2. _2) A Vesting Zone Change from C2-1VL and R3P-1VL to C2-1VL, for the existing surface parking lot areas._

_Design aspects of the Project are being reviewed by the Pacific Palisades Design Review Board.”_ _Discussion_ : Chris directed board members and the public to information available on the land use entitlements requested.
Chris stated that since the Motion #1 was made by a committee that includes several voting board members, per Roberts Rules it is deemed made and seconded and discussion would begin.
Chris first called on Rick Caruso to give brief remarks.
Rick Caruso declined to make remarks. _Action_ : Dick Wulliger, Historical Society, invoked Article 10 of the bylaws to postpone any vote on Motion #1 to the next PPCC meeting.
Chris reiterated the bylaws requirement.
Dick asked for discussion to be allowed to proceed.
Chris exercise her right as Chair to make the board an ad hoc committee so discussion could proceed. (1) Sharon Shapiro reported that CD11 and Planning Staff have received overwhelming support for the project.
For those residents who are in opposition or have concerns, Sharon said that those are few and their concerns are concentrated (unlike other projects in the city that have varied topics for objection; here in the Palisades the same objections are heard over and over). (2) Gil Dembo expressed support for the project. (3) Sarah Conner stated that PPRA wants to meet and understand how these motions may affect larger areas of the City.
Rick Caruso stated that the Village Project land use applications do not affect any other areas of the City as they are project specific.
David Kaplan explained that the subarea includes open space and arguably could be precedent for any private developer not including significant (10,000 square feet of) open space.
Howard Robinson stated that the VPLUC felt the way the application was filed is beneficial to the community because it reduces precedent setting standards (there are no specific plan deviations but rather an amendment which has been very rare and is only applicable to a specific situation with acreage as this; thus it is difficult to image another developer coming in and doing the same thing in commercial areas of the Palisades, i.e., the amendment to the Specific Plan sets less deviation then the alternative).
Sarah Conner asked for the amendments for the Specific Plan to be made public like on the website.
Chris Spitz and Rick Caruso told Sarah that those conditions have been on the Caruso website for a long time, available from the City, are on PPCC’s website, in the minutes, distributed this evening, discussed at prior public meetings, etc. (4) Susan Payne stated that the Chamber supports the project as a huge community benefit and substantial boost to the local businesses. (5) Stuart Muller observed that, in addition to the Caruso project, the Ralph’s and Norris Hardware sites are owned by a local family and could be developed.
Rick Caruso responded that there is another 30 years on the Ralph’s lease and it is not likely to be developed. (6) Diane Bleak expressed concern about retail conglomerates.
Rick Caruso reiterated that the plan is comprised of very small stores and that there will not be chains.
Many local tenants are interested in staying. (7) Rick Mills expressed disappointment that the Historical Society invoked Article 10 to stop a vote on Motion #1; as a member of the Historical Society he stated that its members have been well aware of the project for a long time and was skeptical of the delay.
Dick Wulliger stated that he needed to report what was said here tonight to his members to help them take a position or not. _Public Comment:_(1) Marice Michele (Swathmore business owner) supports the project and is in favor of Mr.
Caruso. (2) Greg Schem supported the project and expressed that we need to help our businesses.
Having a local developer is a benefit and we should thank our lucky stars. (3) Rena Repetti expressed support for the project but not a subarea that doesn’t have to follow the Specific Plan rules that the community created.
Rena said the developer should follow the Specific Plan. (4) Mark Grinblatt opposes the development because there has not been enough dialogue between the developer and the public.
The strip of land between the Mobil Station and US Bank is to be taken and moved so that it makes sense; the idea of it taking private should be discussed more before the council votes. (5) Robin Weitz opposes the project based on the number of alcohol permits being requested by Caruso Affiliated.
Robin read a passage discussing findings for issuing ABC licenses.
David Kaplan stated that Motion #1 does not include nor address the alcohol applications. (6) Nicole Howard supports the project and because of the overwhelmingly positive benefit for the community urged the project to move forward. (7) Jeffrey Spitz supports the project, urged it to move forward and challenged the Historical Society’s claim that it had not had an opportunity to consult with its members particularly given modern electronics. (8) Ted Weitz opposed the project and stated that the CUP is part of the subarea plan.
Ted has expressed concerns because he lives adjacent and represents neighbors.
Sue Kohl said that while Ted’s views may represent some residents but her email list has over 200 people who have supported the project and in her view most of the residents in the Alphabets support the project and the “life” that has been missing in Area
5. Rick Caruso said he has meet with Ted and his wife and will continue to do so and respond to their concerns. Rick Caruso further reported that he has met with the residents of Monument who overwhelmingly support the project and that his company would like to begin development of the stores, parking and open space. Rick also said that there is much to be done with existing businesses in their relocation and efforts to bring them back. (9) Rosalie Huntington asked how shoppers will be drawn to the Palisades if the only thing that is different is the Bay Theater and Trader Joe’s (supports). Will there be different stores on Swarthmore? Rick Caruso stated that there will be a theater and a specialty grocer with every store being unique. Existing tenants have been offered a prior rent to stay in the project. Other retailers and restaurant operators will supplement. _Action_ : Chris stated that this motion would be back on the agenda on
March 10, 2016. _MOTION #2_ David Kaplan read Motion #
2. _“_ _Pacific Palisades Community Council (PPCC) recognizes that the City has determined, based on substantial traffic and other environmental studies, that the Palisades Village Project (the “Project”) will have no unmitigated significant impacts. PPCC also acknowledges community concerns that, as with any project of similar size built within an existing neighborhood village, issues warranting attention may arise on an ongoing basis. PPCC therefore supports adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, provided that a new Village Project Committee is established under the auspices of Council District 11, to assess and address issues that may arise during construction and eventual Project operations. Such a committee should consist of one representative each from the applicant, Council District 11, the Pacific Palisades Chamber of Commerce and PPCC, and an area resident (to be appointed by Council District 11).”_ _Action_ : Same as above, Dick Wulliger (Historical Society) invoked Article
10.
Chris asked Dick to withdraw the motion and abstain so the board vote could be taken; else pursuant to the bylaws the Executive Committee would be able to act for the board.
Dick Wulliger refused stating that he had been instructed by his board to invoke a postponement of the vote.
Chris exercised her right as Chair to make the board an ad hoc committee so discussion could proceed. _Public Discussion_ : (1) Rick Caruso asked for a position of this board, by the Executive Committee, prior to the public hearing. (2) Patty Detroit wondered if the traffic study was relevant since it was done during the Thanksgiving holiday.
Rick said only one intersection was studied on the day a school was closed; that intersection was restudied and reissued so the current report is completely updated and was not done in any way when school was closed.
Patty asked about employee parking.
Rick stated that the size of the parking accommodates employees on the property.
Patty said a concerned resident should be appointed to any kind of citizen’s committee. (3) Sandy Eddy said that 200 people on the other sides of the Alphabet Streets have concerns.
The MND has been available for two weeks and is very large.
Bus schedules and bike racks would help mitigate traffic if for employees.
There would be 150 employees coming into the community and Sandy wondered what peak time arrangements would be made. (4) Linda Andrews spoke in favor of the project and asked for more information on the traffic situation (peak volumes, more or another traffic study). (5) Kat Smitt supports the project and is concerned about the traffic with the addition of retailers in the project. (6) Carly Kamerman, Carly K owner, sees traffic all day long and wondered what does everyone want Rick to do?
Not have a project?
At this point the Village is at a standstill and it is not fair to just do nothing.
More parking is not a solution because those costs will get passed on to tenants who need shoppers to support rents that are already so high. (7) Ted Weitz asked Rick Caruso to continue to talk and meet with residents and acknowledged that because of his meetings with Caruso Affiliated many of his concerns had already been taken care of.
Ted said the committee proposed should not include the Chamber and would not really address resident concerns.
Ted stated that the MND is a complicated document and there should be more time for the pubic to review it. (8) Mark Ginblatt objects to the project because it won’t reduce traffic and claimed that the study was inaccurate because it inappropriately compared existing to proposed traffic. (9) Nicole Howard supported the project, stating that the true traffic problem is not having traffic in the Village to support local businesses. _Board Discussion:_(1) Richard Cohen asked if trips coming to the project would be between the 2-3 pm peak hours studied.
Rick Caruso stated that their peak period is not 2-3 and the Traffic Study which is online has been studied by the City and is in full compliance. (2) Gil Dembo stated that Mike Bonin’s traffic workshop determined that the majority of traffic generated is not from the Palisades and is something that Caruso has little control over. (3) Maryam Zar asked if CD11 considered the idea of a new citizen’s committee to be established.
Sharon Shapiro said that she would find out.
Maryam asked why Ted stated that such a committee would be ineffective since Caruso’s interaction with residents have been successful in working towards solutions. (4) David Kaplan re-read the portion of the VPLUC report that stated that traffic will be increased but that the standards per intersection can be mitigated or the results are still within acceptable parameters. (5) Barbara Kohn stated that based on her own prior personal experience, a citizen committee can be valuable if written into a CUP and that such committees typically meet monthly or less frequently. (6) Richard Cohen supported the committee concept based on past successes such as the Getty Villa and the YMCA Simon Meadow project. (7) Schuyler Dietz spoke in support of the project and does not think traffic will be impacted between 2 and 5 p.m.
See: (1) www.pacpalicc.org, Documents tab/Minutes, and Resources tab/Reports & Summaries (PPCC minutes of 11/18/15, 1/14/16, 2/11/16 and VPLUC Preliminary Report) and (2) http://www.palisadesvillageca.com (FAQs tab/amended application documents, plans and MND). _See also information distributed below._ Note: MND comment period ends
March 9, 2016, per notice published in the LAT on 2/18/16; first City hearing to occur on
March 24, 2016. MOTION #s 1, 2 and 3 sponsored by the VPLUC: _MOTION #3_ David Kaplan read Motion
3. _“The applicant has requested that the City approve a request for a parcel map to vacate public land to the applicant consisting of a 20-foot-wide alley extending north from Sunset Boulevard to the existing alley located behind the existing Mobil Station,__the 20-foot-wide alley between Swarthmore Avenue and Monument Street_ _and a lane of Sunset Boulevard, where it widens in front of the existing Mobil Station. Pacific Palisades Community Council (PPCC) recommends approval of the parcel map, subject to the following:_