CONSIDERATION OF ADDENDUM NO. 16-01, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2016-178, PRECISE DEVELOPMENT NO. 16-04, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 16-10 AND 16-11 FOR A PROPOSED MIXED USE, IN-FILL DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING 747 RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS, 16,900 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL TENANT SPACE AND A 150-ROOM HOTEL LOCATED ON AN APPROXIMATELY THIRTY- ACRE SITE AT THE NORTHWEST AND NORTHEAST CORNERS OF BIRCH STREET AND STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD.
City Planner Lilley provided a brief summary and went on to clarify the format of the meeting.
Presentation made by Hines Development team.
The Commission asked the following questions of the Applicant:
- Jim Grosse: Do employees have access to building A? Where is shipping/receiving location? Explain shared parking with Marketplace not related to legal right but usage. Further explain of hotel operatations. Explain traffic shuttle.
- Melanie Schlotterbeck: Explain accessible guest parking. Electronic vehicle charging stations? Address pedestrian traffic. Is there back-up emergency power?: Bike access on Paseo? Bike lane improvements on St. College and Birch? Will tree growth be affected by building shadow? Are pedestrian connections open or gated?Explain safety inside parking structures. Confirm windows facing west let light in but are high enough for privacy. How do project residents get out in an emergency?
- Art Willis: Has the project considered Imperial Hwy traffic impacts? Has the project considered Lambert/57 improvements? Confirm traffic pattern, improvements traveling south on St. College?
- James McGrade: Confirm bus turn outs north and south on St. Collage and Birch. Consider meridian improvements on St. College. Confirm landscaping adjacent to Claim Jumper. All landscape maintained by Hines? Architect to work on the massing to soften North West Corner of St. College.
- Pat Fox: Confirm traffic mitigation and improvements complete before occupancy: Consider after hours security/gating from trail to Paseo. Consider softening height of the north building; Soften view of the structure from residents. Ensure overflow parking convenient parking for guests?
- Jim Grosse: Will parking be assigned? Confirm accessible handicap parking on all levels.
- Melanie Schlotterbeck: Consider where bus pick up will be for schools. Will the project provide childcare?
A ten minute recess was called at 9:03pm. Meeting resumed at 9:15 pm and Chair McGrade announced because of the number of speakers, speaking time would be limited to 3 minutes to give everyone an opportunity to speak.
Speaker 1: Dr. Jim Schlott What would Brea be today without progressive development? Isn't redevelopment a good thing?
Speaker 2: Bryan Starr, Supports project given it provides needed housing.
Speaker 3: Anthony Kuo, Urges support of project
Speaker 4: Todd Mobraten, Supports project,offering affordable housing with access to their interests and a live, work, play environment.
Speaker 5:John Drachman, Supports project to be able to attract and offer high quality jobs in Brea.
Speaker 6: Barry Friedman, Feels numbers are incorrect. EIR needed. Not enough parking. Shadow created on residents property. Too dense. Reduce by half to 500 units. Keep parking structure as is. Concern for property values and environmental impacts. Suggested to move forward with the hotel. Insist on a new EIR. No construction to occur until after 57 Freeway improvements are complete.
Speaker 7: Zim Walker, Concerns with traffic. How was Chamber of Commerce able to get a consensus? Adaptive traffic controls don't work.
Speaker 8: Sue Chen, Encourages support of project. Believes project will benefit the community and their customers and employees.
Speaker 9: William Beeson, Doesn't feel housing is affordable. Crime will increase and wants PD doubled. EIR is outdated. Traffic will increase. Project will bring cultural change.
Speaker 10: Barbara McDaniel, Feels traffic is horrible but is in favor of project.
Speaker 11: Matt Anderson, In favor of project. Appreciates innovative technology to find solutions.
Speaker 12: Bill Murray, endorses project. Believes property owners have the right to develop their property. Will have a positive long term impact.
Speaker 13: Tim Scott, concerned with adaptive technology for traffic. Wonders how trees will be watered?
Speaker 14: James Harnish, traffic concerns, wants to keep small town atmosphere, impacts of density
Speaker 15: Jason Kraft, Questions the peak hours in traffic study. How does project impact school traffic? Concerns related to density, EIR, height of buildings. Will there be IT security for traffic technology? The density is exceeded based on his calculations. Reduce to 432 units.
Speaker 16: Judy Scott, Concerned hotel will bring crime. Concerns with traffic construction, parking, bus exhaust, bus pull outs, adaptive lighting and bike storage,
Speaker 17: Chris Reyes, Feels we are trying to turn Brea into an "Irvine". Quality of life. Wants a dog park. Concerns with parking structure loitering and noise. Feels resources will be impacted
Speaker 18: Tom Lawless, read letter of support.
Speaker 19: Dwight Manley, spoke out against the Chambers involvement with the project. Feels it's a beautiful project but not the right project as it is for Brea. Has concerns with services, water and freeway impacts. Questions the math for the income to the City.
Speaker 20: Sean Ross, supports the project. Worked on similar project in Fullerton and there were no significant impacts, Feels mixed use project will help reduce crime.
Speaker 21: Keith Fullington, Feels the supporters of the project work for Hines. Don't need more cars. Concerns with Chamber supporting the project.
Speaker 22: Drew Huffman, speaking on behalf of Waad Nadir, in favor of project. A great compliment to the city. Conforms to the General Plan.
Speaker 23: Christine Perez, can't afford to live in Brea. Grandmother lives behind Hines and is affected by noise and fallen trees.
Speaker 24: Scott Peterson on behalf of Jonathan Eckno, supports project and feels that Hines has taken neighbors concerns into consideration.
Speaker 25: Ken Salazar, Wants a full EIR. Wants a smaller development below 500, that includes condos for sale and apartments. Lower the height two to three stories. Keep parking structure at two stories.
Speaker 26: Doug Matthews, liked the presentation. Has concerns about water and infrastructure. Stands opposed.
Speaker 27: Terry Salinski, wants to lessen impact for neighbors. Precedent is two-three stories maximum.
Speaker 28: Katherine Ingersoll, Speaking on behalf of a former Planning Commissioner, Ralph Heiman, he was involved in the approval of the 2003 General Plan and accepted the accompanying EIR. He said the Commission made a tradeoff and accepted higher density here for lower densities on the hillsides. A good compromise at the time and still holds true today. Opposed to revisiting the EIR. Supports the project.
Speaker 29: Maaka Nua, Concerns about traffic volume and capacity. Wants smaller project.
Speaker 30: Anita Cruz, Concerned by five story project, shadows, privacy, noise and property values. Urges changes to be made for the Commission to approve.
Speaker 31: Bill Madden, EIR, CO2 hotspot, suggests long term monitoring system established by the City.
Speaker 32: Joanie Bozzone, Speaking on behalf of Joseph Carbello. Brea needs more housing and hotel and conference space. Ideal location for mixed use project
Speaker 33: John O'Malley on behalf of David S. George, Supports project, much needed housing, multi-use aspects will enhance quality of life. Conforms to land use guidelines.
Speaker 34: John Koos, He recalls the City Council and Planning Commission in 2003 set forth the land use designation for this property. City Leaders have been planning on this for 20 years.
Hines Development Team responded to questions from the Commission and provided a rebuttal in response to comments:
Shade study prepared for Fall, Winter, Spring and Summer;
There have not been multiple community meetings canceled by Hines;
Rents will range from $1300 to $3000;
To ensure safety and reduce crime, robust security will be on site;
There will be irrigation and maintenance for trees;
CC & R's and on-site management will ensure balconies are used appropriately
$2.1 million in income to the City each year; and
The height has been reduced to three-story closest to neighbors on Avocado.
City Planner Lilley asked the Chair if the Commission would please submit any new questions within the week to allow staff time to research any new details and report back.
Chair McGrade made a motion to close public hearing and continue the item for deliberations to the next regularly scheduled meeting on April 25, 2017. Commissioner Schlotterbeck seconded. The motion passed with a unanimous vote of 5-0.
John Erskine asked the Chair if they could request a resolution be brought to the next meeting. Assistant City Attorney Flower stated the Commission would need to deliberate prior to any resolutions being presented.