacts unavoidable and the EIR to be adequate, now the EIR is being "thrown back Into our face." Mr. Whittenberg suggested allowing the Boeing Team to make theIr presentation before beginning to address these issues Commissioner Deaton asked If she could continue to present her objections so that the Boeing Team could then address these dunng their presentation. Mr. Abbe stated that this was fine. Commissioner Deaton said that she found the entire Boeing letter very aggravating. She stated that Boeing IS now uSing the EIR to support their position regarding the future construction of Apollo Drive, their request for exemption from ADA, water quality, and public safety requirements In the beginning, the timing for construction of the medians and sidewalks, the additional traffic signal updates, and the drainage along SBB She asked to go on record in stating that she was really offended by the letter and IS looking forward to Boeing overcoming her objections. Commissioner Shanks stated that he concurred With Commissioner Deaton, particularly when Boeing gives the impression that PA1 IS somehow "sacred" and not part of the overall project, but separate, and not subject to any of the proposed Improvements or amendments He said he was not clear on the Issue of undergrounding utilities. Mr. Cummins explained that there are a senes of overhead utility lines that are not 66Kv and Staff IS proposing that these smaller utility lines be undergrounded. Commissioner Shanks clanfled that Boeing is not agreeing to do these utility lines but Will underground utilities inside the project area Mr. Cummins stated that Boeing would like to have all existing utility lines that are currently above ground remain above ground, but would underground any newly constructed utility lines. Page 13 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ., 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 Meeting Minutes of June 18, 2003 Chairperson Hood asked whether the PC should be concerned about the costs of conditions to the applicant, or should the PC merely be concerned about the conditions It feels to be appropriate Mr Whittenberg stated that the recommendations of the PC should be related to the land use of the property and not the fiscal impacts to the City in either costs or benefits, or the cost of the Implementation of project conditions He noted that Staff along with legal counsel would present conditions that are supportable under law, and would not allow the Issue of cost to determine what those conditions might be. Public Hearing Chairperson Hood opened the public hearing Mr. Alan DeFrancls of the Boeing Company said he would speak specifically to the Boeing-related Issues, most specifically to the connection of Apollo Drive and PA1 He stated that the role of Boeing when the project was designed was to Identify surplus real estate that could be monetized, and first and foremost, to maintain the integrity of the eXisting Boeing campus. With regard to the Apollo Drive connection, he said that If this had been a condition from the very beginning, the PC would not be looking at the current plan as presented He Indicated that Boeing has been very specific to everyone that they have spoken to regarding this project that because the majority of Boeing's business IS defense related and high security In nature, they must be able to control the Apollo Drive connection since It is adjacent to the Boeing campus. He said that this IS why the proposed road conditions were presented for approval with the possibility that It might never happen. He said Boeing would like it to happen in the event that it were to surplus more of the campus. He said that the reality IS that it cannot happen and if Apollo Drive is required, Boeing will come back with a new project. Mr. DeFrancls noted that PA1 IS the main campus and the conditions are ones that Boeing has not had to deal with in the past He said that if new development takes place, It would be absolutely fair to have to comply with all of the conditions as proposed. Mr Clay Corwin stated that the origins of this project In terms of Including the entire 107-acres IS the result of many diSCUSSions with the City Manager and Staff In terms of what could be done to present a project that would be meaningful, appropriate, and helpful to the City. He Indicated that as a result of these diSCUSSions PA 1 and PA4 had been Included because of the revenue opportunities created by the change of land use in PA4 He said that had the City not requested thiS, which has made the project more complex In attempting to address some of the proposed conditions, the project would have been confined to the business park contained In PA3 and PA2 He Indicated that In terms of the references to the EIR In the Pacific Gateway letter, the Boeing Team was attempting In a short period of time to present their perspective In a short document, understanding that Staff would walk through some of these issues He said that the EIR does set a baseline standard of expectation of mitigation measures In terms of the Impacts of the project and is a document that took several months to draft and finalize, so some of the issues referred to In the letter were not a part of the discussions with City Staff. Page 14 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Mr. Corwin stated that he would now address some of the questions raised by the Commissioners as they relate to the issued outlined in the Pacific Gateway responses to the City Staff Report. Future Construction of ADOllo Drive Mr. Corwin introduced Mr. Ray Baretto, the traffic engineer, to address Commissioner Deaton's question regarding mitigation of traffic impacts. Mr. Baretto, traffic engineer with Linscott, Law & Greenspan (LLG), stated that as part of the overall EIR process and the traffic analysis prepared, LLG was specifically asked to look at the potential benefits of the connection of Apollo Drive. He explained that as part of the process, license plate trace surveys were done to see if currently there is a need for this connection to help with congestion at Westminster Avenue and SBB. He said that the results showed that currently there is very little demand for anyone traveling north on SBB to travel west on Westminster Avenue and vice versa. He indicated when making projections for this connection the benefits on the operations of the signal are minimal. He indicated that at the direction of Staff LLG took half the traffic making the movement and relocated to the future connection, and after looking at the overall levels of service (LOS) at SBB and Westminster Avenue the conclusion was that it was not as great a benefit as initially thought. Commissioner Deaton asked if this would mitigate the traffic problem at all. Mr. Baretto stated that the EIR analysis showed that it would not. Commissioner Deaton asked if this data was reflective of the facility as it is today or as projected as of build out. Mr. Baretto stated that this was projected out to 2006. Commissioner Shanks noted that when PA2 is fully developed and if the Apollo Dnve connection is not completed and simply dead ends, how many visitors will be adding to the traffic congestion when driving around trying to find their way about the two ends of the business park? Chairperson Hood interjected that the analysis is flawed and Commissioner Shanks is correct in pointing this out. He said that LLG is analyzing current traffic patterns and projecting future traffic patterns without anything being built on the property. Commissioner Shanks stated that he agreed that currently there was no need for the connection, but if the project is built he does not see how this could remain the case. Mr. Corwin interjected that with projects of this type you will see traffic that is site specific and going into the park for an intended purpose. Commissioner Shanks countered that there will be a fair amount of truck traffic in and out of the park, and these drivers could experience problems with the lack of adequate access to the buildings from Westminster Avenue and SBB. Mr. Corwin explained that some of the history of the site plan deals with several constraints including the operating one that Mr. DeFrancis spoke of. Chairperson Hood asked if the proposed streets are streets or driveways and if they would be paid for by the public or by Boeing. Mr. Corwin stated that they are streets and Boeing is proposing to form a community facilities district and the streets would be dedicated to the City. Chairperson Hood stated that if they are driveways Boeing gets to say how they are to be constructed, and if they are streets and are paid for with public funds, then the City gets to determine this. He confirmed with Mr. Abbe that the Commission could proceed as they have been doing, going Page 15 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 i 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 Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 through step-by-step and asking questions of the applicant as necessary. Mr. Abbe confirmed that this was fine. Commissioner Deaton asked Mr. Corwin to summarize what the Boeing Team cannot live with and what they are asking to be removed from the conditions of approval. Mr. Corwin stated that Boeing could not live with the inability to control the timing or the eventuality of Apollo Drive going through because of high security operations that are conducted at Boeing's core campus, primarily in Building 81. He said that Boeing would like to see a change in Staffs proposal that development of all of PA2 to the west serve as an automatic trigger to develop Apollo Drive as a public right-of-way. Commissioner Deaton asked If PA2 were developed, would this not create the same security problems? Mr. Corwin said that this would not necessarily be the case depending upon the nature of the business or government contract customer, and the type of work going on in Building 81. Commissioner Deaton asked 'What about the parking lot?" Mr. Corwin stated that he could not provide more detail as that is a technical security area. Mr. De Francis interjected that the street still provides a 60-foot right-of-way of separation from the Boeing buildings. He said that you could park in one of the parking lots of the buildings if they are built, but the reality is Boeing has 60 feet of buffer. He stated that if the street gets built, even if it allows no stopping, people might still stop even though it is against the law, and this gets ,cars 60 feet closer to Boeing's buildings. Chairperson Hood confirmed with the Associate Planner that the draft resolution suggests that the location of the street can be moved. Mr. Cummins stated that the resolution is drafted in such a way that should a redesign of the road be required to accommodate a 60-foot additional buffer, the road could be moved 60 feet further to the west. Mr. DeFrancis stated that this condition and discussion should have taken place prior to presentation of this plan, because had Boeing discussed this they would have presented a different plan. Commissioner Deaton stated that this was the time to present the plan. Mr. DeFrancis indicated that the plan has been worked with Staff and this condition came after those discussions. He said that if Boeing has to change the roadway they would probably lose half of PA2 and any viability to sell it for future development. Commissioner Sharp asked Mr. Cummins to point out on the site map where Apollo Drive would run. Mr. Cummins proceeded to do so. Commissioner Shanks asked if when the project is built out, the only entrance would be off of Westminster Avenue. Mr. Cummins explained that Staff proposes that when PA2 is built out, the public road would go all the way through from Westminster Avenue to SBB. He commented that what the PC was hearing from the Boeing Team is that they would like to have sole discretion as to when the road is constructed, if at all. Commissioner Sharp confirmed that what is being stated is that because the road is so close to the main Boeing campus where security is a necessity, that Apollo Road is never going to go through as long as Boeing is at that location and doing high security type work. He said that as far as he can see this discussion is about something that is not going to happen, and this is why Boeing is seeking discretion to do it when it is possible, which means it will probably never be possible. Mr. Whittenberg stated that from the standpoint of Staff this Page 16 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 i 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 Meeting Minutes of June 18, 2003 is probably a fairly accurate summary of the position of both parties at this point. Commissioner Sharp stated that if Boeing is doing government work and needs the security he sees no reason why anyone should tell them that they must have a road that goes that closely past their buildings. Commissioner Deaton stated that the issue has become moving the road. Mr. DeFrancis stated that the easiest thing at this point would be for the road to completely go away. He said that he could not guarantee that Boeing can do it and although the other option is to move the road over, that will take 15-17 acres in PA2. Commissioner Deaton said that what bothers her is that two meetings ago everyone said the traffic could not be mitigated. Commissioner Sharp interjected that part of the no mitigation was because of the government property at the NWS that the City has no control over. Mr. DeFrancis noted that the traffic study shows that they get to those levels of service without the project, so the traffic impact will occur regardless, and the lack of mitigation is coming from the fact that it is Navy land and it will be difficult to get that. Commissioner Deaton stated that each thing that can be mitigated would help to alleviate the traffic. She said that if the Navy property is not an option, then something else must be done. Mr. DeFrancis stated that although this might slightly improve the traffic conditions, it does not alleviate the problem. Commissioner Shanks asked if Boeing owns the buildings across SBB where the Apollo spacecraft was constructed or if the Navy constructed them. Mr. DeFrancis stated that he does not know who constructed the buildings but the Navy currently owns them. Commissioner Shanks inquired whether Boeing was doing any work in these buildings. Mr. DeFrancis stated that they are not. Mr. Whittenberg interjected that the Navy owns these buildings and utilizes them for operations conducted on the Weapons Station. Commissioner Ladner asked whether Boeing had experienced any problems with anyone who is not secured coming into the buildings. Mr. DeFrancis stated that Boeing has completely locked down buildings and assigns security badges. He said the issue becomes getting close to the buildings. He noted that after the 9/11 attacks Boeing had buffers constructed around most of the buildings due to the concern that someone could drive a car with explosives up near the buildings. Commissioner Ladner then asked how long Boeing had been doing sensitive work for the government. Mr. DeFrancis stated that since the inception of the site there has always been work of some sensitive nature going on. Commissioner Ladner asked if there had been any problems with someone attempting the breach security. Mr. DeFrancis stated that he could not speak to this. Commissioner Ladner asked if Apollo Drive were constructed all the way through, how far would this road be from the security sensitive buildings. Mr. Corwin interjected that it would be approximately 30-40 feet from the westerly building footprint. Commissioner Ladner asked if the building is locked down and has a guard inside. Mr. DeFrancis stated that the entire campus is locked down. Commissioner Ladner asked if Boeing anticipated any problems. Mr. DeFrancis stated that Boeing anticipates that it needs to maintain a high level of security. Commissioner Ladner confirmed that nothing had occurred to require a greater level of security. Mr. DeFrancis stated that from 9/11 on security has been stepped up and at one point gating the entire campus was Page 17 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 I 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . City of Seal Beach Planmng Commission Meetmg Minutes of June 18, 2003 discussed. He emphasized that the nature of Boeing's business requires a high level of security and any contract in anyone of those building must abide by specific contract requirements. He said the larger buffer they have the better, and to construct a public roadway that is 30 feet from one of the Boeing buildings creates a potential security breach and places them at a disadvantage when competing for government business. Commissioner Ladner said that if the area were closed off how would truck traffic and employee automobile traffic get through. Mr. Corwin interjected that another issue besides the security of people getting in is the sensitive nature of the business defense programs in which R&D is being conducted that involve radio wave transmissions, so one of the ongoing concerns is how well and how securely this can be monitored from sources outside the buildings. He stated that this is one of the biggest challenges in terms of a buffer and has to do with the sensitivity of people who could "pick things up" from a proximity closer to the buildings. Commissioner Ladner asked if Boeing were anticipating constructing a road from Westminster Avenue down to the buildings at the southwest end of the property. Mr. Corwin stated that access would be from what is currently identified as Road A and lies immediately east of Accurate Metals. He noted that the public road coming in from the north would have the ability to access all 7 of the buildings that would be there. He said that this is the way the SP was designed going back to June 2002 to allow for access and for the eventuality that Apollo Drive may never go through. Chairperson Hood asked why these roads were not just labeled private driveways. Mr. Corwin stated that these roads would be constructed by Boeing and dedicated to the City as public improvements. Chairperson Hood countered that they do not have to be public roads and Boeing could still do this with the City having no concern about this. Mr. Corwin stated that they are attempting to make the project economically feasible. Chairperson Hood stated that if Boeing is to pay for the construction of these roads then it is economically feasible. Mr. Corwin stated that one of the proposals to be presented to CC is consideration of a Community Facilities District (CFD). Chairperson Hood clarified that Boeing would then not be paying for this road. Mr. Corwin stated that the CFD would create an additional increment to the property owners that are affected by the project. Chairperson Hood commented that what Boeing wants is public roads that are dictated by Boeing. Mr. Corwin stated that the design as presented has gone through rigorous engineering with City Staff in terms of the design of those two roads coming in and out without the cut through. Chairperson Hood reiterated that what Boeing wants is public roads that are dictated by Boeing. Mr. Corwin said that City Staff has agreed to this. Mr. Whittenberg cautioned against breeching the issue of finances as it relates to the project. He stated that the issue is not who might eventually pay for the roads, but whether or not the PC is happy with the proposed access system. Chairperson Hood commented that if they are City roads, then the City should control access. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the subdivision proposal gives the City the right to determine the types of roadways that they feel necessary to service the type of traffic that would be generated by the project, and this is why Staff is generally in concurrence with this. He indicated that the outstanding issue is the potential to extend Apollo Drive all the way through at some point in the future. Chairperson Hood stated that he wished to be consistent and asked when a subdivision is done, are there usually driveways or Page 18 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 i 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 Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 public roads. Mr. Whittenberg stated that subdivision for the Bixby Project involved driveways because it was a shopping center. He said that the roads in the Centex Homes residential subdivision and also for the Hellman Project are private roads constructed to City standards, and these roads service single-family residences and will not service close to 1 million square feet of industrial development. He indicated that the design standards are more rigorous as the issues are somewhat different and the scale is greater. He noted that 70-75 homes would generate 700 trips a day as opposed to the Boeing Project that would generate 13,000 trips per day. Chairperson Hood stated that he was not concerned about the design standards but about whether or not the City determined how those roads were to be built. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the City had that choice. Chairperson Hood commented that in order to be consistent the City should have the choice in this case. Mr. Whittenberg reiterated that the proposal is that the roads be public roads, because if they are private roads they cannot be financed the way Boeing would like to finance them and that this would be a separate issue from the PC's decision as to whether or not a cut thru is desirable. Commissioner Sharp asked if Centex Homes were a gated community. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that it is. Commissioner Sharp noted that gated communities have private roads constructed to City standards, but this will not be a gated industrial park. He then asked if there is to be an access road that runs through the business park from Westminster Avenue to SBB. Mr. Corwin stated that as currently planned the project would not include this. Commissioner Sharp asked if there would be a dead-end street with a gate to allow access for fire vehicles. He inquired if the industrial park would be made up of two separate districts with two separate entrances. Mr. DeFrancis indicated that this was cOrrect. Mr. Corwin stated that depending upon the final SP and as part of the development of PA4, a drive isle would be constructed. Commissioner Deaton stated that it appears that the road would not have to be moved over 60 feet, but it could be designed to go through the development in another way. She proposed a means of connecting the roadways near the ends of the cui de sacs. Mr. Corwin stated that although this was a good idea, the man-made ditch in that area demonstrates wetland characteristics and will require a buffer and the CCC would not allow any infringement for a roadway. Commissioner Ladner read the following statement from the Pacific Gateway Letter: "Per the City's EIR, two signals were determined to need upgrading adjacent to the Boeing site; Apollo Drive and Seal Beach Boulevard being one of them. II He then noted that Mr. Corwin had stated that Apollo Drive was not to be connected to SBB. Mr. Corwin stated that Apollo Drive is the name of the road coming in off of Westminster Avenue. He indicated that Staff is requesting that the existing signal at SBB be upgraded as a condition of the VTTM as well as Road A off of Westminster Avenue. Page 19 0131 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 i 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 . CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Chairperson Hood asked the Associate Planner what CCC wetlands issues would impair relocating the road. Mr. Cummins stated that Staff was in agreement with Mr. Corwin's statements regarding the drainage ditches potentially being a wetland area that would require a buffer around them. Commissioner Shanks stated that the names of the streets would have to be Apollo Drive North and Apollo Drive South to avoid confusion and traffic congestion from visitors trying to navigate to their destination. Underaroundina Existina Electrical Lines Mr. Corwin then referred to the discussion on undergrounding of utilities as presented in the Pacific Gateway Letter and restated the information as previously presented by the Associate Planner. He stated that the Boeing Team does not believe that anything they are proposing differs from what is coded policy and it would be very difficult with a project of this size to justify the cost of undergrounding something along Westminster Avenue. He emphasized that this is a business park with similar surrounding uses. He noted that it is Boeing's understanding that on the Hellman Ranch Project that some of the 12Kv lines that run along the easterly border of the site were not undergrounded. Commissioner Deaton stated that the idea of the VTTM and the SP is to come together and work things out. She said she was still very unclear as to why a DA is not being done. She commented that if this is the way it is going to be done, then the PC can request that things be done in a specific manner and Boeing can either agree to do it or not. Chairperson Hood asked the Associate Planner to provide an explanation of the comment on undergrounding of utilities for the Hellman Project. Mr. Cummins deferred to Mr. Mark Vukojevic, Assistant City Engineer. Mr. Vukojevic reported that the developer would underground the frontage portion of the Hellman development on SBB. He said that there may be some on-sight utilities that may not be undergrounded, but most likely those are lines that are on a remainder parcel that is not a part of the subdivision. Timina and Construction of Medians and Sidewalks Mr. Corwin continued by addressing the questions related to PA 1 and the provision of new landscaped medians, sidewalks, drainage, sewers, etc., and stated that from Boeing's perspective, this project was planned in total to attempt to plan for things that would be beneficial to the City and in return there was the understanding that development would occur in normal phases according to market demands. He said that with the phasing Boeing expected that some conditions that benefit a parcel under development might "come home to roost on the owner at that time." He Cited the example that to deal with an aesthetic issue like landscaped medians or new medians along SBB really has little connection to PA2 and PA3 in that development. He said that many of the issues identified by Staff are quite challenging for Boeing. Chairperson Page 20 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 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 Meeting Minutes of June 18, 2003 Hood said that in looking at the phasing in the project he fails to see PA 1 in the phase, because Boeing does not plan to do anything, therefore, PA 1 would never be developed. Mr. Corwin responded that under the current development program this would be correct. Commissioner Shanks stated that when PA3 is developed he assumes that Boeing will be constructing sidewalks down Westminster Avenue. Mr. Corwin confirmed that this is part of the PP for PA3. Commissioner Shanks noted that people working in the PA3 business park area and wishing to eat at the restaurants located at the intersection of SBB and Westminster Avenue would have no sidewalk on which they could walk to reach the restaurant area. He said it only seems logical to have a sidewalk connecting PA3 and PA4 to PA 1. He stated that not putting the sidewalk in until PA 1 is developed would mean that everyone from PA3 and PA4 must drive over and attempt to find a parking space in order to eat at the restaurants. Applicabilitv of Conditions to PA 1 Commissioner Deaton stated that she sees nothing in the Pacific Gateway letter about landscaping, but rather the American Disabilities Act (ADA) and access, public safety, water quality, and these would be of greater concern than landscaping. Mr. Corwin reiterated that this was about timing and noted that the water quality issue is being addressed in all the areas to be developed and the area downgradient as proposed in the business park. He said that in terms of the ADA issue, he believes the City is considering bringing a sidewalk that currently exists in front of PA 1 in conformance with City Code. Commissioner Deaton confirmed that Boeing does not want to do this. Mr. Corwin stated that at this time this is not a part of Boeing's proposal. Commissioner Deaton clarified that Boeing is asking that all of these things not be taken care of until Boeing develops PA 1, which Boeing does not plan to develop? Mr. Corwin responded that Boeing is asking that map conditions be phased as proposed. Additional Traffic Sianal Uporades Commissioner Sharp asked how many traffic signals there currently are and how many there will be when the project is complete? Mr. Corwin stated that the only new signal would be the one at Adolfo Lopez Drive and SBB. Commissioner Sharp noted that there is also a signal at the entrance to the current retail area. Mr. Corwin affirmed that there currently are signals at what is identified as Road A off of SBB and Westminster Avenue. Commissioner Sharp asked if the separate signal into the Boeing parking lot is to remain. Mr. Corwin stated that the existing signals at Road B and Road C would remain. Commissioner Sharp asked if these signals are to be upgraded so that they can be synchronized with the other signals. Mr. Corwin indicated that this is the issue in question. He said that Boeing is already replacing two existing signals at Road Band C and adding a new signal at Adolfo Lopez Drive and SBB. Page 21 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 t 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18. 2003 Commissioner Shanks asked if the demand signals out of the Boeing parking lot along Westminster Avenue and SBB are to remain. Mr. Corwin affirmed that they would remain. Commissioner Shanks stated that as far as traffic mitigation is concerned a lot of cars are being added yet nothing is being done to try to synchronize the lights. Mr. Baretto interjected that the issue is not a capacity issue from an access and egress standpoint, but whether the signal can be upgraded? When would be the right time to upgrade? Should it be tied to future development? Commissioner Shanks countered that the PC has just discovered that there is no phase for PA 1, so development has not been phased for PA1 but has Just been put off, and the one thing that was emphasized in the EIR was traffic and the lack of mitigation. He said that mitigation should include replacing the signals at the Boeing parking lot, as this is a major point. Chairperson Hood asked that the City Traffic Engineer address this question. Mr. Bill Zimmerman, City Traffic Engineer, stated that the signals along Westminster Avenue at Apollo Drive and SBB and Apollo Drive would have to be upgraded for the new configuration of the lanes exiting the project. He said that the signals currently do not have the correct signal heads or location of the signal heads, and with regard to the signal at Westminster Avenue and Road B, it is an older type and will not communicate with the new systems that the City is proposing. He indicated that the only way to adapt them IS to change out the controller and upgrade the timing plan. He said that the City IS implementing a traffic management system within the next month that should be able to communicate to everything south of the 1-405 Freeway and With the ability to communicate with Westminster Avenue traffic will move more efficiently from the new development. Chairperson Hood noted that if the demand signals remain, which are entirely separate, the planned flow of traffic would be interrupted at unexpected intervals. He told Mr. Corwin that it appears that Boeing is asking the City of Seal Beach to approve this plan and also include a Statement of Overriding Considerations because traffic cannot be mitigated, and on the other hand it appears that Boeing is saying that they are not going to do even the little that can be done to help mitigate traffic. Mr. Corwin stated that approximately $1.8 million in traffic mitigation fees from this project will be paid to the City and Boeing has proposed that they be given a credit against these fees if the upgrades are completed. Drainaae on Seal Beach Boulevard Adiacent to PA4 With regard to the drainage issue along SBB, Mr. Corwin stated that as he understands upon subdivision and development in that area, this drainage problem would be addressed. Mr. Cummins clarified that the City proposes that this situation be resolved before the issuance of any bUilding permit for any planning area. Chairperson Hood asked how issues like this were handled on the Bixby Project. Mr. Whittenberg said that he does not recall anything similar to this on the Hellman Project, but on the Bixby Project there was a provision that required that the storm drain inlets from College Park East (CPE) that drain into the golf course be oversized. Page 22 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 , CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Southbound Deceleration Lane at Adolfo Lopez Drive Mr. Corwin then stated that Boeing's traffic analysIs reflects that the deceleration lane from SBB onto Adolfo Lopez Drive would not be necessary, as Adolfo Lopez Drive will simply continue to serve the existing uses and also because acquIsition of an additional right-of-way may be an Issue Chairperson Hood asked Mr Baretto to address this Issue. Mr Baretto stated that purely from an operational standpoint the projected traffic volumes at this Intersection would not merit the addItIonal lane. Commissioner Deaton asked where Boeing IS proposing to have the deceleration lanes. Mr Baretto stated that the traffic analysIs recommends deceleration lanes on Westminster Avenue at Apollo Drive and SBB at Apollo Drive He said in terms of the other locations, because access was not set in terms of future development, It would be difficult to make that determination at this pOint. He indicated that as the plans begin to evolve, Boeing would work with Staff to flush out any issues. He said that if at some future pOint SBB becomes the focal point for the proposed commercial center and traffic demands reflect the need for deceleration lanes the Issue could be addressed at that time. Mr. Zimmerman then spoke and noted that Staff has proposed these Improvements because SBB and Westminster Avenue are major street arterials for the City of Seal Beach and anything that can be done to help move the cars out of the traffic lanes so that they can make right or left-hand turns would be of benefit. Chairperson Hood asked If Mr. Zimmerman sees a right-of-way problem. Mr. Zimmerman stated that if the lane takes up 4 or 5 feet within the parkway area there is no right-of-way problem Commissioner Deaton asked if one car an hour would require a deceleration lane. Mr Zimmerman stated that one car per hour may be on the additional traffic, but the existing traffic does merit the deceleration lane He noted that this would be the appropriate time to construct this improvement to go along with the new signal and new turn pockets along SBB. Commissioner Deaton then asked If more development IS planned for the Adolfo Lopez Drive cui de sac. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the only development currently proposed for this area IS the one bUilding for the Boeing project and a future roadway access pOint for oil maintenance vehicles is planned from the end of Adolfo Lopez Drive onto the Hellman Property. Landscape Improvements Mr. Corwin stated that with regard to the landscaping Improvements, he IS not really certain what the Issue IS He noted that the business park and the PPs have landscape plans that deal with all of these issues and he believes it is simply a question as to Staff having discretion to require additional landscaping along other areas at certain times. Mr Cummins stated that Staff has not done enough study to accurately state whether a deficiency exists. He said that this IS a tYPical type of subdivIsion condition that Staff would want to impose. Chairperson Hood asked if these conditions were imposed on the Bixby and Hellman Projects. Mr Cummins stated that his understanding IS that the City did so. Mr. Whittenberg stated that because there IS no landscaping at all on the Hellman property, they are required to put in landscaping and street trees. He said that the Bixby Project was different because of the eucalyptus windrow with the rest of the project requiring landscaping and the establishment of significant greenbelt areas Page 23 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 . 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 , CIty of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 CommiSSioner Deaton confirmed that the Staff Report states that any diseased, dead, or dYing trees would be replaced. She asked If there were more than this. Mr. Cummins stated that the fundamental disagreement IS that the City IS concerned that if there is a landscape palate along these existing areas that has holes or gaps due to trees dYing, this IS the appropriate time to require that these dYing trees or scrubs be replaced. Commissioner Deaton confirmed that this was in reference to the pre-existing trees In the median of SBB. Mr Cummins clarified that this refers to trees In the parkway between the curb and the property line. Mr Whittenberg noted that these are the existing landscaped areas on Boeing's property along the frontages of Westminster Avenue and SBB Commissioner Deaton then asked Mr. Corwin If Boeing did not want to do thiS Mr. COl"!Vin stated that Boeing does not have a problem With this, but It was unclear what the concern was when Staff raised this as a point of disagreement. Commissioner Deaton clarified that there was no disagreement In this area. Mr. Corwin stated that he did not believe so. He said that Boeing IS attempting to understand what the City's expectations are up front Chairperson Hood commented that perhaps Boeing does not like the Idea that the City can Impose standards. He referred to Commissioner Deaton's comments regarding a DA and noted that If thiS had been done to begin With all of this would have already been settled Commissioner Deaton stated that she understood why Boeing IS unhappy about this plan but without the DA this is what must take place. Pump Station RefJlacement Reserve Mr. Corwin stated that although this was not Identified in the City's list of conditions, Boeing has discussed this With Staff. He said that the project would include a new pump station within the bUSiness park, and the City has requested that there be a replacement reserve funded for that sometime In the future He indicated that users of thiS pump station would pay user fees, a portion of which would be set aside for capital replacement reserves. He said that Boeing feels that thiS IS an appropriate way to deal With this Mr. Vukojevic stated that pump stations are very costly as compared to gravity type systems, and in this case a new pump station IS to be created that will require daily maintenance by City Staff and future replacement at a high dollar value capital cost. He said that the current rate of collection for sewer fees does not fully compensate for the maintenance or future replacement of thiS pump, because this is a large capital faCIlity He indicated that ineqUitIes would be created and the burden would then fall upon all the other sewer ratepayers He noted that now one of the current standard conditions is that any new sewer pump station must have a financing mechanism for ItS operations, maintenance, and future replacement Page 24 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 t 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Existina Conditions Mr. Corwin stated that Mr. DeFrancis had addressed this at the outset in terms of existing operations. He indicated that what it comes down to is that all of the existing development and the status quo that the Boeing facility currently has and the facIlities in PA1 and PA2 have a lot of things that would not lend themselves to the new conditions of approval as proposed by the City. He said that from an operating perspective it would not be feasible for Boeing to go back and bring these Items up to compliance. Commissioner Deaton asked if a "laundry list" of these items was available. Mr. Corwin stated he did not presently have one, but one could be provided. Commissioner Shanks asked if the sidewalk on PA1 along Westminster Avenue would be Included on this list. Mr. Corwin stated that Staff has proposed the sidewalk as a specific condition applied to this project as opposed to standard engineering conditions, which would essentially apply across the board for any VTTM that comes before the PC subject to qualification by specific conditions. Mr. Whittenberg stated that some of these concerns that Staff has expressed stem from water quality standards currently being imposed upon cities by the Regional Water Quality Control Board on new NPDES permits that apply to existing facilities. He said that many of these are related to restaurant operations, and Boeing does have a cafeteria that would fall into this classification. He said that the conditions would apply whether people perform work or not and cities will have to enforce this. He explained that Staff has called out issues of ADA accessibility, water quality, and public safety because of legislation that demands that specific standards be met. He noted that should the City not comply with the NPDES permit requirements, it could face fines of up to $10,000 a day. Ms. Joyce Parque spoke in favor of the Boeing project and stated that it has provided a lot of jobs and revenues for the City. She recommended approval. Mr. Stan Anderson spoke in favor of the project and encouraged the PC to work with Boeing to resolve the issues in question. He also recommended approval. Mr. A. J. McCarthy complimented the PC and Staff for the work done on this project. He encouraged the PC to "stick to their guns" and make sure that some mitigation of traffic be done and that the pump station be taken care of by Boeing. Mr. Charles Gillard of Leisure World suggested that the map not be vested, but that it be passed as a tentative map or as a development map. He stated that once it is vested, all controls are lost. He said the traffic patterns on the project are terrible and Boeing should be able to get a street to go through without too much trouble. He commented he has seen no mention of a floodwater retention basin and he noted that the pump station would be important in order to sell the lots to potential buyers. He expressed his concern related to noise and with the adequacy of the traffic study. He recommended Page 25 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 * 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 . CIty of Seal Beach Planmng CommIssIon Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 that the vote be postponed and that each issue be reviewed separately in order to promote thorough comprehension. Mr. Corwin stated that water retention is provided for in PA3. Mr. Cummins explained that the PC is a recommending body to the CC and in this situation would be adopting a resolution that would make recommendations to CC related to this VTTM. There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Hood closed the public hearing. Chairperson Hood polled the Commission to determine whether all items could be voted on and the hearing on this item completed by 12:00 a.m. The Commissioners were in favor of completing the vote tonight. Chairperson Hood proposed voting in support of Staff or of Boeing on each of the VTTM conditions individually and then to vote on the resolution itself to be amended as necessary. Mr. Cummins noted that aside from voting on the VTTM, there were additional resolutions upon which the PC could vote tonight as follows: 1. General Plan Amendment 2. Adoption of the Specific Plan 3. Approval of a Precise Plan Chairperson Hood asked if all of these resolutions were "clean," with no revIsions necessary. Mr. Cummins responded that he could not think of anything in the SP that would be materially changed from what the applicant proposes. Chairperson Hood asked If amendments were made to the VTTM resolution, the resolution would have to be again brought before the PC for a final vote. Mr. Cummins stated that traditionally the PC has preferred to see the exact language to be adopted. He noted that the language could be worked through and adopted this evening, or the proposed language could be agreed upon with the revised copy of the resolution brought before the PC at its next meeting. Chairperson Hood polled the Commissioners to determine what their preference would be. Commissioners Deaton and Ladner opted for Staff returning with the revised language. Chairperson Hood proposed that if changes were made to the VTTM resolution, it seems appropriate that as long as the Associate Planner would be making these changes, he should probably be allowed the two weeks to ensure that all of the Boeing resolutions are consistent. Mr. Abbe recommended that all of the resolutions be brought back before the PC for review prior to voting on them. The Commission was in agreement. MOTION by Deaton; SECOND by Sharp to approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 16375, subject to conditions, and adopt Resolution 03-27 as presented. Chairperson Hood then suggested that the Commission use the Staff Report to review each item on the VTTM for possible changes. The Commission was in agreement. Page 26 of 31 CIty of Seal Beach Planning CommIssIon Meeting Minutes of June 18, 2003 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 * 1. Underaroundina of Utilities - Commissioners support Staffs proposals. Commissioner Deaton interjected that she still believes Staff and the applicant could work through these issues. 2. Future Construction of Apollo Drive - Commissioners Hood, Deaton, Ladner, and Shanks support Staff's proposals. Sharp does not support. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 . Commissioner Sharp stated that much as he would like to see Apollo Drive go all the way through, due to the security issues cited, he did not believe there was anything that could be done about this. Commissioner Deaton stated that she believed Boeing could develop a new plan to allow for this. Commissioner Shanks stated that what he does not like is that the plan was always presented with the checkered mark going through it on the assumption that when PA2 was developed that Apollo Drive would go through. He said that he did not really hear anything to the contrary until tonight. He indicated that this really irritates him, as there would have been an opportunity on the EIR to come back if the PC had been provided this information, and traffic would not be mitigated, as they had been lead to beheve. He noted that as long as terrorism exists, Boeing will continue to claim that it will need the support to keep vehicles away from their buildings. He said that much as he dislikes doing so, he would probably vote along with Commissioner Sharp. He reiterated that Apollo Drive must be designated as Apollo Drive North and Apollo Drive South or something similar to avoid confusion and traffic congestion. Commissioner Sharp suggested that a note to CC be added at the end of the resolution stating that the PC is not in agreement with the street not going through but cannot see how this issue can be worked out. He stated that if the PC votes on this issue as it is written, CC might think that the Commissioners are happy with this proposal as is. Commissioner Ladner stated that he would like to see Apollo Drive go all the way through unobstructed from Westminster Avenue to SBB. Mr. Whittenberg read Condition No. 14 of the resolution and stated that if it is adopted as presented, the CC will also receive a copy of the minutes of this meeting and can read the concerns expressed in thiS discussion. He said that Staff could provide a separate memorandum to CC if the PC so directed. Commissioner Shanks noted that after reading Condition No. 14, he would vote to have Apollo Drive go all the way through. Commissioner Sharp stated that he wants to see Apollo Drive go through also, but he does not believe that the PC can dictate that Boeing do this. 3. Applicabilitv of Positions to Plannina Area 1 - Commissioners support Staff's proposals. Mr. Whittenberg clarified that these are the issues related to water quality, ADA accessibility, and public safety. Chairperson Hood noted that many of these are federal concerns rather than City concerns. Mr. Whittenberg stated that these are mandates by Federal and State agency actions and permit requirements. Page 27 of 31 City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 t Commissioner Deaton commented that it was her understanding that Boeing was concerned that the City would go in on the existing buildings, but the resolution states "all new construction." Mr. Cummins stated that after multiple discussions with the Boeing Team, Staff was uncertain what Boeing is proposing on this item. He noted that Staff wants to make it perfectly clear that from Staffs perspective the proposed standard and specific conditions should apply to all new construction. Mr. Abbe explained that there are two aspects to the standard conditions. One is if new property is developed and the other is if the property is subdivided into sellable lots, which then provides an opportunity for the owner to have sellable lots. He said that a subdivision can automatically trigger some of the events in the standard conditions, such as water quality and ADA improvements; however, the vast majority of them are triggered upon new development. Commissioner Deaton stated that as she understood the Boeing Team's comments, they were concerned about requirements becoming retroactive in their existing buildings. She confirmed that the resolution specifies new development only. Mr. Cummins confirmed this and stated that Staff had drafted its memorandum prior to receiving a response from Boeing. Commissioner Deaton confirmed that there was no disagreement on this issue. Mr. Cummins stated that there was none as it relates to new construction. Mr. Whittenberg interjected that he believes there is disagreement as to what conditions on the standard conditions would apply to existing buildings if nothing were being done to them. He did note that there are some water quality standards that will apply to everything, regardless of whether or not it is a new building. Commissioner Deaton commented that then it does not matter whether or not this condition is included, since it will happen anyway. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the condition is included as a part of a map and provides notice to future owners of the lots that they may be subject to specific requirements. He noted that whether this is a subdivision issue or not is one issue, and the same water quality conditions appear In the PP for new development. He commented that cities and property owners are struggling with complying with water quality permit conditions and with implementation, enforcement, and inspection of these facilities. Commissioner Deaton stated that it appears that there is still some communication to be done between the Boeing Team and Staff. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 . 4. Timina of Construction and Medians and Sidewalks - Commissioners support Staffs proposals. 5. Traffic Sianal Uoarades - Commissioners support Staffs proposals. 6. Drainaae - Commissioners support Staffs proposals. 7 Deceleration Lanes - Commissioners support Staffs proposals. Commissioner Deaton stated that with the low volume of traffic involved, she does not feel that a deceleration lane is needed at this location. Mr. Whittenberg confirmed that Commissioner Deaton was referring to the intersection of Adolfo Page 28 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 , 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 . City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 Lopez Drive and SBB. Commissioner Deaton confirmed that this was correct and asked how this would be presented to CC. Mr. Whittenberg stated that the PC might want to direct Staff to prepare a memorandum to CC recommending removal of this lane. Commissioner Sharp said he is on the fence on this item and noted that even though there may be a small amount of right-turn traffic, motorists will usually stop before making a right-hand turn anyway, which slows down traffic. Commissioner Shanks stated that he agreed with Commissioner Deaton. Commissioner Ladner stated that if large trucks would be using that street, the turn lane should be constructed, and also in the event that future facilities may be constructed at the end of the drive near the animal shelter. 8. Landscape Improvements - Commissioners support Staff's proposals. 9. Pump Station Reserve - Commissioners support Staff's proposals. Chairperson Hood inquired of Mr. Abbe if a vote could be taken on all of the resolutions at this time. Commissioner Deaton referred to Pages 10-11 of the Staff Report and asked about the section of the resolution that addresses the housing issue and noted that the PC had discussed including an alternative for a residential use. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this had not been included since Staff had not received direction from the PC to amend the resolution to include this statement. Commissioner Sharp interjected that although the PC had discussed this there was no direction given to Staff and he does not approve of proposing a residential use. Mr. Whittenberg suggested that in Resolution 03-25 for the GPA, a statement to this effect could be included. Commissioner Deaton agreed with Commissioner Sharp that no action had been taken. Mr. Whittenberg reported that there was an alternative in the EIR that evaluated 11 acres along the frontage of Westminster Avenue as an alternative for high-density residential development of 165-175 multiple family residential housing units. He noted that the CC would have this alternative before them as part of their EIR evaluation. He reiterated that the PC could submit an accompanying memorandum with the resolution actions recommending that a residential use should be considered in greater detail. Commissioner Deaton requested that the PC direct Staff to prepare this memorandum. Chairperson Hood polled the Commission and Commissioner Sharp reiterated that he is not for housing in any form. Commissioner Ladner stated that he agreed with Commissioner Sharp. Commissioner Shanks stated that he was also in agreement with Commissioner Sharp. He said it was better to stay away from this subject. He then referred to Page 4 and said that he is bothered that at the bottom of the page where it lists PA4, BUSiness Park is listed before 120-Room Hotel/Commercial Retail Restaurant, and he believes Business Park should either be left out altogether or placed after the Commercial area. Mr. Whittenberg stated that these could easily be reversed. Mr. Whittenberg noted that the minutes of this meeting would be provided to CC as part of their agenda packet so they would be able to read this discussion. Commissioner Deaton stated that her concern is related to AB 1221 and she believes that the City should be studying this whole concept. Mr. Whittenberg stated that this legislation has been converted to a 2-year bill, which basically means that nothing will happen for at least 6 months. Page 29 of 31 -- 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 t 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 . MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: City of Seal Beach Plannmg Commission Meetmg Mmutes of June 18, 2003 5-0 Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp None None MOTION by Shanks, SECOND by Ladner to approve General Plan Amendment 03-2, subject to conditions, and adopt Resolution 03-25 as amended. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp None None MOTION by Deaton, SECOND by Sharp to approve The Boeing Integrated Defense Systems Specific Plan, subject to conditions, and adopt Resolution 03-26 as amended MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 5-0 Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp None None MOTION by Shanks; SECOND by Ladner to approve The Boeing Integrated Defense Systems Precise Plan 03-1, subject to conditions, and adopt Resolution 03-28 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: None 5-0 Hood, Deaton, Ladner, Shanks, and Sharp None Mr Whittenberg advised that adoption of Resolution No. 03-28 begins a 10-day calendar appeal penod to the City Council The Commissioner action tonight is final and the appeal penod begins tomorrow morning He then noted that the remainrng resolutions are recommendations to City Council and there is no final action on Resolution Nos. 03-24, 03-25, and 03-26, and no appeal period. STAFF CONCERNS None COMMISSION CONCERNS Chairperson Hood thanked all in attendance for their patience and contnbutlon to the meeting. Page 30 of 31 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 . . City of Seal Beach Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 18, 2003 Chairperson Hood thanked all in attendance for their patience and contnbution to the meeting. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Hood adjourned the meeting at 11: 17 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, C'h~~.A"'~~~ Carmen Alvarez, Executive Secretary Planning Department APPROVAL The Commission on July 23, 2003, app~ved the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of Wednesday, June 18, 2003. ~. Page 31 of 31