Recommendation to adopt resolution certifying the Final Program EIR/EIS-03-17 (SCH No. 2018091021), making findings of fact, adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approving a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP);
Item 21 Report from Development Services. Recommendation two Adobe Resolution Certifying the final program EIA on adopting a Global Master Specific Plan Accepting the decision action of the L.A. County Airport Land Use Commission relating to the Globemaster Quarter specific plan. Declare ordnance amending the Ombudsman's proposed sections relating to implementations of the Globemaster specific plan and ordinance. Amending the Use District Map to reflect the establishment of the Globemaster Cortez Pacific Plan. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for Final Reading District five and seven. Thank you very much. This is a hearings that will follow this, a hearing order. There is no oath required, correct, Madam Clerk? Correct. Okay, great. So let's go. So let's go ahead and turn it over to staff to begin the hearing. I'd like to introduce Patricia Defender for the the planning. Manager to make a presentation on this item. Evening. Mayor. Vice mayor, city council members. My name is Patricia Devendorf. The item before you is a specific plan for the former Boeing C-17 manufacturing site and surrounding areas. This plan is centered on the reuse and redevelopment of the Boeing C-17 facilities located on the west side of the airport and the transformation of that site into a 21st century employment district. The plan also includes surrounding commercial and industrial areas. The actions that are before the City Council this evening represent the final steps to approve the specific plan, which has been in development since 2018. In December 2020, a planning commission held a public hearing on the specific plan and voted to forward the specific plan to the City Council with a recommendation of approval. Following planning permission, the project was heard at the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission, a look which found the project consistent with the county's airport land use plan. The city was awarded a federal grant in 2015 to complete the three Phase C17 Transition Master Plan. Phase one, which was to study existing conditions and alternative land use scenarios for future use of the site was completed in 2016 and phase two kicked off after that time. Phase two has involved preparation of the land use plan, which is the specific plan that's before the council. When this phase is complete, the city will transition to phase three, which is to assist dislocated workers and affected firms and to facilitate business development and job creation. Those tasks will be implemented by the Economic Development Department. Estate planning and zoning law has authorizes cities to prepare a specific plan to implement their general plans, specific plans or customized zoning regulations for a defined geographic area. They enable the city to establish a guiding vision and land use regulations that help implement that vision. And they identify and plan for infrastructure improvements needed to support the contemplated development and mechanisms to fund those improvements. It also further allows a streamlined review process for developments that are consistent with the specific plan. Major economic investment is currently taking place in the city, in the vicinity of the airport and Douglas Park area, which is seeing a clustering of aerospace industries, particularly rocket manufacturing and small satellite launch companies. The adoption of this specific plan will help ensure continued business attraction and job growth in the area and support the successful re-use of the Boeing property. There are 24 aerospace, manufacturing, engineering and design companies based in Langley, Long Beach, and as of January 2020, the industry provided 6500 direct jobs. Recent companies to make Long Beach their home in these industries are. Virgin orbit rockets. Rocket Lab. Relativity. Space spin launch. Morph three of 3D and Space X. The specific plan can help support the continued clustering of these related industries in the area and take advantage of the area's proximity to freeways, the airport and the port. The specific plan consists of 437 acres and is centered around the former C-17 manufacturing site. And Terry Avenue is the North-South access in Spring Street is the East West access. The specific plan area is encompassed within the Long Beach boundaries, but abuts the cities of Signal Hill and Lakewood. Vision of the plan is to transform the area to a 21st century employment district that attracts leading edge firms and takes advantage of its local, regional and global transportation connections. This vision is supported and implemented by a number of goals that include stimulating economic development and job growth, cultivating human capital, encouraging land use and transportation improvements on Cherry Avenue that support surrounding businesses. And increasing mobility choices and reducing vehicular traffic. The plan has six land use districts which are tailored zoning districts for the sub areas of the plan and two overlay zones. The Business Park District, which is shown in the light blue, makes up the core of the plan and covers the former Boeing site, allowing a variety of industrial and commercial redevelopment of the site. This could include office, campus, commercial, industrial, business, park manufacturing, warehousing and research and development uses. The airport district is specifically for airport property, and aviation related use of the remaining districts are largely commercial industrial that allow uses similar to those allowed in Title 21 zoning but that are tailored for the area. The area is divided into four geographic areas based on existing and planned land uses and the role it plays in the broader vision for the area. The North Area is comprised of lots adjacent to Cherry Avenue, as planned for commercial uses and light industrial. The central includes the Boeing site and the uses that I describe before the business park and supportive uses industrial and other supportive uses. The southern area centered on Spring Street is zoned largely for industrial and commercial uses, with the aim of continuing a commercial continuous commercial corridor on Cherry Avenue to create a spine, a commercial spine for the area in the southeastern areas reserved for general industrial and airport related uses. As noted previously, the city is in the second phase of the C17 transition plan process. Outreach has been ongoing since the first phase. During the second phase, staff, which was for the development of this plan, staff held three workshops to hear the community and stakeholders needs and concerns for the project area and how they wanted to see the plan take shape. But South heard at these workshops played a large role in informing the development of the plan. The slide here shows the major points that were expressed by the community that have been incorporated into the vision and regulations of the plan to the extent feasible. They include providing pedestrian oriented retail amenities. Improving safety and appearance of streets. Allowing flexibility in permitted uses and standards. Protecting existing businesses and ensuring sufficient parking, among other comments. This project staff prepared a program IIR as well as an impact environmental impact statement or EIAS, which is required under federal law. Since this project received federal funding, this was necessary because of the federal funding that the city received. We are currently at the second to last point in this process shown on this chart, which is the City Council hearing. This slide lists the issues that were fully analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report, Environmental Impact Statement. And that means that these issues were identified as potentially having impacts, but were mitigated to less than significant levels. And those include esthetics, air quality, cultural resources. These were the items that were analyzed fully greenhouse gas emissions hazards and hazards. Materials, noise, transportation, utilities and service systems. These were the issues that were found to be less than significant, that they were able to be mitigated through the mitigations of the air. And those include esthetics, air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, etc., as showed on the slide here. This slide shows the issues that were found to be significant and unavoidable, even with mitigation incorporated and those included. Air quality cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions and transportation. The environmental review process requires both Sequoia and NEPA require consideration of project alternatives to identify an environmentally superior alternative to alternatives were considered the first one. The no project alternative was found to not meet the project objectives. The second alternative, the reduced project alternative, was found to be environmentally superior, but would only partially meet the project objectives and would fail to meet them as fully as the proposed project while still having significant and unavoidable impacts, although albeit reduced. And that's the reason that the the plan as proposed is, is what's recommended today. Eight Agency comments were received in on the drafty air in responses to each of these comments were provided in the final air. The city also received additional comments, including comment from the Cow Heights Neighborhood Association after the close of comment period. But all the comments were responded to directly by the city to those who submitted comments. Due to the significant and unavoidable impacts, the city must adopt a statement of overriding considerations when certifying this year. This slide lists the considerations in support of the statement of overriding considerations. The benefits of the project were found to outweigh the project impacts of because the plan meets the objectives of the project, aligns with the city's general plan and economic development goals, generates jobs and strengthens the city's tax base, and lays out a plan for improving infrastructure in the area in conjunction with new development. As previously noted, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item on December 17, 2020. A variety of comments and opinions were expressed, many of them in support of the plan. The areas of concern are listed on this slide include concerns about ensuring open space connections. Design of the streets, level of service and transportation impacts. Office parking reductions and parking requirements in general were among the comments that were provided. The city's response to the comments. One of the comments was also from the city of Signal Hill, specifically about concerns about transportation impacts. And I'm going to discuss that in a little more detail. Five letters have also been received leading up to tonight's hearing that have been forwarded to the council, including follow up letters from the Council Heights Neighborhood Association and the City of Signal Hill. The Planning Commission did recommend the City Council certify the EIA. EIA adopt the resolution establishing the specific plan, adopt a zoning code amendment for PD 13 and PD and the repeal of PD sorry, PD 19 and the repeal of PD 13 and adopt a zone change to implement the new specific plan. The LA, the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission held a public hearing on the specific plan on March 3rd, 2021. The purpose of this hearing was to determine the specific plans consistency with the airport land use plan. This is an important step in demonstrating that the plan is not in conflict with the airport and that future land uses will not be negatively affected by the airport or by the airport operations. The ALA made positive findings to declare the plan to be consistent with the county's land use plan. This was procedurally required to take place between Planning Commission and the City Council. In particular, staff wanted to take a moment to address comments submitted by the City of Signal Hill. The City of Signal Hill expressed concerns about traffic impacts, impacts that proposed that the proposed plan may have on streets in the adjacent, in the air, in the city and adjacent to the city. Staff had followed up with City of Signal Hill after the December Planning Commission hearing. There were concerns specifically about mitigation measures being deemed infeasible. Those are mitigation measures that would involve roadway improvements. The air did determine those. Some of those improvements would be infeasible because the intersections are not wholly in the city and therefore the implementation of the improvement is uncertain and requires ongoing coordination with other jurisdictions to be implemented. Some of those improvements also were deemed to be infeasible because they conflict with the multi-modal goals of the specific plan and the city's adopted mobility plan. However, as is also stated in the ER analysis and the response to comments, the city has committed to signal that the city will coordinate and work with them on a project level based on a specific basis through the development review process for future developments to identify additional transportation improvements that will minimize traffic impacts. The city also has agreed to pay the fair share for established transportation mitigations that have been identified that would be identified in the city of Signal Hill as as appropriate in the future. So without ads tonight, Seth asks the city council to take the final steps to approve the specific plan. These actions involve certifying the IRS, adopting the resolution, establishing the specific plan, adopting a resolution, accepting the action of the Airport Land Use Commission, adopting a zoning code amendment, and adopting its own change to implement the specific plan. That concludes my presentation. Staff is available to answer questions and members of the consultant team that help the city prepare the specific plan are also on the line. Thank you. Thank you. And, Mr. Mayor, this is Mike May's end before we move on. As the last slide indicated, there is three resolutions and two ordinances. And because of the nature of this action and the environmental impact, the environmental impact statement that will have to be adopted will need a separate roll call vote on the three resolutions and the two ordinances if we get to that point. Okay. Thank you. And we'll do public comment now. Anthony Souza. He's been. Mr. Mayor. City Council members. Staff. Good afternoon. My name is Anthony Souza. I've been a person of Long Beach my whole life. I went to St Anthony's High School and my kids and grandkids currently live here. I've owned a number of businesses in the city and I've always supported the city in any way I could. Over the past 25 years, I've been purchasing and approving parts of south of Bordeaux, the cherry, which has been zoned Eigg a small part zone PD 19. This area would now be part of a Grand Master Corridor plan. I feel this is it. This is an ambitious plan and a good plan overall. It is not completely considered the many small parcels south of Bordeaux, such as myself and many others. There are many uses in this area and some have been operating over 60 years. And we'll probably operate there a few more decades. There was a car wash on the corner that has a writing commitment to be there another 30 years. The other side of my property there is a dry cleaner that is generational now. It's not going away soon. Then you have H and y rebar and buy and hold digging and have kids and grandchildren running them now. And it's them. I understand that the city would like to have the DC SP adopted. So I feel it's only fair that the plan not be detrimental to the long term businesses and property owners by itself. I believe this could be accomplished by eliminating the PD 19 zoning as as you want and grant grandfathering in the example with an overlay of that CSP for the next 15 years, or at least until the C 17 site is fully developed. Once the C 17 site is about it's redeveloped and you have a robust employment center and an economic driver, the small site may become feasible to develop. I want to thank you for your consideration. Ward Mays, please begin. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and fellow council members. My name is Ward Mace and with Good Men, a global property company that owns, manages and develops properties in gateway cities. For those of you that don't know, we are the company that acquired the former Boeing C-17 manufacturing plant approximately two years ago. And I've had the pleasure of working with staff through the specific plan in the air and are excited and grateful to see this project before the City Council tonight and would like to thank those of us or those that that helped us get there. Oscar Orsi, Christopher Koontz, Scott Kennedy and a whole host of others that we're working on this since 2015, long before we acquired the property. But what I wanted to share with you all is that we continue to receive significant inquiries about the property and are grateful to the city for having been able to license the property to a number of production companies, including Apple TV and Netflix is completing a feature film, The Gray Man that will be released next year. However, most important has been the learning that as we've gotten to know the property, the learning of the unique attributes of these buildings, the clear height , the bay spacing, the power, the significant power with the astro substation and the excess land that makes them incredibly value valuable in the market. And specifically, I want to leave you with letting you know that I look forward to sharing with you some very exciting news in the next upcoming weeks. Thank you. That concludes public comment. Thank you. Will close public comment. Now go to Councilman Monk. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The staff presentation was excellent. Many have already seen it at the Planning Commission. I do want to highlight comments from both of our public speakers. Mr. Mace, I appreciate that you like the unique attributes of those buildings. It was my first trip with the mayor to Washington, DC, where his chief of staff and I were up at dawn in office after office arguing to not allow those buildings to be destroyed. They would have had a significant environmental impact to the communities around them. Mr. Odinga was very supportive of this position and keeping these buildings and reducing the impacts to those adjacent neighborhoods. And I think that many don't know how much work goes in beforehand. When we get to a project of this magnitude. We talk about the 24 aerospace companies that are in Long Beach and the development services team talks about the 6500 jobs. But I go to those locations and those are not just jobs. Those are careers that will set young, innovative individuals on trajectories for a lifetime. But innovating on behalf of our community, our region, and, quite frankly, our country as we take on the international competition of space and satellites. Slide seven. Outlines 437 acre property. And many have commented on the noncontiguous look of that map. If you could put up Slide seven, that would be appreciated and some of the questions related to the overlays. I think that it's important to note that not all of the area is in the city of Long Beach. And so when you see that map, there's a carve out on Slide seven, which is the city of Lakewood. And so that is why there is a bit of noncontiguous ness in the plan. As you move along to Slide nine and you look at the cherry overlay, there's often a question as to why the requirement for Community and Cherry Avenue overlay zone does not apply to both sides of the street. And perhaps it should. But today, we are eager and excited to approve a plan with minor modifications, because we do have many corporations looking to provide additional career opportunities to the residents of Long Beach. And we do feel that the work that has been done over the last you can argue for years, I would argue six years to get to this point has been significant. Specifically when we look at the existing businesses and the need to ensure that they're protected, as was outlined on Slide 12 by the community. As one of their concerns. So that's three slides ahead. We want back one. Thank you. They want to ensure protecting existing businesses and something has changed since some of the initial community input meetings. What has changed is COVID. And so initially we were moving forward with this plan with great steam and determination. But today I ask that we make some minor modifications. City Clerk I don't know how many minutes I have left, but I'd like to read into the record the suggested amendments to the Globemaster corridor specific plan. Is that something that I have time to do or should I come back after additional comment? You have a minute and a half left. Okay. I'll, I'll, I'll close my comments by saying I'll read in the exact or maybe the city clerk can read in the exact language. But I think that my goal today would be to make a minor change, which has been run by the city attorney, Mr. Koons Development Services and others, to ensure that it would still abide by what we're trying to accomplish and be in alignment with community input. And that would be that on page 69, the new subsection 5.3.9 adds in the section as follows Transition between existing zoning and specific plan districts that the land use regulation of the specific plan shall be effective immediately upon enactment, subject to the following four parcels under ten acres. The land use permitted by the existing Zoning and Plan Development District within the plan area prior to the effectiveness of the specific plan shall continue to be permitted in a manner allowed by the existing zoning or Plan Development District for a period of I hear the community asking for 15 years I'm open to. Putting in 15 years in that slot. I recognize that some leases can last up to, as he said, 30 years. But this would not just be for the gentleman who called in plan. It would be for all parcels along that corridor that are ten acres or less. Many of them already have long term tenants and would not be subject. But should those tenants become bankrupt or go under in the next few months or year because of this, then we would give them that opportunity to fill with a like tenant so that they could then recuperate and gather the necessary capital to make significant and transformational improvements to the corridor. Thank you. And that's a compromise that part of a broader motion than that first motion. It is the city clerk has the language. I don't know if I should read it all in or if they would like to read it in. I read in the component that I thought was most important. Mr. City Attorney, is that a line? I mean, I'll ask for a second in a minute, but does that align with how we've got to have the motions yet? Mayor We're going to have to hear the entire text that the Councilwoman was referring to, because it would be a change to the specific plan itself. So the Council needs to know precisely what do we have? What are we ready for the record? Councilwoman and councilwoman, if it's helpful, we have it here at the staff table and we can also assist you in providing that or reading that to the whole council. I can read it from the top. I just knew I was out of time. So if the council will oblige me to read it, I'm happy to do that. There. If I can challenge it up for a second. It's it's in my district, too. And if you need to, I will allow some of my time to the council and so she can read it all. Yeah, let's, let's just go ahead and have Councilman Manga read the rations. It's important for the motion. I think there's also any objection. Go ahead, Councilwoman. So the beginning of this starts. Per City Council Instruction staff proposes the two following amendments to the Globemaster corridor specific plan prior to adoption by the City Council on May 18th, 2021, as follows one on page 69, a sentence is added immediately following the second to last paragraph of subsection 5.2.2 as follows. Land use is permitted by the existing zoning and planning development districts within the plan area. Prior to the effectiveness of the specific plan shall continue to be permitted in a manner allowed by the existing zoning or planned development district for a period of 15 years. From the effective date of the specific plan as further detailed in subsection 5.3.9 of the specific plan on page 69. Number two on page 69, new subsection 5.3.9 is added as follows. 5.3.9 transition between existing zoning and specific plan districts. The land use regulations of this specific plan shall be effective immediately upon its enactment, subject to the following four parcels under ten acres. A The land use is permitted by the existing zoning and planning development districts within the plan area. Prior to the effectiveness of the specific plan shall continue to be permitted in a manner allowed by the existing zoning or planned development district for a period of 15 years. From the effective date of the specific plan of this specific plan B notwithstanding the above, no parcel shall be allowed to serve as container storage. See uses permitted by the specific plan but prohibited by the existing zoning or planned development district shall be permitted upon the effective date of the specific plan and shall supersede the prohibitions of the existing zoning or plan development district D. At the end of the 15 year period, any land uses not conforming to the specific plan shall be subject to Chapter 21.27 non-conformity of the Zoning Regulation three on page 124, add a sentence immediately following the last sentence of subsection 8.2.3 as follows When projects require additional seek or review, the city will coordinate potential transportation mitigation measures with the adjacent jurisdictions. And I think that I also want to just comment that considerable work by Councilmember Odinga's office came into play. Him and I were blindsided by a staff decision this year that allowed container storage on a parcel not outlined in my exemption today. But as we are both very cognizant of that impact on the residents, we are adding that additional restriction against container storage that we thought was clear but may need to be outlined very specifically. That is why I added Section C to ensure that Kim and I are never placed in that position to have to dismantle something that should have never happened in the first place and is not within the support of the community that we represent. Thank you. Thank you for your partnership, Councilmember. And. Mr. Mayor or Councilmember Mongo in discussions we had with Councilmember Mongo. There's also a technical amendment needed to be made, which is number four, which has to do with coordination with the city of Signal Hill as well as Lakewood into the future. So if it's acceptable, we'd like to also include that language. Thank you. Page four, page two. Yes, thank you. Number four on page 124, new subsection 8.3.3.1 is added as follows 8.3.3.1 coordination with adjacent jurisdictions. During the development review process, the city shall coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions, primarily the cities of Signal, Hill and Lakewood, on a project specific basis for all projects requiring a traffic impact analysis and subject to site plan, review or other discretionary land use approval in accordance with Long Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 21.25. The purpose of this coordination shall be to identify transportation improvements that could take place in the adjacent jurisdiction or jurisdictions to mitigate traffic impacts within the framework of the established mitigation measures. The city may additionally commit to pay a fair share portion of these improvements within the adjacent jurisdiction or jurisdictions. Thank you, Mr. Cootes. I was excited and didn't get to page two. I guess I'm not qualified to be the city clerk yet. I. Ah, we are Mr.. Mr. City Attorney. Anything else you needed from that? It's perfect, Your Honor. Okay. And Catherine? Ringo. Thank you, Mary. And I want to thank Councilman Mungo for being so thorough on her research and discussions that we had and I also had with the development services staff in regards to this project and its impacts on the community. If staff would go back to slide number seven again, please. Sorry. It's late night. It's late. Okay. Now, you only see this slide that there's a Cherry Avenue overlay, and that's the property that we're talking about. And those are the ones that basically affected us the most. When Councilmember Mungo was talking about the surprise that we got late last year into this year with the container traffic that was there, that included a lot of noise. And it was that became a 24 hour operation beyond what we knew about. And it was because it was done over the counter without our or our understanding of what was taking place there. But the main purpose of had this map up is that you'll see to the upper left hand corner or that that section that's all residential. And the impact that this development's going to have on the residents there is going to be quite, quite impactful for them. And they're very much interested in concern as to what is going to be taking place here. So the changes that Councilmember Wingo has put in there is to address a lot of those concerns and of course dealing with the other cities that are also impacted by this with cities in Lakewood and Signal Hill. So it's very important that they also have interest in this. And and also the to what we are concerned about in the city alarm each one of the more important issues that was put in place up there and I know it's very impactful to the neighbors up in the in that area is called the heights and the criteria and that's the parking impacts that will be addressed on there. So one of the questions that I have is what what is going to be the parking impact of the development center? There are up and down that corridor. And what is the rationale behind the parking that that is going to go in place there? Because obviously there's impacts not either with the businesses that are there and with the upcoming development, there are going to be future impacts. So I'd like to hear more from staff in terms of what rationale are they looking at when it comes to parking. But thanks, Councilmember Christopher Koonce from Development Services. So as you know, we've been working with constituents in your district because the property, the district five, but the residents surrounding are in District seven. So we've been working on this about five years, six years, and we had a lot of meetings and some things that were really important to the residents was they want the visual character of Cherry Avenue improved. They want goods and services. And then in terms of the businesses, they want higher value businesses, they want high quality buildings. They want next generation manufacturing space uses, R&D uses, and they don't want sort of dead warehousing. So very similar to what we've been able to accomplish on the other side of the airport in Douglas Park. That's always been sort of the vision for here, but also with some more kind of community scale retail over time. So in order to achieve that outcome, we have to look at what the regulations are doing in terms of the building. So because warehousing is at a relatively low parking rate and office can sometimes be at a higher parking rate, you can inadvertently discourage the office uses the higher end users that you're trying to attract if you set the parking requirement too high. So we know that parking is area of concern and a sensitive issue here in the city. So we actually had a consultant report that claimed that we should not have any additional parking required for office uses that were part of these larger buildings, that that should just be sort of a bonus . We took the community input, which was to not do that. We balance that and came up with a number that was appropriate for these very large buildings. In our experience, the number that we came up with is about what is actually used in other such facilities around the city, including over in Douglas Park, and we'll be more than adequate parking. So every new construction job that comes in there is a reevaluation of the parking. And we look at what the parking demand is, the square footage, and then we go through the process on that. So we were trying to balance a bunch of different factors, not just the numerical number of parking spaces, but the type of uses we're going to get and what we heard from the community in terms of what they want to look like and the type of users they want and the district. Thankfully, our response is obviously it's very important to that community in that area. And I'm glad that you're paying attention and listening to what their needs are. I hope that day in the future you will be paying attention to that need. The other question I had is that there was during the presentation you also talked about the coordinated efforts that we will have with the Hill and partly Lakewood in regarding to bike lanes. What can we expect to have in terms of bike lanes along Cherry Avenue? Is it on both sides of the street? Just one side of the street? What is going to be, in your view, the impact for the community? And how can they stay involved in the development of the project as it goes where they are? Sure. So, Councilman, our long term vision is to be able to have bike transportation. And ideally, that's on both sides of the street. But that depends on final design. So it may not be on both sides of the street or there may be an interim condition where one side of the street is different than the other. So what's what's going to happen is this plan establishes a vision that establishes what we want cherry to look like in the future, but that's not tomorrow. So we have to do work development services with public works about actually engineering that street. And that is going to happen sort of based on when properties turn over and how we're able to fund that transformation. And that's all done in partnership with community. So Cal Heights did submit that letter with some concerns about, you know, sort of what's the interim condition on the bike and the exact bike routing and how it transitions as you reach for a five freeway. I don't have the answers on all of those because that is yet to be determined, but it will be determined with community in an open process and there'll be a lot of engagement and ability for folks to participate and then to make it. More complicated but also important. You know, Lakewood has a chunk of property on Terry that has Long Beach on either side and then to the south as well as to the west, we have signal hill. So we have to coordinate with both of those cities. We have a lot of shared goals, but also have some differences and may have some differences of opinion about, you know, the streets and they're welcome to treat their portion of the street differently. We just need to have a clear, understandable transition between the two different approaches. So all of that work is in front of us, but we'll be involving your office and your constituents as we do those refinements. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. And one last question was Councilmember Mungo mention the 15 year lease agreement, or at least the proposal in there? Is there anything magical? About 15 years going to be less than 15 years. I'm thinking maybe five. Is there is that out of the realm of reality? Or please, could you explain the the the process on 15 versus five or ten? That's a policy discussion. So I don't want to speak for a council member. Mungo here at the staff table, we can make that number whatever you want to make that number eight. Every year. Flexibility provides additional flexibility to that property owner and I understand and respect that goal. At the same time, the community did want to see this transition occur over time and every year that's added is perhaps delaying that transition and delaying kind of the goals of what community members and others expected to see along the Terry corridor in this real property. So typically phase ends would be shorter and year a couple of years. But they can be long. There's no. There's no limit in either direction. It really is a policy call for this council to make and will implement whatever decision you make. Councilmember Mongo Would you be amenable to a substitute motion but you're afraid that they'll put in the amendment to make it five years as opposed to 15? So I guess I'd have two questions for staff. I agree that we want to implement what the community is looking for. I think that in reaching out to the land owners in that area, some really good points have been made. The car wash is not going to change for 30 years. The two adjacent businesses are not going to change for likely 30 years. And specifically, if you could pull up the slides again. If you look at. I think it's Slide ten. I guess I'm unclear if the community wanted this. Perfect. Nine. I'm sorry, said nine. If the community wanted Cherry to look a certain way, why wasn't that Cherry Avenue overlay zone applied to both sides of the street? I mean, why the rush to get one side of the street modified, but leaving the other side of the street without any overlay. So the check the Terry Avenue overlay is different than the retreatment of Terry. So the Terry Avenue overlay actually allows additional uses that would not otherwise be allowed in the business park. But the difference between the two sides of the street is the difference between the two sides of the street. So on the east side you do have some industrial uses, but you also have the carwash is actually a commercial use. The Enterprise Rent-A-Car is a commercial use. So the character of the two sides of the street were different. And that was reflected in the plan, which is based on, you know, all of the different meetings, but as well the economic analysis and all the different factors that went into the plan. So yes, there's two different approaches on two different sides of the street, but it's meant to balance all the different input that we received and all the different factors. And then the community is also getting, you know, treatment of the street itself within the public right away. So that character will change sort of regardless of the businesses. So there are multiple parcels which are currently in the business park district, community, commercial district, Cherry Avenue Overlay Zone that are currently industrial. And those were not given the opportunity to stay. General Industrial District. And yet the ones directly across the street from them are. So I don't understand. Well, if the community wants the they'll look to change. Wouldn't they want the look to change on both sides. And the community input was one of many factors is what staff is trying to communicate to you. So the existing land uses were another factor. But I just want to be very clear. So everyone in council understands, you know, whether it's one year, two years, five years, 15 years, 35 years, that's the amount of time to establish a use. So once a user is established and they've been issued permits, they have non-conforming rights, they can exist into perpetuity. They can exist for a thousand years. So what we're talking about is how much time should be given as a transition period to establish a use not there. When the zoning changes, no existing permitted business has to go away. We don't do that. We don't set businesses down. They are able to operate so long as they operate in that location. But I think what the constituents on that corridor that have financial interest in the area have communicated is if the complete opposite side of the street is maintaining its industrial status and the neighbors. To their south are maintaining their industrial status, their ability to sell their potentially new use to a and I don't want to name any specific business and get the community excited but is less because some businesses may not necessarily want to be next to a um, industrial site. So an example might be and Councilmember Austin's done a great job of having a Trader Joe's that's a commercial use, but a Trader Joe's is never going to go next to an industrial use . And so when you have limiting factors based on who your neighbors are, I agree that, yes, the amount of time does not matter, except for that you almost have to outlast some of your neighbors in to the point at which you either can buy them or they want to conform to the use. And if you have someone that will be there in perpetuity, it really limits the adjacent neighbors ability to be successful in bringing in the highest and best use for the residents. So yes, I am open to a reduction in the number of years this dialog has been very fruitful. We have a pretty amazing broker that has been looking in my district for a facility for quite some time and through this dialog I've connected them with some of the property owners on this corridor and I hope that that could result in something that the community is really excited about. But I also know that exploring that could take up to two years, which would then leave them in a place where if the amount of time available was too short, they might not be able to get a long term client. So if Mr. Otunga instead of I know that one of the parcels requested 15, I know in talking with some of the community members they had bigger ambitious numbers, which I thought were much too high in the twenties. Would you be amenable to, let's say. How about ten years? That would give them an opportunity for a five year lease with a potential two year option to explore that could potentially expire during that term. Are you comfortable with that? Yes and no. Okay. What are you most comfortable with? Well, then you just find the. The the part that I have. Problems are issues with is what happens afterwards when it becomes a non-conforming use. It made them have that right. Yeah, we do. And, but if we, if, if we could address that to the point where like it doesn't become non-conforming anymore, we is like something's got to happen in that area in regards to that, those properties. One of the issues that I have, for example, that I have an issue, I have an item coming up later in in tonight's agenda regarding the zoning. And that's one of the biggest issues that I have, is that there are some properties along some of my business corridors that are non-conforming and they will stay like that forever. And it creates barriers to other types of development. And, you know, I don't know if there's a fix for that, but that would be then that becomes the barrier to all other types of development that we would want to see along these types of corridors. So I mean, and that's a conflict where I'm at the quandary that I'm in is that I'm not opposed going from 15 to 10. I would prefer less, obviously, because that way I don't I don't pass on that type of issue concern to my successor whenever that happens. But at the end of the day is that we all have that issue, we'll have that problem. But I think we need to fix that somehow so that we have greater flexibility in getting the types of businesses that our neighborhood serving as. An example, like I mentioned earlier, just north of the area that we're talking about, northwest of it is a big residential area that would benefit greatly from other types of development, like you mentioned earlier that we're not how to get people excited but but I mean it is a type of of development that is much needed in that area and that would be very successful, I think. But if we create barriers to it like, like establishing a, a non conforming use, then they're locked and they're locked it. And I can understand the, the concerns of those owners that are there now. Family owned pass pass on to their kids and grandkids and perhaps even great, great grandkids. But you know, how or how long can it be non-conforming and how long will it be non neighborhood service. So that's that's the quandary and I'll there was this and I don't know if Stapp has an answer to that or or we're just sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place right now. Um, Clark, are you. Are you following the time? I know there's other folks queued up, and I just feel like we're not following the time limits. Or can you please make sure that we are doing that? Yes, we are timing the council member. Okay. And I just I want to go back to folks that are cued up. Also, I have a couple questions as well. Councilman, your on. Over your anger. Can we get an answer to his question first? Yes. Councilman, your anger. It's Mike Mays. The issue with non-conformity is is covered by a separate chapter in the zoning code. And that's something that's not before council tonight. That would take a whole other policy discussion. So there's really no way this evening that we can do anything to address the issue of our situation with existing nonconformity . Thank you. Maybe that's a cop with a future. I could pass it on now. Thank you. So just because I want to clarify just for myself. Do I? I love everything, I think. Councilman Bongo Guthrie, Ringo, you guys did a great job on this. This is a really, really critical, specific plan. I just want clarification. On. And I'm not sure if you were referring to this a moment ago, Mr. City Attorney, but Mr. Monica or some of the Roman services accounts as it relates to the one year initial recommendation, that's part of this proposal that's being currently contemplated to be changed, correct? The recommendation is one year. So on the non-conforming. Correct. Mr. Mayor? A it's a policy call for the council. So I know I personally have had to go. Yeah, let me but let me let me answer your question, please. So we prepared a specific plan based on an economic analysis that shows that this transition can happen quickly and that no transition period was necessary. I then in the preceding days have had discussions with a couple of council members about this issue, and their desire was to provide some additional flexibility to small property owners because the effects of COVID were obviously not accounted for in the economic studies we did in 2018 and 2019. Totally valid. So our job as staff was to provide them some language and some options to do that. I had discussed the one, two, two year time frame with with different parties, but I'm not going to go into the private conversations. But the plan that was prepared and approved by the Planning Commission doesn't include any extra a transition period. But when asked how that would be accomplished, I provided language and the ability to accomplish that. Now, the period of time, that's a policy call for council and you have to weigh the longer the period of time, the more beneficial it is to property owners that need more time. The shorter period of time, the more beneficial it is to accomplishing the goals of the plan and to the community. Seeing, you know, sort of the land use vision that they had talked about in all the meetings that have occurred over the years. So how you strike that balance? We're glad to assist you, but that's really that's a call for the council. And mayor and council member. Just to just clarify and reiterate, we're not talking about the non-conforming status. The properties will remain in a non-conforming status. What we're really talking about is allowing a few additional years to allow those property owners that are perhaps willing to or want to make a change to be able to comply under the existing zoning, not not the the new lands designation. And I'm and I'm trying to just get comfortable with the amount of additional years so I and I can be convinced. I'm hearing, I think, Councilwoman Young making some good some good points. But I just because I you know, I'm just trying to understand of the whole the community process as I understood it, and the desire for the neighborhood, the surrounding neighborhoods and the area to see change is is why the recommendations were made as you presented them. And so I, I just can I that they're going to do ten years which which to me seems. Significant, specific plan to go from a one, you know, 1 to 2 or ten seems significant. So I'm trying to understand maybe maybe this is just a very small group of businesses. Maybe maybe this wouldn't actually impact the area much. And I think Council Mango and customer Ranga kind of understand probably the decline probably more than I do because they've been work, they've been knee deep in it. So maybe Mr. Coons or Mr. Modi, if you want to explain to me just the number of businesses this would actually impact, this actually has changed. So, Mr.. Mayor. This impacts numerically a large number of parcels. But I believe, based on the information we have, that it actually only affects the speaker that that spoke to. No. And possibly one or two others, because they have a situation where they have a vacant or soon to be vacant piece of property that they're trying to lease right now . And they're concerned about the rules changing from under them at a challenging economic time. So there are other properties that would be subject to this rule, but they're fully leased or they're pursuing uses that are enabled by this specific plan. Now, that said, you know, the property that that's most impacted is there at the corner of Cherry and Wardlow, and that's where you have an Enterprise Rent-A-Car and a car wash today, if you're familiar with the location. Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep. Okay. So so it sounded like staff is not overly concerned or there is not a concern with going to the ten year as it relates to developing the specific plan in the appropriate way. Just want to make sure that staff you keep saying it's a policy decision and I appreciate that. But policy decisions have impacts so that the staff is comfortable with that number. I only I only ask because that has not been the that the input that I receive when you when I this has been presented to me, this is very different than what's been presented. So can staff you're comfortable with that? So, Mayor, we are comfortable with ten years or you know, we're trying to balance really hard things, right? So we're in an economy that is in a period of transition and change. And if this plan was in front of you two years ago, we would have not recommended any transition period at all. But we're trying to accommodate what is truly an unprecedented difficult situation for some of the small property owners, while still accommodating our goals and for the large parcels, we expect projects to be entitled this calendar year and for you to see new, exciting companies employing hundreds of thousands of people during calendar year 2022. So it's I don't want to lose sight of what this plan is and how important that is and being able to embrace those space related uses. So in order, you know, staff is comfortable with providing additional flexibility to those small property owners based specifically on the unprecedented place that the economy is in in this exact moment. Okay. And. All right, I'm just trying to wrap my head around it just because we don't normally don't provide this amount of time in these instances. But I'm going to you know, I think that Councilmember Mongeau and Councilman Ranga have been working on this. It's this is the changes is news to me. So I'm just trying to understand it. I know, broadly speaking, with these specific plans, this is the type of we try to avoid these types of extensions. But I understand. So I'm going to go ahead and not I'm not going to have any objections to it. So I will support whatever it is that comes from manga and country. And I want to do. This with this change. But thank you, Mr. Mayor. And we're also trying to mitigate something that's worse for the community, which council member Austin has always been a great proponent of is vacant lots. And we know that as the economy is changing, we just want to avoid that at all costs and particularly in this area. The shapes and configurations of those lots have been unique and we've had some of the land owners combine them over time, which has been helpful, but in the way in which they really need to be united for a vision that will best serve the new industry being proposed and that many businesses are fighting for behind it. It's going to take some time to pull all those complicated, complicated proposals together during the time when the economy is striving, but inflation is going up. And we need to ensure that the businesses can get the capital to make the investments to do something amazing and not just what they can afford to do today. So I appreciate the leeway that you're giving. We've done a lot in the last 48 hours, and I could not have done it without Mr. Kunze, this partnership and Mr. or Councilmember ordering us partnership. So it's been a long road, but and some late hours the last night and a half. But I think we're there if everyone's comfortable. Thank you. I appreciate that. It comes from Austin, Texas. Answer woman mango juice for clarity. Did you accept the friendly made by councilman your anger for ten years for the transition period? Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Austin. Wow. Thank you so much. And, you know, I do appreciate all of the work, particularly by my colleagues, Councilmember Mongo and Eurogroup for, you know, getting us here. But obviously the the the development service and planning staff were there many, many hours and hours of extensive community outreach to get to this. Very, very. Thick and thoughtful plan. I'll just say that it's it's quite a bit you know, I support the goals of this this plan. And there were five goals laid out early, you know, and three of the five of them are are jobs related. And, you know, the fire and the motor that got me to run for city council actually takes me back to the site, McDonnell Douglas Boeing site. As many of you know, I was employed there for 14 years, you know, right out of high school. And, you know, I want to challenge some of the numbers there because, you know, at our height, this is a place that in the 20th century had over 40,000 employees there. Right. And the C-17 site specifically had well over 10,000 at one point in probably the early to mid nineties. And so my my objective and I'm going to support what's on the floor here is to restore a vibrant job sector. And I think this this plan actually does that I want to just point out historically and it's always been an employment district, if you really want to look at the history there and not the thousands and thousands of good middle class quality jobs, union jobs, many of them that were were created and and that allowed for employment there, which had a direct benefit on every aspect of our city through our economic development, all of the small businesses, our housing market, Long Beach thrived as a result and the region thrived as a result of those those those great jobs that were were there. And so this is an opportunity, I think this planning document gives us an opportunity to, I would almost say, restore the employment district and the opportunities that we once had there, because we are if we were honestly honest with ourselves, we're operating from a jobs deficit right now. When we look at what we lost with our aerospace industry in the nineties and most recently Boeing as well as the shipyard jobs that were lost here during that period of time where the jobs deficit. And so we need it. We need a comeback and we need to be as aggressive as we can possibly be as a city council to do that. And so I think the. For those reasons. Obviously, I support this plan and I appreciate the thought that both my colleagues, Mongo and Urunga, have put into, you know, mitigating the concerns of other small property owners and residential impacts as well. I would just say also that, you know, some of the air studies and documents like traffic issues, there shouldn't be a concern again, because we had those issues. Right. We had several thousands of people, three shifts, 24, seven in and out of that that matter at that location. And it was impactful. But I think impactful in a positive way. And I certainly hope we can get back to that very soon. Thanks. Thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Just wanted to just chime in. I, I completely agree with Councilman Austin about the way we should be thinking about this. We think big picture this. You know, this plan sets the foundation for what the future could look like for our city. And there are a number of things taking place across our state, across our region that could potentially bode really well for Long Beach. Given how close we are to the port and our workforce, our college, our educational institutions, the electrification of our entire transportation network is about to happen very, very soon. We already have some history of aerospace manufacturing, and we have automotive manufacturing right here in the city. T ABC, Toyotas and Teslas are built in our city. We don't we don't know. You know, a lot of us may not know that this creates a big opportunity for us. And let's not lose sight of that. We also have a major expansion creation of renewable energy, just general, generally clean technologies. That's where we should be thinking as we should be heading. The fact that we have this plan in place, that this plan is getting into place, I think both well, for the for the entire city. So I want to say good word to both the council members who take the time to make sure that this vibes and aligns with the interests of the neighborhoods, but also are taking on this discussion point for all of us. Because, you know, if this goes well, all of us, all of our communities, whether we have, you know, jobs or educational attainment levels or whatever it is, we're all going to benefit from what happens here. So do you want to chime and say, I'm happy to support where, you know, where we land with this motion as long as we just keep in mind, you know, how important this space is to our broader regional economy. Thanks. Thank you. We're going to go to a vote before we go to to our vote, we have emotional. We have to determine how many votes we have to take on this. Despite separate five separate votes, Mayor. Okay. So before we go into these into the five separate votes, I did want to add that I, I didn't earlier with some of my questions that I just think overall, this is a really, really just historic, I think, plan for the whole area. And I want to just uplift what a lot of what Councilman Mongeau said. And Councilmember Austin, because we were in this plan, I know the staff has been working on really, really hard and a lot of us have been working on pieces of this plan, including the advocacy around land use for for many, many years after. So to see it all come together. I just want to thank the entire staff and team. They worked really hard on this for many years. All the community members that have been involved, the property owners, the neighborhoods. And it is a great opportunity to really uplift the growing space economy, to uplift our aerospace economy that are such important parts of our city and really just improve just that whole portion of our city which which needs so a lot of love and investment. So a great work for everybody and just a really, really great plan. So with that, let's go and take each vote. Madam Clerk, do you want to read the the what we're voting on and then we'll go a roll call for each one. Take it away. Thank you. First vote is adopting a resolution certifying the final program of the air. Councilwoman Sandy has. Councilman Allen. I. Councilman Price. I councilman's a banana. Right? Councilwoman Mango. Yes. Councilwoman Sarah. I council member. Council member. Oranga I. Councilmen Austin. Hi. Vice Mayor Richardson?