Minutes-PC 2011/03/14City of Anaheim
Planning Commission
Minutes
Monday,March 14, 2011
Council Chamber, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, California
Commissioners Present
:Chairman: Stephen Faessel
Peter Agarwal, Harry Persaud, Victoria Ramirez,
John Seymour
Commissioners Absent
:Todd Ament,Joseph Karaki
Staff Present
:
CJ Amstrup, Planning Services ManagerVanessa Norwood, Associate Planner
David See, Senior PlannerRaul Garcia,Principal CivilEngineer
Mark Gordon, Assistant City AttorneyDavid Kennedy, Associate Transportation Planner
Susan Kim, Senior PlannerGrace Medina, Senior Secretary
Della Herrick, Associate Planner
Agenda Posting: A complete copy of the Planning Commission Agenda was posted at4:30 p.m.
onWednesday,March 9, 2011, inside the display case located in the foyer of the Council
Chamber, and also in the outside display kiosk.
Published:Anaheim Bulletin Newspaper onThursday, March 3,2011
Call to Order–5:00 p.m.
Audience Attendance: 9
Pledge of AllegiancebyCommissioner Persaud
Public Comments
Consent Calendar
Public Hearing Items
Adjournment
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda –5:00 P.M.
Public Comments: None
Minutes
ITEM NO. 1AMotionto approve minutes
(Persaud/Seymour)
Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning
November 8, 2010Approved
Commission Meeting of .
VOTE: 4-0
Commissioners Agarwal,
Persaud, Ramirezand Seymour
voted yes.Chairman Faessel
abstained. Commissioners Ament
and Karaki were absent.
ITEM NO. 1BMotionto approve minutes
(Seymour/Persaud)
Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning
November 22, 2010Approved
Commission Meeting of .
VOTE: 4-0
Chairman Faessel and
Commissioners Persaud, Ramirez
and Seymour voted yes.
Commissioner Agarwal abstained.
Commissioners Ament and Karaki
were absent.
03/14/11
Page 2of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
ITEM NO. 1CMotionto approve minutes
(Persaud/Ramirez)
Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning
December 6, 2010Approved
Commission Meeting of .
VOTE: 3-0
Chairman Faessel and
CommissionerPersaud and
Ramirezvoted yes.
Commissioners Agarwal and
Seymour abstained.
Commissioners Ament and Karaki
were absent.
ITEM NO. 1DMotionto approve minutes
(Seymour/Persaud)
Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning
December 20, 2010Approved
Commission Meeting of .
VOTE: 4-0
Chairman Faessel and
Commissioners Persaud,Ramirez
and Seymour voted yes.
CommissionerAgarwal abstained.
Commissioners Ament and Karaki
were absent.
03/14/11
Page 3of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Public Hearing Items:
ITEM NO. 2
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2010-152Continued to March 28, 2011
(DEV2010-00188)
(Persaud/Seymour)
Owner/Applicant:
City of Anaheim
Approved
Redevelopment Agency
Location:200–300 North Beach Boulevard
VOTE: 5-0
The applicant proposes to establish an 11-lot commercial Chairman Faessel and
subdivisionto permit the construction of a future shopping Commissioners Agarwal,
center.Persaud, Ramirez and Seymour
voted yes.Commissioners
Environmental Determination: A previously-certified Final Ament and Karaki were absent.
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the West Anaheim
Commercial Corridors Redevelopment Project Area,
including an Addendum and its technical appendices, will
serve as the required environmental documentation for the
proposed project actions.
Project Planner:
David See
Continued from the February 28, 2011 Planning
dsee@anaheim.net
Commission meeting.
DISCUSSION TIME
:This item was not discussed.
03/14/11
Page 4of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
ITEM NO. 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2010-05528Resolution No. 2011-013
VARIANCE NO. 2011-04846
(Ramirez)
(DEV2010-00157)
Owner:Approved,modified Condition
Tom Stull
No.2, pertaining to the hours of
Aspen Properties
operation.
2951 EastLaPalma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92806
Applicant:VOTE: 4-0
Michael Marek
QPE Technical InstituteChairman Faessel and
1557 North Gemini PlaceCommissioners Persaud,
Anaheim,CA92801Ramirez and Seymour voted yes.
Commissioner Agarwal
Location:1557 North Gemini Place
abstained. Commissioners
Ament and Karaki were absent.
The applicant proposes to retain an existing vocational
training school in the industrial zone with less parking than
required by code.
Environmental Determination: The proposed action is
Project Planner:
Della Herrick
Categorically Exempt from the requirement to prepare
dherrick@anaheim.net
additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines -Class 1
(Existing Facilities).
Della Herrick, Associate Planner, provided a summary of the staff report dated March 14, 2011,along
with a visual presentation;andsheread into the record modificationsto Condition No. 2.
ChairmanFaesselopened the public hearing.
Michael Marek, applicant, statedhehad reviewed the conditions of approval andwas in agreement
with the staff report.
Commissioner Persaud stated there appears to be a lot of equipment parked between the buildings,
and asked the applicant who itbelongs toas it seems like that area can be used for additional parking
spacesif needed.
Mr. Marek responded there is an equal amount of opportunity for parking that is verbally negotiated
with his neighbor, therefore there is an overflow of parking but it is not theirs so he didn’t include it in
today’s proposal.
Commissioner Persaud asked if there is an understanding between the neighbor that it could be used
if needed.
03/14/11
Page 5of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Mr. Marek responded yes, and it has been that wayfor quite some time.
Chairman Faessel asked if anyone was present to speak on the item, seeing no other persons
indicating to speak, he closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Ramirezoffered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
attached to the March 14, 2011 staff report, determining that a Class 1 Categorical Exemption is the
appropriate environmental documentation for this request and approving Conditional use Permit No.
2010-05528and Variance No. 2011-04846(DEV2010-00157).
Grace Medina,Senior Secretary announced that the resolution passedwith fouryes votes.Chairman
Faessel and Commissioners Persaud, Ramirez and Seymour voted yes. Commissioner Agarwal
abstained. Commissioners Ament and Karaki were absent.
OPPOSITION:
None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-dayappeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, March 24, 2011.
DISCUSSION TIME
:12minutes (5:08to 5:20)
(Commissioner Agarwal left at 5:09 p.m.)
03/14/11
Page 6of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
ITEM NO. 4
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2011-00098
MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2011-00493 Resolution No. 2011-014
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2010-00004Resolution No. 2011-015
(DEV2010-00161)
Seymour)
(
(TERMINATING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
NOS. 2005-00002 AND 2005-00003)
Approved, recommended City
Owner/Council approval
BRE Properties
Applicant
:Robert Linder
5141 California Avenue, Suite 250
VOTE: 4-0
Irvine, CA 92617
Chairman Faessel and
Location:1781 South Campton Avenue and
Commissioners Persaud,
1551 East Wright Circle
Ramirez and Seymour voted
yes. Commissioner Agarwal
The applicant proposesamendments to Chapter 18.20 abstained. Commissioners
(Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone) of Title 18 of the Ament and Karaki were absent.
Anaheim Municipal Code and the Platinum Triangle Master
Land Use Plan to allow diagonal parking on Connector
Streets, subject to the review and approval of the City
Engineer; a development agreement between the City of
Anaheim and BRE Properties addressing the development of
two lots containing two 4-story buildings with a total of 400
residential units, subterranean and surface parking and
recreational amenities; and, termination of Development
Agreements 2005-00002 and 2005-00003.
Environmental Determination: CEQA Previously Certified
Project Planner:
EnvironmentalImpact Report No. 339, Previously Approved
Vanessa Norwood
vnorwood@anaheim.net
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
Plan No. 302.
Vanessa Norwood, Associate Planner, provided a summary of the staff report dated March 14, 2011
along with a visual presentation.
Chairman Faessel, Commissioners Seymour, Ramirez and Persaud disclosed that they had met with
the applicant prior to the Planning Commission Meeting.
Commissioner Persaud asked the following questions:
1)How the proposed development will fit within the housing needs goal created by the Platinum
Triangle?
2)Does the development help to advance the sustainability concept?
3)Do these uses help to satisfy either the City’s RHNA requirement or affordability issues?
03/14/11
Page 7of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
4)Does the City have a master plan in which residents of some of these very high intensity
communities are able to connect, via pedestrian routes, to the other communities or other
activity nodes?
Susan Kim, Senior Planner, responded:
1)There are no requirements to provide any specific levels of affordability within the Platinum
Triangle. At the time these apartments go to market, we can determine where they fit within
the affordabilitylevel.
She said she was not aware of the specifics of this project; however, the previous Park
2)
Veridian project was a LEED certified project. In addition, many mitigation requirements for
the Platinum Triangle do move to forward the sustainability goals.Because of the mitigation
needed for traffic, water and greenhouse gas emissions, there are many things that get
projects to those goals; such as using water efficient landscaping.
3)When the Housing Element was prepared for this area, units within the Platinum Triangle were
included in the Above Moderate goals for housing. The Platinum Triangle was not used as an
area to meet the City’s affordability goals determined by the RHNA. Because there were no
specific Code requirements to provide affordable units; they had to consider the units as being
sold at market rates. No one can determine what the unit rents are actually going to be until
the units actually go to market. HCD puts those units into the Above Moderate category until
such time as there are specifics that would limit their affordability.
4)Within the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan,there are a variety of different types of
streets. The streetscape treatment in the Anaheim Resort is carried over into the arterial
streets such as Katella Avenue and Gene Autry Way. They have wide sidewalks to allow
pedestrian movement, there is also landscaping between the sidewalk and the street. The
main connections anticipated within the Platinum Triangle are on those connector streets that
were shown in the visual presentation. The sidewalks are very walkable. The streets are just
as they are in any residential neighborhood and are intended to be slow speed streets, not
streets for moving great volumes of traffic. When the latest Platinum Triangle Master Land
Use Plan amendments were adopted, planned bikeways on Cerritos Avenue and Lewis Street
were added to create connectivity. The City was recently awarded a grant through the
Compass Blueprint Program which will take a closer look at those connections and determine
if greater connectivity can be provided within the Platinum Triangle as well as to the Santa Ana
River Trail, downtown, and The Anaheim Resort. Those efforts are currently under way.
Commissioner Persaud stated there are adjacent regional facilities and entertainment activities such
as the Santa Ana River Trail, Stadium, Convention Center, etc. and questioned whether the PT had
an adopted, non-motorized, pedestrian plan in place that would be populated with more than bicycle
activities.In some cities, the vehicle code has changed to allow “golf carts” to share the road. He
stated that Anaheim is a classic example of where such an application could be very relevant.
Activity nodes are in close proximity with each other that would allow for pedestrian movement other
than being in a car. He questioned if the City of Anaheim had a plan such as this in place.
It was brought out that the City of Anaheim does not have alternative vehicle travel provisions to allow
“golf cart” travel along city streets. Commissioner Persaud further stated that the Governor signed
legislation that changed the vehicle code for a community in northern California and for a 22,000 acre
development in South Orange County known as the Ranch Plan.
03/14/11
Page 8of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Commissioner Ramirez asked if the General Plan specified what type of housing would be provided
within the Platinum Triangle, whether single or multi-family.
Ms. Kim responded that detached housing is not permitted within the Platinum Triangle. There are
minimum projectrequirement of 50 units and a minimum density requirement of 16 dwelling units per
acre; however, most of the approved projects have been between 60 and 100. Mostly podium and
wrap development has been built to date. There are master site plans that have townhouse
development; however, they are within development projects that also include high rise development.
Commissioner Ramirez asked what type of housing was in the Platinum Triangle, in terms of rental
versus for sale.
Ms. Kim said that currently the only for sale housing in Platinum Triangle are the Stadium Lofts and
Vivere. All the other developed projects are apartment communities; however, they have all been
mapped for condominium uses.
Commissioner Ramirez asked how many diagonal parking spaces are being provided.
Ms. Norwood stated there will be 14.
Commissioner Ramirez asked if this was the first development that will be using this type of parking
to meet its parking requirement for residential uses and if it was anticipated that this amendment will
generate more of these types of applications.
Ms. Norwood said it will open the door to more requests. It would depend on the parking requirement
being met or if they want this type of parking solely to enhance the quality of the project.
Commissioner Ramirez asked if there was a concern for street parking and how it would be regulated
as far as whether it was being used by the residents of the community.
Ms. Norwood responded that a parking management plan will have to be provided, reviewed and
approved. The City is confident that it will not be an issue. Signs indicating that no event parking is
allowed will be installed and vehicles will be towed.
Chairman Faessel asked what streets currently have diagonal and parallel parking.
Ms. Norwood responded that only Market Street had that type of parking.
Chairman Faessel stated this action could allow diagonal parking on any street surrounding this area,
subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. He asked what the review would consist of.
David Kennedy,Associate Transportation Planner, responded that the project applicant would submit
a letter, plans and parking plan to request diagonal parking on a Connector street that surrounds their
property. During this process, an assessment to determine the needs for on-street diagonal parking
and the on-site parking provisions would be evaluated in order to determine if diagonal parking is
warranted for the project. They would then meet with the City Engineer to discuss their needs and at
that time the plan would be reviewed, and approved or denied.
03/14/11
Page 9of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Chairman Faessel asked for the criteria that might be considered for approval of diagonal parking on
connector streets.
Mr. Kennedy said in the case of the Platinum Triangle, they wouldlook at the density that is allowed
in that zone or that parcel, as allowed in the master land use plan. They will look at the ability to
develop that site and see if there are any parking constraints or concerns that would limit the ability to
fit all of the required parking on site; or if there is an issue for example, because of the location of the
parking, gates or the convenience of the main entrance, that it might be more feasible to provide
guest parking on the street to maximize the amount of resident parking that is on the parcel itself.
Chairman Faessel asked Mr. Kennedy to define what is considered a Connector street.
Mr. Kennedy stated that a Connector Street is a local residential street with the sole purpose to serve
the predominately residential parcels and circulate traffic to the major streets. They would be slower
speed roads, typically one lane in each direction. It would not exceed 3,000 cars per day.
Chairman Faessel asked what was the original total number of residential units forthese two
properties.
Ms. Norwood stated it was originally 446 and it had been reduced to 400.
Steve Sheldon, 901 Dove Street, Suite 140, Newport Beach, the applicant. He said BRE is prepared
to close escrow on Parcel 2 on March 21, 2011. Mr. Sheldon said the original project was LEED Gold
certified. Both parcels have been registered with LEED and there is intent on behalf of BRE to make
those LEED certified as well. As to affordability, Park Veridian is the most affordable in market rate
units in the Platinum Triangle. He said most of the units in the Platinum Triangle are being rented out
as the market is trying to stabilize. He stated there are more pedestrian friendly walking areas
between Gene Autry and Katella Avenue, west of State College Boulevard. Mr. Sheldon said they
have reviewedthe conditions of approval arein agreement with the staff report.
Commissioner Seymour asked why the density was reduced from 446 to 400.
Mr. Sheldon responded that the podium construction which has subterranean parking, the four levels
on top and the wrap style products are all built with concrete and by and large in Southern California,
those types of projects do not pencil. Architects Orange has come up with a plan that would yield 50
units per acre which comes close to the 446 number, by yielding 400 units.The proposed project is
called a four over one, and is a product that is now being accepted by many communities as a
replacement for the podium project. It is attractive, works well and achieves nearly the same goal but
is a less expensive cost for building the subterranean or structured garages.
Commissioner Persaud stated that in surveying the market need of the community, the BRE
development is including a number of three bedroom units which is noteasily available in the
Platinum Triangle. He commended BRE for looking into the needs of the community and providing
opportunities to satisfy that need.
Chairman Faessel commended BRE for studying the housing needs as well as they are. He asked if
Project 1 has a high occupancy rate.
03/14/11
Page 10of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Mr. Sheldon responded that the occupancy is at 95 percent.
Chairman Faessel said any project in the Platinum Triangle that has 95 percent occupancy must have
certainly targeted their demographic very carefully.
Commissioner Ramirez asked who was the targeted demographic; people inside or out of the City.
Mr. Sheldon responded they are coming from Anaheim and the surrounding areas.
Commissioner Ramirez asked if the 3 bedroom units were a small portion, approximately 13-26 units.
Mr. Sheldon said that was correct.
Chairman Faessel asked that the high points of the project on the visual presentation.
RC Alley of Architects Orange showed Parcel 2 which fronts Katella Avenue; there will be 215 units
with a variety of 1, 2and 3 bedroom units which face the central courtyard, a pool in the center of the
community, and the units will face both edges of the street. The back parcel will front the street and
will have a very lush landscape pallet, the main pool and club area anchors the end of the pool. The
pool has been oriented to receive maximum sun exposure along the street. The upper units will face
the courtyard and the ground floor units have large patios which open directly into the courtyard. The
two projects will have their own character, but they will be similar and complement each other
architecturally. He further visually described the attributes of the project.
Commissioner Faessel asked for more information pertaining to green building
Nathan Krantz, green building consultant, said there will be water efficiency, energy efficient fixtures
and irrigation, energy efficient insulation and HVAC systems of heating and cooling systems as well
as improved indoor air quality with filtration and ventilation needs forthe residents. It will have very
good sustainability features and availability for bicycle and other means of transportation. He further
stated that BRE will work with recycling the construction waste. This activityhas already happened
with the existing Park Veridian I, and will continue as the construction process goes forward with
Parcels 2 and 3.Mr. Krantz said they will try to obtain financial incentives where they can and
maximum Energy Star appliances, etc.
Chairman Faesselopened the public hearing.Seeing no other persons indicating to speak, he then
closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Seymouroffered a recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt the
resolution attached to the March 14, 2011 staff report, determining that the CEQA Previously Certified
Environmental Impact Report No. 339, Previously Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 302.is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request
and recommending City Council approval of Zoning Code Amendment No. 2011-00098,
Miscellaneous Case No. 2011-00493,Development Agreement No. 2010-00004(DEV2010-00161),
and Terminating Development Agreement Nos. 2005-00002 and 2005-00003.
03/14/11
Page 11of 12
MARCH 14, 2011
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Grace Medina, Senior Secretary announced that the resolution passedwith seven yesvotes.
Chairman Faesseland Commissioners Agarwal, Ament, Karaki, Persaud, Ramirez and Seymour
voted yes.
OPPOSITION:
None
Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 10-dayappealrights ending at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, March 24, 2011.
DISCUSSION TIME
:46 minutes (5:20 to 6:06)
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:09P.M.
TO MONDAY,MARCH 28, 2011AT 5:00P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Grace Medina
Senior Secretary
Received and approved by the Planning Commission on May 9, 2011.
03/14/11
Page 12of 12