Good evening, welcome to the October 9th
meeting of the City of Long Beach Planning Commission. If we could please call the meeting order.
Commissioner Castillo? President. Commissioner Clemson? Here. Commissioner LaFarda. Commissioner Ware. Vice chair Templin. President? Chair Lewis. Present. We have quorum. Thank you. Commissioner Clemson would you like to lead us in pledge of allegiance.
Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Commissioner. All right, with that, we have a director's report this evening.
Yes, good evening, Chair Vice chair and commissioners. The main thing I wanted to report this evening is to announce that our current planning officer Alexis Orpisa today is her last thing with the city of Long Beach. I just wanted to take a couple of minutes to congratulate her and thank her for her service here at the city. Alexis joined our team here in the planning bureau in 2016.
She started as a senior planner where she facilitated and guided a whole gamut of complex and controversial projects, including major mixed youth, commercial and residential entitlements. She moved up to the current planning officer role where she has guided our staff and team overseeing review of entitlement projects and processes during a period of major development in the city.
While also serving as the zoning administrator where we've had increased length and complexity of agendas in cases during that time. More importantly, Alexis has provided strong and steady leadership for our team during what has been truly a crazy few years.
First moving to our new city hall, which was a big endeavor to move all of our files and staff and work that takes open a new permits center.
And then the COVID pandemic and shifts to remote work. Major development cycles here, huge complex projects, multiple changes and vacancies to the staff and management team.
Not to mention several changes to state law, changes to our first major overhaul of the land use element and zoning code and a few decades.
And a few other changes like our local emergency ordinance where we've been reviewing projects much faster. She's done it all with grace and this mile.
And on a more personal note, I feel genuinely lucky to have worked with and learned from Alexis over these past several years, especially together on the management team.
She's intelligent, thoughtful, caring and kind and she brings all of that to her decisions recommendations. So I just want to congratulate Alexis on her new role as planning manager for the city of Hermosa Beach and to wish her well in her next chapter.
And thank her for truly helping to make Long Beach a better place.
We're going to miss you. And I do hope for the best for you. I hope they appreciate what they're getting.
So thank you so much. Thank you for all the time to help us up here and research things for us and brought it forth.
We wouldn't be where we were without you. So I appreciate it. Thank you.
Likewise, I'd like to echo that in the city of Hermosa Beach is just taking a big chunk of art knowledge just to turn the knowledge out. So they will benefit from your knowledge and experience and hopefully you can share some of our wisdom and bring it back to us as well.
And we didn't get to work to have it for too long, but I do appreciate the work that you put in to helping us understand what we're presented. So I wish you the best of luck at Hermosa Beach. Thank you.
I know you enjoy all of these accolades. I know that makes you feel comfortable.
My entire seven years on the commission you have been here and your professionalism and your knowledge has been so helpful to me as a commissioner.
And also in my work with the city being able to contact you and talk to you and learn from all of your experience and knowledge has really been beneficial to me personally in here on the commission.
So I just want to wish you all the best and I hope that we will see you around Long Beach.
Thank you so much for the kind of words. It's really been a privilege to serve the city of Long Beach and you will see me around.
I still have family that was here.
Good luck and forward to it. All right.
Thank you for the director's report.
That I think we are ready for a regular agenda.
Have our first item of business please.
Recommendation to accrue the minutes of the planning commission meeting on Thursday October 5th, 2023.
Thank you to have a motion. Commissioner Templin.
And a second of Commissioner Clemson, a person a second.
Any discussion or comments on the minutes is presented?
No.
Any members of the public that would like to address the commission on the minutes from our October 5th meeting.
Seeing none.
Do you have any virtual comments?
If you are joining us virtually and you would like to make public comment on the minutes.
If you use the raise hand function at this time.
There appears to be no further public comment on this.
Thank you.
I'll bring it back behind the rail and if we can have the roll call please.
Motion carries.
Thank you.
Next item of business.
Recommendation to receive and file a presentation for national community planning month.
Terran commissioners.
I would like to provide a brief presentation to celebrate national community planning month, which is celebrated in October of every year.
And as we begin the celebration, I just want to start as we think about planning for and with communities with an acknowledgement of the indigenous lands.
But we occupy here and so would like to acknowledge the Gabriela Lina Tongva and kids peoples as the traditional land takers of this land and pay our respects.
And celebrating national community planning month.
Here is a photo of our planning team.
Getting ready to go out and do some field work last week to help support our technical analysis for our downtown plan update.
And you all know that this month we're also marking the name change for our department.
So we are now the Long Beach community development department and our updated mission is shown here is a team of dedicated experts who work with our community to build and sustain a safe resilient and equitable Long Beach.
And our vision is to be a leader in the delivery of effective community development services.
And I start by talking about community development because that is the department under which the planning bureau is situated were one of five bureaus in the department, which also includes building in safety.
Code enforcement and housing and neighborhood services along with planning and of course our administration bureau.
As we talk about planning and looking at how we regulate development as a city.
Our general plan is that broad, long-range policy document that guides future development whereas our zoning ordinance is the primary tool to implement those policies.
And general plan policies and zoning guides our development review processes including planning and discretionary or entitlement permits like conditional use permits.
And once entitled projects must contain building permits to ensure they're built safely and to meet both zoning and building code standards.
So what exactly do city planners do?
We interpret and apply local county and state ordinances and regulations.
We implement the city's development review processes and we develop long-range plans and update local regulations to address emerging challenges.
Here are a few photos of our planners at work out in the fields including looking at mobility issues and challenges and doing a final inspection for a new residential project and downtown.
Just to give you a sense of the scale of what we do.
We have 24 planners in the city and you can see that over the last fiscal year, which ended September 30, we process nearly 700 entitlement applications.
Over 600 historic preservation cases and assisted close to 20,000 customers both on our zoning line and at the permit center.
And we facilitated close to 50 community outreach and engagement events during that time for various plan update processes.
Just this year alone, especially with the state of emergency, where we've had a focus on facilitating affordable housing and housing development planning as process and improve entitlements for over 1500 housing units, just this year, including 532 affordable housing units.
We had 717 affordable housing units produced in the entire 5th cycle from 2014 to 2021.
So not every project that's entitled at building permit but that is still a huge accomplishment.
And we've done it faster and more quickly under this expedited process with the state of emergency.
We have a lot of ongoing major planning efforts here in planning. Again, related to doing expedited review under the state of emergency updating our entire citywide zoning code.
And the map on the right gives you a sense of the bright green and bright blue where we've resumed already and adopted those new zones and then the other various areas where those are underway and will be coming to the commission shortly.
And other efforts to implement our housing element related to fair housing efforts to produce housing and high resource areas facilitating more mixed income housing than we have in the past including through our inclusionary housing ordinance and our enhanced density bonus program and working on a religious facilities overlay to help facilitate affordable housing collocated with religious facilities.
We're also updating our downtown plan and our downtown shoreline plans. You can see a couple photos of that on the right. We are updating our victory and Santa Cruz Park design guidelines, which we'll talk about later this evening.
We're preparing to update our open space element taking various actions to implement.
For climate action plan, we reinstated the Mills Act Historic Preservation Program this year, and you can see the nearly 200 folks that came out for a workshop for that earlier this year.
And our updating our historic context statements to better reflect the diverse communities of Long Beach, as shown on the slide.
Also, overhauling our subdivision ordinance, which we'll also talk about this evening, creating an ADU and SB9 local ordinance, which we'll hear more about next month.
Making minor amendments to the zoning code to improve and tweak while we work to overhaul and resolve more comprehensively.
Providing, looking at parking reforms, including a change of use parking, which we'll talk about shortly as well.
Providing sequence support for other city departments, not just our private development projects, leasing with the coastal commission, operating our permit center and providing a customer open house and improving our online and website services.
Here are a few things we've been up to just this month, including fieldwork, various outreach activities, putting together community advisory groups for some of our plan update processes.
And we have an event coming up next week in partnership with the American Institute of Architects Long Beach Chapter on Sustainability at Cal State Long Beach and more to come soon.
We've also received recognition regionally and across the state for our work this year, including an award of excellence for the housing element update from APA Los Angeles, an award of merit for our climate action plan, and a special award of excellence for outstanding young planner of the whole region, Mary and Cronin, who you'll hear from later this evening.
And we were the only city got recognition from the LA Conservancy this year, and that was for work on our race and suburbanization context statement.
So with that, I want to say thank you to our planning team and our community and honor of national community planning month. Here are our planners and action with our community and that concludes my report.
I think we should just stop the meeting there really.
It's amazing the amount of work that you guys do.
I know we see the in-products that we're looking through, but what funnels down to get to us is just a phenomenal amount of work.
And so thank you to you and all of your team for doing that.
Any other comments from the commissioners on the report?
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Similar.
I just continues to press me the amount of change and activity that goes on and certainly the struggles from a staffing perspective over the last 18 to 24 months have been staggering.
So thank you for keeping the wheels on the bus and doing your best. Thank you.
Thank you and I want to acknowledge I worked for similar organization that has a public board and you know, I know the flurry of the board reports that we put together and those are every other month, not every other week.
Let alone the council meetings and everything else that folks need to do.
And I just want to thank you because I think a lot of the work that you're doing is is going to help improve the city and I'm really proud to be working alongside you folks with that.
Thank you.
It was very encouraging to see how many parts of the city we have actually are in the process of uploading a rezoning right now.
I know that seem like a very daunting task and it still does, but it's it's nice to see areas of the map now that are that are done as well as the number of affordable housing units that's a pretty significant increase from boy were in the last cycle.
So thank you again for your report.
So with that I think.
We should have probably started with the motion but we'll take one now for receiving the National Community Planning Month presentation.
I have a motion from Commissioner Templar and a second from Commissioner Castillo.
Any members of the public wish to address the commission on the presentation.
Seeing them do you have any virtual comments.
If you're joining us virtually and you would like to make public comment on this item please use raise hand function at this time.
We do have someone with their hand up.
You have been on mute it.
You have three minutes to provide public comment.
Oh hello can you hear me.
Yes we can.
Thank you.
It was more of a question than a comment if I may.
I was curious as to why the the name change.
Like starting this this this month just just if I if I may ask a question.
Is that the end of your comments.
Will with that.
Are those are those the extent of your comments.
Yes.
Thank you very much for that.
All right bring it back behind the rail to any of the commissioners have any questions.
Perhaps staff would like to answer that question for us.
Yes so thank you for the question so October first marks the new fiscal year here at the city so.
It was part of the budget adoption process that our department proposed a name change to the department and that was reviewed by the city council and the public through the budget review process and the budget goes into effect.
The first of this year so that's why it changed this month.
Perfect thank you good timing with it being a national community cleaning month.
All right are there any other comments.
Discussion seeing that if we get up the vote please.
Motion carries.
Thank you if we get up the next item with business commissioner chair Lewis before we move on to the next item.
We will be taking evidence do you mind swearing the witnesses for us.
I would love this for the witnesses. Thank you.
Can you be planning on giving testimony to the commission this evening if you wouldn't mind standing please.
I don't actually have our.
Do you swear for the testimony that you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Thank you may be seated.
All right if we could have the Biden business please.
Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record conclude the public hearing and consider a third party appeal filed by the.
I think that that's organization represented by Melinda cotton.
Julie Dean and Brian Cochrane representing except category like categorical exemption C E 23093 and uphold the zoning administrators approval of a local coastal development permit and adopt the proposed findings and conditions of approval there too.
For the installation of a permanent parklet.
In a portion of the public right away currently designated for two on street parking spaces, abutting a restaurant at 52 15 east second street in the neighborhood pedestrian zoning district district three.
Thank you and before we start just for the commission and the public's.
This is a appeal so we will have a staff report followed by the appellant parking not parklets and following that will have the applicant to will have some time to respond to those comments.
If I could ask that staff and the applicant and the panel and I'll limit their comments to 10 minutes total so that we can get through this in a timely and effective way with that will hand it over to the staff report.
Good evening chair project planner Marianne Cronon has this presentation for you this evening.
Thank you.
Good evening chair and commissioners before you this evening is a third party appeal of a local coastal development permit or LCDP for a parklet but in the open sesame restaurant along second street in the Belmont Shore area.
The zoning administrator initially heard this LCDP application on August 14th, 2023.
The ZA decision was appealed thereafter within the 10 day window on August 24, 2023.
This hearing is to receive supporting documentation and the record conclude the public hearing and consider this third party appeal for the local coastal development permit for the parklet.
The project area is located within the second street public right of way area between yeto avenue and corona avenue.
The project area a but's private property addressed as five to one five east second street located on the east side of second street.
The open sesame restaurant occupies the building that abuts this public space.
The site is surrounded by commercial and restaurant uses on both sides of second street residential uses are located across the rear alley.
This slide shows the project location with respect to second street all improvements would be completed within the public right of way.
On this slide you will also see nearby public right of way parklet application that was before this commission on appeal.
That is located at 5236 second street which is the project sponsor for the parklet would be the legend's restaurant.
On August 3rd, 2023 the planning commission of held the zoning administrators decision to approve the local coastal development permit at legends.
This would occupy two parking spaces and this approval was considered in light of the cumulative analysis that you'll hear in today's presentation.
It's important to note that while the LCDP is approved by this commission the parklet at legends is not installed and is subject to the public works process that is undergoing.
So while if you drove out to the site you wouldn't see that parklet installed today it is approved at this commission level but still has other regulatory bodies to be heard before.
And then the last while not visible or installed today was considered in the cumulative analysis.
As shown on this slide also there are green areas that are public parking lots that are off street parking lots and those are operated by the city of Long Beach and are occupied by the public and used on meter and as well as a base basis.
During the COVID-19 pandemic temporary parklets were established under the emergency proclamation this slide shows the previous temporary installation.
It should be known that the Department of Public Works maintains the sidewalk dining and parklets handbook that predates the COVID-19 pandemic.
That handbook and the policies and clothes in that handbook were approved by city council with the intent to enhance the pedestrian room and encourage pedestrian activity in a safe and organized manner and to establish rules and regulations to ensure.
Best management practices are installed along with those parklets.
It should be note that the parklet handbook while the terminology says a permanent parklet.
The design of that is to be a raised foundation that's even with the sidewalk that a buts.
So they can be completely removable in the event that a new business owner does not want to sponsor that parklet in the future.
It can be completely removed and reinstated as parking spaces within the public right of one.
This installation that you see here was done amidst the COVID-19 pandemic and the goal for this applicant today is to install a permanent parklet that meets all the provisions and standards of the Department of Public Works standard specifications to ensure an orderly and regulatory.
I has been placed on this new parklet.
This slide shows the existing on-site conditions which includes the two parking spaces that were restored upon removal of the temporary installation that I showed you on the previous slide.
As you can see, there are existing fixtures within the street that include a bike rack as well as parking meters and signage.
The applicant does occupy the public sidewalk dining ordinance requirements and those are adhered to on this railing that you see in the bottom right hand corner.
There are nine existing law street parking spaces for which are in tandem at the rear.
In addition to this area for parking, there are parking spaces that are used by the employees and by the public.
In addition to the location of trash receptacles and delivery lock boxes that serve the business.
Normally, parklets do not require planning approval as they are entirely situated within the public right of way that are under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works.
But due to the location of this application within the coastal zone, a local coastal development permit or LCDP is required.
The proposal would remove two-meter parking spaces within the public right of way to accommodate a 256 square foot parklet which includes the removable foundation railing screens at drainage gaps, wheel stops, umbrellas, and solar LED lighting.
It is important to note, no, a pavement excavation would occur during the parklet installation and the parklet could be removed in the future at the request of the property owner and a restaurant owner and or at the requirement of the city.
The items included on the proposed plans that are before you and your package are the permitted items to occupy the public parklet in conformance with public work standards.
As outlined in the parklet handbook, the Department of Public Works holds all applicants that have parklets are required to pay an annual fee to maintain the parklet.
These fees are collected also for any parking remu meters that are removed to accommodate the parklet.
This slide shows the extent of improvements for the parklet described on that previous slide.
The new parklet would be 256 square feet in size and shown as shown.
The election on plans have a total of 17 seats. Within the sidewalk area, the existing sidewalk will remain untouched and remain in place for the path of travel. The overall design would require compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, including the installation of guard rails to ensure that tables and visitors do not spill into the path of travel.
The overall height of all structures shown on the plans do not exceed 10 feet in height.
On the plans you also will see that a drainage gap between the edge of the sidewalk and curb and the parklet would include screens to ensure that debris flow can be collected.
The conditions of approval, so if there is any trash that gets enclosed in the drainage gap, it can be collected in a timely manner to ensure the removal of litter, as well as the passage of stormwater in the event of a rain.
We will move to needed parking spaces along second street and in consideration of the overall availability of off street and on street parking, this map was prepared in conjunction with the Department of Public Works.
As I previously noted, the analysis does include the consideration of the legends parklet, which removed a total of two parking spaces.
Therefore, this analysis looked at a total of four parking spaces presently approved and under application here today for consideration of cumulative impacts to access to the coast as part of this mobility analysis.
Under current conditions with no parklets installed on second street, the city maintains a total of 1,855 parking spaces that available to the public during the operation of a typical restaurant use.
This includes meter parking spaces along second street and bedding streets, as well as private parking property parking lots but are open to the public and maintain by the city along beach.
It is worth noting that street parking that is not metered or maintained by the city along beach was not included in this, so that is additive of the 1,855 parking spaces as that is highly subjective to the size of vehicle that can be parked in those areas that are not marked as red or curb areas.
With consideration of both parklets and this application, and included in your packet, there are service of bus transit along this corridor that is served by long beach transit.
In addition, there are bicycle hubs operated by the mobility group and our public works department, as well as the circuit is shown on here, which is a local circulator that can also serve this area.
And in consideration of all the forms of mobility and the encouragement of the use of non-vehicular travel modes, the staff did find that the findings can be made in the affirmative and the loss of a net of four parking spaces amidst the available bus vehicle parking as well as other modes of non motorized transportation.
There is sufficient access to this area that would be maintained with this application.
For reference, due to the consideration of cumulative effects on the right-hand side, you will see the current parklet applications that have been presently filed with the planning bureau today, which includes legends and the application before you.
There are other applications that you can see under those bullets. Those are under staff review and are not subject to this hearing today, but we wanted to be very full disclosure on the amount of parklets that are coming forth.
The other consideration that we did look at is the location of this parklet in amidst legends. So this location is across the street from legends and not on the same geographical block.
In consideration of that spacing as well as the items before you right now on this TDM plan slide, the applicant does participate in the bus program for employees as well as providing encouragement to both patrons and employees to utilize all non-motorized transportation options.
In addition, the applicant has provided a TDM plan as well as other ways to reduce vehicular travel to and from this establishment, which also includes incentives for employees that use non-motorized transportation to get a meal during their shift or other things that include compliance with green business certification intent.
So therefore with the conditions of approval to create a holistic and a very encouraging situation for which both employees and patrons are encouraged to use non-vehicular travel modes.
The staff did find that the TDM plan submitted met the findings to encourage that multimodal approach to access in the coast.
It is important to note that conditions of approval were included as part of the zoning administrators approval of this LCDP.
In conditions included emphasis on public access signage as public parklets as required under the parklet handbook are required to be public open to the public at all times.
Therefore, conformance with public works standards and maintaining an active public work application with paid fees would ensure that compliance can be maintained as well as enforcement action if needed.
As noted previously a required TDM plan was required of the applicant as well as compliance with alcoholic beverage control standards.
These conditions are intended to ensure compliance with not only local coastal program, but also the coastal act to encourage public access for all and creating space for all rather than accommodating only two vehicle parking spaces for two individuals at one time.
A third party appeal was filed in opposition to the loss of parking spaces as well as identifying concerns related to access related to the mayor consists with disabilities act compliance, cumulative parking impacts and as well as consistency with the local coastal program and prior city planning decisions.
The appeal documents as well as all public comments received during the zoning administrator hearings are included in your packet for review and consideration.
In addition, it should be noted that staff does look at projects on a multi-modal basis as well as consistency with the local coastal program and staff did was able to make the findings that.
The inclusion of all required conditions would create a public space for all rather than a space for two vehicles and that the public.
Parklet would create a space for the community in the intents of the city council's approval of the parklet program.
It is important to note also and we noted in the staff presentation during the zoning administrator hearing.
Conditions of approval are requirements and therefore failure to adhere to these conditions of approval can result in enforcement action and as previously noted the parklet is permanent by name but it is removable so if we find that somebody is not acting in the spirit of this requirements that can be revoked to remove at this time.
There are required findings to recommend approval of a local coastal development permit and this project is not a religious land use short term rental prohibition permitted dwelling unit or motel conversion.
Therefore some of the findings are not applicable applicable.
Therefore the remaining findings is what I'm going to focus on for this short slide but is to relate to the consistency of the LCP related to public access policies as well as best management practices.
Parklet would be open to the public at all times with opportunities for co use at the abutting restaurant.
In consideration of public concerns related access conditions of approval include operating conditions relating to a TDM plan making sure there's public signage as well as encouragement of using multi modal options.
The project does include the net gain of public space for all and therefore as conditioned with this application and included in your packet staff does recommend approval.
According to the California Environmental Quality Act, this project is eligible for a categorical exemption per section 15303 for new construction or conversion of small structures as this is a removable structure and there would be no ground disturbance with the installation.
Public comments both in support and opposition of this proposal have been received and included in your packets including all comments received during the zoning administrator procedures.
Therefore staff does recommend the approval of the local coastal development permit which includes upholding that zoning administrator decision on August 14, 2023.
And the acceptance of all associated environmental considerations which include the categorical exemption.
This concludes staff's presentation both the appellant and applicant are present available for questions as well as the Department of Public Works has a representative that's available for any questions.
Thank you.
Thank you for that presentation.
Commissioner's any questions for staff.
Thank you.
Can I can.
Yes, and this is in relation to the conditions of approval specifically.
I'd like to inquire on provisions 26 and 29.
26 speaks to the permit and all development rights here in shelter many three years from the effective date and that's how that begins.
And then I am 29 is in the event of a transfer of ownership of the property involved in this application the owner do owner shall be fully informed of the permitted use and development.
Between those two and I didn't see this in the other conditions of approval.
What is the timeline and or validity of this permit.
And what are our options in terms of limiting the duration of the overall permit in terms of renewal.
So it sounds like a simple question commissioner, but it's not so the item that's before you is the coastal permit.
So the standard length of a coastal permit is three years but this commission has within its power to modify that on any given project so you can make it shorter.
And I don't think you can make it longer because the restrictions of the municipal code.
But that's not the only approval necessary to operate a parklet, right.
So this also permit is is good for three years and assuming that it becomes vested during those three years it's.
Good going forward didn't have to come back again and again, but they do have to come back to the city and again and again.
And so they're approval from the Department of Public Works, the actual permit to occupy the right away is a one year permit.
And from a risk management standpoint, they have to present new insurance because they end up not by the city every year to the public works department.
But that's a ministerial review, it doesn't go before any commission, it's no one's making a judgment call if it's good or bad, they're checking whether the insurance is correct and they're renewing the permit.
So those are the parameters as they're set up, you know, dropped it today, but if the commission wanted to do something different, we're all all glad to work with you and effectuate that.
Thank you. Thank you for that clarification and that's the spirit of which I want to understand because this is all new ground for us.
We've had two of these surface and I want to understand how we as a commission could best plan and or administer some of these programs in particular around when things go wrong or things happen to go sideways other than our intended objectives are what resources we have.
And I'd like to make sure that we have appropriate repealing authority and that from a qualitative perspective we have an opportunity to review it either through the zoning administrator level or some other mechanism, not necessarily the planning commission.
So that's that's my might level of inquiry in terms of what those triggers are and how that would be handled.
Yeah, so even, you know, silent conditions, we always have the ability to revisit an approval if they're in violation of the conditions or if they're creating a new sense.
So even if they're not to the letter, violating any of these conditions if they create a new sense, we can open an inquiry.
The request information, ultimately hold a hearing and if necessary, revoke the permit.
It's not an easy thing to do, but there's also no way for you to impose a condition that.
It says make it easy to revoke the permit because the property interest the applicant has certain rights and we have to provide the notice and we have to provide them do process and our decisions need to be rational and supported by evidence.
So, but if the concern is about enforcement, you have a few options, right?
So I don't know that this commission wants to be receiving annual reports on every parklet in the city, but certainly you could require the applicant to submit those to the zoning administrator.
Whether it's one time or annually or whatever the commission has a whole decides to do.
You could place a term on the parklet.
I think staff would recommend against that, but just giving you all of your options, you could say.
This approval is only good for five years. They would then have to come back, pay new fees, apply for a new
Coastal permit, come before the commission and complete their case about, I guess, why it should be further extended.
By practice, we don't generally do that because that does mean if they operate perfectly, we're going to reward that perfect operation by charging them a lot of money and making them go through the hearing process again.
So those are just some factors to think about.
Thank you for that and one final question for the indulging. One of the concerns I have and I know from
I anticipate some of the feedback from community will be giving permission and perpetuity.
And although there's a lot of checks and thank you for explaining that.
We could best revisit our decisions in the future of things, again, I'm looking at it from a scenario of
Re-valuating the situation as things evolve. And I know in one of our previous approvals, we had included a provision that if there was a change in ownership, not just necessarily just the property, but also the business that it isn't inherent.
So we could, again, as a trigger for us to revisit that, depending if the operator to your point was doing well.
But a new operator comes in, that's an opportunity to revisit.
Yeah, so we didn't draft it that way, but I think from the staff table, that would be a good revision that I think we would recommend that it run only with this operator and that if there's a change in operator that they would need to obtain a new permit.
Thank you.
Can you just clarify from here, we're seeing this item today because it's a local coastal permit.
Are the other parklets that are approved throughout the city that are not in the coastal zone is planning at the staff level still putting conditions of approval to those or do
Displaining not see those in the same capacity that we see these local coastal permit applications.
Planning staff still reviews as part of the process for the public walkway occupancy permit at the initial stage, but it's not a planning entitlement in the same way where the local coastal permit has to go through the zoning administrator process and can be appealed to commission.
These parklets that are happening in the coastal zone are, in essence, have a higher bar of more restrictions placed on them. We have more control over how they're operated with our conditions of approval than we would.
Other parklets, all right.
Thank you.
All right, with that, I would like to invite the applicant parking or parking up parklets if they wanted to make any presentation to the commission.
And would the applicant like to reserve any time.
We clear about process and time limits because I'm here on behalf of a group of both here in person but also people who couldn't be here tonight.
I want to be fair and represent the entire effort effectively and engage with you as closely as possible.
First off, is this the queue to change the slides? Okay, and it's just left or right.
Okay, so I don't need to call anything on that. I would ask if at about six minute mark, if I can get a little queue that says we're at that mark and I'll try and rain in from there.
I do want to leave some free time for questions and opportunities if necessary, but I think we can proceed.
Any questions? You can, that doesn't have to come from your time.
So there will be an opportunity for the commission to inquire and ask questions after your presentation.
I know that you are a group of appellants.
So you represent the entirety of the appellants.
This is a parent time and then public comment is for public comment time.
If you have a parent that are not presenting, that want to withdraw as an appellant and provide public comments, they would need to do that at this time.
And we need to record it on the record that they are no longer an appellant in this matter.
Does that make sense?
Thanks.
I might use Malinda cotton.
I've been out of town for a month.
We've been on a camping and RV visit family and relatives and trips, but no cell phone, no contacts.
So the presentation was made done by Brian and Julie.
So if I could speak separately and public comment, I'd appreciate that.
It's back in New York.
Well, I guess you're an applicant.
So if you would like to withdraw yourself as an applicant, you can do that.
Or Brian could save a couple of minutes at the end for you to speak during the applicant time.
I'm sure we could accommodate it.
And just to clarify, you're an appellant.
I'm sorry. Thank you.
Okay. Yeah. I assume there's no future appeal process for this.
So I could withdraw.
But I am.
If you want to say an appellant, I'm sure we can accommodate it.
If you have a few minutes that you want to add in to it, which is what public comment would normally be limited to.
Thank you.
I'm sure we can fit that within your group's presentation.
All right.
So Julie, do you mind just putting a lot on the record press?
It's helpful when you say it.
And I don't say it has to be your presentation.
Thank you, Ms. Dean.
Hi. Yeah.
So item number three, my name is Julie Dean.
And I'm going to remove my name as an appellant and speak during public comment.
Thank you, Mrs. Dean.
Thank you very much.
My name is Brian Conferent.
I am a resident of Long Beach.
And I'm not sure it happened for 20 plus years.
You know, ideal situation.
This will be more of a dialogue.
We've got questions and we're certain you do as well.
But apps and that ability to have a genuine dialogue tonight.
We're left to post some vital questions for you on this issue this evening.
They're at the core of the permit application and the park of the issue itself for our community.
And maybe for the city as a whole.
Fundamentally, does this park fit within the LCP and more importantly, it's intent?
Second, what are the logical and inevitable impacts on our neighborhood of this park with and those coming after it being approved?
And third, when is enough enough?
I'll direct you to the slides now.
This is our presentation.
This is from the LCP.
It outlines again what the principles are within that and how it's meant to guide the city and its approach to these kind of programs.
The conditions are approval.
As we've heard discussed so far, we feel there.
We view them as an adequate and full of holes.
There should be a condition making managers responsible and their employees responsible for stopping customers,
encroaching on the walkways.
That five foot space is crucial.
We see and have documented this throughout the last two years even when there wasn't a bar foot there.
This is common to the business.
There should be a condition mandating staff from treating the sidewalk as restaurant property.
They ignore pedestrians and ADRIP, ADRIP regularly.
And they require management supervision of such.
You'll see a lot of reviews here.
These have been taken over the last year or two, but mostly recently as much as possible.
This is the kind of conditions we see typically on second street with open sesame.
These conditions are approval.
They're not consistent among the three businesses so far before you.
And that includes Belmont Brink Company, which is at the pier.
There's umbrellas allowed in some circumstances, not in others.
As you'll see later on, we document those umbrellas in crotch regularly and impede progress along the street.
And safety for people along.
Belmont Brink Company seemingly having a private negotiation with the city and planning.
And the zoning administrator about whether umbrellas will be allowed or what kind of coverings.
That wasn't part of the conditions of use there.
They are going to do sometimes and sometimes not.
The fundamental issue here is that none of these conditions are ever enforceable or monitored by the city.
We've been watching this condition for three plus years now.
These things are on the ground, lived realities by our residents constantly.
We do not see any enforcement.
We do not see any mechanism by which people are going to report them and have timely and efficacious response from the city.
These sandwich boards exist outside the rules of second street and the conditions of use already in place for where they're allowed.
Nothing's been enforced to date.
Just blocks away.
Another restaurant has its umbrellas-priced dairously or the sidewalk in the streets.
bars which are supposed to be prohibited from advertising their specials and drinks.
Do that regularly.
No enforcement.
That's a neon moving sign.
It's not supposed to be a lot of second street or any conditions of use.
It's still there.
It's never been enforced.
And brellas, heaters, chairs, and more on the sidewalk zone have always encroached there.
They've been that way before COVID before the temporary purpose.
They exist now when the temporary purpose have been removed.
You can't account for the stray things that come up.
But these are the kind of encroachments that are allowed.
And that are come as a consequence to having the parklets and sidewalk dining as they exist.
People will use these spaces for these even if they're approved or not.
The restaurant owners and their staff and their employees will never enforce these conditions.
Request in place.
They don't want to say no.
Mr. Cooper and if I may.
We're at six minutes.
Oh great.
We'll move faster.
All right.
Let's get through this.
The conditions of use are never monitored.
These businesses already.
We're here.
You have to second half minutes left.
We'll give you a little time.
Oh, thank you.
Okay.
These existing sidewalk dining conditions that have been in place that's the 1990s.
None of the businesses for the most part have adhered to that.
They encroach any work from a number of couple inches to a full foot out into the
pedestrian walkway.
This is El Pollo Loco, which is a full foot and a little bit over that into the space.
One of the most recent installations.
We're going to be at somehow.
In that entire space of time.
No one's ever enforced that or tried to rain it in.
Curve management as a whole.
These permits are being granted before there's a curb management study that's scheduled
to take place.
Why rush these through now when there's no comprehensive data behind the impacts that these will
occur.
Parkland application.
You should not occur until after the pilots.
pilot programs and studies that are promised.
This is an unknown territory for everyone in the city.
Delivery trucks are one of the.
Giant huge impacts on our community.
They continue park on second street blocking transit stops.
Blocking residential vehicles, blocking sight lines.
The drivers are unhappy about the conditions, but they're required to serve bars and restaurants.
That's what they do.
So they block it.
They park there for hours at a time.
They move their carts up and down the street.
So they don't want to move because once they find a spot in an already impacted area.
They don't want to keep moving forward.
You can see some of the impacts here.
These stay for hours.
They block transit stops multiple times.
Six buses failed to be able to stop at this one recently.
There's a condition that we're statement that the operator shall discourage use of locking
bicycles or leash pets on the relaying of the Parkland dining area.
As you saw on the previous photos and if we have witnessed repeatedly and documented, that is never a condition imposed.
It's never enforced by staff.
It's not enforced by the city.
There's no known mechanism for people to call in and let people know that there's an issue with it.
But it's happened all the time.
And then the language has been changed perpetually from the zoning minister hearing on the BBC and now to this.
Where it's discouraged.
BBC blocked it.
The actual prohibition of something.
So the condition has changed discourage.
How many types?
What kind of teeth does that have in it to make it meaningful to the community?
The public access provision of being allowed to sit there.
That's disingenuous completely.
People will not sit in a fence area.
That's being sort of drinks and food paying customers.
They're not going to sit there.
This is part of the city's original vision and picture with Parkland's permit to be.
There was something called Barclad's Mayor Garcia promoted this free community thing in the space.
Not single Parkland community exists in that circumstances.
They will not be enforced.
This condition will exist will be posted, but no one will need it.
No one will appreciate it.
It will not be used effectively.
It's a soft to the public to say that's open to the public.
There was three minutes left.
Thank you.
At the California Coastal Commission meeting, the majority of the commissioners.
Eight of twelve indicated that a fence and a railing like this is envisioned would not be effective.
That was in just a week ago.
These go to the comments from the Coastal Commission at last week's meeting.
They said if the propositions to truly use space for public use, there would be no barriers.
We recommend that the city pool together a holistic program.
It found that the approach to the BBC's application and the approach that they understood to be coming for these parklets was not adequate and effective in communicating the issues and addressing the concerns that the community has in general.
I do want to underscore, they found some substantial issue with the privatization of public space at BBC at the pier.
These are within the Coastal Zone, but not under the Coastal Commission's purview, but they did express those concerns about this program in general.
In San Diego, they used the initiative they think called spaces as places and regulations requiring businesses that displace parking to create new new parking for those occupying outdoor dining.
It had concerns about elimination of any parking spaces.
We're looking at four already for the two applicants on Second Street, you see.
Three more applications, four more applications pending. The list of the city and the public works. That is when he's 20 of them until fairly recently. So you're looking at the inaudible consequences of that.
The photos in the staff reports typically show empty pristine conditions. We're kind of mystified that these idyllic presentations come forward. It doesn't show impacts at all.
We show you the impacts and that's the reality. This is the lived reality of our residents.
Residents have also spoken and open to these managers and staff frequently about these issues.
They've never been addressed. No mitigation occurs whatsoever with the staff on site.
Again, this is typical. They have their host to stand out front into the sidewalk space.
This is their, the woman in the left is one of their hostesses and one of the staff members there.
They are blocking the pedestrian way with something hardy and crouching in the sidewalk.
I have another question for you.
We circle back to one of the key questions posed at the start. When will enough be enough?
That's not just our question. It was posed by the zoning administrator, Alexis or Pesa after legends that already got.
It's part could have proved and open sesame was first being considered.
And there don't seem to be any guides or specifications transparent to the public or anyone as to what densities do much.
What displacement we over some imaginary line.
We think the coastal commission wants to answer as well.
This again speaks to the LCP and its definition of what fell much shorter than the quarter is meant to be.
This is now. We see day to day and what you would not see if you were able to walk there right now.
A survey in 2021 asked people how they felt about parklets.
It was addressing the temporary parking program.
People who were in the community unequivocally denied that.
We have a petition with more than six hundred names of local residents.
People live in the area that are impacted by this.
That oppose these unequivocally as a wholesale thing in their community and each application individually.
They recognize that the density is inappropriate for this.
They may be perfect in other parts of the city.
They do not fit our community.
I'm sorry.
Almost wrapped up here.
In the past the B.S.B.A. President has worked with the city and the district council member to put angle parking that changed the number of lanes on Ocean Boulevard.
This is more traffic to second street.
Second street is already impacted area.
The next thoroughfare is available for people in our community.
All of these do not pose a possibility for second street turning into a plaza of easy traffic and ease of transportation there.
I'll get close to the end here.
We just want to say.
Open Sesame was able to close down what was already a second location that Ocean at second and the ghetto.
It's a place that essentially transported those seats to a parklet temporarily and now wants to do it permanently.
What you're going to hear tonight will inevitably be the usual platitudes from the owner or the representatives saying they care about their community.
They will mitigate.
They really want to work with you on solving the problems.
The example, the concrete reality is that this will never happen.
There's no mechanism for it to be there.
There's no stop gaps that you guys can instantly instill at this point to make a difference on that.
It will go down a road that will just inevitably hurt the community around it.
You'll also hear from supporters as you'll know from the correspondence that went before the zoning administrator.
Those are 90% supporters from outside the community.
They are customers, friends of the business.
Our 600 plus people live in the community documented to care about their streets of quality life here.
We just asked that you deny this permit.
It's not appropriate for this one.
In aggregate, it's not appropriate for them all to be there.
These fit other places in the city.
We don't think they belong here at all and we appreciate listening to this.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments.
Mr. Cochrane.
This cotton, would you like to address the commission for a few minutes?
Good evening, Commissioner.
Thank you for your time.
My name is Melinda Cotton.
I'm a 40-year resident of Belmont Shore.
I participated in half a dozen parking studies.
And I was on the city's transportation task force that was run by Agado.
The question before you today, is it a benefit to the public to allow open system to take over two parking spaces.
In order for ad seating for 17 restaurant patrons.
And as we learned today, planning bureau already has for more second street parking applications.
Restaurants on second street already have their allowed outdoor sidewalk dining.
They have for many years.
Public meter money that pays for the bond issues that allowed the widening of second street sidewalks for outdoor dining.
And the purchase of additional parking lots to take in the slack.
Each year until 2040, the first $200,000 of revenue that comes into the parking meter fund goes to pay off these expensive bond issues.
The staff report insists that multi-modal transportation options, vehicle, bus, bicycle, scooter, pedestrians will take care of the loss of parking spaces.
But second street has no dedicated bike lane.
It's very, the people who ride bikes, who ride scooters, who skateboard, use the sidewalks.
There's no enforcement, so it's very scary for pedestrians.
And three of the new security people that the shore has hired ride bicycles as part of their work.
Three of them have been hit by cars.
So it's very dangerous out there.
And your own commissioner, Alvaro Castillo, explains the difficulties with the approach of the loss of parking at the September 7 planning commission meeting.
And we appreciate your comments.
I hope it's all right if I excerpts some of them.
You said, and I hope everybody will just do your complete comments.
You explained that day that we don't just have a good mass transit system in the greater elemental area.
You added, even if you want to and have a desire to use mass transit, it's not practical.
Parking is a necessary evil.
As a homeowner, I would not buy a house that did not have a parking.
If I'm going to a restaurant, I will weigh away from parts of town or even restaurants that don't have enough parking.
It's just inconvenience.
It's a factor.
And as a business owner, if I didn't have the space to accommodate my customers, I know that that was a determining factor.
For the success of my business and for a restaurant, a county firm and any other.
And the retail businesses and second street are definitely losing the loss of parking.
So I hope that you will recognize the wisdom of those statements and the concerns that we have for the present and future of second street.
And the viability of the restaurants and the retail that are there.
Because without parking customers are going to stay home.
And thank you for your listening.
Thank you, Mrs. Cotton.
All right.
If we could have the applicant come forward.
Good evening.
I understand that our concerns.
Can you introduce yourself first please.
I'll echo basically the owner of the system.
Thank you.
Thanks.
I understand that our concern about the proposed parking installation from a building.
I'd like to address these concerns.
Explain why I believe this project will be will benefit our building or community.
As we look to the future reducing or rely on our reliance on personal vehicle is crucial.
While the debate between parking spaces and parklet is complex.
Several compelling reasons support the adoption of parklets, including urban sustainability, community engagement,
health, economic benefits, alternative transportation and climate change mitigation.
We must shift away from the parking centric mindset of the past and embrace a more forward thinking and sustainable approach.
The best parking focused design have led to car dominated urban environment, lacking in human sense design.
Parklet offer a more people friendly, sustainable and aesthetically pleasing alternative.
More over these parklets, parklets are designed with safety, sustainability, adaptability and flexibility in mind.
Allowing for reconforguration of removal of changes needed.
In an era marked by climate change, we need to transition to sustainable and eco-friendly transportation mode, like public transit, walking, cycling and dryshare.
This shift naturally reduces the need for parking spaces.
Community spaces like parklets encourage social interaction promoting physical and mental well-being and active lifestyle.
Parklets have shown to stimulate economic growth by attracting more pedestrian to local businesses, boosting sales, creating jobs and contributing to long-term urban development.
It's not about business owner greed, but about ensuring community vitality and strong local economy.
Change can be unsettling, understand, and concern about parking and traffic are valid.
However, city officials have thoroughly researched this project, considering all these factors.
We must break away from adequate parking centric thinking and prioritize sustainability, adopting adaptability and community well-being in urban planning.
In summary, advocating for parklets over parking spaces is not about neglecting business or community needs.
It is about shifting to a more forward sustainable approach that creates healthier, more vibrant urban environment ready to face the challenges of the 21st century.
And as far as the corner location that was mentioned, this corner location has been used for four years now.
During COVID, we used it for storage, and after that, we used it only for banquet.
So it was not used to accommodate any of the customers. We had to close it. It had been costing us a fortune every year. We had to break out of the lease and we closed it. It has nothing to do with the parklet or anything else.
And that's it. Thank you so much.
Thank you sir. Thank you for your comments.
With that I'd like to open up for sharing commission. Do there be any questions for the applicant or the opponent?
So I do have some questions about the appeal and the applicant mentioned sustainability.
And I want to talk about climate. The city's climate action plan says that we need to reduce driving by 25% by 2030 in order to meet our climate goals.
If we're arguing over two parking spaces.
I don't understand how we're going to meet those goals.
It is a cotton you are on the transportation commission or transportation element advisory board correct.
Do you have I mean this seems like something that you'd have some thoughts on on how we're supposed to meet our transportation or driving reduction goals.
When we can't. What are the parking spaces?
Definitely one of the things that's come up for your commission is electrical vehicles and electrical vehicle charging.
And if you don't have parking spaces for vehicles to charge that's a problem.
But already I'm not sure is parking impact. There's very few garages that are usable.
And so with the addition of 80 use and the single Airbnb type operations.
We're finding like there are more and more cars on the street.
And people are being allowed to turn their garages into 80 use.
Which means where are the electric cars going to park overnight.
Which is the natural kind to charge them. So that's definitely a factor that I see right now.
And again.
Second street has been allowed to turn into what they are now calling restaurant row.
This was not the design of the LCP that was written in 1980.
Second street was supposed to be region surfing for the residents or nearby people who could walk there.
And not the type of large operation restaurants.
We have two new big restaurants coming in.
Lantica is a pizzeria Michelle and south of Nick.
Neither of those has new parking.
In fact, some of them are being allowed to take parking spaces and turn them into outdoor dining.
So the impending increase of that.
And then there's the huge impact on coastal access.
During COVID, row restaurant turned its parking lot for 14 cars into a dining patio.
It's still there. It has 50 patrons.
And it's right next to Bayshore, which in the summer is for coastal visitors.
And we're trying to get people from the inland to be able to come to the coastline to the shore to participate in being on the sand too.
Get cool off. And how do families come with children and strollers and picnic coolers? And I just, how are they going to come to the shore if they don't have a car? And as we learned previously at each parking study, 72% and 74% of those people have to have cars to get to work or to work either in the city or elsewhere. So we're trying to preserve parking for coastal visitors.
And staff uses the parking space at the beach as an example of parking that can be used to service the restaurant business and second street.
And honestly, I don't understand that, but through the years there used to be kept a list of the parking requirements for various businesses so that you could add them up and know that those 1800 spaces have probably been given away two or three times.
So I think that you'll expand on that, but I'm a bit brighter myself, my husband, we love to write bikes. There's no dedicated bike lanes on second street.
You'd probably be better off taking away the parking and putting in bike lanes, but that's a whole other discussion, right? But thank you for the question.
Like if you want to talk about that, that's great. But I don't think that that would be something that a lot of people would support.
And I don't know if, anyway, so talking about the local coastal program, there are the overarching goals of the local coastal program, which are increased reliance on public transit, decreased reliance on appeals,
provides slightly more parking and increased pedestrian and bicycle access opportunities.
This seems like a project that would fit several of those goals.
Taking away parking spaces, encouraging pedestrian use, you know, lowering reliance on automobiles.
Well, the problem is just to make sure if it's field pointed out that the mass transit doesn't really work.
The buses start about six in the morning, there's already workers there.
So they have to get to work somehow, and they end before the shift at two in the morning, and so that's a problem.
And the gentleman from the owner of Belmont Brewing Company told the first hearing that none of his employers currently wrote the bus.
He would not ask them to write the bus because they thought it was too dangerous.
He would not pay for it because it was a problem with the IRS.
And the zoning administrative hearings are not recorded, and so I can't present that to you, probably, but I certainly have some doubts.
Excuse the interruptions, just procedurally we seem to getting a little off field.
So you certainly welcome to ask the opponent questions, but you can have a debate amongst members of the commission, but we can't have a debate or dialogue with members of the audience.
So staffs also glad to answer questions, but just want to make sure that we're focused on the substance of the appeal.
I think the thing to keep in mind is keeping your questions to what our appellants and our appellants are the masters of the fact of.
I think you do for staff.
All right, apologies.
All right, well, I'm going to end here then.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Go ahead.
Thank you.
There's a question for the.
Appellants on your presentation, you had indicated there.
On one of your blows, you there should be condition mandating staff from.
Treating the center because restaurant property ignoring pedestrians, et cetera.
Where what condition approval was that absent or addressing.
Correct, it's absent.
Nothing that suggests that the employees and staff should regulate the behavior of their customers.
Got it.
All right, thank you for that.
You're welcome.
Thank you.
With that, we'll open up for public comment.
Are there any members of the audience that would like to address the commission on this item?
If so, please come forward and introduce yourself and you'll have three minutes.
All right, thank you, commissioners.
My name is Julie Dean and I am a 28 year resident of Belmont Shore and I have been on the board of the Belmont Shore
Association for 14 years.
The last two is president.
I am speaking today for myself only though.
I urge the Planning Commission to deny this permit for open sesame.
Authorizing this and other parklets on second street is incentivizing business owners.
Not to invest in the property and space that they should in favor of taking free space the city grants.
This is not a business model and puts other non bar non restaurants at a disadvantage.
City Council having completed the established community org input on parklets several months ago.
Which directly impacted residents led to a $432 hurdle for residents to take appeals to planning commission before an application to even reach city council.
Residents therefore face that burden to even be heard.
The parking and transportation points brought up by staff today are insincere.
Including the 1,000 plus beach lot parking spaces is a wild exaggeration.
People do not park in the beach lots in order to walk all the way up to second streets.
Additionally, the circuit micro transport has extremely limited hours, a small radius, minimal seating, and exists on a temporary basis.
Last week I was appointed to the Long Beach Commission on Disabilities.
I took this role because I want to support and fight for those with disabilities.
ADA regulations are not currently being met.
I reported this over and over.
Our group has reported this over and over.
And it's much worse when the parklets are in place and the public right way is completely trampled all over.
Parklets are overwhelmingly not supported by our neighbors.
As Brian mentioned, we have over 600 petition signatures from our direct and local bill much to our residents.
And also the results of the survey of 2021.
The people who were against the parklets were emphatic.
They had multiple reasons versus the majority of the people who were for the parklets.
They didn't live in the area and basically just said I love parklets.
I love eating outside.
Enforcement does not happen.
That's the other issue.
I love Long Beach, but we are not good at oversight or enforcement.
And the conditions of approval are insufficient to address the impacts of the parklets.
Conditions of approval are essentially negotiations between the businesses and the zoning administration and city officials.
Without a meaningful input mechanism from affected residents.
Why isn't there a website or email dedicated to those needs?
Why aren't conditions of approval shared until just before each hearing?
And why are conditions of approval not allowed at yearly revisions?
Not allowed at yearly renewals.
Even if documented abuses emerge and circumstances change.
We have spoken to the managers and staff of open sesame specifically.
And they have not enforced their staff from standing in the sidewalk.
Look.
Sorry.
Taking orders over the fence.
Moving customers along.
Getting them into spaces that don't block the public right away.
And finally, it's not just two spaces.
It's the two spaces plus all of the parking spaces taken by the 17 patrons in the parklet.
And the additional staff required to support them.
Again, I urge the Planning Commission to deny this permit.
Thank you.
All right.
Good evening, commissioners.
Staff, the fellow citizens.
Pete Marsh, second district.
So I'm a neighbor to second street about a mile and a half away.
A resonated with commissioner Clemsons comments about how are we going to meet the goals of the city's climate action plan.
And you've heard me comment mostly about climate.
Transant transport is a huge part of our climate challenge.
I looked up and I apologize I was late.
I would be climate resilience commission had buildings in energy tonight.
So my heart was all a flutter up there.
But I found a few articles that talk to our love affair with cars and streets and parking in this country.
There's a quote in the big thing by urban designer Jeff Speck.
The twin gods of smooth traffic and ample parking have turned our downtown into places that are easy to get to, but not worth arriving at.
Another quote from Bloomberg about this topic said parking has eaten America's cities.
They have, they talk about parking density in cities around the country.
Arlington, Texas, wins with 42% of its surface area dedicated to parking.
Central Manhattan 1%.
There's a huge range around the country.
In business insider, the parking space is in the US is driving up housing costs and hurting the environment.
Parking spaces in the US take up as much land as Connecticut and Vermont combined.
I've read several estimates.
We have around a quarter of a million cars in this country for our 330 million people.
We have somewhere between 1 billion and 2 billion parking spaces.
That's 4 to 8 parking spaces per vehicle.
We're probably going to see debates over 1 to 10, 20 parking spaces at a time, unfortunately.
The point is, for 70 or 80 years, perhaps we've been suburbanizing.
We have urban flight, redlining, sad history of some racism involved with that.
And our love affairs with cars.
And we're now trying to densify our congressman Robert Garcia former mayor is putting together federal initiatives around better transit.
And I would just urge the commission and the city to keep pushing forward that reduced the vehicle miles traveled.
I wrote my bike here. I'm trying to do my part. I'm a fat old guy, but you're trying to get where I can with low emissions and low parking demand.
Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. If you're comments. Next speaker, please.
Good evening, commissioners. I'm Jeff Miller. I live in Belmont, sure.
I ask you to deny a permit for open sesame for a parklet.
You've heard that many reasons why this request should be denied.
And in fact, why there should be no parklets on second street in Belmont, sure.
These few blocks of second street are simply too narrow, too congested and too dangerous.
In testimony at City Council previously, I presented specific details of the dangers of traffic collisions with parklets.
I noted numerous cities in California and around the nation where vehicles have crashed into parklets.
Some of these crashes resulted in injuries and there were some fatalities.
In Long Beach, two restaurant parklets have been destroyed by car crashes. One in Belmont, sure.
Parklets continued to be destroyed by car collisions in April.
The parklet at the press room bar in Santa Barbara was destroyed by a car crash.
The Long Beach ordinance allows for parklets only on streets with a speed limit of 25 miles per hour.
This would seem to make it acceptable to establish a parklet at open sesame.
However, this speed limit is in fact a fiction.
The vehicles approaching Belmont, sure, on second street from either direction are approaching with speeds at limits of 35 miles per hour.
And many are going 40 or more.
If there's a green light, many of them do not slow down to 25 when they enter the shore.
In engineering terminology, this discrepancy between the wishful permit posted speed limit and the actual speed is called ground truth.
Your decision about parklets should be made based on this ground truth, not on the posted speed limit, which is not enforced.
This excessive speed precludes the approval of parklets in Belmont, sure. It would simply be too great a risk and a danger on this busy street.
Parklets are getting a lot of attention now. They are controversial because of their risks and adverse effects on neighborhoods and traffic.
The recent attempt by a Belmont growing company to add a parklet was covered by NBC TV news.
People are watching Long Beach. It would not be.
Good luck for a long beach to be in the news for the next crash into a parklet. Do not allow this to go forward. Make your decision for the safety and the good of the community, not for the desired additional profits by a restaurant. Thank you.
Thank you for your comments. Any other speakers? The audience?
All right, seeing them will look for a virtual.
If you're joining us virtually and you'd like to provide public comment on this item, please use raise hand function at this time.
The first person with their hand raise is Christopher Crowdetch. You have been unmuted. You have three minutes to provide public comment.
Christopher Crowdetch, you have been unmuted. You have three minutes to provide public comment.
Clarkstaff is a possible to give directions on how he can unmute himself.
Yes, he'll need to unmute on his end.
When are we going to the next speaker when we come back to them?
Our next person with their hand up is Estella, Estella, you have been unmuted. You have three minutes to provide public comment.
Can you hear me? Yes, we can.
Hello. Hi. I'm Estella Tahidor.
And I need to say that I disagree with the city presentation that implies there is a preponderance of parking in Belmont Shore.
I live right off second street.
And it is a rarity that I'm able to park near my house or even on my block.
We need parking for residents and the non-restaurant businesses.
And those who drive the second street to die and to shop.
This is not a democracy. This is a pandering to a well-funded special interest.
Seal Beach and Huntington Beach have taken down their parklets.
I strongly believe that the parklets are destroying the character of our seaside community, which is very important to the residents here.
I implore you to not approve the parklet for Open Sesame. Thank you.
Thank you.
Our next person with her hand up is Anne Cantrell. And you have been unmuted. You have three minutes to provide public comment.
Can you hear us, Miss Cantrell? Can you hear me?
We can. Go ahead, please.
Good evening. Commissioner's Anne Cantrell.
And I too urge you to deny this permit for the taking of public property for private restaurant owner.
I love to eat outdoors.
In fact, I only go to outdoor dining because of COVID.
But I see nothing inviting about sitting in the middle of second street with all the fumes from the cars going by.
And all the people crowding around in the sidewalk and trying to enjoy a meal.
This restaurant owner and other restaurant owners want to provide outdoor dining. They should do it on their own property.
Not look to the public to provide the property for them.
I do not go down to second street anymore because I can never find a parking place.
I go to restaurants that provide enough parking so that I don't have to walk half a mile to the restaurant.
I think there's many reasons why you should deny this.
And the only reason I can see for your approval would be to hand over public property to a private enterprise.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments. Next speaker.
Once again, if you're joining us virtually and you would like to provide public comment on this item, please use the raise hand function at this time.
It appears we have no further public comment on this item.
Would we like to have an opportunity for Mr. Grotech to attempt public comment again?
Of course to regret it. You have been unmuted. Please unmute yourself on your end.
All right. Thank you.
Okay. With that, I'll go ahead and close public comment and bring it back behind the rail.
Thank you.
How do we establish the ultimate number of parklets that would be or could be allowed on second street?
Is there a traffic study or is it a first come first serve of two certain number? What's the long term goal for parklets on second street?
I can start with how planning staff is looking at these as indicated. So we started with legends, which is the first application.
We lived at the context of where public parking lots were located on one side of the second street looking at just the other context and then when open sesame came in.
We're looking at them one by one as they come in in order, but also cumulatively as they come to hearing. So with this it wasn't located on the same side of the street.
It was a block away. There are it is at the more central point of second street. So context wise there is a distribution of public parking spaces available that include also ADA dedicated spaces in those public lots.
As far as location wise the department of public works is also screening those before they even come to planning to make sure all the parklets are designed.
One in accordance with the parklet handbook but also in accordance with what the traffic standards for the department of public works.
So that's what planning is looking at within the context of the two that you've seen here today or discussed today.
And then we do have the traffic engineer from the Department of Public Works if you have specific questions on those operational items that they look at.
Thank you. And then one of these slides that were presented talked about conditions of approval being inadequate as far as the managing of the public sidewalk itself.
So these are conditions of approval related to our local coast permit, but there are other conditions and public ordinances that would apply to somebody having a public walkway permit is that correct.
Yes. So German there are conditions as part of the occupancy of the public right away that are enforced by public works.
There are street use inspectors that enforce those some of the pictures you saw of sandwich science, which I mean the commenter is correct in all those things that exist in the public right away making someone take down a sandwich sign is not the highest priority but.
We do want to complain basis do enforcement, but we have tried to address the public concerns by including conditions in this approval as well.
That address.
Complying with ADA and keeping the street clear. So Marianne's going to point those out to you. I think it's condition five.
And if the commission wanted to modify or strengthen or add to those, we'd be glad to work with you on that.
So one of the conditions that Christopher alluded to is condition number five. So chapter 14.15 is the public works code that has parklets.
In addition, there's been an added subsection to that compliance, which talks about maintaining all the required clearances that you see on the plan.
There is a distinct clearance for ADA path of travel and all of the parklets are designed with that guardrail to prevent the overspilling of seating and or any kind of installations into the public right away.
The temporary installations during COVID didn't have the benefit of that since it was more of an emergency installation.
In addition, through the two and three different kinds of parklets, I'd walk dining applications we received in the last year.
Condition of approval number seven as alluded to with the applicant testimony was added to discourage the locking of bicycles or leash pets that you saw in those photos.
What is something that is implied that the management and the named applicant that is on this application would be required to adhere and discourage from anybody to do that.
And then an additional subsection on that condition is the sign is shall be installed on the parklet saying it is discouraged so while it is discouraging is also going to be signed in accordance.
In addition, some other items just for enforcement action related to maintaining clearances there are conditions that include signage for how to report enforcement activities.
So if we find that the management which is implied to adhere to these conditions of approval whoever holds that permit with the Department of Public Works and exercises this option.
There would be a signage that indicates if you find that there somebody is encroaching in that right of way there would be a identified person from the Department of Public Works that you could contact and call and report that.
And that would be another lever to make sure of enforcement to prevent encroachment.
So those are included in conditions of approval as well for that signage aspect.
Thank you. That was exactly my next question. Although the enforcement mechanism and notification so thank you for answering that.
Commissioners and the other questions. Commissioner Templar.
The operator is asked to discourage.
But does that include I believe the operator would also have the right to limit who they want to serve or not.
I know I've seen little signs. We reserved the right to serve you or not. Would that be included if they do not reply to the discouragement.
Would it be upon the operator then to say well we're not going to serve you because you're not following our guidelines.
Well the public is allowed in these parklets even if they're not being served.
Sorry I'm sorry just just far deep blocking like the dogs and the bicycles.
Well the management can take whatever action is necessary.
But the reason it does they discourage is because at the end of the day they should take all of the available measures.
But they're not being asked to act as law enforcement officers.
They're not going to forcefully remove someone or risk injury to remove someone's dog.
So they're going to take they're going to warn the person they're going to ask them to move.
They're going to not serve them food. They're going to do whatever they're going to do.
But it does you know say encourage because they're not physically you know remove someone from the public right away.
It would be you know the city that would have to do that.
And I like that you're encouraging public works and sectors and following through all of those sidewalk blockages including signs on brellis, eaters, etc.
Thank you.
Just to follow up on that.
Director of the.
And also maybe city of turning on this because I'm inclined to modify that provisions to either stipulate or changing to prohibit.
But again this is a semantic issue maybe but I want to make sure that it is an active participation of behalf of the applicant to discourage that obviously.
I've seen the other language but I certainly do not intend to.
Create a police state situation from the from the applicant but I do want to make sure it's an active involvement.
In that because I do want to put more teeth into that piece because discourage can be naively interpreted as I'll please don't as opposed to you are not welcome here if you.
If you use to lock up your car or leave your dog in the right away, etc.
So like the opinion of possible turning.
So prohibition has taken place there are state laws under the ADA that regulate blockages and inability to have a pathway.
So we're not giving any of our applicants or operators a regulatory power right.
So I think that's why you're seeing the word discourage and kind of piggybacking off of the comments of Mr. Coons.
There are limitations to how far their discouragement can go to where we're not going to using language like take all efforts. Now we're getting into the area of what does that effort look like, physical removal, that's where that becomes a challenge.
So if you wanted to bring more teeth, you could use a word like actively discourage, and that's something that opens up or suggests the need to use kind of the types of response behaviors that Commissioner Templin suggested of not serving folks of asking folks to leave.
Commissioner Templin, Mr. Clemson?
If anyone has anything.
Yeah, so I wanted to just make a few comments, just addressing some of the things that were sent in as the appeal, expand on that.
The first thing I did mention that the goals of the local proposal program, including increasing reliance on public transit, decreasing reliance on homobeals, providing slightly more parking and increasing pedestrian and bicycle access.
But even 2019, the city did the road diet project that added 150 spaces to Ocean Boulevard.
I think if anything that would give us some room to take away a couple of spaces and still be in compliance with the slightly more parking.
It also, the local coastal program also explicitly calls for areas like the Convention Center in downtown here to preserve all spaces.
And so just to, you know, they called for preserving all spaces in one place.
This should give us some flexibility to add and move spaces.
And then there was reference to a Coastal Commission decision from October of 1992, 1999.
And the appeal, or mentions of Breastron, New Breastron really had more Torium, the ending in May of 1999, the decision ended up being that the land use plan is now compliant with
or the suggestions that the Coastal Commission, which I soon were implemented, allow or eliminate lower parking requirements that were in Delmont Shore for new restaurants will now allow for limited tandem parking and that that would in the Coastal Commission's opinion provide slightly more parking as dealt with in the Delmont Shore area.
And then I don't know if we've gone and, you know, has seen the Walker study, but there's a reference to people walking not wanting to walk far for parking.
There's additional information that they suggest having to do with increasing turnover in Delivery spaces.
And usually typically the way that that's turned over is with time limits or raising prices.
And, which is another, other suggestions that the Walker study have includes extending parking meters to 10 pm on weekdays and 12 am on weekends, which I think that the parking commission denied creating parklets for bike parking and then seeking Coastal Commission approval for on paid on street parking for residents.
In my opinion, these are going to be more effective things than keeping two parking spaces.
I think it's going to move the needle on on creating more parking availability.
And I hope that it's something that we can try and figure out how to implement in the future.
But I think I just want to summarize by saying I think that this project is compliant with.
At least all the Coastal Commission decisions that I'm aware of and the local Coastal Program.
Thank you, Commissioner. I will say it was pleased to see the traffic demand, traffic demand management plan.
The incentives for free meals from employees I think those simple kind of concrete.
Solutions like that have a big impact on getting people to change the behavior.
Any other discussions or questions from the commissioners?
I do one more thing and it's I think that I have put in those code violations and the city does deal with that.
And so if we are seeing, well, I have the ones I put in have so.
I've put in a number of them and for people walking sidewalks with fans.
The little wacky waving man thing and you know, fun stuff.
But they do go out and they do deal with these things.
So I really do encourage to make those complaints and especially more than one person does it.
I think that they'll come out and they'll deal with, especially the things that are more static.
All right with that, I'm going to ask if we can have a motion please.
Mr. Clems.
And can we show template for the second.
Have a first and a second in the other discussion?
Mr. Chairman, just a week at the motion right.
I think the commission wanted to.
Out the word.
Actively to condition number seven.
And I also believe there was a discussion about the entitlement not running with the land but only running with this particular operator.
So I don't know if that's part of the motion or not, but we need to know here at the table.
As of right now, it's not that I will find out if they would like to add that to it.
Did you want to have active as part of it? Was that?
I do.
You didn't.
You okay with that?
Yes.
And so how did we feel?
Well, it will formally add a monument.
Yes.
Did you feel about wanting to make an amendment to not running with the land but with the operator?
So we're in discussion now.
We're going to make an amendment from Commissioner Templin.
Perfect.
Yeah.
I was going to make that amendment as well.
I didn't want to be the initiator of the motion or the second but now that we're in.
I certainly concur with that.
I stole my ammo.
Thank you.
And just be clear that would be if the business were to close.
They wouldn't have the next business wouldn't have access to without.
Okay.
I will repeat that motion with the two amendments.
So we have a request for two friendly amendments from Commissioner Castillo to modify.
The condition of approval to include the word active and then that the approval runs with the business and out with the land.
That is correct.
Yes.
That's been seconded by Commissioner Templin.
All right.
We've got a first and a second.
We've got a friendly amendment that's been approved.
I think we'd like to have the vote.
Please.
I think we're good on this question.
Do you have anything else you want to do?
Well, I guess point of order.
I guess we made a motion.
Now we're in discussion on the motion.
We've had some prior discussion.
But if you if the item has not been.
If you feel like there's additional discussion.
It's within the chairs.
Discussion to take that discussion.
But when we begin the vote.
I must continue.
Yeah.
I apologize.
I was waiting to make my comments and based on what what the motion was.
It was going to ultimately be.
I'd like to share that I'm in opposition to this request.
But I also in the spirit of transparency.
I want to share why.
First and foremost, as I look at evaluating this decision.
They're kind of three components that I'm looking at.
First and foremost, the applicant.
I want to share that I'm a huge fan.
Huge.
I always make by decision based on my stomach.
And your location and your venue is phenomenal.
But however, I am in opposition to it for a couple of different reasons.
Number one, we've been discussing parking.
And or the lack thereof in some cases.
I want to commend staff for taking a broader approach on this and being more inclusive.
In terms of the evaluation of this criteria.
Because the city always gets and especially this department.
Sometimes it gets a bad rap because all these regulations and things that happen seems to always be.
You know, the government coming in and making all these rules and regulations.
I appreciate the fact that there's a broader interpretation of of access and parking.
However, as has been noted, I'm not necessarily and I don't want to pigeon myself as a parking advocate.
But in this area, in this location, I don't think it's appropriate to to cannibalize existing parking.
Not because we don't need to be more dependent on public mass transit.
But it is ineffective in this area and it does create other problems.
The other piece of it, too, is that in cases where we are offering, at least from my perspective exclusively.
Or we're providing this.
I'm a huge advocate for parking.
I think there's an outdoor dining, et cetera.
I think it's a great direction for the city to do and be more open to that.
However, again, this location is not optimal.
There's already outdoor dining already.
In this location, I also was not a fan of when we approved this for the other applicant and legends.
Thank you, legends.
For the very same reasons, and I want to be consistent in that approach.
I think we are limited in parking in this area.
It does create an impact on the local community.
As much as I'd love coming in there and dining at all these establishments,
we've got to be balanced in that regard.
And I think it's suboptimal to approve it here at this location at this site.
But that's driving my discontent with this particular motion.
And again, I also want to be cognizant.
In fact, there's probably six, seven or eight more applicants coming down the way.
And again, it's already an impacted area.
And I certainly would be more inclined to support it if they the applicant and or the location was maybe farther out.
I know some of argued at the center of second street is makes it easier.
I would also argue it makes it worse because it does create more issues for the other businesses in the area.
So anyway, so I took up too much time on that.
But I want to try to share my my the reasons for my not supporting this motion.
Thank you commissioner.
Any other discussion?
I'll see you know if we could have looked up then please.
Motion carries.
Thank you.
Thank you all for coming down this evening and sharing your views with the commission.
It's appreciated.
I know it's a lot of time out of your.
Have your time to come down here and we appreciate that.
Freedom of the next item of business, please.
Item four is recommendation to recommend that the city council determine that the project is not subject to
a pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act under Article five section 15061 of the state's
Equal Guidelines and 15308 actions by regulatory agencies for protection of natural resources.
And recommend that the city council approve a code amendment and local coastal program amendment.
To repeal and replace the subdivision regulations of the city of Long Beach.
The amendment includes revisions to one comply with the subdivision map act to streamline major map.
Three improved procedural consistency and accuracy in processing subdivisions to include clear and and unambiguous language and text.
For update the design standards to align with the general plan by streamline the decision making process allowing the zoning administrator to approve maps with up to 50 residential lots or maps for projects that include 100% affordable residential units.
Six update notice requirements and seven introduced chapter 20.18 related to urban lots.
Let's city white.
Thank you commissioners may have a motion and report on this item.
Motion for the Mr. Templine second from commissioner Clemson.
All those and not the get the motion sorry.
Staff report.
The project planner so Sergio Gutierrez will provide this presentation for you.
I think you like this.
Good evening chair and fellow commissioners.
The item for you is a public curing pertaining to the city subdivision ordinance amendment.
Apologies on having technical difficulties with the remote here.
My apologies.
So the agenda for this item will provide an introduction to subdivisions discuss the work program established for the sub date.
Highlight main updates to the ordinance as well as discuss the next steps in this process.
I'll begin with understanding what a subdivision ordinance is.
So subdivision ordinance is a key element in the city suite of land division regulations which follows the state subdivision map back with local refinements.
A subdivision ordinance helps to promote coordinated and efficient development consistent with the general plan and zoning regulations.
The subdivision ordinance is a part of title 20 of the city's Long Beach Municipal Code and was last updated comprehensively in 1983.
We continue with understanding what a subdivision is and the various types of maps associated with subdivisions.
A subdivision is a map, which shows the division of land or units on a property, whether improved and improved into multiple
lots of units for individuals, sale, lease or financing. A subdivision can involve a simple division of land by dividing one parcel into two parcels, which result in the preparation of a parcel map.
Sub-divisions can also involve divisions of much greater land area into many parcels which result in a track map.
Sub-divisions generally create real lotlines and can be defined as the exclusive right to occupy airspace, within a building which is commonly referred to as a condominium.
Conversions are also a form of subdivision where existing rental units and buildings are converted into four sale units.
Sub-divisions can also involve the alteration of existing parcels that were once divided.
This process can be done through what's called a lot merger.
A lot merger is a consolidation of two and more continuous recorded lots into one and more parcels.
Lots that are voluntary merge are used to eliminate the line to accommodate the development of project.
A lot merger are also city initiated, which are pursued to address technical deficiencies such as a lot area, access issues and lack of service to create more conforming lots when such lots are held by the same ownership.
Another form of subdivision is a lot line adjustment.
So a lot line adjustment is defined as the adjustment of the boundary between two or more adjacent lots with a line is taking from one lot is added to the adjacent lot.
This type of subdivision does not result in the creation of any additional lots.
A lot line adjustments are exempt from a tentative map requirements if the adjustments involves four fewer lots in which the final changes are reflected in recorded dates.
Within the sub-dates, the overall goals of the subdivision amendments are to create a subdivision ordinance which is legally consistent with the state subdivision map back.
A line city process for a view of minor map approval such as lot merger slot line adjustments and parcel met with the state lot to streamline work efforts.
Provide consistency with the general plan which includes updating updates to the land use elements mobility elements and the urban zone elements.
And improve procedure consistency and accuracy and processing subdivision cases by including clear and unambiguous language and text and clarifying applicable processes for different map types.
So the slide provides an overview of all the work efforts of this program for this ordinance and updates.
Staff and RM design group have been working closely together on this updated efforts, which again with researching and background analysis in the summer of 2019.
Consultation means with ordinance users such as city staff and stakeholders, we're held in July and September of 2019 to further understand what works in the subdivision code and what sections can be further refined or improved.
And the administrative draft was provided in late January 2020 and the first of two study sessions with the commission was held in May of 2020.
Second study session was held with the commission to provide updates on the additional topics added to the draft ordinance as well as a release of the draft ordinance for public review, which was in May of 2023.
This update is now in the public, the planning commission public hearing stages with city council tend to be tentatively being scheduled for December of 2023.
So during the consultation meetings, staff and consultants captured many key elements from these interviews.
The comments related to rinsity roundtable meetings with the applicant and staff from various departments involved with the review of maps to determine red flags during the early stages of review.
Streamlining lot line adjustments and mergers having the zone administrator act on personal maps identifying inconsistencies between subdivision regulations and regulations and lastly not to issue building permits until math are finalized and environmental clearances are obtained.
So this next slide just provides a brief overview of the various chapters codified within the subdivision ordinance, many of which will be updated.
To ensure consistency with state law, various sections have been updated to reflect the currently current language within the subdivision map, which includes exemptions to subdivision requirements noticing for public hearings.
Current mobile home part conversion requirements and updating terminology and definitions.
So this next slide provides a comparative analysis of the current proposed review authorities for map approvals, which is one of the main topics of this subdivision ordinance of efforts.
As shown in the matrix, the current reviewed authority for lot line adjustments and lot mergers falls within the zone administrator action.
The proposed amendments in this update will allow for the director as a review authority which will no longer require public hearing.
Another proposed change the highlight relates to tentative maps.
Currently the plan commission is a review authority for tentative parcel maps that divisions then includes for a few residential commercial or industrial lots.
The proposed amendments will allow the zoning administrator as a review in authority for this map type.
Additional updates include allowing the zoning minister to act on residential projects with less than 50 dwelling units or lots and projects that include 100% affordable units over 15 dwelling units or more.
With this update, the decision would remain appealing.
However, the planning commission would be responsible for hearing any appeal.
This change aligns with the planning commission's April 2020 delegation of the site plan review authority for housing projects with up to 50 units.
This current process can cause significant delays to projects with time sensitivity to help meet the state's current housing crisis.
Based on past project examples that have been appealed to city council only due to the map and not the number of units proposed updates to the decision making body our necessary for projects to ensure consistency with state housing loss.
The recommended delegation for review authority is also consistent with the housing element go to mitigate government constraints to housing investment and affordability.
These efforts also help to support housing element program 2.6 related to the development review process and tend to support faster and smoother project reviews.
The next major goal within this update will improve procedure consistency in accuracy in the processing of sub division cases by providing concurrent processing of sub divisions with other entitlements processes in terms of hearing dates and approval expiration dates.
Update and the noticing procedures in alignments with other sections of the municipal code and the sub division map back.
A many of the appeal section to be consistent with the zoning ordinance and including information on the code in the code about some middle requirements on maps.
Throughout the design standards and other chapters within the proposed sub division ordinance, very, very sections have been updated to ensure consistency with the city's housing land use mobility and urban design elements.
Which have all been updated since the sub division ordinance was less amended.
A few of these key topics include updates to street typologies to align with the depth functionality requirements of the mobility element to ensure necessary improvements are captured with maps of the development stages for all modes of transportation.
And accessibility requirements for private streets inside walks in sure adequate capacity and design that officially common is almost a transportation which is consistent with the mobility element of general plan and the Americans with disabilities act.
The update also includes amendments to condom apps, which the sub division map act includes minimal requirements for maps of the building called the condominiums.
To make the requirements clear and provide consistency with the city's general plan elements a few of these amendments include creating a chapter related to common interest of divisions that provides procedures for airspace condominiums and planning developments and improvements to the condominium conversions chapter to ensure consistency with the housing land use mobility and urban design elements.
A few key updates to the condo conversions includes requiring the submission of an existing conditions reports and an improvement plan to determine if right away building facade upgrades landscaping utility improvements and other site improvements would be required for the development.
The improvements also include updating the findings to require percentages of units to be affordable and only allowing for conversions if the vacancy rate for multi-family dwellings units in the city is greater than 5%.
The new chapter related to Senate bill 9 also referred to SB 9 which is urban law splits.
The state legislature adopted and adopted this Senate bill become effective in January 1, 2022.
An urban law split is defined as a subdivision of an existing legal law zone R1 single-family district to create no more than two new parses.
The ordinance will align with state law with some local and refined mince which will include which will be completed at the ministerial level.
Recarly east lot to have access from a right of way. Recar a minimum lot size of 1,200 square feet per loss.
Components to the minimum lot with standards of the zoning designation and prohibit loss splits with special resource restrictions on sites that include but not limited to the sites within the wetlands has its way sites and loss there within historic district or designated landmark historic landmark.
In addition to the major changes separate polls within the subdivision ordinance clarifying and more administrative changes are also proposed in order to increase user friend in this by providing the table summarizing the review story of each other map types.
Clarifying street name changes process by providing name conventions procedures application filing requirements and requires findings for approval or denial.
Establish the established parameters for model homes and application processing established requirements for the right away vacation process including application filing requirements findings for approval or denial and decision making process.
And lastly, establish a chapter for legal subdivisions and certificate of compliance is which will replace the existing fractional last chapter.
This new chapter provides clarity on applicability procedures conditions and required fines for approval or denial.
These subdivision ordinance will also ensure consistency with the city's local coastal program by updating the provisions to properties in the coastal zone.
These provisions include ensuring that the ensuring that all maps up types maintain and provide adequate public access to coastal.
Also, recreational amenities and coastal researches such as beach ensuring coastal visibility is not distracted and ensuring the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is consistent with the LCP as it considers a project to see level rise slopes the ability hazards and potential storm flooding for the life of the project based on available FEMA information.
To ensure consistency with the general plan the proposed ordinance has been a minute to reflect the various goals policies and strategies within the city's general plan housing land use mobility and urban zone elements.
The amendments the subdivision ordinance will allow for subdivisions for all housing types which is consistent with housing element policy 4.2.
Intendent to encourage a balance of rental and home ownership opportunities including high quality apartments town homes, condominiums and single family homes to accommodate housing needs of all social economic segments of the community including large families.
The efforts with this update will also support LUE policy 13-2 to provide new housing opportunities and neighborhood serving centers and quarters within transit origin development areas and downtown.
For the more housing element action 2.6.1 requires a city to update the subdivision ordinance to streamline housing development by streamline the lot merger process and reducing oversight requirements which has been included with this update.
So there have been a bit of minor changes throughout the ordinance since the commission last seen the draft documents in May of 2023 and these changes reflect the city surveyors review and edits and these edits include updates to terminology.
The clarification of multiple line adjustments that are submitted concurrently or sequentially to circumvent the four fewer existing adjoining parcels threshold in the map back will not be allowed.
Clarification a lot merger require a parcel map when merging five or more lots and clarification on when a record of surveys required for various map processes.
Presumed to the California Environmental Quality Act article five section 15.161 and the state.
It can be seen with certainly that the subject modifications to the city's municipal code will not have the potential for having a significant effect affect upon the environment and therefore is not subject to sequence.
The project is also exemptors to sequence section 15308 which exempts actions by regulatory agencies for protection of natural resources.
Public drafts of the subdivision ordinance was released in May of 2023 for public review the required public hearing notice was providing in accordance with the Long Beach Municipal Code.
Notice was published in the Long Beach Press Telegram on October 5, 2023.
Additionally, notices were provided via the city's link LB email blast system and to city libraries stakeholders and a notice was posted within city hall.
No comments have been received as the as of the preparation of this report and ordinance update.
Staff finds that positive findings can be made as a part of the amendments to the subdivision ordinance and the amendments will help promote several general plan goals and policies.
Therefore staff recommends that the planning that the city council.
Planning commission recommends the city council and turn into the project is not subject to seqa pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Mac under article five section 15061 and the state of the state.
The state seqa guidelines and one five 308 actions by regulatory agency for protection natural resources and also recommend that the city council approve.
Code amendment ZC a 19 does 305 and local coastal program amendment LCPA 23 does 301 to repel and replace the subdivision regulations of the city of Long Beach also referred to a title 20 in the Long Beach.
So, the next steps in this process, if we're recommended for approval by the commission, will be bringing this item to city council, public hearing in late December of 2023.
This concludes stats presentation. Staff is available to answer any questions. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you for that presentation. Commissioners, any questions for staff on presentation?
This is all done with additional staff, right?
That's what we're really told you're going to have more staff to cover everything.
I'm very soon. That's a friendly amendment, actually.
To the mental.
Good.
All right, any other questions on the staff's presentation?
Just comment. Thank you for bringing this forward.
This is great. Great cleanup. Thank you.
All right, with that up.
Like that, I'm going to open it up to public comment.
Are any members of the public in the audience would like to make comments on this item?
Seeing none, I'll see if we have any video on virtual.
If you're joining us virtually and you'd like to make public comment on this item, please use it raise hand function at this time.
There appears to be no further public comment on this item.
Thank you with that. I'll close public comment.
Bring it back behind the rail.
Make sure there's any discussion.
With that, we have a motion in a second. Can we have the vote, please?
Motion carries.
Congratulations. That is the culmination of an awful lot of work.
And right, come at it.
But Sergio Harris worked on this for years.
And our existing code is garbage.
So this is a pretty amazing wonderful move forward.
Thank you.
And I think for the applicants that are using this will be much easier for you to use a lot more streamlined and some of them more basic things to not have any go through so many procedures.
Good job on that.
All right. I think that brings us to our last regular item.
Item five is recommendation to recommend that the city council accept categorical exemption CE 2313 and approve a local coastal program amendment and repeal the 1989 victory park design guidelines and adopt victory park Santa Cruz park design guidelines and proposed findings there too to established updated design guidelines for victory park and
Santa Cruz park in the downtown shoreline planned development district one.
Thank you may have a motion here this item.
The motion for commissioner template, the second for commissioner Clemson.
If we have a staff report.
Yes, commissioners, this is another project that's been in the work for many years.
I'd like to introduce project planner and landscape specialist Alex Moldero to provide this presentation.
Good evening chair and commissioners.
I am excited to finally bring before you this evening a local coastal program amendment for victory park and Santa Cruz park.
And our consultant's growing associates.
Shout out to you.
Dean Howell and his team that they're listening.
Has been in an engage in a multi year effort to update the Santa Cruz and victory park design guidelines for the first time since the late 1900s.
The victory park is in the downtown area on the south side of Ocean Boulevard.
After the first 80 linear feet of south of Ocean Boulevard sidewalk spanning between Queensway and Collinsway between her place and shoreline drive.
Although the parks are directly in front of private development, someone on the south side of Ocean Boulevard and are maintained.
By the budding private on property owners.
The park parcels are publicly owned.
Then the entire victory park is in a cruise park area within the coastal zone and within the downtown shoreline plant of all that.
Santa Cruz for the next two slides.
The existing these will be the existing conditions of the park.
Santa Cruz park spans the first 30 or 40 feet south of the Ocean Boulevard sidewalk.
We can go to shore and see the Avenue.
Victory park is since from Cedar Avenue to Los Alamedos Avenue.
In 1980, the city council and California Coastal Commission certified the LCP with design guidelines adopted in 1989.
The LCP seeks to re-establish victory park as a unified park through downtown Long Beach.
The LCP requires all development and conversions of apartments to claim to rebuild victory park in Santa Cruz Park according to those design guidelines and dedicate the additional depth to the park.
And create minimum of 80 feet from Ocean Boulevard from the Ocean Boulevard's curve.
Six blocks have been partially or completely redeveloped since this requirement was established.
Our 1989 design guidelines were created to ensure that the land segments dedicated to victory park and Santa Cruz park were available for the enjoyment of the residents in general public of Long Beach.
At the same time, the guidelines served to coordinate the design, the design.
The guidelines served to coordinate the design and renovation of the park to implement a cohesive design.
That is reminiscent of the historic Long Beach and reinforces the character of Ocean Boulevard as a grandpa of art.
These same guidelines have not been changed or updated in over 30 years.
Over the past decade, a greater emphasis has been placed on water-efficient landscapes due to drought, dwindling water supplies, higher water costs, storm water pollution and climate change.
The city of Long Beach seeks to update the 1989 victory park in Santa Cruz Park design guidelines to encourage the use of current sustainable landscape best practices to mitigate the effects of climate change.
In addition to the updated guidelines, we will establish the consistent design vision for victory park and Santa Cruz Park.
That will offer an inviting open space environment for residents and visitors while providing a habitat for native and native for and fauna.
Originally dedicated to the city of the public parkland in 1889.
The victory park originally named Bob Park No. 1 that was renamed in 1920 and Santa Cruz Park is the oldest public park in the city of Long Beach.
The park consists of a number of small landstrips needed to the city by the Long Beach land and water company, also known as the company.
In settlement of a suit by the city against the company, the land was to be used for the purpose of the ornamentation and recreation.
The lawsuit resulted from the original subdivision of Wilmore City, which had dedicated area between Ocean Boulevard and the High Tide Line as a public park.
However, when the Rancho Los Serritos reclaim Wilmore City due to an unemployment and resale the area to Long Beach land and water company.
The new owners disputed the parking dedication.
The dispute was settled by a comprised where by the area top of the bluff would be dedicated public park while the bluff face and the area between the bluff and the High Tide Line would belong to the company.
Early versions of the park, including portions designed by the legendary landscape architect, like Fracicala and St. Junior, who designed New York City Central Park.
The segments, both victory and Santa Cruz parks have been developed on a block by block bases as adjacent developments have been erected.
As a result of the various park segments, which make up victory park in Santa Cruz Park, today very in depth, amenities and overall character during the building boom of 1920s, fueled by the old discovery of Signal Hill and the Aluminous Bay area.
The substantial buildings were built between the victory park and the High Tide Line.
Many of these developers of the buildings wanted access to the building from the farm Ocean Boulevard.
The city granted such access in many cases in exchange for the developers landscaping the park and establishing roadways to the High Tide Line, then defined by Seaside Way.
This created a pattern of circular driveways to do a park in consistent landscaping and additional interruptions in the park roadways.
The updated guidelines utilized five design principles unifying, variety, respect, access and promote.
Each of these design principles are clearly defined in the guidelines and establish establishes the solid precedents for landscape architects and designers when designing their portion of the park.
The updated guidelines also consider existing conditions of victory park in Santa Cruz Park.
The analysis completed by growing associates indicated that there are three conditions that are repeated throughout the entire length of the park.
These conditions or segments as defined in the guidelines were created due to over-development of certain properties along the south side of Ocean Boulevard and to the required part dedications.
These updated guidelines define the segments and provide guidance on how to treat each segment when compliance is triggered.
The update will also provide guidelines on site organization allowable architectural elements, site amenities, landscape planting operations and maintenance.
There are many legal not-conforming conditions that currently exist within that most stretch of victory in Santa Cruz Park.
As development progressed, the dedicated part space began to do a window and transform into front lawns of the budding private properties as the 1989 guidelines were neglected.
The updated design guidelines were crafted not only to address the existing non-conformities but also to help restore and identify victory in Santa Cruz Park as an actual public park over time.
Triggers are placed within the guidelines for property owners to comply with the new guidelines so that their piece of victory park or Santa Cruz Park can be updated accordingly.
These triggers include new entitlements, major renovations, new development or any voluntary changes that are made to victory or Santa Cruz Park itself.
Compliance is only required when triggered, new and renovated landscape projects are required to comply with the state's model water efficient landscape ordinance.
Design strategies within the updated Santa Cruz and victory park guidelines are tailored around this ordinance to ensure to ensure compliance for any project proposed within the designated park.
The following findings are required for a local coastal program amendment.
One proposed change will benefit the public interest to proposed change is consistent with zoning designations.
Victory in Santa Cruz Park is in the downtown Shoreline area of the 1980 local coastal program, which largely incorporates the policies of PD6.
In addition to public access requirements of the coastal act, the Thailand, Thailand's restriction preserve victory park and Santa Cruz Park for visitor for visitor serving uses.
The policy plan for the downtown Shoreline is comprised of an integrated and varied group of developments.
Some existing, most new, the Victory Park Santa Cruz and Victory in Santa Cruz Park is intended to serve general visitors within the certified LCP, the effect of zoning regulations are implementing ordinance.
The entirety of Victory Park is within PD6, which is the zoning definition.
Therefore, the change to the regulations incorporated by reference and PD6 triggers the amendment to the LCP, which must be approved by the Planning Commission, city council and coastal, a California coastal commission.
Since the LP is an adopted element of the general plan, and the 1989 Victory Park guidelines were certified by the California coastal commission in 2004, the repeal and replacement of the guidelines trigger a general amendment.
The General Planning Amendment via LCPA will allow for the updated guidelines to be implemented across all park parcels to enable the cohesive and sustainable park design along the entire frontage of Ocean Boulevard.
The updated guidelines continue the goals of the policies of PD6, while also enhancing the public rounds through guidance for architectural elements, site amenities, landscape planting operation and maintenance.
Furthermore, it reinforces the general plan elements such as the open space element and local coastal program and the coastal act of 1976 through preservation of public open space for all to access.
Committee outreach for the proposed guideline ordinance was conducted over a multi-year period, an open house event was held at Billie Jean Library on December 14, 2019, which included a walking tour of the park. Public comments and input during the outreach process were included in the draft guidelines.
On April 24, 2023, the draft guidelines were posted online for a public review and comment.
An additional event was held at Invictory Park on May 20, 2023 to solicit feedback on the draft guidelines.
Staff attended the the Ocean Residence Condominium Association meeting on June 26, 2023 to provide an overview of the project and how to participate.
Comments received during these events, including feedback related to compliance triggers, active versus passive and design strategies.
Presidency of the California Environmental and Quality Act, this project is eligible for a categorical exemption section 15301 existing facilities 15305 minor alterations and land use limitations and 15308 actions by regulatory agencies for protection of the environment of the SQL guidelines.
In accordance with the public hearing notice requirements for zoning or ordinance amendment and Long Beach Municipal Code.
Notice of this public hearing was published in the Long Beach Press Telegram on October 5, 2023.
Written notices were sent to the Coastal Commission and all of all interested parties public hearing notices.
Sorry, and I noticed of the proposed code amendment was distributed through the cities link LBE email email blast system.
Notices were also provided to city libraries as a preparation of this report for comments have been received, addressing both support and recommendations for edits.
Staff recommends approval of the LCPA as necessary components of the public communities design treatments and landscape elements that will enhance passive coastal recreational activities and access to and through the public park areas proposed design guidelines will follow and will allow for the continued use of this important visitor serving and resident serving resource within the downstream downtown shoreline area.
The water efficient plant pallet and sustainable approach to design will ensure that the park segments convey a uniform and resilient landscape.
The guidelines ensure clear and comprehensive design standards that are apply uniformly across the park segments to encourage enjoyment by a broader public and local residents.
Consistent with the LCP and coastal at goals that encourage visitor serving uses within the coastal zone.
Thank you.
Thanks for your presentation.
Thank you.
Since the triggers are what will primarily drive some of the improvements.
What's the anticipated timeline that is foreseeable in terms of how this would unfold over time relative to the entire park being accessible available in unified.
As a as a park space.
Because of the unique nature of this park it is a public park but it's maintained by the developments that front that park.
The trigger is when we have these major entitlements to have greater compliance with the design guidelines.
However, obviously we're not starting from scratch here we have existing conditions we have existing development.
So it really is a gradual process the guidelines help us get closer to the vision you see in front of you but it's not something that would happen on one fell swoop or overnight but rather over a lengthy period of time as as redevelopment happens in the area.
I think you started to lead to it in your presentation how long have you been working on these guidelines.
Since 2019.
So in correct me if I'm wrong I think because we've had the benefit of that work there's been a considerable amount of development that's happened on Ocean Boulevard along there.
And I'm assuming that you guys have encouraged those developers even though these happen.
So we've been adopted at that point that these were the guidelines that they should be following.
Yeah, this has been a working document and the existing guidelines are so out of date that we can't implement them.
They're all about turf and all about water and all about fertilizer which is not really the most sustainable approach to landscaping.
So you know part of it's going to occur over many many years but I think you know we're now out of the drought will be in a drought again at some point in the future so I do expect that those properties that have just big turf areas.
And that they're going to voluntarily be into the city to make changes and make upgrades and this planning document will allow us to make sure that that is cohesive and that it all flows together.
And more accurately depicts what it is that it's a public park where everyone's welcome.
And with that in mind I know some of the segments that were in the design guidelines.
I don't know the terminology but the driveways that come forward or through.
Are there plans to proactively move or minimize those because that's the major impediment to unification because up until this presentation was moved forward.
And I live here my whole life I never realized that was part of the city so at least.
I just thought of the driveway for for each of those in and certainly most folks will not feel.
Welcome to you know.
Loiter there or hang out there or take a nap there because it would be considered or they would proceed it to be property.
In terms of the community discussions what what conversations have taken place around that because specifically that's a.
A use that I'm sure will create a lot of havoc for the tenants and or owners and those buildings.
But and they've gotten probably used to it if not if not entitled to it.
And their mind so I mean what is going to be our approach to that because I don't see that changing anytime soon unless we move it along in some way.
Yeah so I don't see us coming out and ripping out driveways I just don't see that happening.
So that's why you know it's not just beautiful landscaping and street furniture it is also signage making it more clear that their public parks.
But I'll address reminding me there are also specific rules no new driveways or curb cuts that don't already exist and you know many of the buildings that are there will be there for a long time or forever.
But we do have.
Office buildings that will be coming down at some point in the future so I do think that there's some opportunities in the medium term to change the way that these properties are accessed and access them.
From the rear so that whether it's Santa Cruz park or.
Victory park that it maintains a better park landscape than maybe at house today.
Also our guidelines do speak to other hard services that we could use our approval that are more sustainable.
That can be walked on and dragged on so.
You know considering all the conditions existing condition that we had we took extra thought into implementing those options within our guidelines.
And has there been not to not to poke a.
Alasness here but has there been discussions around putting a time certain on some of these that are.
I could be considered.
Long term kind of.
You know within ten years kind of there needs to be action in terms of redesigning or reclaiming not suggesting.
Emma domain because we already on it.
But it's in terms of them to start making plans around.
Finding alternative entry points for example on the driveways again I'm trying to be sensitive here but I also.
I also realize that we change we there's a lot of work involved in this and this could consume the 75 years from now and still.
Nothing's moved in of these change because.
As a property owner if I'm not forced to do it.
I'm not going to I'm not going to touch a thing to not trigger anything.
So I'm looking at this kind of from a practical perspective not to put staff on on a defensive here again I just want to be sensitive to.
The practicality of the students and again reclaiming the land.
And so so once we give someone a driveway it's hard to take away but that's not to say we don't have tools so.
There is no magic 10 year 12 year you know deadline but we're doing the 86 update right now so Alhandro and his team are doing that and that's going to provide the economic incentives for some of these properties to change or expand or redevelop.
So that's one piece and then whether they remove the driveway or not I think there are going to be some strong.
Economic incentives and distance incentives that are going to drive the landscape changes because they think they're cost of water and the regulatory ability to maintain large areas of turf is going to change.
There was a change in the legislature this year that affects us as a city doesn't affect residential land owners this year but man future years sort of prohibiting you from watering turf that is so.
We're we're thinking about legal mechanisms to get there but there's not a magic timeline.
But in terms of to your point the economic factors and economic incentives or distance incentives is there also the possibility of.
Charging for that access or that use.
As it relates to the drive ways or again to.
Encourage or discourage.
That motivation of retaining existing land again I'm trying to we're going to play through.
I think the property law Europe there is going to tell you you know once we grant people access and we sit on our hands for not just years but decades.
We may as a city not necessarily have the right to then come and ask for a fee it's very easy to do that on a brand new arrangement but there's their certain.
Latches and stop all concerns.
Did I understand correctly when the presentation that this ocean boulevard access that the trade off and allowing that with property owners was that the property owners are then responsible for the maintenance of these parks right the city is not paying.
To maintain them so I think that was the the historical context of how this.
These drive approaches and things went through that that public parkway.
The long time done why not for sure.
Thank you.
So just to.
Beyond.
New construction are there other triggers.
That would require them to update the landscaping.
Yes.
So there's new construction.
There's made on settlements which don't necessarily require new construction major interior.
There's our major exterior renovations park renovations demolition and any introduction of additional units.
So even if it's an existing building.
But they're adding units or square footage all those will be triggers as well.
So that's part of why we are incentivizing and ensuring that we don't have to wait decades.
It starts to change happen between.
The thresholds kind of being broader than just brand new construction.
And the PD six update which will hopefully take less than decades.
Post commission willing.
We'll start to see a lot of changes within the next few years for the better both with the aesthetic and the design and sustainability of the park.
And then more generally within ocean boulevard in the shoreline area more broadly.
We we have one of the larger apartment complexes on ocean boulevard.
Is in to us for I think like 13 additional units they're converting some storage spaces in different spaces in the complex.
So they're not building a new building they're not tearing the building down.
But that is our opportunity to work with them to correct some deficiencies in their landscaping and some.
Artificial turf that doesn't drain properly and some problematic things that are happening at that property.
So we do hope to take them on one by one.
And whenever we have in the opportunity to do so.
Okay, so these these you because I was imagining you know adding another floor and like that's not going to happen right.
But you talk about converting different spaces and even something as low as 13 units on a 500 units 1000 unit would trigger this.
Yep.
Okay, and then to be more specific looking at the projects that kind of have happened in the past like five years.
The breakers hotel conversion with that kind of qualify.
Yeah, so we went through a whole process with breakers to make sure that the driveway wasn't getting bigger and to look at their landscaping.
It's just now winding up construction, but that was approved quite a while ago, so the guidelines.
We're in part a long and, even older ocean error doesn't perfectly fit these guidelines but it's sort of in line with the spirit of these guidelines and we were there working towards what would be a better fit, what would be a more public fit and a more sustainable fit.
Thank you. I'm just trying to get a sense of what kinds of projects, those conversion projects will also apply. Okay, thank you.
Mr. Templin.
Thank you.
Um, clarification. I hope that means like for driveways, they're going to become permeable concrete.
Okay, good.
Yeah, we're going to bring you to meetings with the fire department.
Well, we can.
Where we can.
And, um,
when you mentioned the artificial turf,
there's just one of my little bug booths because I was involved with some of the schools
trying to get it out because of all the chemical, um, exposure to where we're trying it.
And, um, is that going to be taken away hopefully?
Uh, we're not big fans of artificial turf.
It turns out to not be great for water quality, um,
and it's also, um, you know,
as other issues in the right context and the right place with the right drainage, it can be okay.
Um,
So we don't have like a band, but that isn't really what's contemplated, um,
for the most part here, what we're looking at is live, uh,
plant material and permeable surfaces.
So that's really the goal.
There's always going to be locations somewhere here in the city.
Um, and you can do really nice, uh, artificial turf that it, uh,
is not always what people choose, but there's different levels of quality with artificial turf.
It's not always a place in you, especially children and animals,
because they're right down on it.
That's just, you know, something to think about, please.
You know, within the guidelines and in section 2.
We do, um, mention what can, you know, um,
like turf grass be replaced with and it does not include the artificial turf.
Um, however, there's no like language that, um, specifically says we discourage it.
However, we are, um, we can at that in, um, certain sections of this guidelines, um,
so that, you know, you know,
the landscape designers and architects know that it is discouraged to use this type of material.
And within a part, it should be a lively landscape thing.
It's just better for the environment and for the natural ecosystem along that stretch.
Thank you.
I think your guidelines do guide you in that direction if you're looking at,
like, a large turf area in front of a building.
I think the guidelines don't encourage you to replace that with artificial grass,
like for like, but you may want to consider spelling that out a little clearer for homeowners associations
and stuff that are looking at that and don't pick up the subtleties of the direction that you're pushing them.
Can you introduce yourself?
Yeah.
Um, one other kind of follow up in regards to just the visibility, uh,
and I think awareness to the general public, uh, and the community that this is actual park space.
Other things that we will do either as a city or within the department to, um,
publicize that more and when I mean by that is everything from, for example,
the GIS mapping, um, Google mapping, all those things where it's designated as park space,
so that there's at least visibility, signage, things that need to just so that,
I think we start, um, recognizing it and awareness, because I think even earlier we were having
discussions around, um, the parklets and, you know, that the entitlement mentality that may happen
or sometimes is inferred when we give access to that space, but I think making sure that there's signage
of people feeling comfortable and people not being discouraged from being there, because, um,
um, uh, uh, uh, uh, an owner or condo, or whatever, have me be misguided and say,
get off our lawn that we'll get off our lawn scenario.
Um, if there's more that we can do it in terms of that advocacy that would be wonderful,
because, again, I'm thinking this through in terms of moving it forward.
not on a one-year basis, but really just to ongoing ongoing to make sure people do feel
comfortable to stay there and park there and picnic there or whatever.
And within our guidelines, we do a huge emphasis on signage.
We've been going as far to kind of guide the exact language that will go on that signage
to say that this is a public park. This was established this year.
Things like that. We also took a look at how many segments there are and how many
how many monument signs should go up.
Like the idea is not to have like a monument sign on every segment.
But we give different options for signage, like floor plaques, things like that.
The landscape designer architect will have the option.
But on every segment of a victory park, a signage saying that this is a public park,
so everyone will know.
And I think adding to that, I don't know if you can really put this into a design guidelines,
but figuring out a way to design it so it looks like is inviting beyond just putting a sign
and people don't read signs.
And I'm thinking I'm looking at this, the place downtown here with the big black art piece that has the faces on it.
I've walked by that a bunch of times and it does not feel like a place you should be.
It's clearly private property.
And it has the front edge, it has the width, it has the green space,
but it's designed to keep people away from it just from a feeling standpoint.
And I hope that there's something that we can do to formalize,
making it more of a inviting public space rather than even just having a sign to say,
hey, you can come in here if you want.
Right.
In addition to signage we do within our park programming section.
We have different strategies on how to make it more inviting
and how to make it aesthetically look like this is a park.
One of those things is creating movement within the park by putting in
walkways from the sidewalk into the park and out.
So that's one of the strategies that we looked at for the design guidelines.
We also are limiting within the guidelines themselves as well,
to really only be used to screen each other.
So, holistically there's a lot of components within different guidelines
that provide that kind of openness that you're alluding to,
and that Alex just provided an example of.
But generally that was a lot of the guiding principle behind this,
to make it clear to the folks both through signage,
overtly stating so and through the design components that now have to be followed.
That this is a public walkway of public area that,
going back to the driveway conversation,
they have to be shared paths as are updated.
So we might not be able to necessarily to get rid of any that are existing,
unless there's a wholesale redevelopment,
but if they're going to remain,
that they become more accessible to folks in not just cars.
And that every design component works seamlessly to kind of provide that open experience for everybody.
Okay.
I'm just going to add one more thing.
It has been a many year process,
but early in the process,
we did review of best practices,
looking at other linear parks,
not only in the US,
but across the world to see kind of what works,
what makes it feel more inviting,
what design treatments,
and then we design some of our engagement strategies that way.
So the 2019 event was a walk through different parts of the park
to go with community looking at what feels more inviting,
what doesn't, why,
how does that work,
and how can we build upon best practices,
so that was helpful in the process.
And then in our last workshop,
it was actually a pop-up in the park that I'd be able to have a picnic
in the park actually activated in the process as part of our work
to do the outreach on the guidelines.
Thank you.
And I wanted to add,
and why I think this is important because that park,
I'm looking at Google Street View right here,
it has all the elements that we're talking about,
it has, you know, benches and walkways and public art,
but it just builds in a way that keeps you out of it.
But I have faith that you folks will be able to figure that out.
Thank you.
Mr. Templin.
If I may ask to,
one of those components would be park benches.
A lot of people like to walk,
but they get to a certain age,
and they want to be able to sit down and show it for a while,
before they get up and walk a little bit more,
maybe to another bench.
But park benches,
let you know you're welcome.
And it makes a big difference.
I found that out in Central Park,
a new yard that the designer thing.
And those are the kind of things that have been taken away.
And I think they need to be park back.
Please.
Yes, park benches is a requirement within these guidelines.
Also other park amenities that will make a park feel like a park,
drinking fountains, tables, etc.
And actually the oldest design guidelines require a bench as well,
but when you go out there,
you'll see some of the benches don't have a walkway leading to them.
So when it's fully grass up to the bench,
you might not always feel invited to do it,
but that goes back to Alex's point about the walkway piece as well.
Just one observation, as I was looking through this in,
and I was curious because I, again,
I rely on Google Maps and Apple Maps firm,
most everything.
But everything east of Hart Street,
which is just immediately to the east of the Tersteader,
is on being reflected as a park space.
But everything west of that included,
from Hart all the way to shoreline.
But everything else over is looks like private land.
So if we could throw that onto the to do list as well,
just again, from the spirit of visibility in the awareness.
Yeah, we'll share that with some of our departmental partners.
I know parks and public works do interact with Google Maps around some of those issues.
All right, any other comments or questions or concerns?
Now, we have a first and a second then.
If we get up the boat, please.
Oh, I'm sorry, public comment.
Thank you, sir. Come on out.
They will, maybe, trick me up here.
I guess one second.
Sorry.
Sorry for from here.
And.
Thank you.
Hello, my name is Russ McCurney.
I live at West Ocean just across the street.
And in 2009, when I decided to move to Long Beach,
one of the things that really drew me here were all the parks.
All different sizes, huge parks, small parks, medium parks.
Okay. Now, there is a lot of variety along Ocean Boulevard for the parks, right?
Now, I'm going to say respond to some of your comments about parks.
I think West Ocean has a good one.
We have four benches.
And there's no barriers between the sidewalk and going on the grass.
But in the new guidelines, because we have more than 30 feet of depth, 30 feet or more,
we would have to build a new walkway.
You know, it doesn't say how big that walkway is.
But if it's like six feet, then you're losing 20% of your, of your lawn.
And you'd have to build some walkways along the side.
And because on one side, we have an elevated street, you know,
seaside goes down.
So along the park, you'd have to have a walkway here.
And on the other side, the other building has, you know,
how we, we don't have a beautiful, you know, we're not a development, right?
We have some buildings here.
So you'd have to have another walkway over here.
And so you'd lose 30% of your grass.
And two huge trees.
I don't know, the coastal commission is going to allow you to do the trees.
But my concern is that when I look at the architectural guidelines,
that were put out, that they're very modern looking,
and there's lots of concrete, lots of hardscape.
When I think of a park, I think of trees and bushes and flowers.
Oh, we have some of those too, but mostly in the spring.
And so, you know, please, let's, let's not get, you know,
two hardscape focused and say, oh, we've got to have a walkway to the bench.
Well, no, if you go to El Dorado Park and you want to go to,
you're going to walk on the grass.
I mean, that's part of going to the park, right?
So, you know, I would like to, you know, get a little bit less emphasis on the concrete
and more emphasis on the plants.
Now, yes, there ought to be places for people to play it.
Now, I have seen people that don't live in my building sit on the benches.
I've actually seen people that obviously don't live in my building laying on the grass.
And that's okay, so people do use it, right?
So I don't know that adding more sidewalks is going to encourage more use.
I really don't.
And I will say that I went to an orchard meeting that talked about this.
I went to the pop up meeting in the park.
I've provided some comments.
I even sent in email comments with my thoughts.
This was a few years ago now.
But I never received any acknowledgement that I'd made any comments at all.
So, when I see this thing about, you did public comments, but you didn't listen.
Okay, so, and I haven't seen any changes in the, in the, in the document that reflect any of my comments.
Thank you for listening.
Thank you for your comments, sir.
Appreciate it.
Any other public comments in the audience?
Do you have any virtual callers?
If you're joining us virtually and you'd like to make public comment on this item,
please use the raise hand function at this time.
The first person with their hand up is Anne Cantrell.
And you have been muted.
You have three minutes to provide public comment.
Good evening again, and I agree with the previous speaker. I went to the original meeting at Billy King Library in 2019 and made comments. I have not heard from anyone about this sense. In fact, I just happened to see that it was on your agenda tonight.
There, the 1980 guidelines required signage. They required benches in every section. They required drinking fountains and Dave Denovan.
I don't even know whether he's still alive, but he fought for Victory Park and Santa Cruz Park for years.
That's how I found out about it. I'm a Long Beach native and I didn't know that all that land along Ocean Boulevard belong to the city was public land, because it looks like the front yard of every building there.
I do not think that putting a lot of concrete in is going to make it inviting drought tolerant plants, although I have succulents in my parkway, but they are not something that are inviting or look like a park.
I agree, trees, grass, I know it requires water, but as one of the former parks and director said, parks are about the only place left where kids can play and see green grass.
So many residents have turned their front yards into drought tolerant places, and we need green plants in our lives to even if it takes some water.
I'm not happy with what I'm hearing is in this revised guidelines. I don't think it's going to get what you are thinking it's going to.
It's not going to be an inviting place for kids to come and just people to come and sit in the grass or sit on a bench and under the shade of a tree and enjoy a parkland. Thank you for listening.
Thank you, Ms. Cantrell. Next speaker.
Our next speaker is Kurt. Kurt, you have been unmuted. You have three minutes to provide public comment.
Thank you for unmuting me. I guess I wanted to say that I really like the design plans.
I can tell that there's been a lot of work that's gone into it.
And I would like to support the idea of leaning less into turf lawns and grass.
I mean, I grew up in a place that had grass that I could play in, but I have allergies. So I hated grass.
And you know, I played soccer and I had to roll around it all the time. Not a great. Anyway, I think shade is a big, a big components to what I think this space could really use.
I was happy to see that a couple of the trees that were called out look like good trees, not just palm trees, which don't really provide shade and aren't really drought tolerant.
I guess the other thing that I really like is the raised crossings for pedestrians that are in the design guidelines that really made me happy because it comes traffic and it lets pedestrians know that there's supposed to be there, which I think is a really important thing that is missing from the current park, which is that people just, it is not an inviting space.
It's somebody else's front yard. This is what it feels like. And yeah, how many people have said tonight, they did it know that that was public property.
So I think that the new design rules are great, and I think that if this park actually gets built out to its vision, it would be a great amenity for long beach, especially being that it's got a real big place of prominence right next to city hall and our current mud pit.
But the other thing is I do agree with some of the other commenters about how inviting the park is, however, that has most to do with Ocean Boulevard.
And I'm going to get into that place, but I do agree that there are elements that will make this park unenviting. It's just not the grass.
It's the road. All right, thank you.
Thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please.
Once again, if you're joining virtually and you'd like to provide public comment on this item, please use raise hand function at this time.
There appears to be no further public comment on this item.
Thank you with that all close public comment.
I would encourage everyone. It sounds there are some people that are hearing comments and responding.
I would encourage people to actually read through and take a look at the design plans of design guidelines as they've been presented.
Maybe staff could help me a little bit. One of the concerns that somebody had was that this plan was very prescriptive.
I'm assuming that these design guidelines would be treated the way they are for all projects that they would be.
Some would cite specific. We'd be looking at the building and the lot size and orientation and we'd be working conjunction with them. These are guidelines to
Point isn't a certain direction, but would not be so prescriptive that would force somebody to concrete over their entire print yard.
Right, that's correct. So these are guidelines. They're different.
And you know, a zoning standard that a building shall be x feed or you know, shall be y percentage glass. They are guidelines we do try to move them forward, but we look at intent not just the individual prescriptive standards and just.
For the commission, it may be different than what you see today, but what is prescriptive in the prescriptive guidelines is not to cement over any portion of the park or to make it entirely hard escape.
And if people are confused about what happened to their comments, there is an appendix in the document itself that goes over all the different comments.
We received, we did try to be responsive to all of them. Sometimes in the course of public outreach, you might have two given commenters that tell you diametrically opposite things. So you try to be, you know, responsive to everything you hear within the realm of possibility. And that's the work that Alex did here and we're very proud of the outcome.
Thank you. Thanks for clarifying that and for the comments. I also think too that it's nice that there's so many images that are in this one. I think it's people hear.
Load or drought tolerant landscaping and they get a certain image in their head and you know, I think of Lincoln Park, which is which is recently done that has a lot of best practices and it is a very welcoming space, but you know, that incorporates the right type of plant pallets. So I think looking at the actual design guidelines that are put forward. I think people should be encouraged by that.
Commissioners and the other questions or comments.
I just want to comment, I really love Lincoln Park and I bring way through your old down there as much as we can. So if that's what we're looking at, I think we have a good vision.
All right, with that, I think we are ready for a vote.
Motion case. Thank you.
At this point, I'd like to open up the podium to, uh, any members of the public that would like to address the commission on non-agendized items.
Seeing and in the audience, do we have any virtual colors?
If you're joining us virtually and you'd like to make public comment on non-agendized items, please use the raise hand function at this time.
There appears to be no further public comment. Thank you.
I was just going to make a comment to Alexis. She's snuck out really quickly. She's definitely getting her money's worth out of tonight's meeting.
Did you guys get every project she's ever touched on tonight?
Yeah.
Good morning.
Commissioner's any comments?
Go ahead, Commissioner Templin.
Just wanted to comment, I did get my email on the Mayor's survey and it was pretty short, I guess.
So I don't know why, but.
Demographics, yes.
Yes.
So we should have gotten those turned in.
It's optional, but we appreciate to filling out the survey.
We had at least one commissioner at a negative reaction to the survey,
but the survey has nothing to do with kicking anyone off a commission or punishing or rewarding anyone for their demographics.
Brand new commissioners, we ask a number of demographic questions of as we onboard them.
Some of you that have been with us a longer, more distinguished tenure.
We don't necessarily have that information on you.
And instead of signaling people out, we're asking all the commissioners across all the commissions in the city.
Dozens of different boards and commissions, just some basic information so that we have statistics about how we're doing in the aggregate of reflecting the diversity of our city across our different boards and commissions.
So hopefully no one took offense to it because it's actually really helpful information for us to have here at the city.
Yeah, comments.
All right, well, if that I'd like to thank staff and immediately tonight and for the public for your patients and participation this evening and I will adjourn the meeting.