6615 – 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway Appeal
City Council Public Hearing – September 19, 2023
Southeast Area Specific Plan (SEASP)
• September 19, 2017 – The City Council approved the adoption of the SEASP and certification of the Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR).
o The SEASP included Areas of Change (red) to accommodate the intended infill development anticipated by the specific plan. o The PEIR included a recirculated traffic section and study based on public input. The final mitigation measures included specific traffic improvements as well as fair-share payments to fund these improvements in the City of Long Beach (City), City of Seal Beach (Seal Beach), and state transportation facilities (Caltrans). o The certification of the PEIR included a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the following impact categories:
• Air Quality
• Cultural Resources
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Noise
• Transportation and Traffic
• September 8, 2021 – The California Coastal Commission certified the SEASP after approved modifications were made by the City Council.
2 Background
• July 20, 2023 – The Planning Commission heard the proposed item and took action to approve the project with an added condition related to tenant notification. • July 27, 2023 - A third-party appeal was filed by Lozeau Drury LLP , on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER) (APL23-011). • July 28, 2023 - A third-party appeal was filed by Elizabeth Lambe, on behalf of the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust (APL23-012).
• July 31, 2023 - A third-party appeal was filed by Ann Cantrell and Anna Christensen, on behalf of Sierra Club Los Cerritos Wetlands Task Force (APL23-014). • September 19, 2023 – The City Council public hearing to consider the third-party appeals of the project.
3 Vicinity Map
Zoning:
• Southeast Area Specific Plan(SP-2),
Mixed-Use Community Core (MU-CC)
General Plan (1989):
• Mixed Uses (LUD 7)
General Plan (2019):
• Regional Serving Facility (RSF)
Local Coastal Program (LCP) Area:
• Southeast Area
Coastal Zone:
• Coastal Zone (City Jurisdiction)
Legend
4 Mixed-Use Development Site
Building and Parking to Remain
Public Right-of-Way (Studebaker Road) to be Improved
Existing Conditions
5 Project Proposal
The proposed project includes the following requested approvals:
• Site Plan Review to:
o Demolish two existing office buildings, paved areas, and ornamental vegetation. Existing office building at 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway would remain in place.
o Construct a 6-story mixed-use development consisting of:
• 390 residential units (17 affordable units [very-low]) • 5,351 square feet of commercial/retail
• 576 vehicle parking spaces
• 196 bicycle parking spaces
o Construct necessary improvements within public right-of-way. • Lot Line Adjustment between 6615 and 6621 E. Pacific Coast Highway
• Lot Merger to merge two parcels (development site)
• Local Coastal Development Permit for all discretionary and subdivision actions.
6 Development Site
Building to
Remain
7 State Density Bonus
State Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915
through 65918)
• The Applicant is proposing 17 very-low-income affordable units in the project, which qualifies the project for a 20% increase in the base density established for the site.
• Pursuant to state law, the Applicant is entitled to concessions, incentives and/or waivers:
o Incentive: Building massing
o Waiver: Building height
o Waiver: Building stories
o Waiver: Building story requirements along Shopkeeper Road fronting wetlands
o Waiver: Variety of heights
• Project is eligible for reduced parking under Senate Bill 1818 = total 576 parking spaces
o 456 parking spaces for the residential uses,
o 98 parking spaces for residential guest uses (SEASP)
o 22 spaces are required for the commercial (SEASP)
8 Renderings and Materials
9 Landscape Plan
10 Ground Level Roof Deck
Lot Merger and Lot Line Adjustment
11 Potential Shopkeeper Road (Not Part of Project)
• The existing Shopkeeper Road dedicated public right-of-way is unbuilt. • Consistent with SEASP , the project was designed to not preclude the connection of Shopkeeper Road to Studebaker in an alignment that will not impact a delineated wetland. • The extension of Shopkeeper Road is not included as part of this application. 12 SEASP Figure 7-4
Potential Shopkeeper Road Alignment
The required findings have been made in the affirmative for the required entitlements:
• Site Plan Review
• Lot Line Adjustment
• Lot Merger
• Local Coastal Development Permit
Required Findings
13 • The project shall comply with Mitigation Measures included in Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR 02-16) (SCH # 2015101075). • The applicant shall file a restrictive covenant to maintain the 17 dwelling units as affordable housing for very-low income households for a period not less than 55 years.
• The existing Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions shall be amended to reflect the shared parking areas.
• The architectural, design, and materials shall comply with plans presented to the Planning Commission.
• Building shall meet LEED Silver certification.
• All landscaping shall comply with the plant palette included in Appendix D of SEASP . • Public access signage shall be included in the sign program and installed prior to occupancy.
Conditions of Approval
14 Conditions of Approval (cont.)
• The building shall contain all electric appliances with the residential units. • The project shall join the SEASP Transportation Management Association (TMA). • The final selection of window and door systems shall be in compliance with Bird- Safe Treatment requirements of SEASP .
• Final photometric plan required to demonstrate compliance with SEASP lighting requirements.
• All modifications to onsite vegetation, including trees, shall be in compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and SEASP policies. • Conditions related to parking policies in the vicinity of the Alamitos Bay Marina. • Tenant notification prior to and after issuance of demolition/building permits. (Added by Planning Commission)
15 Appeals
• Three third-party appeals were filed within the 10-day appeal period. o Lozeau Drury LLP , on behalf of SAFER
o Elizabeth Lambe, on behalf of the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust o Ann Cantrell and Anna Christensen, on behalf of Sierra Club Los Cerritos Wetlands Task Force
• The appeals cite concerns related to the environmental review process and approvals:
o Reliance on a PEIR.
o The appeals cites additional topics related to height, cumulative impacts, biological impacts, air quality impacts, hazardous material impacts, mitigation measure compliance, energy impacts, tribal cultural resources, and additional impacts allegedly not included in the PEIR. o Concerns related with the lot line adjustment for the site, realignment of the Shopkeeper Road extension, implementation of and compliance with the General Plan and SEASP polices, and cumulative impacts allegedly not considered as part of the SEASP PEIR. o The appeal asserts safety concerns for residents within proximity to oil operations and geological conditions.
16 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
• A PEIR State Clearinghouse No.2015101075) (EIR 02-16) ) (SCH No. 2023040370) was prepared pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines for the SEASP .
• Mitigation Measures were identified as part of the PEIR for the following topics:
o Air Quality
o Biological Resources
o Cultural Resources
o Hazards and Hazardous Materials
o Hydrology and Water Quality
o Noise
o Transportation and Traffic
• Mitigation identified in the Traffic and Transportation section included fair-share payments for identified traffic improvements and facilities necessary to mitigate the impacts of the SEASP . o TRAF-3 – Fair share payments for identified improvements in the City. o TRAF-4 - Fair share payments for identified improvements in Seal Beach. o TRAF-6 - Identify feasible operational physical improvements and associated fair share funding to impacts to state transportation facilities. for identified improvements in Seal Beach. 17 California Environmental Quality Act (cont.)
• The fair share contributions under Mitigation Measure TRAF-3, TRAF-4, and TRAF-6 include the following intersections for identified improvements:
o City of Long Beach
• Studebaker Road and State Route 22 (SR-22) Westbound Ramps • Shopkeeper Road and 2nd Street (Existing and 2035 with project conditions) • 2nd Street and Bay Shore Avenue
• Studebaker Road and SR-22 West- and Eastbound Ramps
• Marina Drive and 2nd Street
• Pacific Coast Highway and Studebaker Road
o City of Seal Beach
• Seal Beach Boulevard and 2nd Street/Westminster Boulevard • Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard
o State Facilities
• City and CalTrans shall jointly identify feasible operational and physical improvements and the associated fair- share funding contribution necessary to mitigate Project-related impacts to state transportation facilities. 18 California Environmental Quality Act (cont.)
• A Compliance Checklist (PECC 03-23) was prepared for the proposed project that included the following site- specific technical studies:
o Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis
o Biological Technical Report
o Historic Evaluation
o Geotechnical Investigation Report
o LID Feasibility Screening Memorandum
o Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
o Sea Level Rise Analysis
o Construction Noise Modeling
o Transportation Memorandum
o Sewer Area Study
o Will Serve Letters: The Water and Energy Resources Departments, and Southern California Edison • Based on the project-specific analysis, the project is consistent with and within the scope of the project previously analyzed as part of the SEASP PEIR and subject to the SEASP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and warrants no further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15168, 15162, and 15183.
19 Noticing
• Noticing of the hearing was completed in accordance with Section 21.21 of the Long Beach Municipal Code.
o A total of 184 notices of public hearing were mailed to a 300-foot radius on September 5, 2023.
o Six notices were posted on the project site.
o All commenting parties from the July 20, 2023, hearing were notified of the appeal hearing.
• Three public comments have been received in response to the required noticing. 20 Recommendation
Receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and consider third-party appeals from Lozeau Drury LLP , on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER) (APL23-011); Elizabeth Lambe, on behalf of the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust (APL23-012); and Ann Cantrell and Anna Christensen, on behalf of Sierra Club Los Cerritos Wetlands Task Force (APL23-014); Adopt a Resolution determining that the project is consistent with and within the scope of the project previously analyzed as part of the Southeast Area Specific Plan Program Environmental Impact report (State Clearinghouse No. 2015101075) (PECC 03-23) and subject to the Southeast Area Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and making certain findings and determinations related thereto and warrants no further environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15168, 15162, and 15183; Deny the appeals and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission to approve the Site Plan Review (SPR22-082), and adopt the proposed findings and conditions of approval related thereto, for a project within the city jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone consisting of the demolition of two existing office buildings (6615 and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway) on the site, and the construction of a new six-story mixed-use project consisting of 390 residential dwelling units (seventeen (17) of which are affordable [very low income]), 5,351 square feet of commercial/retail space in a building with 576 vehicular parking spaces in an above-grade parking structure, 196 bicycle parking spaces, and 45,141 square feet of public and private open space area within the Mixed-Use Community Core (MU-CC) designation of the Southeast Area Specific Plan (SP-2) located at 6615, 6621, and 6695 East Pacific Coast Highway; 21 Deny the appeals and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission to approve the Lot Line Adjustment (LLA22-002), and adopt the proposed findings and conditions of approval related thereto, to reposition the eastern property line between two parcels (APNs: 7237-020-050 and 7237-020-041);
Deny the appeals and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission to approve the approve a request to merge (LMG22-012) two (2) lots (APNs: 7237-020-050 and 7237-020-040) into a single 163,249-square-foot (3.75-acre) lot, and adopt the proposed findings and conditions of approval related thereto; and,
Deny the appeals and uphold the decision of the Planning Commission to approve the approve a Local Coastal Development Permit (LCDP22-049) for all discretionary and subdivision actions required for the proposed project and adopt the proposed findings and conditions of approval related thereto. (District 3)
Recommendation (Cont.)
22 Thank you
23 Christopher Koontz
Development Services Director
[email protected]
Elevations
24 Elevations
25 Floor Plan - Typical
• The ground floor areas include indoor
amenity areas adjacent to outdoor
common space.
• Residential units wrap three sides of
the above-grade parking structure.
• The orientation of the proposed
project is informed by the site shape,
requirements to provide open space
(public and private), location of
required view corridor/paseo, and site
access from Studebaker Road.
26 Open Space
• Required Open Space = 20 percent of project area (32,645 square feet) • Provided Open Space = 45,141 square feet
• Public Open Space Provided = 24,507 square feet
• Private (Outdoor) Open Space Provided = 20,634 square feet 27