Adopt resolution determining that the proposed project is within the scope of the project previously analyzed as part of the Midtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2015031034) and warrants no further environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15162; and, approving a Lot Merger (LMG17-019) and Site Plan Review (SPR17-075) request to allow the construction of a new five-story 145,478-square-foot mixed-use building consisting of 3,938 square feet of commercial space and 102 residential units (101 affordable residential units) at 1795 Long Beach Boulevard, in the Midtown Specific Plan (SP-1).  (District 1)
Thank you. So let's go ahead and pull up our first hearing. So hearing them hearing item number one. Report from Development Services. Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing and adopt a resolution approving an amendment to Midtown's specific plan. Environmental Impact Report. Adopt a resolution approving a General Plan Amendment to amend the Land Use District Map by changing the designation of 13 properties to mixed uses. Adopt a resolution determining that the proposed project is within the scope of the project previously analyzed as part of the Midtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report and approving a lot merger and site plan review request to allow the construction of a new five story mixed use building at 1795 Long Beach Boulevard, District one. Thank you. And I understand there's no oath required that true? City Manager. No. Okay. All right. So, Mr.. Mr. Modica, take us away. So, first off, Mayor Councilors, I do want to introduce our brand new first ever interim director of Development Services as this first ever meeting Tom Modica. Why, thank you, Mr. West. I'm happy to be here for this. You'll hear a staff report from Kari Tai, our current current planning officer supported by Oscar Orsi, our deputy director of development services. So take it away, Carrie. Thank you, Tom. Good afternoon. Honorable Vice Mayor Richardson and members of the city council staff has prepared a presentation that summarizes the staff report. If you so choose, we will proceed. This is a request for a general plan amendment to resolve inconsistencies between the Midtown specific plan and the general plan designation. Hang on. A minute. This on. I don't know. It's like, let's see. In the back. Can we please have the PowerPoint presentation? Not. Sorry. Technical difficulties. This is the general plan. Amendment request is also accompanied by a lot merger and a site plan review approval for a new mixed use project at 1795 along Beach Boulevard. Thank you. So on the screen, the red outline shows the development site, and that's at the southwest corner of Long Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. The map is oriented where North is. This is actually facing west, so don't let that disorient you. And the general plan land use designation for the site is mostly in land use District seven, but part of it is in three B, which is residential only, and the development is a mixed use project. And there lies the inconsistency. So talk about the general plan amendment a bit. This area used to be what was called PD 29 plan development 29. That was the zoning and it was changed to the Midtown specific plan in 2016. The Midtown specific plan changed the way that we implemented zoning in this area. Namely, it's more of a form based code and uses floor area ratio. So in terms of the uses, like I mentioned, the project site is on the map here and you'll see it's outside of the hatched area that leaves or is not working. But the the rear part right behind the project site area is an area that's marked as a land use district eight A and that is for retail only. And then if you look under just to the vote below the text of the project site, there's Area three B, which is for residential only. And so you can see that those two don't allow for mixed uses. And so along with the project site, we want to clean up the rear part of the project site as well as a basically a comprehensive area because general plans we can't do parcel by parcel. And so the request here is to take all of that hashed area and make it part of land use District seven. And that will allow us to implement the Midtown specific plan the way it was intended to be implemented. For example, something that is under the allowable floor area ratio may be inconsistent with today's general plan. So in terms of the proposed building at 1795 Long Beach Boulevard, like I mentioned, the project is a project is five stories with 102 dwelling units, 101 of those are going to be affordable. The floor area ratio for this project is 3.4, where the Midtown specific plan allows for 4.0. So clearly that's under the Midtown specific plan also allows for ten storeys in this area. But this project is only five stories. However, if it were to go under the existing general plan designation of three B, that only allows 30 dwelling units per acre. And this has 101 over a project site that is just about one acre. And so that's that they're thereby illustrating the technical inconsistency there. With the general plan amendment approved, this project would be able to move forward. The project, like I mentioned, has 102 residential units. It also includes of a series of courtyards, common areas, balconies and amenities for the residents, as well as at that corner plaza there right at Pacific Coast Highway and Long Beach Boulevard. That would really establish a presence and identity right where right now there there lacks a character there. So this would essentially change the entire corner. So then just to summarize the environmental and project findings behind the request here briefly, the Midtown specific plan was accompanied by a certified programmatic environmental impact report. And now that it was always intended that the general plan designations would change along with that, however, as the Council was aware, the ongoing land use element effort that was anticipated to be completed and it was supposed to include the underlying properties for the Midtown Plan. However, since that has not been done, we are actually trying to comply with a mitigation measure out of the programmatic EMR, which required that these cleanup items be completed within one year of adoption. We're just over 18 months now, so we're just trying to get into compliance there. This would clean that up. An addendum was prepared for that program, air for the cleanup, and also the project itself had a separate environmental document that established consistency with the programmatic IIR. The general plan amendment that's proposed is internally consistent with the rest of the general plan. And also the findings for the lot merger and site plan review have been documented in your packet in accordance with the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission who the recommending body on this action met on December 9th, 2017 and recommended that the City Council approve this project. They conducted a public hearing as well and received a series of speakers in support. So lastly, for public noticing, for both the Planning Commission hearing as well as this hearing, public notices were sent out to a 1000 foot radius to property owners as well as occupants of that hashed area you saw on the previous slide. And the staff has not received any comments to date. So therefore staff recommends that the City Council concur with the planning commissions, recommend the recommendation to approve this project and that is articulated in the recommended action on the Council letter as well as the agenda. That concludes staff's presentation and the applicant for the development project is also in the audience. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So that concludes. That's comments. Yes. Yes. Okay. So at this point, we're going to open it up for public comment on this hearing. Is there any public comment come forward? Saying none. I'm going to go ahead and close public comment, take it back behind the the rail. So the motion is made by Councilwoman Gonzalez. Do you have a comment? I just would like to say thank you to the staff as well as the developer. This is going to be a fantastic attribute to central Long Beach, especially on Long Beach Boulevard. We've been waiting for this for so long. So thank you very much for all of your collaborative work. Thank you. Councilman Brice. I echo that I did have a long list of questions for our interim development services director involving, you know, decades of work on his part. But I will refrain from those so we can get to the state of the city. Thank you. Thank you. Because they would be very short answers. Thank you, Councilmember Supernormal. Thank you. I just had one question either for staff or maybe the developer. Was there any reference to the. Original use of this building? It's hard to tell now, but it was a Norm's restaurant, one of the. Real. Most elaborate one of their Googie restaurants. But no preservation, no preservation effort or anything, I guess. Convert Googie. Thank you. QUESTION Thank you for your question, Councilman. So you're not in evaluation of any existing project site staff always looks at the existing building on on site to see whether it qualifies for any type of status. And in this case, this did not meet any criteria. Okay, fine. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no further comment. Members, please cast your vote. Hmm. Well. Motion carries. Thank you. Item number two please.