Correspondence H-13 Theresa Dela Cruz
From: Theresa Dela Cruz <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2023 6:23 AM
To: Scott Kinsey <[email protected]>; CityClerk <[email protected]> Subject: Public Comment for 1/7/23 City Council Meeting - 2600 California Ave (APN 7212-009-017)
-EXTERNAL-
Hello,
First, thank you to the members of City Council for holding this hearing and allow members of the public to voice their opinions on the lot at 2600 California Ave. I would like to state that I am disappointed to learn that there is a proposal to build a medical building at this location. The proposed project at the intersection of Willow and California would disproportionately BIPOC and low income communities. City leaders have acknowledged that north, west and central Long Beach are park-poor. These areas average about 1 acre of park per 1000 residents. The amount of park area dedicated in north, west, and central Long Beach are already 16 times worse than more affluent areas of Long Beach. The city should stop any efforts to widen the disparities between low and high income areas of the city. The city should ensure the health and wellbeing of ALL its residents, especially those who are disenfranchised, marginalized, and otherwise subject to worse living conditions than their richer counterparts. This area also has potential native burial sites and monitors must be hired to observe development. The developer “2H Construction” who owns and plans to construct the office building on the site has been previously investigated as cited by the Los Angeles Times article from March 24, 2009 titled “Signal Hill firm investigated”. The article alleges the company came under investigation for “levelling 10 acres of salt marsh, dumping asphalt and unearthing a city dump near the Los Cerritos Wetlands.” How can we trust that this site will not be treated the same way in its development? Long Beach lacks indigenous sites and protecting the sites that do exist are increasingly more important. The company has shown disregard in how it has dealt with the Los Cerritos Wetlands site, and it is widely known that wetlands and river estuaries have always been important sites to indigenous coastal communities. I am seriously concerned about the prospect of this area being rezoned for commercial purposes.
Please protect District 5, protect communities of color, and protect open space by stopping this project in its tracks.
Theresa dela Cruz
Correspondence H-13 Thomas Nieto
From: tnieto3 <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2023 1:46 AM
To: CityClerk <[email protected]>; Scott Kinsey <[email protected]> Subject: Public Comment Regarding 2600 California Ave.
-EXTERNAL-
Good evening.
I would like to submit a comment to be read at the city council meeting regarding the proposed General Plan Amendment from Open Space to Neo-Industrial at 2600 California Ave. Please see below:
It appears based on public record that the use of this property has always been for the public good; it was once an area designated as a railroad line to move people up and down the city in which it was zoned “institutional” it was later zoned to “open space.” It has always been zoned as uses that benefit the public good rather than private uses. The owner must have knowingly purchased this property knowing the limitations that it would have. The property was shown 2 recent and separate planning maps that both showed it to be used for public uses.
The city Globemaster Specific Plan should go further to “provide physical and psychological relief from the intense urban development of the plan area”, the plan can connect to the subject property along an existing sidewalk along California Ave. The parcel is already improved as a park in terms of its use and appearance regardless of whether it is publicly or privately owned; it has trees, a meandering path and park benches. Rather than tear out a functional park that is surrounded on both adjoining sides by land managed by the Parks and Recreation Department of Long Beach, the city should incorporate it into the Globemaster Specific Plan as designated open space as it is already designated. If the city needs to acquire the park from the owner, they should enter negotiations to do so and compensate the owner based on fair market value. The cost of acquisition can be offset by impact fees assessed to properties located in the GSP, which at this point are up to the writers of the plan. Further the GSP should aim to protect the spaces that are able to “provide physical and psychological relief from the intense urban development” to come, the plan should specifically forbid any commercial activities within he boundaries of areas designated as open space. This land should be specifically designated to adjoin the existing “Willow Springs Park”.
I would also like to point out that the proposed medical building site is an important area for water recharge. If it is paved with building and hardscape, it will contribute to worsening the impacts of flooding attributed to the shifting weather patterns caused by climate change. Increasing the amount of hardscape, that already includes almost half parking lot already, will worsen the impacts of flooding and erosion on the surrounding parklands. The surrounding parklands feature native plants and grasses that can allow for the natural absorption of water back into the ground. If the area is left unpaved, it can contribute to recharging ground water rather than worsening flooding and polluted urban runoff into the ocean.
With urgency,
Tomas N.