Planning Commission Decision Being Appealed By Neighboring Business Owners
A decision of the Planning Commission is being appealed by a property owner located next to the proposed project and a group called Supporters’ Alliance for Environmental Responsibility. The appeal will be heard before the City Council on Tuesday, July 14, 2020. The City Council can affirm, deny, modify, or send it back to the Planning and Traffic Commissions for further consideration.
Gemdale USA, a Pasadena-based real estate investor, has proposed building a 275,000 square foot office complex with a seven-level parking structure and accessory retail at 2400 Barranca Parkway (the project). The site is in the Irvine Business Complex (IBC) near single and two-story light industrial buildings and in close proximity to The District, a large outdoor shopping center.
On March 5, 2020, the Planning Commission voted 4-1 to approve the project, and to increase the applicant’s “vehicle trip count” allocation. Commissioners J. Pierson (Carroll), D. Nirschl (Fox), C. Knowland (Kuo), and S. Huang (Khan) voted in favor and G. Smith (Shea) voted no.
Many speakers during the two hour Planning Commission public hearing expressed opposition. Concerns raised included compatibility due to the proposed multi-story development being positioned next to existing smaller scale buildings, the significant increase in traffic and its impact on the surrounding vehicular circulation system, and the adequacy of the accompanying Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
In order to develop the project for this much density, the applicant had to transfer vehicle trip counts from another parcel in the IBC that was not using their development intensity. The Planning Commission approved the transfer. The trip budget for the project increased from 72 AM peak-hour, 75 PM peak-hour, and 758 daily trips to 358 AM peak-hour, 380 PM peak-hour, and 3,787 daily trips. This is a 500% increase of average daily trips.
The site is currently occupied by a single story, 69,780 square-foot office and industrial building. If the Council affirms the decision of the Planning Commission, the site structure will increase in square footage by 400% to a total of 275,000 square feet. Access to the project site will be provided via two right-in, right-out (RIRO) driveways off of Barranca Parkway to the north and two full-access driveways off of Gates Avenue to the south.
The IBC is a regional employment job hub and was designed to handle more traffic volume than other areas in Irvine. A comprehensive IBC Traffic Study is required by the city every two years to identify traffic improvements needed for the ongoing development in the IBC. Are the traffic mitigation measures for this project adequate given the amount of development intensity that was approved?
Residents can give feedback on this item by submitting a public e-Comment on agenda item 3.1.
Join The Discussion on Facebook and Subscribe on our Homepage! 
2 Comments
Susan Sayre
July 10, 2020 at 8:32 amIrvine’s General Plan objectives include programs for the improvement and preservation of the city, maintaining good traffic circulation and for encouraging viable commercial centers, and successful manufacturing centers.
This Barranca Parkway project does not meet any of these objectives. It does not serve to improve or preserve the City. The area does not have good traffic circulation. It adversely impacts viable commercial centers.
This project has an adverse impact on traffic in the area which is already overly congested. The presented traffic remediation plans are inadequate to address the circulation problems that would be created by the project. This section of the IBC planning area has already reached its density capacity. Density transfer from another IBC section along with its traffic generation was approved by the planning commission even though it will serve to increase traffic circulation in the area.
The General Plan should serve to protect the viable businesses that already exist in Irvine as well as support the development of new business centers. But this development project does not serve to protect the currently viable businesses in the area. This project will have an adverse impact on the existing local businesses which are already adversely impacted by the traffic circulation conditions in the area.
The Irvine City Council must act to uphold the General Plan viable commercial center and traffic circulation objectives by voting in favor of the appellants and thus not approving the Barranca development project. The Council has the duty to represent the interests of the established local businesses and residential and commercial commuters that would be adversely impacted by this development project.
Sylvia Walker
July 14, 2020 at 9:39 pmThe city council just voted 3-2 to deny the appeal against this IBC project. In other words, the city council affirmed the density proposed by the developer. The appellant wanted reduced density to be included.
The vote in favor of the developer’s current plan was given a Yes by Councilmembers Kuo, Khan, and Carrol. Major Shea voted No as did Councilmember Fox. Mayor Shea was against the density of the project and the nearness of a multi-level parking structure that will be near a neighboring business. Councilmember Fox stated that she could have supported a proposed compromise project that included a reduction of the density proposed by the developer.
Comments are closed.