This story is far from complete and does need further investigation. The Signal Tribune has received several emails from concerned Wrigley Heights residents who have expressed deep fears that Integral Communities, an Newport Beach-based developer, is serious about creating a 275-unit residential community in their neighborhood. The property in question is located at 712 Baker Street.
Wrigley Heights resident Lorelei Hermann said she worried about the traffic and housing congestion that any proposed development on the site would bring. Additionally, she feared that the proposal would also relocate the nearby dog park located on Golden Avenue.
“Our concern as a neighborhood is that some things [are] just going to be done to us here, without us having any word in it,” the 58-year-old concluded. Hermann acknowledged that there may not be a formal proposal filed, but she expressed concerns about the safety of building on the property. She said the land is abandoned now, but it had been polluted years ago from former oil-industry related activity.
“When we first moved in here, there were these big black holes over there like tar,” Hermann said, adding that the substance had eventually seeped deep into the ground and that there have been attempts to remediate the land.
The property is currently owned by Oil Operators, Inc. Its spokesman, Kevin Laney, confirmed in a phone interview that the land has not been sold, but he did add that he hoped that would change.
“We hope to sell and have somebody develop it someday,” he said. He declined to provide further comment and requested to be interviewed at a later time.
A spokesman for Integral Communities declined to offer any statement at this time and did not confirm whether the property is in the process of being sold to them. The Signal Tribune was asked to contact them in a week for further comment.
City officials have also repeatedly told residents that no promises have been made to developers surrounding the property.
Long Beach Director of Development Services Amy Bodek wrote a memo to City Manager Patrick West in February.
“No commitments were made on whether staff would support a residential project on that site, or at what densities,” Bodek wrote. “It should be noted that it is common for staff to meet with prospective developers or applicants. Often the proposals discussed at these meetings never materialize, but it is critical that staff make themselves available to meet with parties interested in investing in the city of Long Beach.”
Wrigley Heights resident Richard Gutmann is one of the leading critics of the proposal. He voiced major concerns that this particular project will likely follow the same approval process in November when the city council gave approval to Integral Communities to develop the Riverwalk Project, a 131-home development on the former Will J. Reid Scout Park. The Riverwalk approval involved a change in zoning at its location in the 8th District.
Riverwalk remains a controversial project, and two media sources have reported that it faces a legal challenge.
Gutmann criticized the City’s decision to approve the Riverwalk project and the possibility that Integral Communities could change the zones on the Oil Operators property as well.
“Cities are under no obligation to change the zoning to make it higher density just so that the developer can make more money,” the 71-year-old added.
According to the Long Beach City Planning website, the property on Baker Street is currently zoned for commercial storage.
On Wednesday night, Gutmann offered copies of several public-record documents to the Signal Tribune, including one email exchange from last year between Bodek and Integral Communities that mention the housing development and zoning. Those documents are being reviewed and vetted by the Signal Tribune for a future story.
Jacqueline Medina, a spokesman for Long Beach Development Services, indicated that no application had been filed for the project at this time, and she added that an applicant with any intention to build a development of that scale would need initially to apply for a “conceptual site-plan review filing/submittal.”
Pertaining to the Wrigley Heights Dog Park, she added that, at this time, “there is no discussion” about moving the city park.
Medina said that the proposal would “trigger park replacement requirements on a 2:1 basis.” In a subsequent statement, she explained what that requirement would mean.
“One acre of replacement land shall be located in the park-service area where the land was converted,” she said, “and an additional acre of replacement land shall be located in a park-service area needing parkland.”
Since the Signal Tribune could not confirm whether the property at the center of the debate was even in the process of being sold, Gutmann was asked whether it was likely that the developer wanted information about the feasibility of a development plan.
Gutmann acknowledged that the developer could simply be exploring the possibilities of what could be done with the land, but he had his doubts that this was all that had been done.
“They are spending a lot of money to go through a lot of trouble just for a possibility,” he said of the possible sale to Integral Communities.
