The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 2005/07/25Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Monday, July 25, 2005 Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard. Anaheim. California Chairman: Gail Eastman Chairman Pro - Tempore: Cecilia Flores Commissioners: Kelly Buffa, Joseph Karaki, Ed Perez, Panky Romero, Pat Velasquez . Call To Order Preliminary Plan Review 11:30 A.M. • Staff update to Commission on various City developments and issues (As requested by Planning Commission) • Preliminary Plan Review for items on the July 25, 2005 agenda Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session • Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:30 P.M. For record keeping purposes, if you wish to make a statement regarding any item on the agenda, please complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to the secretary. . Pledge Of Allegiance . Public Comments . Consent Calendar Public Hearing Items . Adjournment You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e -mail address: plan ningcommission (a)anaheim.net H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc (07/25/05) Page 1 Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda -2:30 P.M. Public Comments: This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items. Planning Commission Appointments: • Appointment of a Planning Commission Chairman (Motion) REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES AND ALTERNATES FOR THE FOLLOWING: • Anaheim Transportation Network Board of Directors • Utilities Underground Conversion Subcommittee (Continued from the June 27, 2005, Planning Commission meeting.) Consent Calendar: The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and /or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 1A.(a) Conditional Use Permit No. 3471 — Request for Termination (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04995) Agent: Mark Whitehead, Brandywine Homes, 16580 Aston, Irvine, CA 92606 Location: 425 North Magnolia Avenue. Request to terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 3471 (to permit the conversion of an existing 128 -unit apartment complex to a 128 -unit, 21- lot air -space condominium complex with waiver of the required lot frontage, minimum lot width, minimum floor area, permitted encroachment into required yards, minimum distance between buildings and landscaped setback). Termination Resolution No. 1B.(a) CEQA Negative Declaration (Previously- Approved) (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04831 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04996) Agent: John Ward, Stonybrook LLC, P.O. Box 4304, Carson, CA 90749 Location: 736 South Beach Boulevard and 2966 West Stonvbrook Drive. Request for a retroactive extension of time to comply with conditions of approval for a previously- approved 7 -unit detached single - family condominium subdivision. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc Project Planner: (kwong2 @anaheim. net) Q. S. 19 Project Planner: (mnewland @anaheim. net) Q. S. 14 (07/25/05) Page 2 1C.(a) Conditional Use Permit NO. 3650 and 2002 -04645 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 05007) Agent: Carol C. Cushing, CDC Properties, 701 Concord Street, Glendale, CA 91202 Location: 3020 West Lincoln Avenue. Request to terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 3650 (to permit the installation of automotive accessories in conjunction with a proposed Project Planner: retail establishment) and Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04645 (to (kwong2 @anaheim.net) permit and retain a computer rental and internet amusement [arcade] business). Q. S. 9 Termination Resolution No 1 D.(a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 05008) Agent: Jimmy Nguyen, P.O. Box 15751, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Location: 420 -504 South Brookhurst Street. Project Planner: Request to terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 (to retain (kwong2 @anaheim.net) a banquet hall with service but no sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption). Q. S. 40 Termination Resolution No. 1E.(a) CEQA Environmental Impact Report No. 189 — (Previously- Certified Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00007 Owner: Elisa Stipkovich, Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: 203 South Anaheim Boulevard, 290 South Lemon Street, 180 and 435 West Center Street, and 291 West Broadway. Project Planner: (dsee @anaheim.net) Request for review and recommendation to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency of final plans for a mixed -use project on Parcels Q S. 83 Al - A3, B, and D within Downtown Anaheim. Minutes 1F. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2005 (Motion) Continued from the June 13 and 27, 2005, Planning Commission meetings. H: \docs \clerical\agendas \072505.doc (07/25/05) Page 3 1G. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of June 13, 2005 (Motion) Continued from the June 27, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. 1H. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of June 27, 2005 (Motion) 11. Receiving and approving supplemental detailed Minutes for Item No. 2 from the Planning Commission Meeting of June 1, 2005, scheduled to be heard as a public hearing item before City Council on Tuesday, July 26, 2005 ITEM NO. 2 CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 129 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04975 Tentative Tract Map No. 16825 Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 1J. Receiving and approving supplemental detailed Minutes for Item No. 4 from the Planning Commission Meeting of June 27, 2005, scheduled to be heard as a public hearing item before City Council on Tuesday, July 26, 2005. ITEM NO. 4 CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 131 Tentative Tract Map No. 16826 Development Agreement No. 2005 -00006 H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc (07/25/05) Page 4 2a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Readvertisment) 2b. Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 2c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004.04951 2d. Tentative Tract Mao No. 16833 Owner: Marci Odon, 3117 West Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 Agent: Walter Bowman, Bonanni Development, 5622 Research Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Location: 3117. 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road. Property is 1.4 acres, having a frontage of 198 feet on the north side of Ball Road located 741 feet east of the centerline of Western Avenue. Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 - Request reclassification of the property from the T (Transition) zone to the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) zone, or less intense zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 — Request to permit a 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision. Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 —To establish a 1 -lot 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision. Continued from February 7, 23, March 7, April 4, May 2, and June 13, 2005, Planning Commission meetings. Reclassification Resolution No. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 3a. CEQA Negative Declaration 3b. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005.00040 Agent: City of Anaheim, Community Services Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: Citywide. Request to amend the zoning code pertaining to the establishment of building and ground- mounted telecommunication facilities on public recreational facilities within the Scenic Corridor Overlay, Open Space and Residential zones, to clarify the definition of certain types of telecommunication facilities, and to add standard conditions of approval to the Telecommunication Antenna Review Permit process. Continued from the June 27, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. Zoning Code Amendment Resolution No. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc Project Planner (avazquez @anaheim. net) Q.S. 10 Request for continuance to August 8, 2005 Project Planner: Qpra mirez @a na he i m. net) Q.S. (07/25/05) Page 5 4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e. 4f. 4g. Agent: Sandy Sanchez, D.R. Horton, 16755 Von Karmen Avenue, Suite 200, Irvine, CA 92606 Location: 2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue. Property is approximately 3.49* acres, having a frontage of 318 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue located 432 feet east of the centerline of State College Boulevard. Request to approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring Plan prepared for the project and circulated for public agency/ responsible agency review in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and City of Anaheim CEQA Guidelines. General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00435 - Request to amend the land use element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle. Amendment to Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous No. 2005- 00113) - Request to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 - Request to amend the PTMU Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 - Request to modify setbacks along a proposed private street and Katella Avenue to construct a 251 unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,347 square feet of retail. Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 - To establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision. Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 - Request to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing for the construction of a 251 unit residential and commercial mixed use project. General Plan Amendment Resolution No. Miscellaneous Resolution No. Zoning Code Amendment Resolution No. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. _ Development Agreement Resolution No.. *Advertised as 3.39 acres H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc Project Planner: Qdadant@ a na he i m. net) Q.S. 118 (07/25/05) Page 6 Owner: Peter French, Kayco Plaza Partners, L.P., 120 Newport Center Drive, Suite 240, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Sa. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 136 5b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16832 5c. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO.DAG2005 -00007 Owner: East Katella Partnership, 666 Sherbrook Street, Montreal, Quebec H3A 1E7 Agent: Ian Ellis, 1331 East Katella Development, 1849 Sawtelle Boulevard, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 92707 Location: 1221 and 1331 East Katella Avenue. Property is approximately 4.88* acres with a frontage of 355 feet on the north side of Katella Avenue, located 966 feet east of the centerline of Lewis Street (Platinum Triangle Condominium Development). Request to approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigated Monitoring Plan prepared for the project and circulated for public agency/ responsible agency review in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and City of Anaheim CEQA Guidelines. Tentative Tract Map No. 16832 - To establish a 3 -lot, 336 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision. Development Agreement No. DAG2005 -00007 - Request to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and 1331 East Katella Development Company, LLC and East Katella Partnership to construct a 336 unit residential and commercial mixed use project and associated public street. Development Agreement Resolution No. *Advertised as 5.37 acres 6a. CEQA Neaative Declaration 6b. Waiver of Code Requirement 6c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005.04997 Owner: Myron Trust, Cotti Foods, 26111 Antonio Parkway, Suite 100, Las Flores, CA 92688 Agent: Holly Sandler, 1450 North Tustin Avenue, Suite 105, Santa Ana, CA 92705 Location: 100 and 130 North State College Boulevard. Property is approximately 0.8 acre, located at the northeast corner of Center Street and State College Boulevard. Request to construct a commercial retail center and a fast food restaurant with drive - through and outdoor seating with waivers of (a) minimum landscaped setback adjacent to residential zone boundary, (b) minimum setback for trash enclosure adjacent to residential zone boundary, and (c) minimum number of parking spaces. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc Project Planner: (ethien@anaheim. net) Q.S. 107 Project Planner: (avazquez @anaheim. net) Q.S. 112 (07/25/05) Page 7 7a. CEQA Negative Declaration 7b. Reclassification No. 2005 -00163 7c. Variance No. 2005 -04653 7d. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132 7e. Waiver of Council Policy No. 542 Owner: Evart C. Fountain, 1432 Roberta Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92833 Agent: Alan Nguyen, 15401 Firmona Avenue, Lawndale, CA 90260 Location: 1400 East Burton Street. Property consists of two parcels. Parcel 1: Property is an irregularly- shaped parcel having a frontage of 133 feet on the south side of Burton Street and is located 889 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street. Parcel 2: Property is an irregularly- shaped parcel having a frontage of 26 feet on the south side of Burton Street and is located 1022 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street. Reclassification No. 2005 -00163 - Request reclassification of the property from the T (Transition) zone to the RS -2 (Residential, Single - Family) zone, or a less intense zone. Variance No. 2005 -04653 - Request waivers of (a) minimum lot width and (b) minimum lot area to construct four single - family residences. Tentative Parcel Map - Request to establish a 4 -lot, 4 -unit detached single family subdivision. Waiver of Council Policy No. 542 - Request to waive Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects. Continued from the June 27, 2005, Planning Commission meeting Reclassification Resolution No. Variance Resolution No. 8a. CEQA Categorical Exemption — Class 1 8b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05000 Owner: American Investments /Chino LLC, 312 Broadway, Suite 204, Long Beach, CA 92651 Agent: Serena Elliot, Southern Cal Real Estate, 15901 Red Hill Avenue, Suite 204, Tustin, CA 92780 Location: 464 South Anaheim Hills Road. Property is approximately 10.6 acres, located north and east of the northeast of Nohl Ranch Road and Anaheim Hills Road. Request to permit a retail market (fresh vegetables and fruit) within an existing commercial shopping center. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc Request for continuance to September 7, 2005 Project Planner: (cflores @anaheim. net) Q.S 91 Project Planner: (mnewland @anaheim. net) Q.S. 192 (07/25/05) Page 8 9a. SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 332 AND UPDATED AND MODIFIED MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 106A 9b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004 -00420 (Tracking No. GPA 2005. 00432) 9c. RECISSION IN -PART OF THE RESOLUTION OF INTENT PERTAINING TO THE RECLASSIFICATION OF THE NORTH NET FIRE TRAINING SITE (MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2005. 00115) 9d. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004.00134 9e. AMENDMENT TO THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN (MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2004. 00089) 9f. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2004.00036 9g. AMENDMENT TO THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE STANDARDIZED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2005 - 00114) Agent: City Initiated, Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: The Platinum Triangle. The "Project Area" encompasses approximately 820 -acres located at the confluence of the Interstate 5 Freeway and the SR -57 Freeway, in the City of Anaheim in Orange County, California. The Project Area is located generally east of the Interstate 5 Freeway, west of the Santa Ana River channel and SR -57 Freeway, south of the Southern California Edison easement, and north of the Anaheim City limit. CERTIFICATION OF SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 332 AND UPDATED AND MODIFIED MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 106A — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council certification of Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332, including adoption of a Statement of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for The Platinum Triangle. SEIR No. 332 has been prepared to serve as the primary environmental document for subsequent actions within the Project Area related to the adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, The Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement. Implementation is intended to include, but not be limited to, the approval of subdivision maps, grading permits, street improvement plans, final site plans, development agreements and other related actions for properties located within The Platinum Triangle. Future developments that require additional discretionary review will utilize this document for CEQA purposes to the extent possible, consistent with Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. This SEIR is also intended to provide the additional environmental documentation for proposed city- initiated amendments to the General Plan, The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone and the Standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement described below. General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00420 (Tracking No. GPA 2005- 00432) — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council adoption of an amendment to the City of Anaheim General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements to provide for the following: Land Use Element: To (A) redesignate a 321 -acre property located at the southeast corner of Orangewood Avenue and Rampart Street and further identified as 2400 East Orangewood Avenue ( "North Net Fire Training Center') from the Office -High to the Mixed -Use land use designation and (B) to provide for an additional 325 dwelling units and up to 210,100 square feet of additional commercial square footage in The Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use land use designation. This amendment would increase the maximum overall residential density from 9,175 to 9,500 dwelling units and the maximum overall commercial density from 2,044,300 to 2,254,400 square feet. H: \docs \cle dcal \agendas \072505.doc Request for continuance to August 22, 2005 Project Planner: (vnorwood@anaheim. net) (07/25/05) Page 9 Circulation Element: To (A) redesignate a portion of Cerritos Avenue between State College Boulevard and Douglass Road from a Primary Arterial Highway (six lanes divided with no parking or four lanes divided with left turn pockets and two parking lanes with a typical right -of -way width of 106 feet) to a Secondary Arterial Highway (four undivided lanes with parking on either side with a typical right -of -way width of 90 feet) to be consistent with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways and respective lane configurations; and (B) to provide for Gene Autry Way between Betmor Lane and State College Boulevard to be up to 170 feet in width to provide for the construction of the "Grand Parkway" (this segment of Gene Autry Way is designated as a Primary Arterial with a current typical width of up to 106 feet). Miscellaneous Case No. 2005 -00115 — Request for Planning Commission to rescind in part Resolution No. PC2004 -83 and recommend that the City Council rescind in part Resolution No. 2004 -180 pertaining to Reclassification No. 2004 -00127 in order to rescind resolutions of intent pertaining to the reclassification of a 3.21 -acre property located at the southeast corner of Orangewood Avenue and Rampart Street and further identified as 2400 East Orangewood Avenue ( "the North Net Fire Training Center') from the PR (Public Recreational) Zone to the O -H (High Intensity Office) Zone. Reclassification No. 2004 -00134 — Request for Planning Commission to reclassify a 3.21 -acre property located at the southeast corner of Orangewood Avenue and Rampart Street and further identified as 2400 East Orangewood Avenue ( "the North Net Fire Training Center') from the PR (Public Recreational) Zone to the PR (PTMU) (Public Recreation — Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use Overlay) Zone. Amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2005 - 00089) — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council adoption of an amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to incorporate the following: an adjustment to the boundaries of the mixed -use districts to include the North Net Fire Training Center in the PTMU Overlay Zone Gateway District and add 325 units to said district (321 of said units would be designated for the North Net Fire Training Center); a modification to the PTMU Overlay Zone commercial density to add 210,100 square feet of additional commercial square footage (190,000 square feet of this square footage would be designated for future required ground floor commercial uses on Market Street and Gene Autry Way in the Katella and Gene Autry Districts and 20,000 square feet for other commercial uses in the Katella District); and, additional technical refinements and clarifications, including, but not limited to, refinements to street cross - sections and density descriptions to reflect the above -noted changes. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004 -00036 — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council adoption of an amendment to the PTMU Overlay Zone to incorporate the following: an adjustment to the boundaries of the mixed -use districts to include the North Net Fire Training Center in the PTMU Overlay Zone Gateway District and add 325 units to said district (321 of said units would be designated for the North Net Fire Training Center); a modification to the PTMU Overlay Zone commercial density to add 210,100 square feet of additional commercial square footage (190,000 square feet of this square footage would be designated for future required ground floor commercial uses on Market Street and Gene Autry Way in the Katella and Gene Autry Districts and 20,000 square feet for other commercial uses in the Katella District); and, additional technical refinements and clarifications, including, but not limited to, refinements to density descriptions to reflect the above -noted changes and other City Code requirements (the proposed changes are set forth in Appendix C to Subsequent EIR No. 332). H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc Project Planner: (vnorwood @anaheim. net) (07/25/05) Page 10 Amendment to The Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement (Miscellaneous Case No. 2005- 00114) — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council adoption of refinements to The Platinum Triangle Standard Development Agreement to reflect mitigation measure requirements set forth in the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A, editorial refinements and updated fees. Environmental Impact Report Resolution No. General Plan Amendment Resolution No. Reclassification Resolution No. Zoning Code Amendment Resolution No. Miscellaneous Case No. 2005 -00115 Resolution No. Miscellaneous Case No. 2004 -00089 Resolution No. Miscellaneous Case No. 2005 -00114 Resolution No. 10a. CEQA Categorical Exemption —Class 21 10b. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04960 (Tracking No. CUP2005- 05006) Owner: Juan Castro, Victory Outreach, 2230 West Colchester Drive, 1 -5, Anaheim, CA 92804 Location: 2230 West Colchester Drive, Suites 1 -5, Property is approximately 0.87 -acre, located at the southwest corner of Colchester Drive and Colony Street (Victory Outreach Church. A City- initiated request to consider the revocation or modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04960 (for a previously- approved church in conjunction with a commercial retail center). Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. H: \docs \cle rical\age ndas \072505.doc Project Planner: apramirez @anaheim.net) Q.S. 34 (07/25/05) Page 11 Adjourn To Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 5:00 P.M. for Preliminary Plan Review for a Special Meeting on the Mountain Park Specific Plan. CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at 10:00 a.m. July 21, 2005 (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: (Original Siqned by Danielle C. Masciel) If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. RIGHTS OF APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use Permits and Variances will be final 22 days after Planning Commission action and any action regarding Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 days after Planning Commission action unless a timely appeal is filed during that time. This appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied by an appeal fee in an amount determined by the City Clerk. The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (714) 765 -5139. Notification no later than 10:00 a.m. on the Friday before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. Recorded decision information is available 24 hours a day by calling the Planning Department's Automated Telephone System at 714- 765 -5139. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc (07/25/05) Page 12 SCHEDULE 2005 August 8 August 22 II September 7 (Wed) II September 19 October 3 October 17 October 31 II November 14 II 0CdM,I 0T-4M. II December 12 II II December 28 (Wed) II H: \docs \clerical \agendas \072505.doc (07/25/05) Page 13 ITEM NO. 1 -A J �U h DID l ,UH l J VIVA ADULT LIVING CRESCENTAVENUE -- RS -2 j I VAR 2013 y 1 DU EACH VAR 1871 GG I RCL 646 RM -4 RM-2 RCL 5980 RS -2 RCL 78 -79-40 CUR20040 r 1 DU EA ~ I j VAR 3098 / - - - -- CU VAR 3806 VAR 9065 / __________ 1 DU EACH CONDOS / STOCKTON AVE 44 DU RM-4 RCL Bfi -87 -25 VAR 907 S \ \- J VAR 3645 \- i APARTMENTS CHURCH & RS- RS -2 J 21 DU 1 DU EACH CH 1 DU EACH � SCHOOL RS -2 1 DU EACH F w W K F N Q Z W K Q J BAYLORAVE RS -2 ~ DU EACH ~ r RS -2 y 1 DU EACH CORNELL AVE RS -2 DU EA STANLEYAVE 1 RCL 89 -90-51 RCL 58 -59-53 T -CUP 2005 -04995 CUP 2004-04898 CUP 3471 VAR 790 S GPA 299-1 (CUP 3275) THE COMMONS GARDEN APTS. 128 DU W z Z W Q Q J O Z Q PR RCL 73 -74-34 GOLF COURSE RUSSELLAVE RMI VIVA ADULT LIVING RM-4 RCL 66-67 -59 VAR 2013 BAYLOR CIRCLE VAR 1871 VI VA ADULT LIVING 124 DU RM -4 VIVA ADULT LIVIN G 606 ' w RCL 89 -90-51 RCL 58 -59-53 T -CUP 2005 -04995 CUP 2004-04898 CUP 3471 VAR 790 S GPA 299-1 (CUP 3275) THE COMMONS GARDEN APTS. 128 DU W z Z W Q Q J O Z Q PR RCL 73 -74-34 GOLF COURSE RUSSELLAVE Conditional Use Permit No. 3471 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04995 Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: MARK WHITEHEAD Q.S. No. 19 REQUEST TO TERMINATE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3471 (TO PERMIT THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING 128 -UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX TO A 128 -UNIT, 21 -LOT, AIR -SPACE CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX WITH WAIVERS OF: (A) REQUIRED LOT FRONTAGE (B) MINIMUM LOT WIDTH (C) MINIMUM FLOOR AREA (D) PERMITTED ENCROACHMENT TO REQUIRED YARDS (E) MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND LANDSCAPED SETBACK 425 North Magnolia Avenue 1930 C -G � K W O z RS -2 RCL 62-63 -80 CUP 377 - VAR 1632 C-G RCL 63-64 -23 RCL 5 9-60-107 CUP 3323 CUP 2302 CUP 2234 CUP 2229 CUP 1254 CUP 888 VAR 2411 MAGNOUA CRESCENT SHOPPING CENTER T VAR 1626 1 DU EACH T CUP 3674 PR pp0 RCL 73 -74 -34 w RS -2 CU VAR 3806 1 DU EACH VAR 1915 VAR 907 S <J CHURCH & 1 DU EACH I SCHOOL pEL Conditional Use Permit No. 3471 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -04995 Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: MARK WHITEHEAD Q.S. No. 19 REQUEST TO TERMINATE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3471 (TO PERMIT THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING 128 -UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX TO A 128 -UNIT, 21 -LOT, AIR -SPACE CONDOMINIUM COMPLEX WITH WAIVERS OF: (A) REQUIRED LOT FRONTAGE (B) MINIMUM LOT WIDTH (C) MINIMUM FLOOR AREA (D) PERMITTED ENCROACHMENT TO REQUIRED YARDS (E) MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND LANDSCAPED SETBACK 425 North Magnolia Avenue 1930 C -G � K W O z RS -2 RCL 62-63 -80 CUP 377 - VAR 1632 C-G RCL 63-64 -23 RCL 5 9-60-107 CUP 3323 CUP 2302 CUP 2234 CUP 2229 CUP 1254 CUP 888 VAR 2411 MAGNOUA CRESCENT SHOPPING CENTER T VAR 1626 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -A 1 -A. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3471 - REQUEST FOR (Resolution) TERMINATION (Tracking No. CUP2005- 04995) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangular- shaped, 9.2 -acre property has a frontage of 662 feet on the west side of Magnolia Avenue, a maximum depth of 606 feet, and is located 662 feet south of the centerline of Crescent Avenue (425 North Magnolia Avenue). REQUEST (2) The property agent, Mark Whitehead has submitted the attached letter dated May 17, 2004, requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 3471. BACKGROUND (3) The property is developed with a 128 -unit apartment complex and is zoned RM -2 (Multiple - Family Residential). The Land Use Element Map of the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Low - Medium Density Residential land uses. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 3471 (to permit the conversion of an existing 128 -unit apartment complex to a 128 -unit, 21 -lot air -space condominium complex with waiver of required lot frontage, minimum lot width, minimum floor area, permitted encroachment to required yards, minimum distance between building and landscaped setback) was approved by the Planning Commission December 12, 1991. (5) Condition of approval no. 11 of Resolution No. PC2004 -120 (to construct a 114 -unit residential condominium subdivision with waiver of maximum building wall length) requires the termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 3471. (6) The property manager is requesting termination of this conditional use permit since this entitlement is no longer needed- RECOMMENDATION (7) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the meeting that the Commission, by resolution, terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 3471. Srcu p3471 kw.doc Page 1 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 -*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3471 (425 NORTH MAGNOLIA AVENUE) WHEREAS, on December 16, 1991, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. PC91 -198, grant Conditional Use Permit No. 3471 to permit the conversion of an existing 128 -unit apartment complex to a 128 -unit, 21 -lot air -space condominium complex with waiver of required lot frontage, minimum lot width, minimum floor area, permitted encroachment to required yards, minimum distance between building and landscaped setback at 425 North Magnolia Avenue; and WHEREAS, Mark Whitehead property agent, has submitted a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 3471 to comply with the condition of approval of no. 11 of Resolution No. PC2004- 120, for Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04898 (to construct a 114 -unit attached and detached residential condominium with waiver of maximum building wall length) approved by the Planning Commission on October 10, 2004, requiring the property owner to submit a letterto the Planning Services Division requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 3471 since this entitlement is no longer needed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 3471 on the basis of the foregoing findings. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. ATTEST: CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: K11I11147 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION Cr1PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- MAY -17 -2005 14:46 FROM BRANDYWINE DEVELOPMENT CO TO 17147655280 P.02i02 Attachment - R &R 1 -A B RA DY WI N E � p H C:) M E S a� c�05 � P p PPit \ik�;.N6 ,�9 May 17, 2005 John Ramirez Planner City of Anahe'rtn 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard,, Suite 162 Anaheim, Ca. 92805 Subject: 425 N. Magnolia Avenue Dear John, As the owner, BW Magnolia Lane Cottages, LLC, of the above listed property, we respectfully request the termination of Conditional User Permit No. 3471 frown the Zoning Department. Should you have any questions or comments you can reacb. mQ at (949) 296 -2400 xt. 102. Sincere , Mark Whitehead BW Magnolia Lane Cottages, LLC 16580 Asion . Irvine, CA 92606 . Tcl: 949 - 296.2400 . Fax:949 -290 -2420 ITEM NO. 1 -A West Anaheim Commercial 1 Corridors Redevelopment Area 1 RMA RM -2 CUP2102 -- RCL 80- 81 -05 . - -- TOWNHOMES RCL 70 -71 -17 I a VAR 3196 RCL 59 - 60 - 112 a VAR 2215 APARTMENTS U C -G I 300 DU RCL84 -85-31 I m`c CUP 2676 m I E a C -G RCL 82 - 08 RMA I RCL 68 -69 -50 I 'm I CUP 1 VAR 2034 I CUP 112 �_I I APARTMENTS I¢� ARCADE I T 1'V3 BADEN- POWELL RM -2 r j RCL 82 -83 -01 I 1 ELEMENTARY RCL 74 -75 -18 I 1 SCHOOL RCL 74 -75 -16 1 I C -G C -G RC 1 I RCL 70 -71 -51 RCL 66 -67 -15 CUP UP 23 2354 4 1 I CUP 3926 SMALLSHOPS RMA CUP 1498 VACANT 0_ rOWNHOMES APARTMENTS — - - - - - -� Q Lu STONYBROOKDR 58 DU 241 C GG RCL 78 -79-43 78- J J— UN4 RCL2U4-0 RCL 78 -79-43 RCL 70 -71 -51 RCL 90-91 - 33 1 ( Intent RCL 66-67-62 REST. (Res. of io CL) S to o RS- RS - 7200) CUP 2355 VAR 3382 O m o_ TLUP 2 R 2 DD 96 TLUP 2004-04903 RCL VAR 3092 CU CUP VACAN1 CUP 343fi VACAN G = CUP 319 GPA 2A RCL 74 -7536 C) CUP 1843 MOTEL Q CUP 1736 1 RMA = CUP 1547 m RCL i'L7 cuPZ 4z RCL 61 -62 -81 wQ GG CUP 1843 RCL 5960 CUP 2142 VAR 4322 CUP 209 W -60 1 CUP 3280 MOTEL T -VAR 2002-04548 MOTEL APARTMENTS o VAR 43zz E- i MOTEL Cn RS -2 a_ c -c RCL 80 -81 -32 20 RS -2 VAR 2002- ¢ CUP 2003 -04714 IUm i 04529 1 DU EACH T -VAR 2005 -04659 m T 2003 a a 1 DU -VAR -04559 VAR 1229 Q U Im`c (( CUP 2199) a O` G _EL E� (VAR 2234) l oa ROME AVENUE U)� MOTEL 'O �¢ m 6G CUP 2231 E N � RCL 80 -81 -41 VAR 2336 o a t I¢o; RCL 71 -72 -35 MOTEL ( J � 1 DU U EACH I _m ma h GG I� R CL 80-81-44 1 ECONO LODGE ¢ RM -4 RMA MOTEL RCL 62 -63 -36 RCL 77 -78-28 RCL 56 -57 -33 RCL 56 -57 -33 CUP 314 I C -G RS -2 _ PrA AA- AQ -'i0 ceueoe - ... .., Conditional Use Permit No- 2004 -04831 Subject Property TRACKING NO- CUP2005 -04996 Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: JOHN WARD Q -S- No- 14 REQUEST FOR A RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED 7 -UNIT, DETACHED SINGLE - FAMILY CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION - 736 South Beach Boulevard and 2966 West Stonybrook Drive 1932 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -B 1 -B. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) (Motion) b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04831 REQUEST FOR A TIME EXTENSION TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Motion) (TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 04996) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 0.64 -acre property is located at the southeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Stonybrook Drive, having frontages of 100 feet on the east side of Beach Boulevard and 241 feet on the south side of Stonybrook Drive (736 South Beach Boulevard and 2966 West Stonybrook Drive). REQUEST: (2) Mr. John Ward, authorized agent for the property owner, has submitted the attached letter, dated May 24, 2005, requesting a retroactive extension of time to comply with the conditions of approval for a previously approved 7 -unit detached single - family condominium subdivision under authority of Code Section 18.60.170. BACKGROUND: (3) Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04831 (to permit a 7 -unit detached single - family subdivision), in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 2004- 00417, Reclassification No. 2004 - 00115, and Tentative Tract Map No. 16650 was approved by the City Council on April 9, 2004. (4) This is the applicant's first request for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval for the conditional use permit. The applicant is requesting this time extension to allow more time to obtain approval of precise grading plans. (5) The property consists of two vacant parcels zoned RM -2 (Residential, Multiple - Family). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Low - Medium Density Residential land uses- DISCUSSION (6) This entitlement was approved on April 9, 2004, and expired on April 9, 2005. The applicant is requesting a one year retroactive (from April 9, 2004) extension of time. The Code requires the application for an extension of time be submitted within 180 days of the date of expiration (prior to October 9, 2005). The request for the time extension was received on May 24, 2005. This is the first request for a time extension to comply with conditions of approval, and Code allows the granting of a maximum of two time extensions subject to the findings contained in Code Section No. 18.60.170 of the Zoning Code. The applicant has indicated that the time extension is being requested due to conditions of approval that are currently in process, but have not yet been completed. :9 V[oil] zQ1bEoEBI:Zx rI , Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -B (7) On June 8, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004R -95 and Ordinance No. 5920 which approved a comprehensive update of the Anaheim General Plan and an amendment of Title 18 Zoning Code in its entirety. Contained in Ordinance No. 5920 of the Zoning Code Update was Section 5c "Exemptions" which provided projects approved prior to June 8, 2004 an exemption from the new Zoning Code regulations provided the project was granted an extension of time by the approval authority. (8) An inspection by the Community Preservation staff on June 22, 2005, indicates there are no existing code violations relative to the property. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (9) Staff has reviewed the request for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval and the previously approved Negative Declaration and finds there are no changes to the originally- approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04831 and that the request will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Negative Declaration serve as the required environmental documentation for this request- FINDINGS (10) Zoning Code Section No. 18.60.170 specifies that the applicant shall, within one year after receiving approval (or within any greater or lesser time limit specified in the Resolution of Approval) comply with all conditions imposed with time limits. In addition, subsection 18.60.170.020 specifies that before granting any request for an extension of time to comply with conditions of approval, the Commission must make a finding of fact that the following findings exist: (a) That the extension of time will not extend the approval beyond two extensions of time, with each extension not to exceed one year, or any greater or lesser time increment specified in the original resolution of the conditional use permit. (b) That the approval remains consistent with the General Plan and the zone district designation for the property. (c) That either no Code amendments have occurred that would cause the approval to be inconsistent with this title, or the applicant has (i) submitted revised plans demonstrating that the approved project can be modified to bring it into conformance with such Code amendments and (ii) agreed to modify the project to conform to such Code amendments. (d) That the subject property has been maintained in a safe, clean, and aesthetically pleasing condition with no unremediated code violations on the property, as confirmed by an inspection of the subject property by the Community Preservation Division. (e) That no additional information or changed circumstances are present which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for approval of the project. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -B RECOMMENDATION: (11) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the meeting, that the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the previously- approved Negative Declaration is adequate to serve as the appropriate environmental documentation for this project. (b) By motion, aoorove the request for a one -year retroactive extension of time to comply with conditions of approval to expire April 9, 2006, based on the following: (i) That this is the first request for a time extension and Code permits a maximum of two requests for extension of time to comply with conditions of approval. (ii) That the property has been maintained in a safe, clean and aesthetically pleasing manner with no outstanding code violations affecting this property. (iii) That there is no information or changed circumstances which contradict the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004- 04831. Page 3 ITEM NO. 1 -A NE I I 1TES h O C -G CUP2853 C-G I I O RCL 66-67 -21 VAR 4342 RCL 98 -99-12 I I E2 RCL 59 -60 -36 REST_ RCL 55 -56 -37 I I =0 CUP 2 00 3 -046 76 CUP 2705 I t QU CUP 114 FURNITURE I - VAR 3573 STORE - - -___ ti U VAR 2162 S i i --- - W W VAR 1919 S I I (RCL 56 -57 -7) I I (CUP 584) I I O (VAR 1086 S T) I I 53 -28 U (VAR 1083 S T) I I RM -4 I I RCL 97 -98-15 1435 (CUP X-16) CG TPCUP4 RM -1200) ,� (SUP 2 -58) RCL 6667 -53 C-G j j 090017 496 SHOPPING RCL 59LWLW RCL 9 &9412 I I VACANT �w❑ CENTER CUP 3717 RCL 5556 -37 I I HO VAR 4186 VAR c ss K �jj a I I K REST_ FOOD MART I I LINCOLN AVENUE 1260' cc c� RCL 62-63-64 RCL 5556 -4n C� RCL 5556-40 GG of RCL 91-92 -14 C -G R es of Ini t C _ (Res of InL Q (Res of to CL) F C-G 7 CUP 687 to CL) RCL 55 -56-40 VAR 1139 > 5 RCL 61 E: RCL 56 -57 -22 1 z �A RCL 61 -62 -12 VAR 1926 (Res. of nt. to CL) OASIS _ CUP 2999 VAR 15: VAR 4151 CUP 4029 SHOPPING CENTER MOTEL PEP BOYS o tJJ J �a� VAR 14' SS_B GONV. ��¢ CUP 3682 TOOL SHi N MARKET >w CUP 1372 _ _ tt VAR 1534 C-G I O VAR 1412 U) RCL 90 -91 -07 m PCN 98 -03 RCL 55 -56-40 ° BEACH - LINCOLN 0 (Res. of Int. to CL) 1 + = C -G m PLAZA Q T -CUP 2005 -05007 () RCL 56 -57 -22 W CUP 2005 -04957 LU CUP 176 C 0 CUP2 00 3 -0466 7 T MHP t1J CARWASH Um CUP 2002 -04645 T -CUP 2001 -04328 RCL(82 -83)28 m RM-4 CUP 4054 RCL 62 -63 -108 ;? 2CL 62 -63-64 CUP 4041 (Res. of Intent to RM -1200) 2CL 40 CUP 3650 RCL 55 -56 -40 L v7 35. f I. t CL) 1 PCN 205 -00016 (Res. Of Int. to CL) a,_, W O 0 U 7 CUP 607 CUP 3 (CUP 33 7 PACIFIC SUNSET RCL 9 1- 14 VAR 1926 NC BEACH AT LINLINCOLN MOBI f Int. t o C (Res.of to LR 116 D SHOPPING CENTER R -57 -22 ESTATES ESTATES VAR 41 VAR E m AMERICANA MOTEL U a RM -4 T(MHP) R CL RCL 82 -83 -28 T> VAR 534 RCL 62-63 -108 RCL 80 -81 -23 �a VAR 1412 Res. of Intent to CL) (Res. of Intent to RN1 -1200) S Re 4 DU EACH RCL 40 RCL 64 -65 -68 ¢� f Int. t (Res. of Int. to CL) (Res. of Int. to CH) I t, CUP 767 ! j RCL 55 -56-40 C-G MOBILE HOME (Res. of Int. to CL) RCL 87 -88-57 PARK CUP 2170 CUP 3960 CUP 3006 � Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04645 Subject Property Conditional Use Permit No. 3650 Date: July 25, 2005 TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05007 Scale: 1" =200' Requested By: CAROL C. CUSHING Q -S. No. 9 REQUEST TO TERMINATE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3650 (TO PERMIT THE INSTALLATION OF AUTOMOTIVE ACCESSORIES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT) AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO- 2002 -04645 (TO PERMIT AND RETAIN A COMPUTER RENTAL AND INTERNET AMUSEMENT (ARCADE) BUSINESS). 3020 West Lincoln Avenue 1929 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -C 1 -C. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 3650 & 2002 -04645 - (Resolution) REQUEST FOR TERMINATION (Tracking No. CUP2005- 05007) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 1.58 -acre property is located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Beach Boulevard with frontages of 260 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue and 260 feet on the west side of Beach Boulevard (3020 West Lincoln Avenue). REQUEST (2) The property agent, C. Cushing has submitted the attached letter dated May 23, 2005 requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit Nos. 3650 and 2002 - 04645. BACKGROUND (3) The property is developed with a commercial shopping center and is zoned C -G (General - Commercial). The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for General Commercial and Low Density Residential land uses. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map further designates properties to the north across Lincoln Avenue for Regional Commercial and Residential Corridor land uses, to the east across Beach Boulevard for Regional Commercial and General Commercial land uses, to the south for Low Medium Density Residential land uses, and to the west for General Commercial Low Medium Density Residential land uses. The property is also located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors Project of the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Area. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 3650 (to permit the installation of automotive accessories in conjunction with a proposed retail establishment) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 10, 1994. (5) Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04645 (to permit and retain a computer rental and internet amusement (arcade) business) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 13, 2003. (6) Condition of Approval No. 26 of Resolution No. PC2005 -34 (to establish a convenience market within an existing commercial center with accessory retail sales of beer and wine for off - premises consumption) and Condition of Approval No. 16 of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2005 -00018 (to permit retail sales of beer and wine for off - premises consumption in conjunction with a proposed convenience market) requires the termination of Conditional Use Permit Nos. 3650 and 2002 - 04645. (7) The property manager is requesting termination of these conditional use permits since these entitlements are no longer needed- RECOMMENDATION ( Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the meeting that Conditional Use Permit Nos. 3650 and 2002 -04645 be terminated. srCUP3650 & CUP2002 -04645 Page 1 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS. 3650 AND 2002 -04645 (3020 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE) WHEREAS, on January 10, 1994 the Anaheim Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. PC94 -5, granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3650 to permit the installation of automotive accessories in conjunction with a proposed retail establishment; and WHEREAS, on January 13, 2003 the Anaheim Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. PC2003 -13, granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2002 -04645 to permit and retain a computer rental and internet amusement (arcade) business; and WHEREAS, C. Cushing property agent, has submitted a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit Nos. 3650 and 2002 -04645 to comply with Condition of Approval No. 26 of Resolution No. PC2005 -34 for Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04957 (to establish a convenience market within an existing commercial center with accessory retail sales of beer and wine for off - premises consumption) approved by the Planning Commission on March 7, 2005, and Condition of Approval No. 16 of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2005 -00018 (to permit retail sales of beer and wine for off - premises consumption in conjunction with a proposed convenience market) approved by the Planning Commission on March 7, 2005, requiring the property owner to submit a letter to the Planning Services Division requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit Nos. 3650 and 2002 -04645 since these entitlements are no longer needed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Conditional Use Permit Nos. 3650 and 2002 -04645 on the basis of the foregoing findings. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. /_\11111 =9i CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION Cr>,PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- Attachment - R &R 1 -C CC Properties 701 Concord Street, CCendafe, CA 91202 SAY +�s acRxr� G ��rur May 23, 2005 .' r Q CITY OF ANAHEIM, Planning Department Attn: Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Area Planning Commission 200 South Anaheim Boulevard P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 RE: Approval of Conditional Use Permit NO. 2005 -04957 Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity NO. 2005 -00018 And Request for Termination of Conditional Use Permits 2002 -04645 and 3650 Gentlemen: This a letter to request termination of Conditional Use Permit 2002 -04645 (to permit and retain a computer rental and internet amusement business) and Conditional Use Permit No. 3650 (to permit the installation of automotive accessories in conjunction with a proposed retail establishment) to the Zoning Division. The Conditional Use Permits were granted to tenants at locations within the shopping center located at 3000 -3020 W. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 9280 which is owried by Michael R. A. Bagguley. awed or, the chaiya iii tenancies at the shopping center over the last several months, these CUPs are no longer needed. Yours very truly, Carol C. Cushing, CPM®, Agent for Owner Troperty Management and 12eafEstate Investments Certified2'ropeny Manager Cafifornia ReafEstate (Broker Th one: (818 ) 500 -9120 Tax: ) 500 -8512 ITEM NO. 1 -A Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05008 Date July 25, 2005 Scale 1"=200' Requested By JIMMY NGUYEN Q.S. No. 40 REQUEST TO TERMINATE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000 -04277 (TO RETAIN A BANQUET HALL WITH SERVICE BUT NO SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION- 420-504 South Brookhurst Street - Seafood Place Restaurant 1931 KULLUW -UU194 UL VAR 433 VAR 433 LIQUOR m. PCN 99 -01 &SHOPS SS_ E C-0 (BCC) CUP 1563 RCL 9 VAR 433 j RCL 5960 -10 103 PROF. 60 AREA T- BUILDING BUST C7 (LOCAL BUSINESS) U;E m��'m C IJP20 P2005 W5 ALCOM UW-04885 VALL VE RCL 2005 -00145 C-0 C, RCL9 &9411 = _ RCL 596&103 TACO BELL U U CUP 3352 REST_ N Q N Q VAR 433 (6 W fn W _ Of D Of , - C G VAR 1157 S ROL 9 &99-11 C_G N Q 01 0 RCL 98 -99 -11 SMALL COM M. RCL 5960 -103 r R pLZ��a VAR 433 W RCL 63 -64116 3 SHOPS 7 -cua 2001 7 WD c-c cuP 2739 cuP la9a u RCL 59FA -143 cuP n31 vcuPZ005a4s1z C) ELM AVE RCL 9 &9 &11 CUP1847 SM GOMM_ CUP846 cuP2aao -w2n_� CL 6364- 118 ( CUP 1675 SHOPS VAR 433 REST. T RCL 5960 -29 LU )R RCL9 & 4-11 VAR w c-0 RC RCL 6364 -118 SMALLCOM. GOM M RCL9 &99-11 RCL596&103 (Res_ottrlt_toCL) SHOPS 2005 -05008 -0 C RCL9 &9411 SMALL COMM_ TLUP T -CUP 2000-04512 r1D RCL 6364 -118 SHOPS T -CUP 2001 -04457 (Res. of Int to CL ) CG CUP 2000-04277 SEAFOOD VAR 433 E GG PLACE PARKING W RCL 98 -99 -11 m CUP 2005 -04974 = LU RCL 63- 64118 (1) = RCL 98 99 -11 N U = (J J J = U m CUP 2487 m Y TLUP 2005 -05008 Q UQ m CUP 670 T -CUP 2001 -04457 O0 �� Of D Q � N �¢ COMM. SHOPS Q CUP 2000-04277 (b W CI `mc TLUP 2000-04512 0< Of E m O VAR 2002 -04538 d = _ CI_ E E GG VAR 433 U U 0 o RCL 98 -99-11 CUP 2489 m N UU N Q 275' RCL 63- 64118(2) CUP 2431 W W E'm CUP 3269 CUP 2418 C -G (BCC) RCL 98 -99 -11 Of D IY, - m CUP 3044 CUP 994 TILE & RCL 56 -57 -2 C) C) - mtt RITZDANCING MARBLE VAR 4 3 ¢ — m C-G (BCC) RCL 98 -99-11 RCL 63 -64118 (5) C -G (BCC) — CUP 3513 RCL 98 -99 -11 CUP 3044 RCL 56 -57 -2 RESTAURANT CUP 2001 -04419 VAR 433 U�SUm� mom N W BROOKHURST mJ `ooI m °� PLAZA a CUP 3468 �� o VAR 1807 S G` (gCC) CHU RCI%L% -I1 -G (BCC) RCL 99 -1 SCHOOL RCL 6364- 118(4) RCL 6465 -IS RCL 5 &57 -2 RCL 96 -99-11 VAR 3610 VAR 2278 S CUP 3770 2240 � v AR VAR 433 VAR 2296 VAR 40 PIZZA MARKET — - SMALL SHOPS -- ORANGE AVENUE r T F I RCL 9 &99-11 ___ _ _. Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05008 Date July 25, 2005 Scale 1"=200' Requested By JIMMY NGUYEN Q.S. No. 40 REQUEST TO TERMINATE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000 -04277 (TO RETAIN A BANQUET HALL WITH SERVICE BUT NO SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON- PREMISES CONSUMPTION- 420-504 South Brookhurst Street - Seafood Place Restaurant 1931 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -D 1 -D. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000 -04277 - (Resolution) REQUEST FOR TERMINATION (Tracking No. CUP2005- 05008) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 1.5 acre property has a frontage of 205 feet on the east side of Brookhurst Street, a maximum depth of 275 feet and is located 492 feet north of the centerline of Orange Avenue (420 -504 South Brookhurst Street — Seafood Palace Restaurant). REQUEST (2) The property agent, J. Hua has submitted the attached letter dated May 2, 2005, requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 - 04277. BACKGROUND (3) The property is developed with a restaurant currently operating as a banquet facility in the C -G (BCC) (General Commercial; Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overlay) zone. This property is also located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridor Project Area of the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Area. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property and properties to the north, south and west (across Brookhurst Street) for Corridor Residential land uses; and the property to the east for Low Density Residential land uses. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 (to retain a banquet hall with service but no sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption) was approved by the Planning Commission on November 6, 2000. (5) Condition of Approval No. 27 of Resolution No. PC2005 -77 (to permit on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages and a banquet facility in conjunction with an existing restaurant) requires the termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 - 04277. (6) The property agent is requesting termination of this conditional use permit since this entitlement is no longer needed- RECOMMENDATION (7) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the meeting that Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 be terminated. srcua2000 -04277 Page 1 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION TERMINATING ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2000 -04277 (420 -504 SOUTH BROOKHURST STREET) WHEREAS, on November 6, 2000, the Anaheim Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. PC2000 -125, granted Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 to retain a banquet hall with service but no sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption; and WHEREAS, J. Hua property agent, has submitted a letter requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 to comply with the Condition of Approval No. 27 of Resolution No. PC2005 -77 for Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04974 (to permit on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages and a banquet facility in conjunction with an existing restaurant) approved by the Planning Commission on May 2, 2005, since this entitlement is no longer needed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby terminate all proceedings in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 -04277 on the basis of the foregoing findings. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION Cr1PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- Attachment - R &R 1 -D Jonathan Hua Seafood Place #2 420 S. Brookhurst St. Anaheim, CA 92804 May 2, 2005 Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Blv. Suite 162 Anaheim, `CA 92805 Dear Ms. Herrick: I am requesting the termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 2000 - 04277_ And in replacemept is the new Conditional Use Permit No. 2005- 049749( permit on- premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages and a banquet facility in conjunction with the existing restaurant) Once again, I would like to thank you for your supportive of the new C.U.P. We are looking forward to serve the community with our traditional Chinese food. Sincerely, Jonathan Hua ITEM NO. 1 -A A m R55�2p �DU m � �'p Y aG RG�s9- aUa o Z� a m 3 VPR1 wag a N O � VAR y0 g155 DU P P a o� GHP RjR sj 10 R`� 4288 PJ G.G VPR 31 1 �� V pORF wF AGO A Rol a�.,61A9 RG b 1,5 e� 2154 O OFF" E 7 A co X83 G Gc f as m OFF GE A V V Gc Il e 1o wN �cEN gH OPP� "/ + z y 305' Z cG lOM�1 _ G \CAP JPa199 2011 a�` as9 p i s . pp�a`H , °`14''0�°",5w1z n R `io5 .1x° EE5 ECM g(R i F � aMFFMO U P SMP1lry�D. gODV € Fa o Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00007 Subject Property Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Q.S. No. 72 REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APROVAL OF FINAL PLANS FOR A MIXED USE PROJECT ON PARCELS Al - A3, B, AND D WITHIN DOWNTOWN ANAHEIM. 203 South Anaheim Boulevard, 290 South Lemon Street, 180 and 435 West Center Street, and 291 West Broadway 1941 g O or.•� ego a s N cnWE � vP O � 0 00 2 y � L cG lOM�1 _ G \CAP JPa199 2011 a�` as9 p i s . pp�a`H , °`14''0�°",5w1z n R `io5 .1x° EE5 ECM g(R i F � aMFFMO U P SMP1lry�D. gODV € Fa o Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00007 Subject Property Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Q.S. No. 72 REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APROVAL OF FINAL PLANS FOR A MIXED USE PROJECT ON PARCELS Al - A3, B, AND D WITHIN DOWNTOWN ANAHEIM. 203 South Anaheim Boulevard, 290 South Lemon Street, 180 and 435 West Center Street, and 291 West Broadway 1941 g O or.•� ego a s N � � ac zazs s '�ts C a j N� gM�l G 8�" 1c 7 y c " N (' w000 6E � V1ll c 0� "� a cz`"M'az a c < cgMg "P yg�az cc looloa z Cop z41aA 0 laaa V 11g ac`aOEac ac` � � _ c coMME ac Cl� a a CUP�q A v� 17s OFF\D'T Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -E 1 -E REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 189 - (Motion) ADDENDUM TO KOLL ANAHEIM CENTER (PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED) b. FINAL PLAN REVIEW NO. 2005 -00007 - REQUEST FOR (Motion) REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF FINAL PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ON PARCELS Al —A3, B. AND D WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN MIXED USE OVERLAY ZONE c. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION OF FINAL PLANS (Motion) FOR PARCELS Al — 3. B. AND D SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This 2.5 -acre area is located at the southwest corner of Anaheim Boulevard and Center Street Promenade, with frontages of 173 feet on the west side of Anaheim Boulevard, 429 feet on the north side of Broadway, and 283 feet on the south side of Center Street Promenade (Parcels Al —A3 within Downtown Anaheim — 203 South Anaheim Boulevard, 290 South Lemon Street, and 180 West Center Street). This irregularly- shaped 0.93 -acre property is located at the northwest corner of Lemon Street and Broadway, with frontages of 120 feet on the west side of Lemon Street, 128 feet on the east side of Clementine Street, and 305 feet on the north side of Broadway (Parcel B within Downtown Anaheim — 291 West Broadway). This 2.9 -acre area is located at the southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue, with frontages of 377 feet on the east side of Harbor Boulevard and 233 feet on the south side of Lincoln Avenue (Parcel D within Downtown Anaheim — 435 West Center Street Promenade). REQUEST: (2) The Community Development Department requests review and recommendation to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency of final signage, lighting, and landscaping plans to allow for construction of a new Planned Mixed Use Development (Parcels Al —A3, B, and D) in Downtown Anaheim- BACKGROUND (3) This Community Development- initiated development project is being submitted to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item in response to the restructuring of the Housing and Community Development (formerly the Redevelopment and Housing) Commission. Conceptual design review of Redevelopment Agency projects is now under the purview of the Planning Commission. The intent of this plan review is to receive comments and direction from the Planning Commission pertaining to conceptual plans and design issues. The Commission's comments will be forwarded the City Council acting as the Redevelopment Agency. (4) The properties are currently zoned C -G (DMU) (General Commercial, Downtown Mixed Use Overlay) and are designated for Mixed Use on the City of Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map. The properties are located within the Alpha Downtown constituent sub -area of the Merged Redevelopment Project Area. Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -E (5) On October 29, 2002, the City Council approved a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) between the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency (ARA) and CIM California Urban Real Estate Fund, LP (CIM). On June 17, 2003, the City Council approved a first amendment to the DDA. On September 28, 2004, the City Council approved two Amended and Restated DDA's. The agreements provide for the conveyance of ARA -owned property and for the construction of a mixed -use project located within Downtown Anaheim. These properties are located within the Downtown Sub -area of Redevelopment Project Alpha. (6) Since April of 2002, ARA staff has conducted over 100 community meetings to receive comments on the downtown master plan and the CIM master plan, and to discuss the architectural design, historical elements, conceptual landscaping, and conceptual sign program for the CIM project. (7) On November 17, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved final site, floor, elevation, roof - mounted equipment, parking, and pedestrian and vehicle circulation plans for the construction of a Planned Mixed Use Development for Parcel B within Downtown Anaheim. On May 17, 2004, the Commission approved Tentative Tract Map No. 16679 (to establish a 5 -lot planned mixed -use residential /commercial subdivision on Parcel B). On December 13, 2004, the Commission approved Tentative Tract Map No. 16606 (to establish a 5 -lot, 135 -unit commercial /residential mixed use subdivision for Parcel D), Tentative Tract Map No. 16810 (to establish a 11 -lot planned mixed -use residential /commercial subdivision for Parcels Al —A3), and final site, floor, parking, elevation, roof - mounted equipment, and pedestrian and vehicle circulation plans for the construction of a Planned Mixed Use development on said parcels within Downtown Anaheim. (8) The Downtown Mixed Use Overlay Zone and the reclassification of approximately 36 acres of property to the overlay zone provides for the orderly development of "Planned Mixed Use Developments" in Downtown Anaheim. In lieu of development standards, development proposals to implement the overlay zone are subject to final plan review and approval- DISCUSSION (9) Submitted signage plans (Final Plan Nos. 1 - 20) indicate above - canopy tenant fascia signs, under - canopy tenant blade signs, building blade signs, building identification plaques, building address signs, directional signs, and roof signs for five mixed use buildings within Downtown Anaheim. Each building would have a signage theme which complements the historical characteristics of that particular building. However, even though each building will have its own individual theme, there will also be a unified sign criteria for all five buildings to ensure high quality materials and no sign clutter. A summary of the overall sign criteria contained in the submitted Tenant Sign Guidelines are as follows: Permitted sianage • Landlord will review and approve all new signage • Wall- mounted tenant fascia signs will have individual channel letters • Channel letters will have halo type lighting (concealed neon tube around the perimeter of the letters) • Blade signs will have solid panels with internal lighting and routed letters • Building addresses will have vinyl letters or etched onto glass • Window signs are allotted a maximum of 10% of the total window area • Tenants are allotted 1 sq. ft. of signage per linear foot of storefront, not to exceed 50 sq. ft. unless approved by the Landlord • Sign letters cannot exceed a height of 24 inches unless approved by the Landlord • Signs shall be maintained in good condition • Blade signs cannot exceed an area of 4 sq. ft. unless approved by the Landlord Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -E • Blade signs must maintain a minimum clearance height of 7 feet, 6 inches from the ground or floor Prohibited signage • Box channel letter forms with acrylic face • Vacuum formed luminous letters • Signs with exposed fastenings and unfinished edges • Paper, cardboard, styrofoam, or cloth • Exposed neon • Signs employing flashing, flickering, rotating, or moving lights • Signs painted directly on the storefront • Prohibited window graphics include credit card logos, posters or advertising, store hours, numbers, or graphics, and vinyl cut letters (10) Submitted lighting plans (Final Plan Nos. 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20) indicate various wall- mounted metal light fixtures for all five mixed use buildings. The lights will have a metal faceplate, a maximum height of 12 inches, and a maximum width of 16 inches. The sconce -type lights will provide illumination directly onto the buildings thereby providing a dramatic appearance from the street. (11) The conceptual landscape plan (Final Plan No. 21) for Parcel D indicates a row of palms and canopy trees along the Harbor Boulevard frontage, decorative pavement and hedges to provide privacy for each live /work unit along Harbor Boulevard, planters and seating in front of the retail units at the corners, shrubs at the east side of the building to screen the utility devices, plaza in front of the retail units along Center Street Promenade, and benches in front of the newsrack facility at the Harbor Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue intersection. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (12) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore, recommends that the previously- approved Addendum for the Koll Anaheim Center Environmental Impact Report serve as adequate environmental documentation for this request for final plan review upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the previously - approved Addendum together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- EVALUATION (13) The implementing DMU Overlay Zone requires final plans to be submitted for Planning Commission for review and approval as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. If the final plans are found to be in conformance with the DMU Overlay Zone and Design Guidelines, the Planning Commission may approve the final plans. (14) Downtown street improvements in the public right -of -way such as street trees, benches, wayfinding signage, public art, street lights, and other public amenities will be reviewed in conjunction with the Downtown Charette Master Plan at a later date. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 1 -E (15) The project has been reviewed for consistency with the DMU Overlay Zone performance standards and Design Guidelines and for compatibility with surrounding uses in the Downtown area. The submitted plans are consistent with the intent of the Guidelines so as to (i) encourage superior design mixed -use development projects that combine residential with non - residential uses as a means to continue downtown revitalization, (ii) encourage a full array of diverse land use types and structures, to ensure that the appearance and effects of buildings, improvements, and uses are harmonious with the character of the area in which they are located, and (iii) ensure consistency with and implement the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan for the Alpha Downtown Redevelopment Project Area and related plans for Downtown Anaheim- RECOMMENDATION (16) Planning Department staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received at the public meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, that the Planning Commission: (a) By motion, determine that the Addendum to previously - certified EIR No. 189 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. (b) By motion, approve Final Plan No. 2005 -00007 (as shown on Final Plan Nos. 1 through 21 on file in the Planning Department) based upon a finding that the Final Plans are in conformance with the DMU Overlay Design Guidelines. (c) By motion, recommend to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency approval of signage, lighting, and landscaping plans to develop a Planned Mixed Use Development for Parcels Al - A3, B, and D within Downtown Anaheim. Page 4 ITEM NO. 1 -A VACANT -90 -39 RS -2 1 DU T 1 DU T VACANT W N V RM -4 F � RCL 77 -78 -16 a W VAR 3419 RM-4 �¢ APTS. RCL 84 -85 -32 rn VAR 3487 UJ C -G APTS. m > RCL 63- 64-139 �a RCL 61 -62 -20 a C 3 UP 0 2 0 Uw I VACANT F� 741 IE I 36 VAR 3673 RM-0 PCN 91 -02 RCL 76 -77 -35 RCL 29 VAR 2867 APTS. RM -4 VAR R 256 T RCL 69 -70 -04 1 D RCL66 -67 -29 (: RM -4 RCL 62-63 -109 APTS. RM-2 RCL 87 -8849 TERANIMAR DRIVE 1 DU GLEN HOLLY DR I RM -4 RCL 69 -70 -C VAR 2107 APTS. RM -2 RCL 74 -75 -33 RCL 65-66 -116 (/AR 2709 VAR 1797 7E RS -2 x x 1 DU EACH Z N Q 0 N Q � W C6 W W � � W � ° D ° M S-2 M R 1 DU EACH RM -4 CL 69 -70 -21 VAR 2133 APTS. RM -? Cn VI H D O x U U W o ASC F- Cn Cn W Q CO F- U Q w Q W DI ° Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 (READVERTISED) Subject Property Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 Date: July 25, 2005 Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: ODON MARC[ Q.S. No. 10 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141 - REQUESTS RECLASSIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION) ZONE TO THE RM -3 (RESIDENTIAL, MUTIPLE- FAMILY) ZONE, OR A LESS INTENSE ZONE. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951 - REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16833 - TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road 1901 T 1 DU EACH RCL 2004 -00141 RM-4 CUP 2004 -04951 RCL 29 T 1 DU EACH VAR R 256 S. APTS. 1 DU EACH �� N ww wm wae C) 198' BALL ROAD I RM -4 RCL 69 -70 -C VAR 2107 APTS. RM -2 RCL 74 -75 -33 RCL 65-66 -116 (/AR 2709 VAR 1797 7E RS -2 x x 1 DU EACH Z N Q 0 N Q � W C6 W W � � W � ° D ° M S-2 M R 1 DU EACH RM -4 CL 69 -70 -21 VAR 2133 APTS. RM -? Cn VI H D O x U U W o ASC F- Cn Cn W Q CO F- U Q w Q W DI ° Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 (READVERTISED) Subject Property Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 Date: July 25, 2005 Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: ODON MARC[ Q.S. No. 10 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141 - REQUESTS RECLASSIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION) ZONE TO THE RM -3 (RESIDENTIAL, MUTIPLE- FAMILY) ZONE, OR A LESS INTENSE ZONE. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951 - REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16833 - TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road 1901 T 1 DU EACH W Q z w U) w L 1 t ry4S IMAR DRIVE - x D z P` 1 i- 1 1� Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 (READVERTISED) Subject Property Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 Date: July 25, 2005 Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: ODON MARC[ Q.S. No. 10 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141 - REQUESTS RECLASSIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION) ZONE TO THE RM -3 (RESIDENTIAL, MUTIPLE- FAMILY) ZONE, OR A LESS INTENSE ZONE. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951 - REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16833 - TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road 1901 r 1 1� Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 (READVERTISED) Subject Property Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 Date: July 25, 2005 Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: ODON MARC[ Q.S. No. 10 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141 - REQUESTS RECLASSIFICATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION) ZONE TO THE RM -3 (RESIDENTIAL, MUTIPLE- FAMILY) ZONE, OR A LESS INTENSE ZONE. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951 - REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16833 - TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 16 -UNIT, ATTACHED AND DETACHED, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road 1901 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 2 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 2b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141 (Resolution) 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951 (Resolution) 2d. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16833 (Motion) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 1.4 -acre property has a frontage of 198 feet on the north side of Ball Road, a maximum depth of 277 feet and is located 741 feet east of the centerline of Western Avenue (3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of the following: Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 — to reclassify this property from the T (Transition) zone to the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) zone, or less intense zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 —to permit a 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision. Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 to establish a 1 -lot, 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision- BACKGROUND (3) This item was continued from the February 7, February 23, March 7, April 4, May 2 and June 13, 2005, Planning Commission meetings to allow the architect to redesign the project to comply with the Corridor Residential Design Guidelines. (4) This property is currently developed with three (3) single - family homes and zoned T (Transition). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Residential Corridor land uses. The properties to the east and west are also designated for Corridor Residential land uses and properties to the north and south (across Ball Road) are designated for Low Density Residential land uses. (5) There are no prior zoning actions pertaining to this property. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (6) The applicant proposes to reclassify this property from the T zone to the RM -3 zone in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan in order to construct a 16 -unit attached and detached residential subdivision. SR- RCL2004 -00141 Finalakv.doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 2 (7) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the following: Development Standards Proposed Project RM -3 Zone Standards Site Area 1.4 acres 54,847 s . ft. N/A Minimum Lot Width 198 feet 70 feet Number of Dwelling Units 16 18* Average Land Area per Unit 3,428 s . ft. 3,350 s . ft.* Lot Coverage 31% 45% Average Recreation /Leisure Area per Unit 374 sq. ft. per unit 5,990 total 350 sq. ft. per unit 5,600 total *Because the proposal includes a mixture of attached and attached units, the Residential Planned Unit Development standards are used to evaluate the project. The maximum density allowed by these standards is 13 units /acre or 3,350 square feet. (8) The site plan and tract map indicate the following setbacks: * Modification to standards is allowed in order to achieve good project design, privacy, livability and compatibility with surrounding uses. (9) The site plan further indicates a setback of 8 to 12 feet between the detached residences and 48 to 60 feet between the clusters of attached housing. Code requires a minimum of 15 to 30 feet between the detached residences and a minimum of 15 to 40 feet between the attached residential unit buildings. The code further allows modification to these standards in order to achieve good project design, privacy, livability, and compatibility with surrounding uses. The site plan further indicates front yard patios for the townhouse units fronting on Ball Road. These patios would be enclosed with a maximum 3 -foot high wall or fence. Code permits fences at a maximum of three feet in height within the required front yard setback. The petitioner has indicated that they would construct a 6 -foot block high wall along the north, east, and west property lines. (10) The tentative tract map indicates the subdivision would consist of 1 airspace residential lot. The map further indicates the attached residences would be located at the front and center portion of the site facing Ball Road and the detached single - family residences would be located to the rear (north) portion of the property. (11) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 2 through 4) for the attached townhouse units indicate 2 -story units consisting of a living room, dining room, kitchen, balcony, patio, bedrooms, bathrooms, and attached 2 -car garages with laundry/utility area. (12) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 5 and 6) for the detached units indicate 2 -story units consisting of a foyer, family room and living room, dining room, kitchen, nook, 3 bedrooms, 3 bathrooms, laundry/service room, tech center and a 2 -car attached garage. Page 2 Proposed Structural Code - Required Direction Setbacks Structural Setbacks* Adjacent Zonin North (adjacent to single-family homes ) 20 feet 35 feet RS -2 East (adjacent to single-family home ) 10 feet 35 feet T South (adjacent to Ball Road ) 20 feet 20 feet N/A West (adjacent to single-family home ) 10 feet 35 feet T * Modification to standards is allowed in order to achieve good project design, privacy, livability and compatibility with surrounding uses. (9) The site plan further indicates a setback of 8 to 12 feet between the detached residences and 48 to 60 feet between the clusters of attached housing. Code requires a minimum of 15 to 30 feet between the detached residences and a minimum of 15 to 40 feet between the attached residential unit buildings. The code further allows modification to these standards in order to achieve good project design, privacy, livability, and compatibility with surrounding uses. The site plan further indicates front yard patios for the townhouse units fronting on Ball Road. These patios would be enclosed with a maximum 3 -foot high wall or fence. Code permits fences at a maximum of three feet in height within the required front yard setback. The petitioner has indicated that they would construct a 6 -foot block high wall along the north, east, and west property lines. (10) The tentative tract map indicates the subdivision would consist of 1 airspace residential lot. The map further indicates the attached residences would be located at the front and center portion of the site facing Ball Road and the detached single - family residences would be located to the rear (north) portion of the property. (11) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 2 through 4) for the attached townhouse units indicate 2 -story units consisting of a living room, dining room, kitchen, balcony, patio, bedrooms, bathrooms, and attached 2 -car garages with laundry/utility area. (12) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 5 and 6) for the detached units indicate 2 -story units consisting of a foyer, family room and living room, dining room, kitchen, nook, 3 bedrooms, 3 bathrooms, laundry/service room, tech center and a 2 -car attached garage. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 2 (13) Vehicular access would be provided by a new private street from Ball Road. The site plan indicates 48 parking spaces available within the subdivision, including 2 garage spaces for each unit, 5 driveway spaces, and 16 open (guest) parking spaces. Code requires a total of 44 parking spaces based on the requirement of 225 spaces for each 2- bedroom attached unit (225 x 6 units = 13.5 spaces), 3 spaces for each 3- bedroom unit (3 x 10 units = 30 spaces). (14) Conceptual elevation drawings (Exhibit Nos. 7 through 11) indicate 2 story structures for both the attached and detached units. Craftsman style architecture would be incorporated throughout the site. The units would include flat, concrete -tile roofs, wood fascias and corbels, exterior plaster and HardiPlank siding. Features such as raised entry porches and French patio doors would be utilized for the town homes. Decorative elements would include features such as wood lattice, wood beams, shutters and accent trim with keystones. (15) The conceptual landscape scheme is indicated on the site plan. The plan shows 6 parkway trees and 9 trees within the landscape setback adjacent to Ball Road. Code requires one 24 -inch box evergreen tree for every 20 feet of street frontage to be planted in the landscape setback adjacent to Ball Road (198 feeU20 = 9). A layered landscaped theme is required to provide depth and variety within the landscaped setback. Code further requires that 50% of all shrubbery be a minimum of five (5) gallons in size at the time of planting. The plan also indicates large trees within the rear yards of the detached residences and throughout the side setbacks along the east and west property lines in order to provide a buffer from the existing single - family residences. As a recommended condition of approval, the applicant will be required to submit final detailed landscape plans for staff review. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (16) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Planning Commission that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- EVALUATION (17) The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element designates this property for Corridor Residential land uses, with a density range of 0 to 13 dwelling units per acre. The petitioner proposes a reclassification from the T (Transition) Zone to the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) Zone to construct 5 detached single - family units and 11 attached condominium dwelling units at a density of 12.3 dwelling units per acre in compliance with the maximum density allowed by the General Plan and consistent with the type of housing envisioned for sites with this designation. The proposed development would be compatible with the Corridor Residential land use designation for the site and serves the City's long term housing needs by providing units as called out in the General Plan. In addition, this property is identified as a housing opportunity site within the Housing Element of the General Plan. (18) Detached one - family dwellings (detached condominiums) and attached single family residences are permitted in the RM -3 Zone, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit for a Residential Planned Unit Development under authority of Code Section 18.06.160 pertaining to residential planned unit developments. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 2 (19) Following is an analysis of the proposed density (dwelling units per acre) of the subject property compared with ten other recently- approved detached condominium projects in the City. Because this is a blended project, (detached and attached product) the density is the most comparable with the Brandywine Development project located at 425 North Magnolia Avenue: Project Zoning No. of Units Site Area Net Density acres per Acre* Proposed Project RM -3 16 1.4 12.3 Brandywine Development RM -2 114 9.8 12.3 425 N. Magnolia Avenue The Olson Company RM -2 21 2.50 8.4 3302 West Ball Road Rio Vista RM -2 26 2.90 9.0 226 -230 North Rio Vista Brandywine Development RM -2 12 1.3 9.2 820 S. Magnolia Avenue Knott/Ball RM -2 18 2.1 8.6 832 South Knott Ave. Peppertree Walk RM -2 68 5.67 11.9 1925 W. Lincoln Ave. Linhaven RM -2 60 6.3 9.5 2144 W. Lincoln Ave. Cypress Infill RM -2 41 3.0 13.6 NEC Cypress St.& Olive St. StonyBrook 736 South Beach RM -2 7 10.9 Boulevard and 2966 West .64 Ston brook Drive Lincoln /Brookhurst RM -2 57 6.25 9.1 112 -218 S. Brookhurst St. (20) Modification to standards is allowed in order to achieve good project design, privacy, livability, and compatibility with surrounding uses, as outlined in Code Section 18.06.160. The project varies from the Code with regard to setbacks (side and rear) and the distance between the detached residential buildings. (21) Staff believes the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and that the minor deviations from the Code as provided in Section 18.06.160 would achieve a good project designed to enhance the privacy and livability for residents within and around the project, and create a project that is compatible and consistent with surrounding land uses. The proposed setbacks for the rear yard of the detached units abutting the single - family homes to the north are double the setback that would be required for a typical RS -2 (Single - family) zoned property. The side setbacks proposed along the east and west property lines are also double the setback that would be required for a typical single - family zoned property. Because the proposed use would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed and because the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area, staff recommends approval of the request as conditioned. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 2 (22) Staff attended two (2) community meetings for the proposed development. Several of the neighbors residing in the single - family neighborhood to the north are in opposition to this project. Concerns were raised pertaining to traffic, parking, distance of the new homes to the rear (north) property line, density and window placement of the proposed development. Staff has also received a petition with 134 signatures, indicating opposition to this request- FINDINGS (23) Before the Planning Commission grants any conditional use permit for a residential planned unit development, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) The uses within the project are compatible; (b) New buildings or structures related to the project are compatible with the scale, mass, bulk, and orientation of existing buildings in the surrounding area, provided the existing buildings conform with the provisions of this title; (c) Vehicular and pedestrian access are adequate; (d) The project is consistent with applicable design guidelines adopted by the City; (e) The size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area; (f) The traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; (g) The project complies with the General Plan and any applicable zoning or specific plan; and (h) The granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim" (24) "The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to include in all motions approving, or recommending approval of a tract map, a specific finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan. Further, the law requires that the Commission make any of the following findings when denying or recommending denial of a tract map: 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 2 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision." RECOMMENDATION: (25) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission approve the petitioner's request and adopt the resolution and tentative tract map including the findings and conditions contained herein. Page 6 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00141 BE GRANTED (3117, 3121 AND 3125 WEST BALL ROAD) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for Reclassification for real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows: PARCEL 1: THE EAST 66 FEET OF THE WEST 264 FEET OF THE SOUTH ONE -HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE - QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE - QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE - QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ORANGE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 2: THE WEST 66 FEET OF THE EAST 132 FEET OF THE WEST 264 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. EXCEPTING THEREFROM A 3.4 INTEREST IN A TO A WATER WELL AND PUMPING PLANT LOCATING ON SAID LAND. PARCEL3: THE EAST 66 FEET OF THE EAST 132 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ORANGE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 2005 at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 "Procedures ", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed reclassification and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts 1 - That the petitioner proposes reclassification of subject property from the T (Transition) zone to the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) zone, or less intense zone. 2. That the Anaheim General Plan designates the properties to the east and west for Corridor Residential land uses and properties to the north and south (across Ball Road) are designated for Low Density Residential land uses. 3. That the proposed reclassification of subject property is necessary and /or desirable for the orderly and proper development of the community. 4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does properly relate to the zones and their permitted uses locally established in close proximity to subject property and to the zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout the community. CR \PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- 5. That the proposed reclassification of subject property requires the dedication and improvement of abutting streets and alleys in accordance with the Circulation Element of the General Plan, due to the anticipated increase in traffic which will be generated by the intensification of land use. 6. That "* indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify subject property from the T (Transition) zone to the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) zone, or less intense zone; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve the subject Petition for Reclassification to authorize an amendment to the Zoning Map of the Anaheim Municipal Code to exclude the above - described property from the T (Transition) zone and to incorporate said described property into the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) zone, or less intense zone upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That prior to introduction of an ordinance rezoning subject property, a preliminary title report shall be furnished to the Planning Services Division showing the legal vesting of title, a legal description and containing a map of the property. 2. That prior to placement of an ordinance rezoning subject property on an agenda for City Council consideration, Condition No. 1, above - mentioned, shall be completed. The City Council may approve or disapprove a zoning ordinance at its discretion. If the ordinance is disapproved, the procedure set forth in Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.60.140 shall apply. The provisions or rights granted by this resolution shall become null and void by action of the Planning Commission unless said conditions are complied with within one (1) year from the date of this resolution, or such further time as the Planning Commission may grant. 3. That completion of these reclassification proceedings is contingent upon approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16833. 4. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such conditions, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution shall not constitute a rezoning of, or a commitment by the City to rezone, the subject property; any such rezoning shall require an ordinance of the City Council, which shall be a legislative act, which may be approved or denied by the City Council at its sole discretion. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or -2- PC2005- unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION Ip\1111Ix.9i SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2005- [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04951 BE GRANTED (3117, 3121 AND 3125 WEST BALL ROAD) WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL 1: THE EAST 66 FEET OF THE WEST 264 FEET OF THE SOUTH ONE - HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE - QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE - QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE - QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ORANGE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 2: THE WEST 66 FEET OF THE EAST 132 FEET OF THE WEST 264 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. EXCEPTING THEREFROM A 3.4 INTEREST IN A TO A WATER WELL AND PUMPING PLANT LOCATING ON SAID LAND. PARCEL 3: THE EAST 66 FEET OF THE EAST 132 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ORANGE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.06.160 to construct a 16 -unit attached and detached residential condominium subdivision. 2. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located as staff believes the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and that the minor deviations from the Code as provided in Section 18.06.160 would achieve a well designed and livable project, while being compatible and consistent with surrounding land uses. The proposed use would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed and because the size and shape of the site for the project is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area. 3. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area as the proposed project because the project would be implementing the Corridor Residential land use designation of the General Plan. This Cr\PC2005- -1- PC2005- designation was environmentally analyzed as part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) performed as part of the General Plan Update approved by the City Council on May 25, 2004. 4. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 5. That * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct a 16 -unit attached and detached residential condominium subdivision and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That roll -up garage doors shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Said doors shall be installed and maintained as shown on submitted plans. 2. That final landscape and fencing plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. The fencing plan shall incorporate a six (6) foot high block wall along the north, east, and west property lines. Said plans shall show minimum 24 -inch box size evergreen, trees along the north property line (two (2) trees per property). The landscape plan shall reflect a three (3) foot high landscaped berm and incorporating a layered landscape planting design along Ball Road within the street setback. Any decision made by the Planning Services Division regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendation item. All trees shall be properly and professionally maintained by the homeowners association to ensure healthy growth. 3. That final building elevation plans, a colors and materials board, and street presentation plans, showing building articulation and architectural embellishments for all elevations, shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Any decision made by the Planning Services Division regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendation item. 4. That all air - conditioning facilities and other ground- mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent residential properties. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 5. That all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully screened by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 6. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 7. That clothes washer and dryer hookups shall be incorporated into each condominium dwelling unit and shall be shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 8. That this Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 approval and recordation of Tentative Tract Map No. 16833, now pending- -2- PC2005- 9. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 10. That the locations for future above - ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be subject to the review and approval of the appropriate City departments. 11. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. That landscape and /or hardscape screening of all pad- mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 12. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 13. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 609 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 14. That the driveway on Ball Road shall be reconstructed with 10 -foot radius curb cut returns as required by the City Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 15. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 16. That an on -site trash truck turn - around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 610 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Trash truck turn - around shall be provided through each construction phase of the project. Said turn - around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 17. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 18. That a comprehensive trash management program shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said program shall include information on the following: a detailed, scaled site plan showing the storage and collection areas for automated trash barrels for each unit, the location of any trash enclosure with enclosure details drawings, and truck access. 19. That prior to grading plan approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number. The applicant shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City review on request. 20. That prior to grading plan approval, the developer shall submit a geotechnical report that meets the requirements for a "Screening Investigation for Liquefaction Potential" as identified in DMG special publication 117 "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California If the findings of the screening investigation cannot demonstrate the absence of liquefaction hazards, then the comprehensive quantitative evaluation shall be conducted to develop mitigation recommendations to effectively reduce the hazard to an acceptable level- -3- PC2005- 21. That prior to grading plan approval, the applicant shall submit a Drainage Study prepared by a registered professional Civil Engineer in the State of California. The Study shall be based upon and reference the latest edition of the Orange County Hydrology Manual the applicable City of Anaheim Master Plan of Drainage for the project area. All drainage sub -area boundaries per the Master Plan for Drainage shall be maintained. The Study shall include: an analysis of 10 -, 25- and 100 -year storm frequencies; an analysis of all drainage impacts to the existing storm drain system based upon the ultimate project build -out condition; and address whether off -site and/ or on -site drainage improvements (such as detention/ retention basins or surface runoff reduction) will be required to prevent downstream properties from becoming flooded. 22. That the City of Anaheim Sewer Impact Mitigation fee for the Combined West Anaheim Area, Zone A shall be paid. The mitigation fee is currently $206 /unit for single family and multi - family developments. 23. That prior to the issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: • Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs, and • Describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 24. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: • Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. • Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. • Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMPs. 25. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside of the street setback areas in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector before submittal for building permits. 26. That since this project has a common landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed and shall comply with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 27. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. 28. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards Specifications- Any water service and /or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The owner /developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line- 4- PC2005- 29. That prior to submitting water improvement plans, the developer shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on -site water system to meet the project's water demands and fire protection requirements. 30. That water improvement plans shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division for approval and a performance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney, and shall be posted with the City of Anaheim. 31. That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the developer /owner shall submit to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall occur in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations. 32. That water improvement plans shall indicate two separate connections to the public water main and that a minimum clearance of five (5) feet from the water main to the curb and gutter and a minimum clearance of 10 (10) feet from the water main to the sewer line shall be maintained. 33. That an address monument and /or complex map shall be positioned to be readable from the main vehicular or pedestrian access points without causing vehicular stacking and shall be illuminated during hours of darkness. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 34. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 11, as conditioned herein. 35. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 36. That prior to approval of a grading plan, Condition Nos. 19, 20, 21 and 23, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 37. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 24, 28 and 34, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 38. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application- -5- PC2005- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning Provisions — General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2005. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -6- PC2005- July 25, 2005 Marci Odon 3117 West Ball Road Anaheim, CA 92804 Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. 2a. CEQA Negative Declaration (Readvertisment) 2b. Reclassification No. 2004.00141 2c. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004.04951 2d. Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 Owner: Marci Odon, 3117 West Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92804 Agent: Walter Bowman, Bonanni Development, 5622 Research Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Location: 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road. Property is 1.4 acres, having a frontage of 198 feet on the north side of Ball Road located 741 feet east of the centerline of Western Avenue. Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 - Request reclassification of the property from the T (Transition) zone to the RM -3 (Residential, Multiple - Family) zone, or less intense zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04951 — Request to permit a 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision. Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 —To establish a 1 -lot 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision. Commissioner JO (offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner X>Otand MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit a 16- unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision and does hereby approve the (Environmental findings) upon finding that the CEQA Negative Declaration serves as adequate environmental documentation for this request for Tentative Tract Map No. 16833 to permit a 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision. The Planning Commission has X>O(, have been environmentally - cleared by this prior environmental documentation. A project- specific Initial Study has been prepared and additional environmental review and mitigation has been provided as needed pursuant to the procedures outlined for subsequent projects under a Program EIR. CommissionerX'Koffered a motion, seconded by CommissionerX>O(and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the proposed tentative map, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan, and does therefore approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16833, to establish a 1 -lot 16 -unit attached and detached single - family residential subdivision, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder (Subdivision Map Act, Section 66499.40). 2. That a maintenance covenant, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with approved Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 3. That the legal property owner shall execute a Subdivision Agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, to complete the required public improvements at the legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney and City Engineer and then recorded concurrently with the final map. 4. That all units shall be assigned street addresses by the Building Division. Street names for any new public or private street (if requested by the developer or required by the City) shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Division. 5. That the access drives, sanitary sewer and storm drain within the development shall be privately maintained. Improvement plans for the sanitary sewer, and private drainage system shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division concurrently with the final map. 6. That the sewer connection and mitigation fees shall be paid. 7. That the property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim, on the Final Map, an easement 53 -feet in width from the centerline of Ball Road for road, public utility and other public purposes. 8. That the developer shall submit a cash payment in an amount determined by the City Engineer to pay for the required street improvements along Ball Road. The cash payment shall be paid to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division prior to the issuance of building permits. 9. That prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: • Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. 10. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: • Demonstrate that all structural BMP's described in the project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. • Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMP's describe in the project WQMP. • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved project WQMP are available onsite. • Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMP's. 11. That approval of this parcel map is granted subject to the approval of Reclassification No. 2004 -00141 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 - 04951, now pending. 12. That prior to final parcel map approval, Condition Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 11 above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 13. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim Planning Commission cc: Walter Bowman, Bonanni Dev., 5622 Research Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 ExcerptTTM16833.doc Item No. 2 We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences,• limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the future residents. Signature collected by Print Name Address Telephone Signature T ohn iV_ 'fou 3 %M /o4 2 S 278`f � S z � �� S • C1 � (7��+� i -Z &OI TO Z7 Z6 s Petition We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the future residents. Signature collected by Print Name Address Telephone VesIt Q J / J � Signature � _ ll�S "1.� 5`S�G ✓. r`� wY � � /`f SZ77G l �" t "� L��C��. Lax S- mdv�. 3© 9 A �a 1 0-2 5: Scz Petition _ Page of .� We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the futu reside . Signature collected by Print Name Address Telephone Signature J17tv--�- �UC� 3��k�i yn�� 'd�- ��33 �? ; j M cY hL �(�1 1 e 4° V- V r //n� - x/33 n D o �i k c 'St � 91x1 r I AN/ MwDi� � � e A n"IFix A 44 1 0 �{ ic n n l,l��i? �,I 310 y etJ • Te � � 9 4;m1/r . �,(n9�Pi%n CA �Zdf� r�ra�o•�� leanv �n c �`- sue' -� X91 Petition Page of We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the future residen s. Signature collected by -w �` ✓ �� Print Name Address Telephone Signature ;D6?j ®s V &S q oC - 3174 iA/ -12;?Z41j tM Paz - W - -77 92 /9 1 4AW t4SfP Z- 31-7f V74C*Wi/n4k Plt y'95•-� - AI,04 /ice kAt,4, Uot A I I G L e2 /'L/ c N iv�ia 5 I bra L Cl Petition Page of _ We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Plan quig Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the fyfure Oesidents. / Signature collected by Print Name Address Telephone Signature 3osx w, 1301e rM s l� � 4 -�40 ,Jef r' �a v V Petition Page of We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the future res dents. Signature collected by Print Name Address Telephone Si nature (70 Ke-VZ 1303 V 7, � X 7 9 C 64 �'55 -�/� ra e 16 ��Olatl 12-1 7W -795 U �/ r� • �` �� /sir �� 3 C - e< 33i 5. mostLY m 710 4g5'17Zg L ` <O� �P' �,uT� 1"S`b� S• r�s•�¢zs�,, s• -. Ar»aE+�,N, CZ�Y 993 —�7z9 G��✓< --� • - Z a 95° z T Petition Page / of _ We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the fut residents ts. r Signature collected by !.� /�� Print Name Address Telephone Signature I DA4A io - Q, ii \je,4 a Q e- v J 1lv I� �. r7l _ y 6 z 96 m �� -A oGG S`'a7 G ��lP�� L✓��OfRS'� �. .S /��' G /�� i S� SL- 6f'�Z�� y _. Do NN {� . Garc� SO% W 9 s - i ©s 1 p, )WR +S LILA � ////CY Petition Page of We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the f re r sidgnts/ Signature collected by Print Name Address Telephone Signature U) L C A ed // � 60V 4 o+d&r7 h d/� 19A�i9/l(M 01V A'2c � %SS �� &)?Z / � d Dian-t- Sorgen 2733 W- SAVOY PL. ANAN+ "I (714) 327 -S3y) ¢ 1 FS �4R,tl�E �.1� .$. C2iD<'t t[Lf1Y �fY 6/ff G 6 /77 /IS✓G�'�z��'' — C 2r� X92 /�i�, ✓�sr �w ��rA�I 7 'y — �f UT ed j -7i41 sas- 7fr s7 67 31 5 w_e 1� i - 0 - 7 ((- of ..;�µf� Ka�rc ✓/t� �tL9c�✓at l��ci�� SU!o ` J Petition Page of We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planninq Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the f ure sidpnt�( Signature collected by Print Name Address Telephone Signature a W&- 4 �XeA C el 3o52 6 ei� C� dal I,' I 5- tl , r- 7/ # 3 -10 �'p 3Lol V,J. G -10 pvz�Il 1 . EJ Q � Tq MM I Kkk4i , 15AIIA5 L,.�beNVw - 3 1 0 0 ()rL J ©qA( 6P1,fx N evI- �/u No A-�-u ac 715 E#gi �. A 1 ta) 1 O(aq4 - 'C >e '�I 3;?- a_ Cz� �Z , �� - - /( #, -� z 7 Petition Page —/ We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the f�t�r rr nts. Signature collected by �� Print Name Address Telephone Signature I.�/C� C7 A u-bi N E-k 3 r 37 T5re, A f P ! oil &R7 -3G ` CO lejr1 GrAUIileey C " o n 2 v, 1 3 ie rgP , 1 Vv,wrDr, S' as -Sg 3)'S T 5 (3) � USS A�- 31V 7 _rA i 0�C. Uq�-10 12 1-ec' e-iaa2 '31 /o / �� 2 -/�N suAL� / - .Z X - Petition Page j- of CL We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the future residents. Signature collected by C l ) � Print Name Address Telephone Signature -7/c/ �e ff, ,LJ �32-1 , )&L�kMW') 54 WUDAY 5�, Il q b(q-6Z�5 Aym-f�Aed DayOe hl ZI A r 1 5t , ,¢ , . D�tf/ 6, u< d' /d%Ce). %ie/��0/9� 7�y�a�, A7�e a ter/ S7 ► (-l� Altai lZau �STr'NB U, �!5 - jig 151L � ��inGu I Petition Page q of We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the f ture sidents. Signature collected by U -Q'A' Print Name Address Telephone Signature 6ILL CA tzc y 303 W T ANrL 1-2 6� 1 ;, 1� C cf A Uv�y 1 &' ' G- ,.��' 5 Q q7 LO, rose a - ad � � a r C-- -5 Oka iJE 71 YIY 26 /v y l E TfILtLIJ d'el ei /��Pa- E ° Klie'�,t[/ � 9 -09' 3 .. �t1eMw i� Klt1 3IL /Zt a,bv ,a 8z1 -o8ti3 s + .� �cX Petition Page Z of We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We -also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the future resi4ents. Signature collected by Print Name Address Telephone Si gnature ��le Z 2 5Ln5' Al k& I YQAtA AA -4115 w &�v�� Oa k nn 2o�ek't toy- q12- S. ��Gl f��DL°. 7 -3 732 l��lir1 ` /d1 �L`E1 e o.� Li'1�1 Q�„, g 7r`f- �:j) -fs)3 y 3/Vk W ($IE✓ /JK A IA (",I- z�a ?IkO /2Yo L. ( -1 /z >o 2 v/ 31 u . /I a/Z ,A x 'j /-, e , "_ c..a e y 2 P Z' cc h 4i 2-1-6ti Pa/P! Ali A Petition Page _�_ of We the undersigned, homeowners and residents, who currently reside in surrounding vicinities of 3117, 3121 and 3125 West Ball Road, oppose the demolition of existing residential structures for the purposes of developing a 16 -unit condo development. We ask that the plan be reconsidered to minimize the density limiting the number of units not to exceed 9 per acre, to maximize the quality of the construction. We also ask the developer to provide more than one guest parking per unit, 30 feet from back fence and 20 feet from side fences, limiting windows facing north in the back structures with the exception of bathroom and stairwells, and that the surrounding fences be eight foot in height with mature trees or ,shrubs. We petition the Planning Commission to consider the quality of life for the existing and the future residents. Signature collected by n e2 Print Name A Address T Telephone S Signature l0 �� CAE/V tO /I/ \)c 9 9& € qz 1 ' 'V U4\ 4+o 1 14 �Z7 113 W (3 , xi S �e� h�/l a a �ais8 0& K K*W-6 31 ? ?Ifi 4� 3 C9l( a a� Ufa 731 G er-e = =5 c L z z -- sa. 71V sue coo r' 5 5/ I r G L �7r - -a7 f L1J I PA ITEM NO. 1 -A D Zoning Code Amendment 2005 -00040 Subject Property Date: June 27, 2005 Scale: Graphic Requested By: CITY OF ANAHEIM Q.S. No. City -wide REQUEST TO AMEND THE ZONING CODE PERTAINING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF BUILDING AND GROUND - MOUNTED TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES ON PUBLIC RECREATIONAL FACILITIES WITHIN THE SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY, OPEN SPACE AND RESIDENTIAL ZONES, TO CLARIFY THE DEFINITION OF CERTAIN TYPES OF TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES, AND TO ADD STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO THE TELECOMMUNICATION ANTENNA REVIEW PERMIT PROCESS- City-wide 1 875 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 3 3a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 3b. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -00040 (Motion for continuance) LOCATION: (1) Citywide- REQUEST (2) This is a City- initiated (Planning and Community Services Departments) request to amend the Zoning Code pertaining to the establishment of building and ground- mounted telecommunication facilities on public recreational facilities (parks and golf courses) within the Scenic Corridor Overlay, Open Space and Residential zones, to clarify the definition of certain types of telecommunication facilities, and to add standard conditions of approval to the Telecommunication Antenna Review Permit process- BACKGROUND (3) This item was continued from the June 27, 2005, Commission meeting to allow staff time to prepare comprehensive changes to the Code to address the objectives of both the Community Services and Planning Departments. (4) In 2003, the Mayor directed the Community Services Department to assess the feasibility of working with telecommunication providers to establish facilities on City -owned parks to generate income to off -set park operating and maintenance costs. In January 2004, the Community Services Department sent out Requests for Proposals to cellular phone service companies for the development of cellular antennas to be placed at various City park facilities. In April of 2004, the Community Services Department prepared a memo to the City Manager's Office requesting permission to begin the negotiation process with the providers. Although the City already had several telecommunication facilities on City - owned properties, there was no policy regarding lease terms, time frames, or monetary compensation, etc., to be included in the lease. In an effort to streamline the process, the Community Services Department in August 2004, initiated the development of a standardized lease agreement that would be used City -wide for any provider proposing to establish a telecommunication facility on a City -owned park or other facility operated by the Community Services Department. In December 2004, the Community Services Department provided a memo to the City Manager /City Council on the status of completing the standardized agreement. In March 2005, the agreement was distributed to all vendors who had expressed an interest in a park location. (5) In May of this year, the Planning Commission approved a policy interpretation request (see attached staff report) pertaining to building- mounted telecommunication facilities within the SC (Scenic Corridor) Overlay Zone to determine that telecommunication facilities located on athletic field lights in conjunction with a recreation facility (park or community center) be considered "building- mounted ". Staff requested this policy direction from the Planning Commission as an interim measure until a zoning code text amendment could be prepared to allow Community Services staff to continue to negotiate with wireless providers on telecommunications facilities at Toyon and Canyon Rim Parks. ZCA2005 -00040 072505 JR.do Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 3 (6) Staff is recommending a continuance of this item to the August 8, 2005, Commission meeting to allow staff more time to prepare comprehensive changes to Section 18.38 (Supplemental Uses) to address the objectives of both the Community Services Department and the Planning Department. RECOMMENDATION: (7) Staff recommends the Planning Commission, by motion, continue this item to the August 8, 2005, Commission meeting. Page 2 ITEM NO. 1 -A ., -� V J -- - - - - -- RCL 66 -67 -14 ---- - - RCL 56 -57 -93 PARKING �� - - -- -- —� CUP 4141 �� 04 -04906 CUP 3957 �� 2862 CUP 3406 3386 BANK \� RCL 2004 -00129 4729 O -L(PTM U) PARKING �\ \\ \ O -L(PTM U) OFFICE BLDG. O�(PTMU) CUP 3957 RCL 9U91-n 7404939 CUP 690 RCL 66-67-14 1-04906 RCL 56 -5793 O -L(PTM U) ( � 562 T -CUP 200604260 O -L(PTM U) FOOD I \ 427 CUP 4141 CARL'S JR. COURT -00002 CUP REST. USE CUP6% JTIAL TPM NO 97 -155 INIUM DENNY S REST_ (CUP 3356T) KATELLA AVENUE —432' 318' P- R(PTMU) RCL 99 -00.15 I I(PTMU) (Res. of Int. to SE) -1 s (PTMU) o ) c U P SE DONALOS 7 d RCL 99-00 -15 RCL 66 -67 -14 M cuazsaa -14 cua2 (Res. of Int. to SE) w RCL 59 -60.61 l3 VAR 2408 CUP2426 RCL 66 -67 -14 DCOr RCL 59 (Res of Intent to MH s VAR 182 CUP 14 0 VAR 2498 -60 -61 Fz0 Res of Intent to MH) 0.,o RCL 56 -57 -93 SS s_ MU) RCL 56 -57 -93 —OM C UP 2400 Q CUP 2226 VAR 2466 CUP 750 CUP 1745 a LLI OTT. BLDG_ TTM 16800 _ THE GROVE J O -L (PTMU) CUP 2005 -04967 THEATER TrM DAG 2005 -00004 on 0 CL 9 00515 04 KAVCO I (PTMU) (Res. of Int. to SE) GSA 2005 -00 PLAZA X99-00.15 m RCL 66 -67 -14 MIS 2005 -00113 of Int to SE) RCL 56 -57 -93 X ss67 -14 LLI ZCA 2005 -00044 RCL 2004 -00129 3L 58 -5793 RCL 86 -87 -22 OD I (PTMU) SUP 1371 CUP 2005 -04975 'UP 4475 W T -CUP 2005 -05001 RCL 99 -00 -15 VAR 2561 J FSP 2005 -00005 (Res. of Int. to SE) L TIL RETa — J DAG 2005 -00005 RCL 596061 Q CUP 2883 (Res of Intent to MH) CUP 1111 V RCL 56 -57 -93 VACANT VAR 2466 99- 99 LU f Int. toS 7- 4 - -14 5 6 56 -57 -93 Q 1003 -04721 PARKI NG 1 447 S fn ALL IND_ 1RM5 ANGEL STADIUM OF ANAHEIM PR (PTMU) RCL 99 -00.15 (Res. of Int. to SE) ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE PTMU (PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE) OVERLAY ZONE. General Plan Amendment No- 2005 -00435 Miscellaneous No. 2005 -00113 Subject Property Zoning Code Amendment No- 2005 -00044 Date: July 25, 2005 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 Scale: 1"=200' Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 Q.S. No. 118 Requested By: PETER FRENCH GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -00435 - REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL USES IN THE KATELLA DISTRICT OF THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE - MISCELLANEOUS NO. 2005 -00113 - REQUEST TO AMEND THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL USES IN THE KATELLA DISTRICT. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -00044 - REQUEST TO AMEND THE PTMU OVERLAY ZONE TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL USES IN THE KATELLA DISTRICT. 2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue 1913A 1 OF2 Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00435 Miscellaneous No. 2005 -00113 Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00113 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 Requested By: PETER FRENCH Subject Property Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Q.S. No. 118 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -00435 - REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL USES IN THE KATELLA DISTRICT OF THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE. MISCELLANEOUS NO. 2005 -00113 - REQUEST TO AMEND THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL USES IN THE KATELLA DISTRICT. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -00044 - REQUEST TO AMEND THE PTMU OVERLAY ZONE TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL USES IN THE KATELLA DISTRICT. 2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue 1913_A 1 OF2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 4a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 130 (Motion) 4b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -00435 (Resolution) 4c. AMENDMENT TO PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN (Resolution) (MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2005- 00113) 4d. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -00044 (Resolution) 4e CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04967 (Resolution) 4f. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16800 (Motion) 4g. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00004 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION (1) This regularly- shaped, 3.49 -acre property has a frontage of 318 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue with a maximum depth of 496 feet, 432 feet east of the centerline of State College Boulevard (2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue — Anaheim Stadium). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of the following: General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00435 - to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle. Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Permit No- 2005-00113) —to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 —to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 —to modify the required setbacks adjacent to Katella Avenue and the proposed private street to construct a 251 unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,347 square feet of retail and under authority of Code Section No. 1820.030.010 and 1820.090.050. Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 —to establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision. Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 - to recommend City Council adoption of a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing for the Anaheim Stadium Project (to construct a 251 -unit condominium mixed use complex with 9,764 square feet of retail and restaurant uses). The Planning Commission's role is to review the land use aspects of the Agreement, specifically to determine if the eligibility criteria has been met, if the Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and if the project implemented by the Agreement is compatible with the development of the surrounding area. The City Council will consider approval of the Agreement. S R -CUP 2 0 05 -04 9761 pd. d M Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 BACKGROUND: (3) On August 17, 2004, the City Council approved the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle including serving as a blueprint for future development and street improvements. The City Council also adopted the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (Chapter 1820 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) and an associated standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement. The PTMU Overlay Zone encompasses approximately 375 acres and five Districts (the Katella, Gene Autry, Gateway, Arena and Stadium Districts) within The Platinum Triangle, as depicted on the PTMLUP. The PTMU Overlay Zone provides opportunities for high quality well- designed development projects that could be stand -alone residential projects or combined with non - residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area. Properties encompassed by the PTMU Overlay Zone can be operated, developed or expanded under their existing underlying zone or, if the property owner chooses, developed under the PTMU Overlay Zone standards. Ordinances adopting the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements and reclassifying certain properties to the PTMU Overlay Zone (those properties designated for Mixed Uses by the General Plan) were finalized on September 23, 2004. (4) This property is currently developed with two office buildings and is zoned I (PTMU) (Industrial; Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property as well as properties to the north (across Katella Avenue), east, south and west for Mixed Use land uses. The PTMLUP further indicates the property is located in the Katella District of the PTMU Overlay. s r A ITC Y _ a 4 � i i Existing office building at 2100 E. Katella Ave. (to be demolished) Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 Existing office building at 2110 E. Katella Ave. (to bed erno I ished) DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (5) The applicant proposes to construct a 6 -story, 251 -unit condominium project in a "podium" style building with residential units located above a subterranean parking structure and ground floor retail /restaurant and parking uses. The project would also include construction of a 26 -foot wide private street with sidewalks and parkways that would be shared with a the Platinum Centre mixed -use development to the west. The private street would be utilized for primary tenant and commercial access, fire access, moving plazas, and sanitation access. (6) The tentative tract map indicates the subdivision would consist of a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace, residential subdivision for condominium purposes. The commercial and restaurant portion of the mixed use development will most likely be subdivided into at least two units with the lobby to the residential units between them. (7) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the condominium subdivision would contain one (1) airspace, residential lot developed with one (1) podium style building. The building would meet Code requirements for minimum floor area, lot coverage and setbacks with the exception of the requested setback modifications along Katella Avenue and the private street. (8) The floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 2 -6) propose a 7,397 square foot restaurant on the northeast portion of the building facing Katella Avenue and Sportstown, and 2,367 square feet of commercial retail at the northwest portion of the building facing Katella Avenue. The main entrance into the residential area is located between the restaurant and commercial area along Katella Avenue. There is one level of subterranean parking, parking and commercial uses on the ground level, and 5 stories of residential for -sale units. Outdoor seating is proposed along the Katella Avenue in front of the restaurant and commercial areas. (9) This project includes a request for a conditional use permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with the proposed restaurant. The applicant has indicated that a specific tenant has not been identified for this site at this time. Outdoor seating is proposed in conjunction with the restaurant. In addition, low metal fencing is proposed to enclose the restaurant outdoor dining areas due to the proposed sale of alcoholic beverages. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 (10) Floor plans (Exhibit Nos. 17,18 and 19) indicate 1 to 3- bedroom condominium residences ranging from 992 to 1,527 square feet. The units would provide kitchens, entry areas, living room, dining room, dens/studies, storage areas and private balconies. The sizes and interior features of the units are in compliance with the PTMU Overlay Zone. (11) Primary access to the project would be via newly constructed private street from Katella Avenue terminating as a cul -de -sac at the southwest side of the property. The private street meets the City standards and includes a 5 -foot wide sidewalk, 5 -foot wide parkway and enhanced asphalt to create a cobblestone finish. This private street will be shared with the Platinum Centre project to the west. The structured parking would be subterranean and at- grade. The project would provide 561 parking spaces with 212 spaces at ground level (including 20 valet spaces and one mail service space) and 349 subterranean spaces. No on- street parking would be allowed on the private street or along the project frontage on Katella Avenue. The total number of proposed spaces has been justified based on the parking study required by the PTMU Overlay for mixed use projects and submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Two (2) moving plazas would be provided within the private street for residential use, one of which would also serve as a commercial loading and unloading area. (12) The applicants Solid Waste Management Plan indicates that a trash loading and staging area would be located at the terminus of the cul -de -sac on the south side of the building. A driveway is proposed on the east side of the cul -de -sac to facilitate trash truck and trash bin access. Four (4) separate residential enclosure areas would be located within the ground level parking area in order to store the refuse dropped down the chutes. A separate trash enclosure for the commercial uses is provided within the ground level parking structure at the east side of the building. A site superintendent would monitor the trash levels throughout the day and would be responsible for changing out the bins when they reach capacity. (13) The elevation plans (Exhibit Nos. 11 and 12) indicate the building would be a contemporary clean line design that incorporates quality architectural elements such as a built -up parapet roof with canopy accents, stepped parapets, window variation and painted smooth - textured stucco. Portions of the building are framed around the windows to provide depth and interest. The north elevation which includes the retail, restaurant and main entry, proposes aluminum storefront windows with perforated metal and glass canopies, stone veneer enhanced colonnades and a round (at the restaurant) and curved building line. The main entrance to the lobby is proposed with 2 -story windows making the curved staircase to the second level visible. Above the second level, the lobby area is highlighted with a projecting glass panel into the lobby areas for each floor. A balcony is provided north of the lobby on the third and fifth floor which are visible to the street to provide open areas for the residents and additional architectural interest. Architectural features for the residential component above the retail and around the building include recessed windows, art elements, metal canopies, decorative metal railings and gates, stone veneer and roof and window trim. The building would be a maximum of 65 feet high. Code permits buildings within the Katella District up to 100 feet high. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 (14) To clad the parking structure along the private street, art walls are provided on the building, and a water fountain is proposed against the building with landscaping and seating areas to create a passive open space. Outdoor dining and seating areas are proposed in front of the restaurant and commercial retail areas. The landscape plan (Exhibit Nos. 25 -29) proposes a combination solid and glass wall along the Katella Avenue frontage at the back end of the landscaping to define and protect the outdoor seating and dining areas. Perimeter fencing is also proposed along the south and east sides of the property. The southerly fencing will consist of a combination of masonry wall with light sand finish and screed lines (to match the adjacent Platinum Centre project) and wrought iron openings to allow an open feel with Anaheim Stadium. The easterly fence will be a combination of 3- to 6 -foot high decorative wrought iron fence transitioning to a solid masonry wall to match the south side. (15) The landscape plans (Exhibit Nos-27 and 28) provide depictions of the proposed project's common outdoor amenities including a pool and spa, restrooms, martini lounge, yakatori /BBQ grill, outdoor kitchen, lounge pit, flaming fountain, raised planters, outdoor furniture and cabanas. Other amenities include a 5th floor bar and barbeque with fire place and cabanas and a lounge area with fountain and seating. Other common recreation areas include a library, gym, game room and multiple fountains throughout the project. The landscape palette includes a variety of trees, shrubs and groundcover, in compliance with the landscape requirements of the PTMU Overlay Zone and the PTMLUP. (16) Sign plans (Exhibit No. 39) propose a choice of two type of signs for the retail tenant in compliance with code. The first option is for an canopy sign that sits on top of the canopy at various locations along the storefront. The second option for identification is for wall signage on the fascia band over the storefront windows. Both the canopy and wall signs are proposed to be brushed aluminum letters in various fonts and color. Page 5 Rendering of building from Katella Avenue Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 (17) Project construction is anticipated to commence the Spring of 2006, and be completed by the Fall of 2008. The construction phase would begin with the demolition of the existing office buildings. This phase is anticipated to last four (4) weeks. Materials generated from demolition would be removed from the site and transported to an appropriate waste disposal facility. Grading would begin after demolition and would be completed in approximately fifteen (15) weeks. The actual building construction is expected to be complete in approximately 2 years. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2005 - 00435, MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2005 -00113 AND ZONING CODE UPDATE NO, 2005 -00044 DISCUSSION: (18) The Katella District of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan allows 544,300 square feet of commercial uses. Based on the existing and approved commercial uses in the district, prior to this project, there are 4,156 square feet of maximum permitted commercial uses remaining. This proposal is for 9,764 square feet of commercial which exceeds the maximum permitted square footage of commercial by 5,608 square feet. This limitation in square footage is established in the General Plan Land Use Element based on Environmental Impact Report No. 330 for the comprehensive General Plan Amendment. The maximum permitted square footage in the Platinum Triangle as identified in the General Plan is implemented through the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone as approved through EIR Nos. 330 and 321 adopted for the General Plan and Anaheim Stadium Master Land Use Plan respectively. Therefore this request includes an amendment to the General Plan as well as the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone. (19) Currently a City- initiated request to amend the General Plan as well as the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay zone is currently being processed to redesignate a 321 -acre property on Orangewood Avenue ( "North Net Fire Training Center') from the Office -High to the Mixed -Use land designation, to increase the number of allowed dwelling units from 9,175 units to 9,500 units, and to increase in the maximum overall commercial uses from 2,044,300 to 2,254,400 square feet. Of the total 210,100 square feet of additional commercial uses, 20,000 square feet would be allocated within the Katella District. A subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 has been prepared and circulated for public review to address the potential impacts associated with the amendment. The additional square footage requested as a part of this proposal falls within the additional 20,000 square feet of commercial uses in the Katella District being analyzed under that City- initiated amendment. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for this proposal has analyzed the request to increase the commercial square footage in the Katella District by 5,608 square feet and has found no significant impacts from this minor increase. Applicable mitigation measures have been incorporated to Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130 to address any impacts of this increase in square footage consistent with the Subsequent EIR currently being processed for the City- initiated amendment. (20) "Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City" of the General Plan Land Use Element indicates that the maximum square footage of commercial development in the Platinum Triangle is 2,044,300. This request to increase the square footage by 5,608 in the Katella District would bring the new square footage to 2,049,908 as shown in the excerpt from Table LU -4 below: Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 The Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use Up to 9,175 dwelling units at densities up Area to 100 dwelling units per acre; up to 3,265,000 s.f_ of office development at maximum FAR of 2.00; and, up to nn�znn 2 s.f. of commercial development at a maximum FAR of 0.40. Office High and Office Low Up to 1,735,000 s.f. of office development at a maximum FAR of 2.0 for properties designated Office -High and a maximum FAR of 0.50 for properties designated Office-Low- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04967 DISCUSSION: (21) Code Section No. 1820.090.050 of the PTMU Overlay Zone allows modification of setbacks when minimum landscape requirements are met, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant requests modification of setbacks in accordance with the following table: Property line adjacent to: Required Setback Permitted Encroachments Proposed Setback Type of encroachment Katella Avenue Combination solid 16 feet None listed 9 feet and glass decorative art wall Private Street Commercial Uses: Building, Utility 10 feet 3 feet 0 feet equipment and loading and unloading space (22) The requested setback modification on Katella Avenue is necessary to allow a decorative art wall along the northerly edge of the outdoor seating and dining area. The overall height of the wall is 6 feet, with only the 3 foot decorative glass art portion being visible to the street. The solid bottom would be concealed by the bermed landscaping in the setback. Code allows public art as a permitted encroachment, however because the art pieces are attached to a wall and also functions as a wall, a modification to the street setback is required. Code requires a minimum front yard setback of 16 feet and the site plan indicates a proposed setback of 9 feet to the ultimate right -of -way for a segment of the setback. In order to comply with City standards for the new private street, a portion of the units and residential parking along the southwest side of the building would encroach into the required setback. In addition, utility equipment and the commercial and residential loading and unloading area reduces the required setback from 10 feet to 1 -foot, 9- inches at the building and zero setback at the electrical equipment. This private street serves as the primary access for residents and commercial patrons and is also used to accommodate trash and moving truck access, and to comply with life safety requirements on the west side of the building. With the exception of the deviation at the loading and unloading area, the area of setback modification occurs mainly at the end of the cul -de -sac where most of the site services are staged. Landscaping and a fountain are proposed near the location of the loading area to provide supplemental screening. In addition, the private street would be Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 developed with a landscaped parkway and sidewalk that would provide an adequate buffer between the street and the building and utility equipment. (23) The Police Department indicates that this property is located within Reporting District 2128, which has a crime rate of 60 percent above the City -wide average. It is also within census tract number 761 -01, which has a population of 5,264. Based on this population, 6 on -sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses are permitted, and 6 licenses currently exist. The Police Department would support this request for the sale of alcoholic beverages within a proposed restaurant because it is not anticipated that this use would negatively impact he surrounding businesses or neighborhoods. Specific conditions of approval have been incorporated into the conditional use permit based on recommendations of the Police Department. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00004 DISCUSSION: (24) In 1982, the Legislature of the State of California adopted Section 65864, et. Seq. of the California Government Code authorizing a city and an applicant for a development project to enter into a development agreement, permitting cities to contract with property owner /developers for their mutual benefit in a manner not otherwise available to the parties. A development agreement is a contract for development which provides a property owner /developer a vested right to proceed with an approved development, "freezing" the entitlement along with established regulations and fees, in exchange for the City obtaining benefits over and above what would otherwise be required by existing regulations and ordinances. (25) On November 23, 1982, the City enacted Ordinance No. 4377 making the City subject to the Statute and adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (Procedures Resolution) establishing procedures and requirements for the consideration of Development Agreements upon receipt of an application by the City. On August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -179 approving the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement to implement projects in the PTMU Overlay Zone. The Agreement is intended to provide the property owner /developer with a maximum amount of flexibility while ensuring development and maintenance of high quality projects that carry out the vision for The Platinum Triangle. (26) Pursuant to the Procedures Resolution, the Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation to the City Council relative to the proposed Development Agreement. The Planning Commission must determine whether the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the Development Agreement by finding the project satisfies one or more of the eligibility requirements set forth below: (a) That the project shall occupy at least 50 acres; or (b) That, upon completion, the project shall result in the construction of at least 250 dwelling units, 250,000 square feet of commercial -office space, or 250,000 square feet of industrial space; or (c) That the project will be constructed in phases over an anticipated period of not less than 5 years; or (d) That a project shall be eligible if the Planning Director finds that the public health, safety or general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim will best be served by accepting an application for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. Page 8 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 The Commission must also determine whether the proposed Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district, compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area; and not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim. (27) Staff has reviewed the proposed Development Agreement and finds that the Agreement has been prepared in conformance with the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement approved per Resolution No. 2004 -179. Further, the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the Agreement since the project will result in the construction of 251 residential dwelling units and 9,767 square feet of commercial and restaurant uses, which are consistent with and implements the goals and policies of the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation for The Platinum Triangle and the PTMLUP by providing for a high - quality mixed use project. (28) The plans associated with the project depict a high - quality mixed use development that incorporates a variety of rooflines, extensive window variation, prominent entry features, and numerous architectural details with usable common and semi - private open space enhanced by landscaping, decorative paving treatments, low patio walls and decorative wrought iron fencing. Further, in approving the Final Site Plan for the Anaheim Stadium Mixed Use Project, the Planning Director determined that the Final Site Plan was consistent with the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements, subject to approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2005 - 00435, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044, Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04967, Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00004. Part of this approval included an analysis of the amount of approved commercial square footage allowed by the General Plan Update and the subsequent PTMLUP. The Katella District provides for up to 544,300 square feet of commercial retail space. This request proposes an increase of 5,608 square feet of commercial retail to the Katella District because the project proposes 9,764 square feet of commercial thereby using the remaining 4,156 square feet in the District. Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00006 (Platinum Triangle Condominium Development) which is for a proposed mixed use residential and commercial project (Item No. 5 on today's agenda) will propose to demolish 105,472 square feet of commercial retail space and add a 1,248 square foot retail tenant space. This would result in a net surplus of 104,224 square feet of commercial retail space credited back to the Katella District for use by future commercial retail projects within the District. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS (29) On May 25, 2004, the City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans (including an Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle) (FEIR No. 330) under Resolution No. 2004 -04, in conjunction with the consideration and adoption of the citywide General Plan and Zoning Code Update Program and a series of related actions. (30) On August 24, 2004, the City Council determined that the previously certified FEIR No. 330 was adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the PTMLUP, the PTMU Overlay Zone, the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement and other related reclassification actions. It was also determined that future individual development projects and infrastructure improvements which are proposed to implement the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone would require further environmental review and analysis of potential site specific environmental impacts in conjunction with the processing of discretionary applications. Work has commenced on the preparation of a Subsequent Page 9 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 EIR to provide additional environmental documentation for these requests (it is anticipated that this will be completed by Fall of this year). Projects that precede certification of the Subsequent EIR require independent environmental review and documentation. (31) A Notice of Intent (NO[) to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated to public agencies and interested parties on July 5, 2005, for a 20 -day review period. The NO[ and associated Initial Study outlined the environmental issues to be addressed in Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130, including: Aesthetics/Visual, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Transportation/Traffic, Utilities /Service Systems, and Cumulative Impacts. (32) Staff has reviewed the Initial Study for the proposed project, a copy of which has been provided to the Planning Commission and is available for review in the Planning Department, and finds that with the incorporation of mitigation measures set forth in Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130, no significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to a level of significance would result from the proposed project and therefore, recommends that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Planning Commission that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Applicable mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 have been incorporated into the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130 for ease of use. Project specific measures are lettered- EVALUATION (33) Development in the PTMU Overlay Zone is implemented through the administrative processing of a final site plan (to show compliance with the Code) and entering into the standardized development agreement with the City. The Code requires the final site plan to be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Director as to conformance with the provisions of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone. Once approved, the final site plan is incorporated into the Development Agreement as an exhibit. The Code additionally states that if the final site plan includes a request for a variance or a conditional use permit that said applications shall be processed concurrently with the Development Agreement. (34) The applicant submitted Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00004 to provide for the development of the Anaheim Stadium mixed use residential and commercial project. Based upon a review of the plans and in accordance with the authority set forth in Section 1820.170 (Implementation) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, on July 20, 2005, the Planning Director approved Final Site Plan No. 2005 - 00004, subject to the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2005 - 00435, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044, Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04967, Tentative Tract Map No 16800 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00004. This approval was based upon the determination that the Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00004 is in conformance with the provisions of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone. The approved Final Site Plan is attached as Exhibit "B" to the Development Agreement. Following is a summary of the approved Final Site Plan: Page 10 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 FINDINGS: (35) Prior to making a recommendation for approval of a General Plan Amendment, the Planning Commission shall make the following findings: (a) The proposed amendment maintains the internal consistency of the General Plan; (b) The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; (c) The proposed amendment would maintain the balance of land uses within the City; and (d) If the amendment is to the General Plan Land Use Map, the subject property is physically suitable to accommodate the proposed modification, including but not limited to access, physical constraints, topography, provision of utilities, and compatibility with surrounding land uses. (36) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and Page 11 PTMU Overlay Development Standard Proposed Project Zone Standards Site Area 3.49 acres N/A Minimum 50 units Number of Dwelling Units /Acre 71 units /acre required and (251 total units) maximum of 100 du /acre Building Area 384,341 s.f. Parking Structure Area 209,946 s.f. N/A Total Building and Parking 594,287 s.f. Area Lot Coverage 55% Maximum 75% Height 65 feet Max mum feet Minimum 200 s.f. Recreation /Leisure Area 61,531 s.f total per unit 245 s.f. per unit FINDINGS: (35) Prior to making a recommendation for approval of a General Plan Amendment, the Planning Commission shall make the following findings: (a) The proposed amendment maintains the internal consistency of the General Plan; (b) The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; (c) The proposed amendment would maintain the balance of land uses within the City; and (d) If the amendment is to the General Plan Land Use Map, the subject property is physically suitable to accommodate the proposed modification, including but not limited to access, physical constraints, topography, provision of utilities, and compatibility with surrounding land uses. (36) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and Page 11 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. (37) "The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to include in all motions approving, or recommending approval of a tract map, a specific finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan. Further, the law requires that the Commission make any of the following findings when denying or recommending denial of a tract map: 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision." RECOMMENDATION: (38) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing and the findings included in the attached resolutions, the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion recommend that the City Council, as lead agency for General Plan Amendment No. 2005 - 00435, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044, Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04967, Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 and Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 (the "Proposed Actions "), based upon its independent review and analysis of the Initial Study prepared for the Proposed Actions, pursuant to CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, unless additional information or contrary information is received during the public hearing, find and determine, based upon said Initial Study and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Page 12 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 4 Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Actions, together with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed Actions and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared. (b) By the attached resolution and its findings, recommend that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00435 to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle. (c) By the attached resolution and its findings, recommend that the City Council approve Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113) to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District. (d) By motion, approve Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 based on the finding that the amendment will implement the General Plan and the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan as amended by this request. (e) By the attached resolution and its findings, approve Conditional Use Permit No- 2005-04967 (f) By the attached resolution and its findings, recommend to the City Council that the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the Development Agreement; that the Agreement meets the criteria set forth in the PTMU Overlay and the standardized Development Agreement language adopted in conjunction with Resolution No. 2004 -179; and, that Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 be approved and entered into by the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing. (g) By motion, approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16800, to establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit, airspace, attached residential condominium subdivision. Page 13 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTING AND RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -00435 PERTAINING TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT (2100 and 2110 EAST KATELLA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim City Council did adopt the Anaheim General Plan by Resolution No 69R -644, showing the general description and extent of possible future development within the City; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan to modify "Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City" to increase the square footage of commercial development in the Katella District in the Platinum Triangle by 5,608 square feet from 2,044,300 square feet to 2,049,908 square feet. WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Anaheim Civic Center, Council Chamber, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, on July 25, 2005, at 230 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against said General Plan Amendment and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due consideration, inspection, investigation and study made by itself, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, DOES HEREBY FIND 1 - That the evidence presented substantiates the need for an amendment to the Anaheim General Plan and that, the proposed amendment maintains the internal consistency of the General Plan. 2. That the proposed amendment would be consistent with the goals and policies for the Platinum Triangle approved by the City Council as part of the comprehensive General Plan Update on May 25, 2004. 3. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; 4. The proposed amendment would maintain the balance of land uses within the City; and CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed General Plan Amendment No. 200500435 —to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle, in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 - to modify setbacks along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street to construct a 251 unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,347 square feet of retail, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 -00113 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District, Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 - to establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision, Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 - to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing for a 251 -unit residential condominium mixed use project with 9,764 square feet of commercial and restaurant uses; and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for the General Plan Amendment, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the PC2005- -1- PC2005- Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed General Plan Amendment and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this General Plan Amendment and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this General Plan Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to the above findings, the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby adopt and recommend to the City Council of the City of Anaheim adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00435 pertaining to the modification to Table LU -4 General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Mixed Use designation by 5,608 square feet. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION r_\1Ix.9i SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2005. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -2- PC2005- [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 ="' A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR AMENDMENT TO PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN (MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT NO. 2005 - 00113) BE GRANTED (2100 and 2110 EAST KATELLA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for an amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113) for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF LOT 5, TRACT 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89° 59' 15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08' 00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 59'15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM SAID CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 7, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010069995, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DISTANT SOUTH 89° 59' 15" EAST 748.00 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND (SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5); THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING, NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID Cr\PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- LOTS 4 AND 5, A DISTANCE OF 595.06 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE 60.00 FEET WIDE, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000.00 FEET FROM TANGENT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 70 38' 28" WEST THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18 17'32" A DISTANCE OF 31926 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO RANDALL RAY BIVENS AND WIFE, BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 5285, PAGE 252, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 0 08'00" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 538.52 FEET TO SAID SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS; THENCE SOUTH 89 59' 15" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, 313.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89 59'15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH THE DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08' 00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 59' 15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTELRY FROM SAID CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. I_ 1 Wei y (ygi110 [ell I:Iq:7g9:li] LTA 0I:I_\ 21010 910] 0 N 7N[i]1.79]M61y:71:3g9L1- 1&]1XiWTid BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANCE 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 00° 07' 37" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1060.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10° 12' 14 " A DISTANCE OF 188.78 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF EXCEPTION TO THE LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 00 45' 13" WEST 1223 FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO A POINT ON A NON - TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1072.00 FEET, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 10° 12' 19" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10 05' 17" A DISTANCE OF 188.75 FEET TO SAID WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS; THENCE NORTH 00 0 45' 13" EAST 1200 . FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM IN DEED RECORDED APRIL 24, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010245967, OFFICIAL RECORDS- -2- PC2005- WHEREAS, the recently adopted General Plan envisions The Platinum Triangle as a thriving economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment, shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades (set forth in Goal 15.1 of the Land Use Element); and WHEREAS, the adopted General Plan establishes a maximum development intensity for The Platinum Triangle for up to 9,175 dwelling units (at an intensity of up to 100 dwelling units per acre), 5,000,000 square feet of office space, 2,044,300 square feet of commercial uses, industrial development at a maximum floor area ratio of 0.50 and institutional development at a maximum floor area ratio of 3.0; and WHEREAS, the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan provides for the implementation of the General Plan vision, goals and policies for The Platinum Triangle and will serve as a blueprint for future development and street improvements within The Platinum Triangle, including setting forth planning principles, development intensities, conceptual street, park and potential new signalized intersection locations and streetscape designs including, but not limited to, landscaping, lighting fixtures and street furniture and by identifying the existing Amtrack/Metrolink Station and the conceptual Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) location-3 WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 2005 at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 (Procedures), to hear and consider evidence for and against said Proposed Actions to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed increase of 5,608 square feet of commercial uses within the Katella District is consistent with the goals and intent of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and General Plan and impacts related to this increase has been analyzed. 2. That the proposed project requesting the increase in square footage of commercial uses is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. 3. That' *' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 -00113 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 - to modify setbacks along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street to construct a 251 unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,347 square feet of retail, General Plan Amendment No. 200500435 — to amend the land use element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle, , Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District, Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 - to establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision, Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 - to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing for a 251 -unit residential condominium mixed use project with 9,764 square feet of commercial and restaurant uses; and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related -3- PC2005- projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Proposed Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Proposed Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve the amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District by 5,608 square to 549,908 square feet. That this Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 -00113 is granted subject to adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 2005 - 00435, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044, Conditional Use Permit No- 2005-04967, Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16800, now pending. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 1 2005- SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2005- [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - - "' A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND A PORTION OF CHAPTER 1820 "PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE" (ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2005 - 00044) (2100 and 2110 EAST KATELLA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for an amendment to Chapter 1820 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone) of the Zoning Code (Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044) to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses permitted in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF LOT 5, TRACT 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89° 59' 15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08' 00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 59'15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM SAID CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 7, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010069995, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DISTANT SOUTH 89° 59' 15" EAST 748.00 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND (SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON Cr\PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5); THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING, NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5, A DISTANCE OF 595.06 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE 60.00 FEET WIDE, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000.00 FEET FROM TANGENT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 70 38' 28" WEST THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18 17'32" A DISTANCE OF 31926 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO RANDALL RAY BIVENS AND WIFE, BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 5285, PAGE 252, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 0 08'00" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 538.52 FEET TO SAID SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS; THENCE SOUTH 89 59' 15" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, 313.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89 59'15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH THE DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08' 00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 59' 15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTELRY FROM SAID CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. I_ 1bY6l y(ygi110 LTA II:I_\ 21010 910] 0 N7 N [i]1.79]M61y:71:3g1L1- 1&]1XiWTid BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANCE 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 00° 07' 37" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1060.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10° 12' 14 ", A DISTANCE OF 188.78 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF EXCEPTION TO THE LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 00 45' 13" WEST 1223 FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO A POINT ON A NON - TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1072.00 FEET, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 10° 12' 19" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10 05 A DISTANCE OF 188.75 FEET TO SAID WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS; THENCE NORTH 00 0 45' 13" EAST 1200 . FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF -2- PC2005- ANAHEIM IN DEED RECORDED APRIL 24, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010245967, OFFICIAL RECORDS. WHEREAS, the Zoning Code was originally adopted in 1929 and has been updated a number of times over the years; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 18.76 (Zoning Amendments) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, provisions of Title 18 may be amended whenever the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare require, when adopted by an ordinance of the City Council in the manner prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, the recently adopted General Plan envisions The Platinum Triangle as a thriving economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment, shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades (set forth in Goal 15.1 of the Land Use Element); and WHEREAS, the adopted General Plan establishes a maximum development intensity for The Platinum Triangle for up to 9,175 dwelling units (at an intensity of up to 100 dwelling units per acre), 5,000,000 square feet of office space, slightly over 2,000,000 square feet of commercial uses, industrial development at a maximum floor area ratio of 0.50 and institutional development at a maximum floor area ratio of 3.0; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code implements the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes recommendations to the City Council regarding Zoning Code Amendments; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 2005 at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 (Procedures), to hear and consider evidence for and against the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, having reviewed and considered the amendment to Chapter 1820 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone) of the Zoning Code (Zoning Code Amendment No- 2005-00044) to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses permitted in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone has determined that the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare require its amendment because the amendment 1 - Allows mixed use development that is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan; and 2. Updates the permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District to reflect development factors and demand in the Platinum Triangle; and 3. That * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District in conjunction with Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 -00113 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District, Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 - to modify setbacks along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street to construct a 251 unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,347 square feet of retail, General Plan Amendment No. 200500435 — to amend the land use element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the -3- PC2005- Platinum Triangle, Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 -to establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision and Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 - to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing for a 251 -unit residential condominium mixed use project with 9,764 square feet of commercial and restaurant uses, and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA'), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Zoning Code Amendment, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Zoning Code Amendment and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Zoning Code Amendment and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Zoning Code Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve the amendment to Chapter 1820 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone) of the Zoning Code (Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044) to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses permitted by 5,608 square to 549,908 square feet in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone. That this Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 is granted subject to adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 2005 - 00435, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113, Conditional Use Permit No. 2005- 04967, Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16800, now pending. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION r_\1Ix.9i SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2005- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , 2005. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -5- PC2005- [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 ="' A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04967 BE GRANTED (2100 and 2110 EAST KATELLA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL & THAT PORTION OF LOT 5, TRACT 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89° 59' 15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08' 00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 59'15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM SAID CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 7, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010069995, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DISTANT SOUTH 89° 59' 15" EAST 748.00 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND (SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5); THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING, NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5, A DISTANCE OF 595.06 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE Cr\PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- 60.00 FEET WIDE, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000.00 FEET FROM TANGENT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 70 38' 28" WEST THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18 17'32" A DISTANCE OF 31926 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO RANDALL RAY BIVENS AND WIFE, BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 5285, PAGE 252, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 0 08'00" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 538.52 FEET TO SAID SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS; THENCE SOUTH 89 59' 15" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, 313.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89 59'15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH THE DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08' 00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 59' 15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTELRY FROM SAID CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. I_ 1 Wei y( ygi110 [ell I: Iq: 7q9: li ] LTA 0I:I_\21i101[0]0 N7N[i]967191 Yy:71:3MI 11-11- 1&]1XiWTi -i BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANCE 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 00° 07' 37" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1060.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10° 12' 14 " A DISTANCE OF 188.78 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF EXCEPTION TO THE LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 00 45' 13" WEST 1223 FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO A POINT ON A NON - TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1072.00 FEET, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 10° 12' 19" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10 05' 17" A DISTANCE OF 188.75 FEET TO SAID WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS; THENCE NORTH 00 0 45' 13" EAST 1200 . FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM IN DEED RECORDED APRIL 24, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010245967, OFFICIAL RECORDS. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 2005 at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as -2- PC2005- required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 "Procedures ", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed modification of setbacks along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street to construct a 251 -unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,367 square feet of retail are properly ones for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section Nos. 1820.030.010 and 1820.090.050. 2. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and that the minor deviations from the Code would still achieve a project with architecturally enhanced elevations and layered landscaping, and further provide a project that is compatible and consistent with the General Plan Mixed -Use land use designation and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP). 3. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to health and safety. 4. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area as the proposed project has been analyzed in a Traffic Impact Study dated June, 2005, reviewed and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and that the required infrastructure improvements along the adjacent streets will be constructed in connection with the project. 5. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition, and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 - to modify setbacks along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street to construct a 251 -unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,347 square feet of retail in conjunction with General Plan Amendment No. 200500435 — to amend the land use element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 -00113 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District, Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 - to establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision and Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 - to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing for a 251 -unit residential condominium mixed use project with 9,764 square feet of commercial and restaurant uses; and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Conditional Use Permit and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation -3- PC2005- Monitoring Program No. 130, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Conditional Use Permit and satisfy all of the requirements of CEOA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Conditional Use Permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 1. That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 402, 436, 470, 471 and 475 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 2. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 3. That prior to issuance of building permits, all vehicular ramps and grades shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 402, and be approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 4. That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval in conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the walltfence location. 5. That prior to issuance of building permits, all internal streets shall be posted with "No Stopping Any Time" including the Katella Avenue frontage. 6. That prior to issuance of building permits, the proposed loading and unloading on private streets shall comply with Engineering Standard Plan No. 474. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 7. That prior to the building occupancy, the developer shall design and construct dual eastbound left -turn lanes or extend the single left -turn lane as required by the City, at the Katella Avenue and Sportstown intersection. 8. That prior to building occupancy, the developer shall provide traffic signal modification plans and reconstruct the signal for the Katella Avenue and Sportstown intersection. The plan shall depict modifications needed due to the widening of Katella Avenue at the southeast quadrant of the intersection as well as introduction of dual eastbound left -turn lane or extension of the left turn lane. Construction improvements shall be completed prior to building occupancy or as approved by the City Engineer. 9. That prior to issuance of building permits, signs shall be posted indicating no on- street parking shall be allowed on the adjacent streets except where designated turn -out areas are provided for loading and unloading. Such signs shall be shown on plans submitted for the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. 10. That prior to issuance of building permits, installation of any gates shall conform to the Engineering Standard Plan No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to the issuance of the first building permit- 11 - That prior to issuance of building permits, all driveways to the project site shall be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 12. That prior to issuance of building permits, assigned parking spaces shall be provided for each residential unit. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits- -4- PC2005- 13. That prior to issuance of building permits, visitor parking spaces shall be posted, "No Overnight Parking, Except by Permission of the Management" Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. STREETS AND SANITATION 14. That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted providing a separate Knox box for the trash truck at each applicable gate entrance. 15. That between the hours of 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. that a minimum horizontal clearance of 14 feet shall be maintained on the ground floor parking structure to allow access for the trash bin retrieval vehicle. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 16. That prior to issuance of building permits, the proposed development shall submit a final written solid waste management plan signed by the property owner to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval. The property owner shall then operate in accordance with the approved written solid waste management plan, as it may be modified from time to time subject to written approval by the Director of Public Works. Said solid waste management plan shall be referred to in the Maintenance Covenant which is recorded for the property. 17. That prior to issuance of building permits, trash storage areas and trash chutes shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with exhibits approved in conjunction with this Conditional Use Permit, on file with the Planning Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 18. That prior to issuance of building permits, an on -site trash truck turn - around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said turn - around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. WATER ENGINEERING 19. That prior to issuance of building permits, a private water system with separate water service for fire protection and domestic water shall be provided. Said information shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 20. That individual water service and /or fire line connections shall be required for each parcel and /or residential and commercial unit per Rule 18 of the City of Anaheim's Water Rates, Rules and Regulations. 21. That prior to issuance of building permits, all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area except as permitted by conditional use permit in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division outside of the street setback area except as permitted by conditional use permit in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for approval by the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 22. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modification, relocation, or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through and reviewed for approval by the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 23. That prior to issuance of building permits, because this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 24. That prior to issuance of building permits, all existing water services shall conform to current Water Utility Standards on file in the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. Any existing water services that are not approved by the Utility for continued use shall be upgraded to -5- PC2005- current standards, or abandoned by the property owner /developer. The owner /developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or abandon any water service or fire line. 25. That prior to issuance of building permits, the legal property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim an easement twenty (20) feet in width for water service mains and/or an easement for above ground large meters and other public water facilities to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. Backflow devices and large meters shall be located above ground and properly screened. Such information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 26. That prior to issuance of building permits, or submittal of water improvement plans, the property owner /developer shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department for review and approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on -site water system to meet the project's water demands and fire protection requirements. 27. That prior to issuance of building permits or application for water meters, fire lines or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the property owner /developer shall submit to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department, an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall be done in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules, and Regulations. 28. That prior to issuance of building permits or rendering water service, the property owner /developer shall submit a set of improvement plans for Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, review and approval in determining the conditions necessary for providing water service to the project. 29. That prior to issuance of building permits, a minimum clearance of ten (10) feet shall be provided between the water and sewer line and that the water line shall be a minimum of 5 feet from the curb line. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for review and approval by the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division. PUBLIC WORKS 30. That prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: • Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). • Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements, identifies the responsible parties, and funding mechanisms for the Treatment Control BMPs. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. • Describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 31. That all grading shall conform to the requirements of Chapter 17.04 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Grading plans shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works, Development Services Division for review and approval. 32. That prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall submit street, sewer and landscape improvement plans for the public improvements along Katella Avenue and the private street to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division. A bond shall be posted in an amount -6- PC2005- approved by the City Engineer and a form approved by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a building permit or plan approval whichever occurs first. A Right -of -Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the Development Services Division for all work performed in the right -of -way. The improvements shall be constructed prior to certificate of occupancy. 33. That all private streets, private sewers and private storm drains shall be privately maintained. 34. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Supplemental Sewer Impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $430/ 1,000 GSF for building floor area developed between the 0.4 and the 1.0 floor area ratio developments. 35. That prior to approval of the grading plan, the City of Anaheim Drainage Impact Mitigation Fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $35,000/ net acre. Credit will be applied for the current development. The project architect or engineer shall document the existing impervious area and the proposed impervious area. If the impervious area remains the same or decreases, no fee is due. If the impervious area increases, the fee will be proportional to the increase. 36. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Arterial Highway beautification /aesthetics impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $12,500/ gross acre. 37. That prior to issuance of building permits, vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue except at street intersections, shall be relinquished to the City of Anaheim. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 38. That prior to issuance of building permits, the legal owner of this property shall irrevocable offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for emergency, public utility and other public purposes for the fire access along the west property line, over the private street to the westerly curb and gutter. 39. That prior to issuance of building permits, the legal owner of subject property shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for street, public utility and other public purposes for Katella Avenue to the ultimate right -of -way and a corner cut -off at Katella Avenue and Sportstown. 40. That prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall acquire the necessary dedications from the adjacent property owner for the other portion of the Fire Access outside the tract boundary to be irrevocably offered for dedication to the City of Anaheim an easement for emergency, public utility and other public purposes. 41. That a drainage report shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section for review and approval prior to grading plan approval. 42. That all connections to the Orange County Flood Control District (OCSD) channel shall be approved by the OCFCD. 43. That any median trees that are removed due to the median reconfiguration on Katella Avenue at Sportstown shall be relocated to a location determined by the Public Works Department. If at such time relocation is not appropriate, the trees may be used elsewhere with a reimbursement to the City for the value of the trees as determined by the Public Works Department. PLANNING 44. That the developer shall provide disclaimers to prospective buyers indicating that they are purchasing property that is within close proximity to Angel Stadium, the Grove of Anaheim and the Arrowhead Pond and that the nature of these venues include potentially audible noise (such as crowd noise, vehicular traffic noise, fireworks, and amplified sound) during events, and traffic delays during event times. 45. That the development /site may not charge for "event parking" either for the Grove or the Angel Stadium unless approved by the City. 46. That the hours of delivery shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 47. That prior to issuance of building permits, all above - ground utility devices shall be located on private property and outside any required street setback area except where specifically permitted by conditional use permit. Said information shall be shown on plans submitted for the first building permits- -7- PC2005- 48. That prior to issuance of building permits, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 49. That prior to issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully screened by architectural devices and /or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 50. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 51. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 52. That the property owner /developer shall be responsible for compliance with all mitigation measures within the assigned time frames and any direct costs associated with the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 as established by the City of Anaheim and as required by Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code to ensure implementation of those identified mitigation measures. 53. That signage for this project shall be limited to that shown on the approved Conditional Use Permit exhibits submitted by the project applicant, on file in the Planning Department. The building elevation signage (excluding window signs) shall be of the same type for all units. Any additional signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Director. 54. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, the OWNER shall undertake and implement the maintenance of certain landscaping, private street and private utilities, and the performance of other obligations, as set forth herein. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, OWNER shall execute and record with the Orange County Recorder an unsubordinated covenant to run with the land, satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney, creating maintenance obligations to maintain the following areas and facilities (collectively referred to hereinafter as the "Maintenance Areas and Facilities ") as indicated below: • Private Street at the east portion of the project including sidewalks, landscaping, street lighting, signage, striping and parkways. • Private sewer lines, grease interceptors, and clean outs. • Private storm drain lines, area drains, inlets, and catch basins. • Water Quality Management Plan Best Management Practices. • Internal landscape areas, courtyards, common areas. • Internal hardscape. • Parkway landscaping. • Parkway hardscape. • Onsite fountains and art elements. • Enclosed parking structures with mail facilities, rubbish collection areas, and bicycle storage. • Appliances in each dwelling unit including washer, dryer, stove, refrigerator, microwave, and dishwasher. • HVAC equipment in each dwelling unit- -8- PC2005- • Recreational amenities areas including pools & spas, barbecue areas, clubhouse meeting room(s) and workout room. • Public restrooms. • Site lighting systems. • Trash collection and facilities including the Solid Waste Management Plan for the project as approved by the City. • Squeal -free surface in parking structure. • Maintenance of on -site signs and awnings. • Outdoor seating and dining areas. The obligations described above and depicted in the Maintenance Exhibit shall collectively be referred to as the "Maintenance Obligations." OWNER shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Maintenance Areas and Facilities and performance of the Maintenance Obligations, including any additional obligations, which may be specified herein. The Covenant may provide any of the Maintenance Obligations may be assumed by a duly formed Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and /or Maintenance Assessment District subject to CITY'S written approval. The covenant set forth herein constitutes a general scheme for the development, protection and maintenance of the Property. Said covenant is for the benefit of the Property and shall bind all successor owners thereof. Such covenant shall be a burden upon, and a benefit to, not only the OWNER but also its successors and assigns. Such covenant is intended to be and shall be declared to be running with the land or equitable servitudes upon the land, as the case may be. The Covenant shall provide that amendment of any provision thereof, which may negatively impact performance of the Maintenance Obligations, shall require prior written consent of the City. Termination of this Covenant is not a release of Declarant with regard to Declarant's independent obligations in connection with development and approval of the Project or with regard to obligations and liabilities incurred prior to such termination. 55. That the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. 56. That the mail delivery parking stall shall be posted with a sign that indicates that it is a reserved space for mail delivery during the hours of potential mail service. POLICE 57. That prior to issuance of building permits, closed circuit television (CCTV) security cameras shall be installed to monitor the parking structures and the mailrooms to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department. CCTV cameras shall be strategically located throughout the parking structure, mailroom and lobby, covering all areas, especially all pedestrian and vehicular access points. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 58. That prior to issuance of building permits, each individual building and unit shall be clearly marked with its appropriate building number and address. These numbers shall be positioned so they are easily viewed from vehicular and pedestrian pathways throughout the complex. Main building numbers shall be a minimum of 12 inches in height. Main building numbers and address numbers shall be illuminated during hours of darkness. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits- -9- PC2005- 59. That prior to issuance of building permits, 4 -foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of each building in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from view of the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 60. That prior to issuance of building permits, pedestrian and vehicular access control shall be required to prevent unwanted entry. A digital keypad entry system shall be included to facilitate quick response by emergency personnel. The system's entry code shall be provided to the Anaheim Police Department Communications Bureau and the Anaheim Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 61. That prior to issuance of building permits, that adequate lighting on all levels of the parking structures, including circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on -site. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 62. That prior to issuance of building permits, common rooms, such as gym facilities, recreation areas, laundry rooms, conference rooms, etc., should have transparent doors, have view panels installed in solid doors, or have a window installed next to the door for increased visibility into the room. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 63. That prior to issuance of building permits, a minimum lighting level of one (1) foot - candle measured at the parking surface shall be maintained for the parking structure with a maximum to minimum ratio no greater than 10:1. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. POLICE — ABC 64. At all times when the premise is open for business, the premise shall be maintained as a bona fide restaurant and shall provide a menu containing an assortment of foods normally offered in such restaurant. 65. Petitioner shall not share any profits, or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person, based upon monies collected as a door charge, cover charge, or any other form of admission charge, including minimum drink orders, or the sale of drinks. 66. There shall be no pool tables or amusement devices maintained upon the premises at any time unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim. 67. The gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 40 percent of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating the separate amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages and other items. These records shall be made available for inspection by any City of Anaheim official when requested. 68. There shall be no live entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted on the premise at any time unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim. 69. The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premise shall be prohibited. 70. There shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. 71. The activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties. 72. That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premise (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a public premise as defined in Section 23039 of the Business and Professions Code. 73. There shall be no admission fee, cover charge, nor minimum purchase required. 74. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot- _10- PC2005- Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminated the windows of nearby residences. 75. That all doors serving subject restaurant shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed at all times during the operation of the premises except for ingress /egress, permit deliveries and in cases of emergency. 76. That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and Profession Code so as not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit- sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. 77. At all times that entertainment or dancing is permitted, security measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct on the part of employees or patrons, and promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, and to prevent disturbance to the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises. 78. There shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building . 79. Any and all security officers provided shall comply with all State and Local ordinances regulating their services, including, without limitation, Chapter 11.5 of Division 3 of the California Business and Profession Code. (Section 4.16.070 Anaheim Municipal Code) FIRE 80. That prior to structural framing, fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and approved by the Fire Department. 81. That an all- weather access road as approved by the Fire Department shall be provided during project construction. 82. That prior to issuance of building permits, fire hydrants shall meet minimum Fire Department Specifications and Requirements for spacing, distance to structure and available fire flow. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 83. That prior to issuance of building permits, emergency vehicular access shall be provided and maintained in accordance with Fire Department Specifications and Requirements. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 84. That prior to issuance of building permits, an automatic fire sprinkler system shall be designed, installed and maintained as required by the Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 85. That prior to issuance of building permits, a fire alarm system shall be designed, installed and maintained as required by the Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 86. That prior to issuance of building permits, lockable pedestrian and /or vehicular access gates shall be equipped with Knox devices as required and approved by the Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 87. That prior to issuance of building permits, any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at property owner /developer expense. Landscape and /or hardscape screening of all pad- mounted equipment shall be required outside the easement area of the equipment. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 88. That prior to issuance of building permits, the legal property owner shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement along /across high voltage lines, low voltage lines crossing private property and around all pad mounted transformers, switches, capacitors, etc. for electrical service lines to be determined as electrical design is completed to the satisfaction of the Electrical Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. Said easement shall be submitted to the City of Anaheim prior to connection of electrical service- _11- PC2005- 89. That the property is to be served with underground utilities per the Electrical Rates, Rules, and Regulations, and the City of Anaheim Underground Policy. 90. Prior to issuance of building permits, streetlights shall be installed along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street according to The Platinum Triangle Guidelines and Specifications. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits- 91 - That prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner /developer shall underground overhead facilities if required and provide easements in a location acceptable to the Anaheim Public Utilities Department that shall interface with and /or replace the existing overhead 12kV and communication distribution systems. 92. That the relocation of existing facilities and /or installation of new systems shall be timed to coincide with the level of development that would require this improvement, to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department and other utility companies. 93. That prior to approval of grading plans and street improvement plans, the property owner /developer shall coordinate site development with the Anaheim Public Utilities Department- Electrical Engineering Division to ensure proper locating of electrical service equipment (transformers, switches, vaults, etc.) in accordance with the Electrical Engineering Construction Standards, Anaheim's Rates, Rules and Regulations and standard design criteria. 94. That prior to approval of grading plans the property owner /developer shall meet and confer with Anaheim Public Utilities Department- Electrical Engineering Division regarding special service requirement for large multiple story mixed -use buildings maximizing lot coverage. 95. That prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner /developer of the property shall coordinate its service requirements and relocation issues with Anaheim and the other utility companies involved. 96. That prior to issuance of building permits, all electrical facilities that are located on the project boundary shall be relocated underground and all existing services that are fed from the overhead system shall be converted to underground at the expense of the developer/owner- 97. That this Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 2005- 00435, Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005- 00113), Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044, Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16800, now pending. 98. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by project applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 40, and as conditioned herein. 99. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 47, 48, 49, 54, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90, 91, 95, and 96, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 100. That prior to issuance of the grading permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 30, 31, 35, 41, 93 and 94, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 101. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition No. 98, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 102. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement- -12- PC2005- BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the property owner /developer is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice, prior to the issuance of building permits or commencement of activity for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 1 2005- SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -13- PC2005- [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO- 2005-00004 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING, AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATED THERETO (2100 and 2110 EAST KATELLAAVENUE) WHEREAS, Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7 (commencing with Section 65864) of the Government Code of the State of California (hereinafter the "Statute ") authorizes a city to enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of the property as provided in said Statute; and WHEREAS, upon request of an applicant, cities are required to establish procedures and requirements by resolution or ordinance for the consideration of development agreements; and WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim (hereinafter the "City ") heretofore on November 23, 1982, enacted Ordinance No. 4377 (hereinafter the "Enabling Ordinance ") which makes the City subject to the Statute; and WHEREAS, pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65865 of the Statute, the City heretofore on November 23, 1982, adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (hereinafter the "Procedures Resolution ") establishing procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application by the City, and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim ( "General Plan Amendment "), and certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ( "FEIR No. 330 "), in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General Plan Amendment, amendment of the City's zoning code, and a series of related actions; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment sets forth a vision for development of Mixed Uses, Office High, Office Low, Industrial and Institutional land uses within an approximately 820 -acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north ( "hereinafter referred to as The Platinum Triangle "); and WHEREAS, in order to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, on August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -177, approving The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, setting forth the new vision for The Platinum Triangle; and WHEREAS, to further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle and pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 18.76 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, on August 24, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5378 amending Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to establish zoning and development standards for the Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (the "PTMU Overlay Zone ") and Ordinance No. 5936, amending the zoning map to reclassify approximately three hundred and seventy -five acres within The Platinum Triangle into the PTMU Overlay Zone as depicted in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to provide opportunities for high quality well- designed development projects that could be stand -alone projects or that combine residential with non- residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area; and Cr1PC2005- -1- PC2005- WHEREAS, the PTMU Overlay Zone requires an approved Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement between the property owner and the City of Anaheim to implement all development in the Katella, Gene Autry Arena and Gateway Districts of the PTMU Overlay Zone, except as otherwise exempt under the Code; and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -179, approving the form of the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle PTMU Overlay Zone; and WHEREAS, in connection with adoption of The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone, and the form of the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle, the City Council by motion, as lead agency for the proposed actions, determined that FEIR No. 330 and the associated Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, were in compliance with CEQA and the state and City CEQA guidelines and were adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for said actions based upon findings set forth in said motion; and WHEREAS, on May 20, 2005, pursuant to the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance, and the Procedures Resolution (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Development Agreement Law "), Western Pacific Housing ( "Owner'), submitted an application to the Planning Department for approval of Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 (the "Application "), which included a proposed development agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "Development Agreement ") prepared in conformance with the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle to vest certain project entitlements and address the implementation of the Anaheim Stadium Project; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement pertains to 3.49 acres of real property in the City of Anaheim, equitably owned by the Applicant, commonly known as 2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue (the "Property "), which is located in The Platinum Triangle and zoned PTMU Overlay ( Katella District), and more particularly shown and described on Exhibit "A ", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, Applicant desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement by developing a multiple family residential and mixed use commercial project consisting of 251 residential dwelling units and 9,764 square feet of commercial and restaurant uses, as more particularly set forth in Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00004 and Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 16800 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Project "); and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2005, the Planning Director approved Final Site Plan No. 2005- 00004 to provide for the development of the Platinum Centre Condominium Project, contingent upon the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2005 - 00435, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044, Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04967, Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00004, by the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to hear and consider evidence for and against said Development Agreement, General Plan Amendment No. 2005 - 00435, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044, Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 and Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 16800 and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has demonstrated that the Project meets the eligibility requirements of the Procedures Resolution to enter into the Development Agreement by showing that, upon completion, the Project will result in the construction of 251 dwelling units and 9,764 square feet of commercial and restaurant uses within a period of not more than five (5) years; and -2- PC2005- WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of and based upon all of the evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine that the Development Agreement meets the following standards set forth in the Procedures Resolution: 1. That the Project is consistent with the City's General Plan as amended by this request in that it is in conformance with the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation and with the goals, policies and objectives for The Platinum Triangle as set forth in the General Plan. 2. That the Project is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district in that the Project is in compliance with the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements as set forth in Final Site Plan No. 2005 - 00004, which was approved by the Planning Director, and General Plan Amendment No. 2005 - 00435, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044, Conditional Use Permit 2005 - 04967, Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 16800, which was approved by the Planning Commission on July 25, 2005. 3. That the Project is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area in that it is in conformance with and implements The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements. 4. That the Project is not otherwise detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 5. That the Development Agreement constitutes a lawful, present exercise of the City's police power and authority under the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution. 6. That the Development Agreement is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with its charter powers and the requirements of Section 65867 of the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution. 7. That' *' indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 - to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing for a 251 -unit residential condominium mixed use project with 9,764 square feet of commercial and restaurant uses in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 2005- 04967 - to modify setbacks along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street to construct a 251 unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,347 square feet of retail General Plan Amendment No. 2005- 00435 — to amend the land use element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 -00113 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District and Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 -to establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision; and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA'), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Development Agreement and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development -3- PC2005- Agreement and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon the aforesaid findings and determinations, the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council the approval of the Application and the Development Agreement. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 1 2005- SENIOR SECRETARY. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2005- EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL & THAT PORTION OF LOT 5, TRACT 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89° 59' 15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08' 00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 59'15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM SAID CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 7, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010069995, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DISTANT SOUTH 89° 59' 15" EAST 748.00 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND (SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5); THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING, NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5, A DISTANCE OF 595.06 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE 60.00 FEET WIDE, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000.00 FEET FROM TANGENT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 70 38'28" WEST THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18 -5- PC2005- 17'32" A DISTANCE OF 31926 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO RANDALL RAY BIVENS AND WIFE, BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 5285, PAGE 252, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 0 08'00" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 538.52 FEET TO SAID SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS; THENCE SOUTH 89 59' 15" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, 313.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIAAVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89 59'15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0° 08' 00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH THE DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08' 00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 59'15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTELRY FROM SAID CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. I_ 1 Wei y (ygi110 [elk I:Iq:7g9:li] LTA 0I:I_\ 21010 910] 0 N7 N [i]1.79]M61y:71:3g9L1- 1&]1XiWTid BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANCE 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 00° 07' 37" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1060.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10° 12' 14 " A DISTANCE OF 188.78 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF EXCEPTION TO THE LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 00 45' 13" WEST 1223 FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO A POINT ON A NON - TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1072.00 FEET, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 10° 12' 19" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10 05' 17" A DISTANCE OF 188.75 FEET TO SAID WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS; THENCE NORTH 00 0 45' 13" EAST 1200 . FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM IN DEED RECORDED APRIL 24, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010245967, OFFICIAL RECORDS- -6- PC2005- July 25, 2005 Western Pacific Housing (D. R. Horton) 16755 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92606 Attention: Sandy Sanchez Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. 4a. CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130 4b. General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00435 4c. Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 -00113 4d. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 4e. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 4f. Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 4g. Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 Owner: Western Pacific Housing 16755 Von Karman Ave., Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92606 Agent: Sandy Sanchez, Western Pacific Housing (D. R. Horton) Western Pacific Housing 16755 Von Karman Ave., Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92606 Location: 2100 -2110 East Katella Avenue. This regularly- shaped, 3.49 -acre property has a frontage of 318 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue with a maximum depth of 496 feet, 432 feet east of the centerline of State College Boulevard (2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue — Anaheim Stadium). General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00435 - to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle. Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 - 00113 —to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 —to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 —to modify the required setbacks adjacent to Katella Avenue and the proposed private street to construct a 251 unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,347 square feet of retail and under authority of Code Section No. 1820.030.010 and 1820.090.050. Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 —to establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision. Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 - to recommend City Council adoption of a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing for the Anaheim Stadium Project (to construct a 251 -unit condominium mixed use complex with 9,764 square feet of retail and restaurant uses). The Planning Commission's role is to review the land use aspects of the Agreement, specifically to determine if the eligibility criteria has been met, if the Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and if the project implemented by the Agreement is compatible with the development of the surrounding area. The City Council will consider approval of the Agreement. ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the Tentative Tract Map in conjunction with Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 -to adopt a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Western Pacific Housing for a 251 -unit residential condominium mixed use project with 9,764 square feet of commercial and restaurant uses in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 - to modify setbacks along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street to construct a 251 unit mixed use residential condominium project including a 7,397 square foot restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption and 2,347 square feet of retail General Plan Amendment No- 2005-00435 — to amend the land use element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle, Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005 -00113 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District, and Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 -00044 - to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District; and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Development Agreement and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the proposed tentative map, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan as amended by this request, and does therefore approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16800, to establish a 1 -lot, 251 -unit airspace attached residential condominium project within a mixed use project subject to the following conditions: That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder (Subdivision Map Act, Section 66499.40). 2. That prior to final tract map approval, the vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue except at street intersection shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. 3. That prior to final tract map approval, the legal owner of subject property shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for street, public utility and other public purposes for Katella Avenue. 4. That prior to final tract map approval, the legal owner of subject property shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for emergency, public utility and other public purposes for the westerly Fire Access over the private street. 5. That prior to final map approval, the legal property owner shall furnish a Subdivision Agreement to the City of Anaheim, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney's Office, agreeing to complete the public improvements required as conditions of the map at the legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and shall than be recorded concurrently with the final map. All public improvements shall be constructed within one year of recordation of the final map. 6. That prior to final map approval, a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's Office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities including compliance with an approved Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall also include provisions for regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash and debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. This covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 7. That the developer will be responsible to construct a 15" & 18" sewer line in Katella Avenue to the State College Boulevard trunk line. The project's civil engineer shall prepare final construction drawings for the complete sewer line. Costs associated with the design and construction of the sewer line may be used to offset the sewer impact fees. If the developer's costs exceed the required sewer impact fees, the developer may request creation of a reimbursement agreement to provide for the reimbursement of the constructed sewer line at such time as the adjacent properties develop and connect to the sewer line. 8. That prior to final map approval, improvement plans for construction 15" and 18" sewer line for Katella Avenue along the project frontage to the State College Blvd. trunk line shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and bonds shall be posted in an amount approved by the City Engineer and form approved by the City Attorney's office prior to issuance of a building permit or plan approval whichever occurs first. The improvements shall be constructed prior to final building and zoning inspections. 9. That prior to grading plan approval, grading shall conform to requirements of Chapter 17.04 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Submit the grading plan to the Department of Public Works, Development Services Division for review and approval. A grading permit is required for cut or fills exceeding 500 cubic yards. Allow at least 8 weeks to obtain a grading permit. 10. That prior to grading plan approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number. The applicant shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City review on request. 11. That all private streets, private sewers and private storm drains shall be privately maintained. 12. That prior to final map approval, all existing structures shall be demolished. The legal property owner shall obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division. 13. That prior to final map approval, all units shall be assigned street addresses by the Building Division. Street names for any new public or private street (if requested by the developer or required by the City) shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Division. 14. That prior to final tract map approval, the developer to acquire the necessary dedications from the adjacent property owner for the other part of the Private Street/Fire Access outside the tract boundary to be irrevocably offered for dedication to the City an easement for emergency, public utility and other public purposes. 15. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Supplemental Sewer Impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $430/ 1,000 GSF for floor building area developed between the 0.4 and the 1.0 floor area ratio developments. 16. That prior to approval of the grading plan, the City of Anaheim Drainage Impact Mitigation Fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $35,000/ net acre. Credit will be applied for the current development. The project architect or engineer must document the existing impervious area and the proposed impervious area. If the impervious area remains the same or decreases, no fee is due. If the impervious area increases, the fee will be proportional to the increase. 17. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Arterial Highway beautification /aesthetics impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $12,500/ gross acre. 18. That prior to final map approval, street and landscape improvement plans for Katella Avenue and Private Street/Fire Access shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and bonds shall be posted in an amount approved by the City Engineer and form approved by the City Attorney's office prior to issuance of a building permit or plan approval whichever occurs first. The improvements shall be constructed prior to certificate of occupancy. 19. That prior to the issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that • Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMP's) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMP's as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMP's as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMP's. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's, and • Describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's. 20. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: • Demonstrate that all structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. • Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. 21. That prior to final tract map approval, an agreement for maintaining all the Water Quality Management Plan BMP's, which treat or prevent pollutants which do or could flow to a common drainage area (including but not limited to street sweeping and treatment control BMPs in the common private streetffire access road), shall be obtained from the property to the west and shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's Office. The agreement shall include provisions for responsibility of maintenance of private facilities and a maintenance exhibit. The agreement shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 22. That prior to grading plan approval, a Drainage Report shall be submitted to Subdivision Section for review and approval prior to grading plan approval. 23. That any connection to OCFCD channel shall be subject to approval of the OCFCD. 24. That prior to final tract map approval, an easement for the proposed 10'x10' RCB shall be irrevocably offered for dedication on the Tentative Tract Map 16800. A storm drain alignment study is required if a storm drain easement is to not dedicated within this Tract 16800. A study shall be submitted to Development Services Division of the Public Works Department on the storm drain re- alignment to determine where it should be placed. The study should consider the existing buildings to the north of the site, the existing RCB, existing underground utilities in Katella Avenue, design slope, minimum radii and geometric constraints for a box culvert, etc. Prior to Tentative Tract Map 16800 approval, the study of the proposed 10'x10' box alignment shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department Development Services Division. 25. That prior to final map approval, tract fees shall be paid and tract bonds shall be posted. 26. That prior to final map approval, an unsubordinated use covenantlagreement shall be recorded for shared use of the emergency fire access. The covenantlagreement shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney's office and the Fire Department. 27. That prior to final map approval, the City Engineer and City Attorney shall approve and the property owner shall record a maintenance covenant providing for the continued operation and maintenance of the street as a private street. 28. That prior to the recordation of the tract map associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for the undergrounding of all overhead electrical utility structures located on the property and the construction of streetlights as required by CUP2005- 04967, FSP2005- 00004, TTM 16800, and MMP. 130 referenced herein. All improvements /under grounding shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 29. That prior to grading plan approval, Condition Nos. 9, 10, 16, 19 and 22, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 30. That prior to final tract map approval, Condition Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, 18, 21, 24, 25, 26, and 27, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 31. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim Planning Commission rrrrs11 ifier-M City of Anaheim POLICE DEPARTMENT Special Operations Division To: Judy Dadant Planning Department From: Sergeant Mike Lozeau Vice Detail Date: July 15, 2005 Attachment - Item No. 4 RE: CUP 2005 -04967 Restaurant within the Platinum Triangle 2100 E. Katella Ave. Anaheim, CA 92805 The Police Department has received a route sheet for CUP 2005- 04967. The applicant is requesting to have a restaurant with sales of alcoholic beverages within a mixed -use project titled the Platinum Triangle. The location is within Reporting District 2128, which has a crime rate of 60 percent above average. It is also within census tract number 761.01, which has a population of 5,264. This population allows for 6 on sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there are presently 6 licenses in the tract. The Reporting District north of the location is 2028; it has a crime rate of 56 percent above average. The Reporting District east is 2129; it does not report a crime rate (mostly City of Orange). West is 2127; with a rate of 19 percent below average, and south of the location is 2228; with a crime rate of 78 percent below average. The census tract boundaries are: North Katella South Orangewood East Santa Ana River West State College Off sale licenses in the immediate vicinity of the applicant: 1435 W. Chapman Ave 2245 W. Chapman Ave Anaheim Police Dept. 425 S. Harbor Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 TEL 714.765.1401 FAX 714.765.1665 Memorandum Judy Dadant 2100 E. Katella On sale licenses in the vicinity of the applicant 2200 E. Katella 2075 E. Katella 1535 W. Chapman 400 N. State College 450 N. State College 3000 W. Chapman The census tracts surrounding this location are as follows: North — 863.03 On Sale allowed 5 /active 18 pending 2 South — Orange population 4,546 Off Sale allowed 3 /active 5 West — 863.03 On Sale allowed 5 /active 18 pending 2 East — Orange population 4,546 Off Sale allowed 3 /active 5 Additional Census Tract information: North West — 863.03 On Sale allowed 5 /active 18 pending 2 North East —Orange population 4,546 Off Sale allowed 3 /active 5 South West — Orange South East —Orange Please see original memo for conditions. Contact me at extension 1451 if you require further information. f:AhomeAmmirwin \2005 -04967 CUP Platinum Triangle Restaurant 2.doc Page 2 Attachment - Item No. 4 P.C. Date: July 25, 2005 Existing A.B.C. Sites: 761.01 863.03 1 2075 E KATELLAAVE STEA 2 2200 E KATELLAAVE Four addition licenses in the City of Orange 1535 W. Chapman 400 N. State College 450 N. State College 3000 W. Chapman 31105 E KATELLAAVE 41199 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD 51201 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD 61210 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD 71210 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD 81221 & 1331 E KATELLAAVE 9 1340 SANDERSON AVE 10 1440 S ANAHEIM BLVD H8 11 1440 SANAHEIM BLVD SP H2 & 11 12 1759 S CLAUDINA WAY 13 1759 S CLAUDINA WAY 141801 E KATELLAAVE 151801 S STATE COLLEGE BLVD 161929 -1939 S STATE COLLEGE BL 17 2000 G EN E AUTRY VVY 18 2020 E BALL RD 19 2100 E BALL RD 20 2438 E KATELLAAVE 21 2550 E KATELLAAVE 22 2610 E KATELLAAVE 23 2695 E KATELLAAVE 24 710 E KATELLAAVE Legend 1 On Sale License Off Sale License Pending License Suspended /Surrendered Not In Use License 219.22 Census Tract 6/3/1 Licenses: Flowed /Active / Pending 1936 -1 CUP 2005 -04967 CENSUS TRACT MAP CUP 2005-04967 Attachment - Item No. 4 POLICE REPORTING DISTRICT MAP P.C. Date: July 25, 2005 Proposed Site: ANAHEIM STADIUM RESTAURANT 2100 E. KATELLA AVE. 1244 Police Reporting Districts 184 % + /- Percentage Above or Below the Average Number of Crimes per District Citywide Attachment - Item No. 4 ATTACHMENT "A" FINAL SITE PLAN Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 Anaheim Stadium — Anaheim ESP 2005 - 00004— List of Exhibits Architectural Plans Sheets Title Exhibit No. 1 Sheet A -02 Site Plan and Summa Exhibit No. 2 Sheet A -04 Ground Level Floor Plan Exhibit No. 3 Sheet A -05 Parking Plan Exhibit No. 4 Sheet A -06 1st Floor Plan Exhibit No. 5 Sheet A -07 2nd, 3rd, 4th Floor Building Plan Exhibit No. 6 Sheet A -08 5th Floor Plan Exhibit No. 7 Sheet A -09 Roof Plan Exhibit No. 8 Northeast Corner Renderin Exhibit No. 9 North Elevation Renderin Exhibit No. 10 South Elevation Renderin Exhibit No. 11 SheetA -00 Colored Street Elevations North/West Exhibit No. 12 Sheet A -01 Colored Street Elevations South /East Exhibit No. 13 Sheet A -10 Building Elevation North/West Exhibit No. 14 Sheet A -11 Building Elevation South /East Exhibit No. 15 SheetA -12 Building Sections Exhibit No. 16 Sheet A -03 Residential Open Space Analysis Plan Exhibit No. 17 Sheet A -13 Unit Plans 1, 2, and 3 Exhibit No. 18 Sheet A -14 Unit Plans 4 and 5 Exhibit No. 19 Sheet A -15 Unit Plans 6 and 7 Exhibit No. 20 Sheet A -16 Enlarged Retail /Restaurant Exhibit No. 21 SheetA -17 Enlarged Elevations & Wall Sections Exhibit No. 22 Sheet A -18 Trash Enclosure /Chute Details Exhibit No. 23 Sheet A -19 Enlarged Lobby & Recreation Areas Exhibit No. 24 Sheet A -20 Interior Corridor Section and Details Landscape Plans Exhibit No. 25 Sheet L -1 Conceptual Landscape- Street Level Exhibit No. 26 Sheet L -2 Enlarged Street Level Landscape Plan Exhibit No. 27 Sheet L -3 1s Level Outdoor Recreation Plan Exhibit No. 28 Sheet L-4 5� Level and Site Furnishings Exhibit No. 29 Sheet L -5 Street Sections, Fencing Plans Lighting Plans Exhibit No. 30 Sheet E -01 Sight Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 31 Sheet E -3 Courtyard Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 32 Sheet E -5 Ground Level Retail/Parking/Security/Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 33 Sheet E -7 Subteranean Parking Light Plan Exhibit No. 34 Sheet E -9 Elevation North and West Lighting Layout Exhibit No. 35 Sheet E -10 Elevation South and West Lighting Layout Exhibit No. 36 Sheet E -11 Lighting Fixture Cut Sheets Other Plans Exhibit No. 37 Sheet 1 of 1 Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 Exhibit No. 38 Sheet 1 of 1 Preliminary Grading Plan Exhibit No. 39 Sheets 3 -13 Sign Plans Exhibit No. 40 Color & Materials Board *All exhibits in this table are incorporated into Development Agreement No. 2005- 00004; however, the noted exhibits (reduced in size) are attached for ease of reference. Full size sheets of all exhibits are provided in the Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00004 on file in the Planning Department. fsp2005 -00004 memo attach a Attachment - Item No. 4 ATTACHMENT "B" Development Intensities for the Katella, Gene Autry and Gateway Districts Amendment to the Katella District - Residential (Anaheim Stadium, PC Date 7/25/05) District PTMU Overlay Table 20 -D Residential (Dwelling Units) Approved by Previous Entitlements Existing' Approved Remaining Proposed by FSP 2005 -00004 New Construction Demolition Remaining Katella 4,250 0 1,075 3,175 251 0 419,840 2,924 Gene Autry 1,000 0 0 1,000 0 0 100,000 1,000 Gateway 1,750 0 618 1,132 0 0 122,000 1,132 Total 7,000 0 0 5,307 0 0 641,840 5,056 District PTMU Overlay Table 20 -D Approved by Existing' Office (Square Feet) Previous Entitlements Approved 2 Remainin Proposed New Construction by FSP 2005 -00004 Demolition Remainin 3 Katella 775,000 385,160 4,156 - 44,100 419,840 0 0 419,840 Gene Autry 100,000 0 0 0 100,000 0 0 100,000 Gateway 530,000 408,000 0 0 122,000 0 0 122,000 Total 1,405,000 793,160 87,832 0 641,840 0 0 641,840 District PTMU Overlay Table 20 -D Commercial (Square Feet) Approved by Previous Entitlements Existing' Approved Remaining Pro New Construction 3osed by FSP2005 -00004 Demolition Remaining Katella 544,300 524,300 15,844 4,156 9,764 0 -5,608 Gene Autry 50,000 5,230 0 44,770 0 0 44,770 Gateway 50,000 1,330 0 48,670 0 0 48,670 Total 644,300 530,860 0 97,596 0 0 87,832 1 Existing at time of EIR No. 330 was circulated (March 18, 2004) Z Approved is net approved (amount proposed minus amount demolished) 3 Following approval of FSP No. 2005 - 00004. Negative amount indicates increase in square footage proposed under GPA2005- 00435. ° Negative number indicates demoliton Attachment - Item No. 4 To: Sheri Vander Dussen, Planning Director From: Judy Dadant, Senior Planner Date: July 21, 2005 RE: FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2005-00004 ANABEIM STADIUM (2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue) The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) requires an approved Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement between the property owner and the City of Anaheim for all development that implements the PTMU Overlay Zone in the Katella District, except as otherwise exempt under the Code. A Final Site Plan Application is required to be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Director as to conformance with the provisions of the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. The approved Final Site Plan is then attached as an exhibit to the Development Agreement. The Agreement is submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council for review at a noticed public hearing. When a Final Site Plan application includes a request for a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit, the PTMU Overlay Zone requires the Variance and/or Conditional Use Permit applications to be processed concurrently with the Development Agreement. The project applicant (Western Pacific Housing) has submitted Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00004 to the Planning Department to provide for the development of the Anaheim Stadium project (a high - density urban mixed -use center with 251 for -sale residential units located above 2,347 square feet of retail use and 7,397 square feet of restaurant use and one level of subterranean parking) in the PTMU Overlay Zone, Katella District. The project site encompasses approximately 3.49 acres at 2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue and is currently developed with two office buildings. All of the existing uses will be demolished in connection with the proposed development. The applicant has also submitted a request for a General Plan Amendment (GPA2005- 00435) to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle; Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (MIS2005- 00113) to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to increase the maximum square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District; Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA2005- 00044) to amend the July 20, 2005 Attachment - Item No. 4 Final Site Plan Review No. 2005 -00004 Page 2 of 2 Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone to increase the maximum permitted square footage of commercial uses in the Katella District; and Conditional Use Permit (CUP2005- 04967) for the proposed Anaheim Stadium project to modify required setbacks along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street and to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in the proposed 7,397 square foot restaurant. As required by the PTMU Overlay Zone, the Conditional Use Permit will be considered in connection with the Development Agreement. Both applications are agendized for a Planning Commission public hearing on July 25, 2005, with an anticipated City Council public hearing date of September 13, 2005. Staff has reviewed the submitted Final Site Plan application, including the exhibits listed on Attachment `A' to this memo which are on file and available for review in the Planning Department and Attachment `B', Development Intensities for the Katella, Gene Autry and Gateway Districts. With the exception of the modifications requested pursuant to the Conditional Use Permit application which are under the purview of the Planning Commission and City Council, staff has determined that the Final Site Plan application is in conformance with the provisions of the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Director, by signature below, approve Final Site Plan No. 2005- 00004. Approval of Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00004 is contingent upon the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2005- 00435, Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005- 00113), Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005- 00044, Conditional Use Permit No. 2005- 04967, Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Approved by: Sheri Vander Dussen, Planning Director Date att6- fsp2005 -00004 memo Attachment - Item No. 4 o ° 4 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 130 FOR D.R. HORTON MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT CEOA Action Mitigated Negative Declaration Project Description D.R. Horton (dba Western Pacific Housing) proposes development of a mixed -use project within The Platinum Triangle area of the City of Anaheim. The applicant proposes development of 251 residential condominium units and 9,764 square feet of commercial uses within a six-story building, with associated driveways, sidewalks and landscaping on a 3.49 acre site. Project implementation would involve the demolition of an existing two -story commercial office complex (Kayco Plaza) on the site and the development of 251 condominiums in one interconnected six -story structure. The commercial uses will be situated on the first floor of the building along the frontage of Katella Avenue and a portion of the eastern side of the building. Parking will be within a subterranean level and at street level within the structure. The residential condominium units will be situated within the five stories above the commercial and parking uses. Maximum building height will be approximately 65 feet. Project Location The proposed project site is located within the Platinum Triangle area of the City of Anaheim at 2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue. The site is located on the south side of Katella Avenue, between State College Boulevard to the west and Sportstown to the east. The site encompasses two contiguous parcels, APN 232 - 021 -14 and APN 232 - 021 -15. The project site is currently developed with a two -story, multi - tenant office building complex. The site is located northwesterly of Angel Stadium, southwesterly of the Amtrak/Metrolink Station and rail line, west of the Orange Freeway (I -57), and east of the Santa Ana Freeway (I -5). Terms and Definitions 1. Property Owner/Developer — Any owner or developer of real property within the DR. Horton Mixed -Use Development 2. Environmental Equivalent/ Timing —Any Mitigation Measure andtiming thereof, subjeetto the approval of the City, whichwill have the same or superior result and will have the same or superior effecton the environment The Planning Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed "environmental equivalent/timing" and, if determined necessary, may refer said determination to the Planning Commission. Any costs associated with the information required in order to make a determination of environmental equivalency /timing shall be home by the property owner /developer. Staff time for reviews will be charged on a time and materials basis at the rate in the City's adopted fee schedule. 3. Timing — This is the point where a mitigation measure must be monitored for compliance. In the case where multiple action items are indicated, it is the first point where compliance associated with the mitigation measure mustbe monitored. Once the initial action item has been complied with, no additional monitoring pursuantto the Mitigation Monitoring Program will occur because routine City practices and procedures will ensure that the intent of the measure has been complied with. For example, if the timing is "to be shown on approved building plans" subsequent to issuance of the building permit consistent with the approved plans will be final building and zoning inspections pursuant to the building permit to ensure compliance. 4. Responsibility for Monitoring — Shall mean that compliance with the subject mitigation measure(s) shall be reviewed and determined adequate by all departments listed for each mitigation measure. 5. Ongoing Mitigation Measures— The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this mitigation monitoring program will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner /developer in January of each year stating how compliance with the subject measures(s) has been achieved. When compliance with a measure has been demonstrated for a period of one year, monitoring of the measure will be deemed to be satisfied and no further monitoring will occur. For measures that are to be monitored "Ongoing During Construction," the annual letter will review those measures only while construction is occurring. Monitoring will be discontinued after construction is completed. 6. Building Permit —For purposes of this mitigation monitoring program, a building permit shall be defined as any permit issued for construction of a new building or structural expansion or modification of any existing building but shall not include any permits required for interior tenant improvements or minor additions to an existing structure or building. D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page I of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion AESTHETICS AE -1 Prior to the approval Where adjacent uses are deemed to be shadow sensitive, the property owner /developer for future Planning of each building development projects shall demonstrate that the proposed project would not preclude shadow Department, permit sensitive receptors' exposure to natural sunlightfor at least 50 percent of duration for the season, for Building Division at least 50 percent of the shade sensitive area, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. AGRICULTURAL No Mitigation Required N/A RESOURCES AIR QUALITY AQ -1 Prior to the approval To reducethe health impacts of aircuality hazardswithin The Platinum Triangle, placementofwood Public Works of each building burning fireplaces in residential units shall be prohibited. As an alternative to wood burning Department, permit fireplaces, gas fireplaces may be used. Engineering Division AQ -2 Prior to the approval The property owner /developer shall use zero - Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)- content Public Works of each building architectural coatings during the construction of the project to the maximum extent feasible. This Department, permit measurewould reduce VOC( ROC) emissions by 95 percent over convention architectural coatings. Engineering Division The following are websites that provide lists of manufacturers of zero -VOC- content coatings: • http:// vwAv .agmd.gov /businesstbrochures /zerovoc.html • http: / /vwAv.delta- institute .org /publicationstpaints.pdf • http: / /vwAv.cleanaircounts. org/ factsheets /FS %20PDF /LOw%2OVOC %2OPaint.pdf 2 -1 On -going during The following measures will reduce these emissions: South Coast Air (MMP 106) grading and a) The contractor will ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and Quality construction maintained to reduce operational emissions. Management District b) Where feasible, the contractor shall use low emission mobile construction. Public Works c) The contractor shall utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean -fuel generators Department, Field rather than temporary power generators where feasible. Engineering Division 2 -2 On -going during The following measures shall also be implemented in order to reduce PM10 emissions. South Coast Air (MMP 106) grading and a) The property owner /developer shall implement standard mitigation measures in accordance with Quality construction SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403, to control fugitive dust emissions and ensure that nuisance dust Management District conditions do not occur during construction. Public Works b) In addition to the standard measures, the property owner /developer shall implement Department, Field supplemental measures as feasible to reduce fugitive dust emissions to the extent feasible during Engineering Division construction operations. To assure compliance, the City shall verify compliance that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections. The measures to Planning be implemented are listed below: Department, • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. Planning Division • Pave onsite haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion overextended periods D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 2 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and afterthe end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and usesound engineering practices. • Restore landscaping and irrigation that are removed during construction in coordination with local public agencies. • Sweep streets on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. • Suspend grading operations during high winds in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Wash off trucks leaving site. • Maintain a minimum 12 -inch freeboard ratio on haul trucks. • Cover payloads on trucks hauling soil using tarps or other suitable means 2 -3 Prior to the approval The property owner /developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export Plans. These plans shall Planning (MMP 106) of each grading plan include identification of offsite Iocationsfor materials export from the projectand optionsfor disposal Department, (for Import/Export of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials onsite or to an adjacent site, Building Division Plan) and prior to sale to a soil broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally issuance of cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The property owner /developer demolition permits shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private (for Demolition firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if not all can be reused at the Plans) project site. 24 Prior to the approval The property owner/developer shall submit evidence that high-solids orwater-based lowernissions South Coast Air (MMP 106) of each building paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with Quality permit SCAQMD regulations. This information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. Management District Additionally, the property owner /developer shall specify the use of high volume /low pressure spray equipment or hand application. Air atomized spray techniques shall not be permitted. 2 -5 Timing as required The following measures shall be implemented to reduce long -term operational CO, NOx, ROG, Public Works (MMP 106) by Traffic and and PM10 emissions: Department, Traffic Transportation Traffic lane improvements and signalization as outlined in the traffic study and MPAH shall and Transportation Manager be implemented as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manger. Division • The property owner /contractor shall place bus benches and /or shelters as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager at locations along any site frontage routes as needed. 2 -6 Prior to the issuance While mobile source emission do present the greatest source of impact, all emissions add to the Planning (MMP 106) of a building permit cumulative total and further mitigation is warranted to reduce stationary source emissions as well. Department, These emissions will be reduced though the following: Building Division • The property owner /contractor shall specify the installation of energy efficient lighting, air conditioning, water heaters, and appliances. • The property owner /contractor as feasible shall specify the installation of insulation in D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 3 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion excess of Title 24 requirements. 2 -7 Prior to issuance of Implementation of energy conservations techniques (i.e., installation of energy saving devices, Public Works (MMP 106) a building permit construction of electrical vehicle charging stations, use of sunlight filtering window coatings or Department, double -paned windows, utilization of light- colored roofing materials as opposed to dark - colored Engineering roofing materials, and placement of shady trees next to habitable structures) shall be indicated on Division, Traffic and plans. Transportation Division Planning Department, Building Division BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES B -1 On -going during The project shall be required to comply with the MBTA [Migratory Bird Treaty Act]. Migratory bird Planning grading and impacts can be avoided by scheduling construction, including tree removal, demolition, and grading Department, construction outside of the breeding season, which extends from February 15 to August 31. If construction is Building Division scheduled to occur during the nesting season, a qualified biologist shall be retained and shall conduct a nesting bird survey within three days prior to the commencement of construction activities to determine the presence of migratory birds and their nests. If an active nest is detected, a minimum buffer of 150 feet between the nest and the limit of construction will be flagged. No construction activities are permitted within this buffer zone until it is determined by the biologistthat the nest is no longer occupied. CULTURAL RESOURCES 8 -1 Prior to approval of The property owner /developer shall submit a letter to the Public Works/Engineering Department, Public Works (MMP 106) a grading plan as Development Division, and the Planning Department, Planning Division, identifying the certified Department, required by the archaeologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: Development Public Works a) The archaeologist must be present at the pre - grading conference in order to establish Services Division Department proceduresfor temporarily halting or redirecting workto permitthe sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered Planning and determined to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions Department, in cooperation with the property owner /developer for exploration and /or salvage. Planning Division b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c) Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. d) A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted to the City Engineer. Upon completion of the grading, the archaeologist shall notify the City to when the final report will be submitted. D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 4 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion 8 -2 Prior to approval of The property owner /developer shall submit a letter to the Public Works/Engineering Department, Public Works (MMP 106) a grading plan as Development Division, and the Planning Department, Planning Division, identifying the certified Department, required by the paleontologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented: Development Public Works a) The paleontologist must be present at the pre - grading conference in order to establish Services Division Department procedures to temporarily halt or redirect work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation offossils if potentially significant paleontological observer shall determine appropriate Planning actions in cooperation with the property owner /developer for exploration and /or salvage. Department, Planning Division b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c) Any paleontological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered during grading operations when the paleontological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. d) A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted. Upon the completion of the grading, the paleontologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted. GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4 -1 Prior to approval of The property owner /developer shall submitto the Public Works Department a site specific report in Public Works (MMP 106) a grading plan if compliance with DMG Special Publication 117 "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Department, within Seismic Hazards in California." The report shall be prepared by an engineering geologist and geotechnical Development Hazard Zone engineer. All grading shall be in conformance with Title 17 of the City of Anaheim Municipal Code. Services Division 4 -2 Prior to issuance of The property owner /developer shall submit for review and approval, detailed foundation design Planning (MMP 106) each building permit information forthe proposed buildings, prepared by a civil engineer, based on recommendations of a Department, geotechnical engineer. Building Division 4 -3 Prior to the issuance The property owner /developer shall submit report prepared by geotechnical engineer for review Planning (MMP 106) of each foundation and approval which shall investigate the subject foundation excavations. Department, permit Building Division 44 Prior to the issuance The property owner /developer shall submit plans showing that the proposed structure(s) has been Planning (MMP 106) of each building analyzed for earthquake loading and designed according tothe most recent seismic standards inthe Department, permit Uniform Building Code adopted by the City of Anaheim. Building Division 4 -6 Ongoing during The property owner/ developershallimplementstandardpracticesfromCityOrdinance (Title17 )and Public Works (MMP 106) grading operations policies. Department, Field Engineering Division HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HM -1 Prior to the issuance All structures to be demolished during site preparation of the proposed project shall be investigated South Coast Air of grading permit for ACM [asbestos containing materials] contamination during the Plans, Specifications, and Quality Estimates (PS &E) stage. An ACM investigation of the onsite buildings shall be conducted during the Management District early stage of design. If ACM contamination isfound, the results /conclusions shall be included in the PS &E package and the Resident Engineer's File bythe design consultant. If ACM is present, proper Planning D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 5 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion removal, decontamination and disposal procedures shall be implemented prior to demolition and Department, grading. Building Division Public Works Department, Engineering Division HM -2 Prior to the issuance Prior to issuance of grading permits for each development project, a Phase I Site Assessment shall Fire Department, of grading permit be prepared by the property owner /developer and submitted to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department, Development Services Division, for review and approval. If actual or potential impacts Orange County are identified by the Phase I, a Phase 11 ESA [Environmental Site Assessment] will be completed for Health Care Agency the site by the owner /developer and the results will be submitted to the Public Works, Development Services Division. During the Phase II ESA, samples from potential areas of concern will be Public Works collected and submitted for laboratory analysis to confirm the nature and extent of potential impacts. Department, If hazardous materials are identified during the site assessments, the property owner /developer shall Engineering Division notify the finding to the Anaheim Fire Department and the appropriate response /remedial measures will be implemented in accordance with the directives of the OCHCA [Orange County Health Care Agency] and /or the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), as appropriate. If soil is encountered during site development that is suspected of being impacted by hazardous materials, work will be halted and site conditions will be evaluated by a qualified environmental professional. The results of the evaluation will be submitted to OCHCA and /or RWQCB, and the appropriate response /remedial measures will be implemented, as directed by OCHCA, RWQCB, or other applicable oversight agency, until all specified requirements of the oversight agencies are satisfied and a no- further -action status is attained. HM -3 Prior to the issuance Prior to issuance of a grading permit or a demolition permit for any building, an asbestos survey Planning of grading/ shall be conducted and submitted to the Planning Department, Building Division, by the property Department, Demolition permit owner / developer. If the materials are found to contain asbestosfibers, demolition shall be conducted Building Division in accordance with the remediation and mitigation procedures detailed in Remediation Procedures Report, and in accordance with Federal, State and local law. Buildings constructed prior to 1973 shall be screened for lead -based paint prior to demolition. If lead -based paint is identified, it shall be mitigated in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Remediation Procedures Report. 7 -1 Ongoing during In the eventthat hazardous waste is discovered during site preparation or construction, the property Orange County (MMP 106) demolition and owner /developer shall ensure that the identified hazardous waste and /or hazardous material is Health Care Agency construction handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5) and according to the requirements Fire Department of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. 7 -2 Ongoing during The applicant shall handle and dispose of all hazardous materials and wastes during the operation Fire Department (MMP 106) project operation and maintenance of facilities in accordance with the state codes identified in Mitigation Measure No. 2 above. 7 -3 Prior to issuance of The property owner /developer send a Notification Letter to businesses in proximityto the projectto Planning (MMP 106) the first residential inform them of the presence of the sensitive use (i.e., residential land uses). The letter shall request Department, building permit that the mixed -use project property owner /residents be notified of any accident at the nearby Building Division businesses that may involve the release of hazardous substances. The Good Neighbor Program shall also require that the future project property owner/ developer prepare a Safety Plan, which D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 6 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion shall be implemented ongoing during project operation that includes staff training, emergencytools, and first aid provisions, supervision of children or other individuals in an emergency situation, and a shelter -in -place program for when evacuation is not appropriate or practicable. 74 Prior to final building The owner /developer shall prepare a Safety Plan, which shall be implemented ongoing during Planning (MMP106) and zoning proj . ectoperation that includes staff training, emergencytools, and firstaid provisions, supervision of Department, inspections children or other individuals in an emergency situation, and a shelter -in -place program for when Building Division evacuation is not appropriate or practicable. 7 -5 Prior to final building For any residential project within 1,000 feet of a use that has the potential to release substantial Planning (MMP 106) and zoning amounts of airborne hazardous materials (determined to be "Category 1, 2, or 3" hazardous Department, inspections materials), the project property owner /developer shall submit a shelter -in -place program to the Building Division Planning Director for reviewand approval. The shelter -in -place program shall require the property owner /developer to purchase a subscription to a service that provides "automated emergency notification" to individual residents (subject to meeting minimum standards set by the City) of the project. The shelter -in -place program shall include the following: • The property owner /developer shall be required to purchase a minimum 10 -year subscription to such a service that would include periodic testing (at least annually). • The CC&Rs for each individual project shall require that each property owner and/or project Homeowners Association (HOA): • Maintain a subscription following expiration of the initial purchased subscription. • Maintain in a timely manner the database of resident phone numbers in conjunction with the service. • Provide appropriate agencies (police, fire, other emergency response as identified by the City) with information on how to activate the notification via the service provider. The CC &Rs for each individual project shall require that each resident provide the property owner /HOA with a current phone number for the residence and /or individual residents, this would include timely notification following the sale of a unit and would require notification if the unit were rented or leased or subject to any other change in occupancy. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY WQ -1 Prior to issuance of The City Engineer shall reviewthe location of each projectto determine if it is located within an area Public Works building permit served by deficient drainage facilities, as identified in The Platinum Triangle Drainage Study. If the Department, project will increase storm water flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan Engineering Division drainage study for the area or if the project currently discharges to an existing deficient storm drain system or will create a deficiency in an existing storm drain, the property owner /developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impactto adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney's Office. The property owner /developer shall be required to install the drainage facilities, as required by the City Engineer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the Development Mitigation within Benefit Zones (Appendix E of The Platinum Triangle Drainage Study), prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building /structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner /developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, if adopted for the Project Area, as determined by the City Engineer, which could include D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 7 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. 5 -2 Prior to the issuance The property owner /developer shall submit plans documenting that the design of all aboveground Public Works (MMP 106) of building permits structures (with the exception of parking structures) shall be at least 3 feet higher thatthe 100 -year Department, flood zone, where applicable, unless otherwise required by the City Engineer. All structures below Development this level shall be flood - proofed to prevent damage to property or harm to people. Services Division 54 At least 90 days For projects greater than five acres, a NOI [Notice of Intent] shall be filed with the RWQCB by the Public Works (MMP 106) prior to the initiation property owner /developer pursuant to state and federal NPDES [National Pollution Discharge Department, of grading activities Elimination System] requirements. As part of the NOI, a SWPPP [Storm Water Pollution Prevention Development Plan] shall be prepared. The property owner /developer shall also prepare and submit to RWQCB Services Division [Regional Water Quality Control Board], a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) in accordance with the City's municipal NPDES requirements and the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. The SWPPP, in conjunction with the WQMP, will describe the structural and nonstructural BMPs [Best Management Practices] thatwill be implemented during construction (short-term) within the project area as well as BMPs for long -term operation of the project area. Long -term measures could include, but may not be limited to street sweeping, trash collection, proper materials storage, designated wash areas connected to sanitary sewers, filter and grease traps, and clarifiers for surface parking areas. LAND USE AND PLANNING No Mitigation Required N/A MINERAL RESOURCES No Mitigation Required N/A NOISE N -1 Prior to issuance of Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner /developer shall be responsible Planning the first building for the submittal of plans and a final acoustical report prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, permit Department that shows that the development shall be sound attenuated against present and Planning Division projected noise levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter, railroad, and stadium noise, in compliance with the City's interior noise standards in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. The final acoustical report shall be based upon the Noise Analyses for the D.R. Horton Mixed -Use Project provided in Appendix F of the Initial Study. N -2 Prior to issuance of Priorto the issuance of thefirst building permitthe property owner/applicant shall submita detailed Planning the first building construction schedule including proposed equipment use. An acoustical study shall be prepared to Department, permit refine anticipated noise levels associated with construction activities and to assess the potential Planning Division impact on scheduled activities at The Grove. The study shall detail mitigation to offset potential vibration and noise impacts that could significantly affect events at The Grove. The study shall include the actual schedule for events at The Grove and include a monitoring program to assure that measures are implemented. Such measures may include temporary cessation of construction activities, partial cessation of activities, or altering activities during the events. Example measures include the following: • Limit truck traffic or activity to the western half of the project site. • Utilize smaller size construction equipment during events at The Grove. 3 -1 During demolition, Noise generated by construction, shall be limited by the property owner /developer to 60 dBA along Planning D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 8 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion (MMP 106) grading, and the property boundaries, before 7 a.m. and after 7 p.m., as governed by Chapter 6.7, Sound Department, construction Pressure Levels, of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Building and Code Enforcement Divisions 3 -2 During demolition, Limit the hours of operation of equipment that produces noise levels noticeably above general Public Works (MMP 106) grading, and construction noise levels to the hours of 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Department, Field construction Engineering Division 3 -3 During demolition, All internal combustion engines on all of the construction equipment shall be properly outfitted with Public Works (MMP 106) grading, and well maintained muffler systems. Department, Field construction Engineering Division 34 Prior to issuance of For any project generating over 100 peak hour trips, the project property owner /developers shall Planning (MMP 106) building permits submit a final acoustical report prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The report Department, shall showthat the development will be sound - attenuated against present and projected noise Building Division levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter and railroad, to meet City interior and exterior noise standards. POPULATION AND HOUSING I No Mitigation Required N/A PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Protection 6.1 -1 Prior to approval of The property owner /developer shall submit an emergency fire access plan to the Fire Department Fire Department (MMP 106) a Grading Plan for review and approval to ensure that service to the site is in accordance with Fire Department requirements. 6.1 -2 Prior to the issuance Plans shall indicate that all buildings shall have fire sprinklers installed by the property Fire Department (MMP 106) of each building owner /developer in accordancewith the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed permit prior to each final building and zoning inspection. 6.1 -3 Prior to Fire hydrants required shall be installed and charged by the property owner /developer, as required Fire Department (MMP 106) commencement of and approved by the Fire Department. onsite structure framing 6.14 Prior to the issuance The property owner /developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan, which shall include Fire Department (MMP 106) of each building detailed design plans for accessibility of emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant location, and any permit other construction features required by the Fire Marshal. The property owner /developer shall be responsible for securing facilities acceptable to the Fire Department and hydrants shall be operational with require fire flow. 6.1 -5 Prior to approval of The water supply system shall be designed by the property owner/developer to provide sufficientfire Fire Department (MMP 106) street improvement flow pressure and storage for the proposed land use and fire protection in accordance with Fire plans Department requirements. D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 9 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion 6.1 -6 Prior to issuance of Projects shall be reviewed by the City of Anaheim on an individual basis and will be required to Fire Department (MMP 106) building permits complywith requirements in effectatthetime building permits are issued (i.e., impactfees, etc.) or if an initial study is prepared and the City determines the impactsto be significant, then the projectwill be required to comply with appropriate mitigation measures (i.e., fire station sites, etc. Police Protection 6.2 -1 Prior to the approval The property owner /developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval Police Department (MMP 106) of Final Site Plan for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including the concept of crime and issuance of prevention through environmental design (i.e., building design, circulation, site planning and lighting each building permit of parking structure and parking areas). Rooftop addresses shall be provided for all parking structures (for the police helicopter). Minimum size for numbers shall be 4 feet in height and 2 feet in width. The lines for the numbers shall be 6 inches thick and spaced 12 to 18 inches apart. All numbers shall have a contrasting color to the parking structure and shall face the street to which the structure is addressed. 6.2 -2 Prior to the issuance The property owner /developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval Police Department (MMP 106) of each building indicating the provision of closed circuit monitoring and recording or other substitute security permit for a parking measures as may be approved by the Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented structure prior to final building and zoning inspections. 6.2 -3 Prior to the issuance The property owner /developer shall submit design plans that shall include parking lots and parking Police Department (MMP 106) of each building structureswith controlled access pointsto limit ingress and egress if determinedto be necessary by permit the Police Department, and shall be subject to the reviews and approval of the Police Department. 6.24 Ongoing during If the Anaheim Police Department or Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are Police Department (MMP 106) project operation required to provide temporary traff ic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. Public Works Department, Traffic Management Center 6.2 -5 Prior to issuance of Projects shall be reviewed by the City of Anaheim on an individual basis and will be required to Police Department (MMP 106) building permits complywith requirements in effectatthetime building permits are issued (i.e., impactfees, etc.) or if an initial study is prepared and the City determines the impactsto be significant, then the projectwill Public Works be required to comply with appropriate mitigation measures (i.e., police station sites, etc.). Department, Traffic Management Center Schools 6.4 -1 Ongoing The City of Anaheim will work cooperatively with school districts to identify sites for new schools Community (MMP 106) and school expansions in The Platinum Triangle. Development Department, Redevelopment Services Planning Department, Zoning D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 10 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion Division 6.5 -1 Prior to issuance of The property owner /developer shall provide proof to the Building Division of Planning Planning (MMP 106) each building permit Department that school impact fees have been paid consistent with State statutes. Department, Building Division RECREATION No Mitigation Required N/A TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC T -1 Prior to the issuance Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the applicant shall be required to construct dual Public Works of occupancy eastbound left -turn lanes or extend the single eastbound left -turn lane at the Sportstown /Katella Department, Traffic permits intersection as determined by the City. City standards for single and dual left -turn transitions are 90 and Transportation feet and 120 feet respectively. It is anticipated that the roadway improvements will also require Division removal of up to nine (9) existing, median mounted trees and replacement of at leastthree (3) trees in the re- configured median. The applicant shall coordinate the design of the reconfigured lanes and Planning median with the City. This design would be reviewed and approved bythe City Traffic Engineer prior Department, to roadway design. The applicant will receive credit towards the Platinum Triangle and Building Division Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees, as required for the project, through provision ofthese improvements. 1 -1 Prior to the issuance For new development forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Public Works (MMP 106) of grading or Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, Department, Traffic building permits, the property owner /developer shall be required to pay the City of Anaheim for all costs associated and Transportation whichever occurs with updating the applicable Transportation Model to include the trips associated with their proposed Division first development. This model update will be used to determine and program the extent and phasing of improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development. Planning Department, If the model demonstrates that the proposed developmentwill cause an intersection to operate at an Building Division unacceptable level of service (LOS "E" or "F" depending on the location), the property owner /developer shall be responsible for constructing its fair share of necessary improvements to maintain acceptable levels of service at intersections within Anaheim and surrounding municipalities for the anticipated theoretical build out of the General Plan as identified in the City's Circulation Element and Mitigation Measure 5.15 -2. 1 -2 Prior to final building The property owner /developer shall implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Public Works (MMP 106) and zoning Demand Management (TDM) program for all employees. Objectives of the TDM program shall be Department, Traffic inspection and to increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests and provide a menu of and Transportation ongoing during commute alternatives for employees to reduce project - generated trips. Objectives of the TDM Division project operation program shall be • Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests • Provide a menu of commute alternatives for employees to reduce project - generated trips. • Conduct annual commuter survey to ascertain trip generation, trip origin and Average Vehicle Ridership. A menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both existing and future employee commute options include, but are not limited to, the following: • Onsite Service. Onsite services, such as the food, retail, and other services be provided. D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page II of 18 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion • Ridesharing. A computer listing of all employee members be developed forthe purpose of providing a "matching" of employeeswith other employees who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare. • Vanpooling. A computer listing of all employees for the purpose of matching numbers of employees who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool or participate in the existing vanpool programs. • Transit Pass. Southern California Rapid Transit District and Orange County Transportation Authority (including commute rail) passes be promoted through financial assistance and onsite sales to encourage employees to use the various transit and bus services from throughout the region. • Shuttle Service. A computer listing of all employees living in proximity to the project be generated, and a local shuttle program offered to encourage employees to travel to work by means other than the automobile. Event shuttle service will be available for the guests. • Bicycling. A Bicycling Program be developed to offer a bicycling alternative to employees. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers be provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options. • Guaranteed Ride Home Program. A program to provide employees who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. • Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. An incentives program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips. • Stagger shifts. • Develop a "compressed work week' program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts as an option for employees. • Explore the possibility of a "telecommuting" program that would link some employees via electronic means (e.g., computer with modem). • Developa parking management programthat provides incentives to those who rideshareor use transit means other than single- occupant auto to travel to work. • Access. Preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles may be provided. • Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and /or Public Transit. (Currently, Federal law provides tax -free status for up to $65 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit including commuter rail and /or express bus pools) • Financial Incentive for Bicycling. Employees offered financial incentives for bicycling to work. • Special' Premium" forthe Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Ticket/passesto special events, vacations, etc. be offered to employees who recruit other employees for vanpool, carpool, or other trip reduction programs. • Design incentive programs for carpooling and other alternative transportation modes so as to put highest priority on reduction of longest commute trips. D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 12 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion 1 -3 Prior to final building The property owner /developer shalljoin and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program, if Public Works (MMP 106) and zoning established and, shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network/Transportation Department, Traffic inspections Management Association in conjunction with the ongoing operation of the project. and Transportation Manager 14 As determined by The General Plan Circulation Element and associated Planned Roadway Network Map (Figure C -1 Public Works (MMP 106) the Traffic and of the General Plan), identifies those roadways that are planned to accommodate current Department, Traffic Transportation development and future growth established bythe Land Use Element. Roadways will be constructed and Transportation Division as development occurs and as funding becomes available. In addition to the roadways identified on Division the Planned Roadway Network Map, improvements will be necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service within the anticipated theoretical build out identified in the General Plan. The north bound lane configuration for the intersection of Sportstown Way /Katella Avenue shall be changed from 1/1 /2 to 1.5/.5/2. 1 -5 Prior to issuance of Appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees shall be paid Public Works (MMP 106) each building permit by the property owner /developer to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Department, Traffic Resolution in effect at the time of issuance ofthe building permitwith credit given for City-authorized and Transportation improvements provided by the property owner /developer, and participate in all applicable Division reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. Planning Department Building Division 1 -6 Prior to approval of The property owner /developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of Public Works (MMP 106) the first final easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s) -of- Department, subdivision map or way as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan adjacent to their property. Engineering Division issuance of the first building permit, Planning whichever occurs Department, first, and subject to Building Division nexus requirements UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Water W -1 Prior to the issuance Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the Public Utilities of the first building property owner /developer shall comply with Rule 15D of the Water Utilities Rates, Rules, and Department, Water permit or grading Regulations. Rule 15 -D shall be amended to include construction of a new well with a minimum Engineering Division permit, whichever 1,500 GPM capacity within The Platinum Triangle. occurs first Planning Department, Building Division 6.6 -3 Prior to the issuance Submitted landscape plans shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Anaheim adopted the Public Utilities (MMP 106) of a building permit Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines. This ordinance is in compliance with the State of California Department, Water Conservation in Landscaping Act (AB 325). Resource Efficiency Among the measures to be implemented with the project are the following: Division D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 13 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion • Use of water- conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible, • Use of vacuums and other equipmentto reduce the use ofwaterforwash down of exterior areas, • Low -flow fittings, fixtures and equipment including low flush toilets and urinals, • Use of self - closing valves for drinking fountains, • Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors, • Infrared sensors on sinks, toilets and urinals, • Low -flow shower heads in hotels, • Infrared sensors on drinking fountains, • Use of irrigation systems primarily at night, when evaporation rates are lowest, • Water- efficient ice machines, dishwashers, clothes washers, and other water using appliances, • Cooling tower recirculating system, • Use of low flow sprinkler heads in irrigation system, • Use of waterway re- circulation systems, • Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation, and • Use of reclaimed water for irrigation and washdown when it becomes available. In conjunction with submittal of landscape and building plans, the applicant shall identify which of these measures have been incorporated into the plans. 6.64 Prior to issuance of The applicant will provide engineering studies, including network analysis, to size the water mains Public Utilities (MMP 106) the first building for ultimate development within the project. This includes detailed water usage analysis and building Department, Water permit plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering reviews and approval in determining project water Engineering requirements and appropriate water assessment fees. 6.6 -5 Prior to the issuance Projects shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation meterwhen the total landscaped Public Utilities (MMP 106) of the first building area exceeds 2,500 square feet. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) Department, Water permit or grading Engineering Division permit, whichever occurs first Planning Department, Building Division Wastewater 6.7 -2 Prior to issuance of In accordance with Title 17, Chapter 17.32 (Resolution 99R -48), the property owner /developer shall Public Works (MMP 106) a building permit submit a sewer study to the Public Works Department, prepared to the satisfaction and subject to Department, the approval of the City Engineer. If said study determines that there is currently adequate capacity Development for the proposed project, the property owner /developer shall pay the fee. If said study determines Services Division that there is not adequate capacity, the property owner /developer shall be responsible for a D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 14 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion combination of paying the fee and constructing improvements as required by the City Engineer. 6.84 Prior to approval of The City Engineer shall reviewthe location of each projectto determine if it is located within an area Public Works (MMP 106) a final subdivision served by deficient sewer facilities. If the City Engineer determines that the above condition exists, Department, map or issuance of the property owner /developer shall conduct a sanitary sewer studyto be reviewed and approved by Engineering Division a grading or building the City Engineer. If the project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the permit, whichever appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the project currently discharges to an existing Planning occurs first deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property Department, owner /developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impactto adequately serve the area Building Division to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney's Office. The property owner /developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required bythe City Engineer to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the applicable sewer deficiency study, priorto acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building /structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner /developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, if adopted for the project area, as determined by the City Engineer, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. Solid Waste 6.3 -1 Prior to issuance of The property owner /developer shall submit project plans to the Street and Sanitation Division of the Public Works (MMP 106) each building Public Works Departmentfor reviewand approval to ensurethatthe plans complywith AB939, and Department, permit, to be the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Sanitation Division implemented prior to Waste Management Plans as administered by the City of Anaheim. Implementation of said plan final building and shall commence upon occupancy and shall remain in full effect as required by the Street and zoning inspections Sanitation Division and may include, as its discretion, the following plan components: • Detailing the locations and design of onsite recycling facilities. • Providing onsite recycling receptacles to encourage recycling. • Participating in the City of Anaheim's 'Recycle Anaheim" program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City. • Facilitating paper recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and recycling bins. • Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail area) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and bailing. • Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for sorting and storing. • Providing trash compactors for non - recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and number of trips required for collection • Providing on -site recycling receptacles accessible to the public to encourage recycling for all businesses, employees, and patrons where feasible. • Prohibiting curbside pick -up. • Ensuring hazardous materials disposal complies with federal, state and city regulations. D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 15 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion 6.3 -2 On -going during The following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner /developer: Public Works (MMP 106) project operations Usage of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead, and packaging. Department, Sanitation Division • Recovery of materials, such as aluminum and cardboard. • Collection of office paper for recycling. • Collection of polystyrene (foam) cups for recycling. • Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. 6.3 -3 Prior to issuance of The property owner /developer shall submit a Demolition and Import/Export Plans, if determined to Planning (MMP 106) a demolition permit be necessary by the Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division and /or Street and Department, Sanitation Division. The plans shall include identification of offsite locations for material exportfrom Building Division (same as 2- the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of 3) materials onsite, sale to a broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move itwithin Orange County. The property owner /developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if all cannot be reused on the project site. Storm Drains 6.8 -1 Prior to approval of Projects contained within the 100 -year floodplain shall submit a detailed flood study to determine Public Works (MMP 106) a grading plan elevation of proposed buildings above the 100 -year floodplain. Department, Development Services Division 6.8 -2 Prior to issuance of A detailed drainage analysis will be required to determine if any project design features (construction Public Works (MMP 106) a building permit of landscape berms or other barriers) will retard or take storm runoff outside the limits of the public Department, right -of -ways. Measures will be required to avoid any flooding effects on downstream properties. Development Applicable storm drain improvements will be required per the SCAMPD and the revised Drainage Services Division District 27 Master Plan of Drainage. 6.8 -3 Prior to issuance of The property owner /developer shall apply for a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Public Works (MMP 106 a grading permit construction permit. This permit would require the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Department, Prevention Plan to mitigate the erosion that may occur from storm water runoff during construction Development periods. Services Division Electricity 6.9 -1 Prior to issuance of The property owner /developer shall submit plans showing that each structure will comply with the Public Utilities (MMP 106) each building permit State Energy Efficiency Standardsfor Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part6, Article 2, California Department, Code of Regulations) and will consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Resource Efficiency Resource Efficiency Division in order to review above Title 24 measures priorto each final building and zoning inspection Department to incorporate into the project design including energy efficient designs. This consultation shall take D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 16 of 18 Measure Responsible for No. Timing Measure Monitoring Completion place during project design to incorporate into the project design energy efficiency and allow potential systems alternatives such asthermal energy storage air - conditioning and building envelope options. 6.9 -2 Prior to issuance of In order to conserve energy, the property owner /developer shall implement energy- saving practices Public Utilities (MMP 106) each building permit in compliance with Title 10, which may include the following: Department, • High- efficiency air - conditioning with EMS (computer) control. Resource Efficiency Division • Variable Air Volume (VAV) air distribution. • Outside air (100 percent) economizer cycle. Planning • Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads. Department, Building Division • Isolated HVAC zone control by floors /separable activity areas. • Specification of premium- efficiency electric motors (i.e., compressor motors, air - handling units, and fan -coil units). • Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces. • Use of compact fluorescent lamps in place of incandescent lamps. • Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified. • Use of metal - halide or high - pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots. • Consideration of thermal energy storage air conditioning for hotel buildings, meeting facilities, theaters, or other intermittent -use spaces or facilities that may require air - conditioning during summer, day -peak periods. • Consideration for participation in Resource Efficiency's Programs such as: • New Construction Design Review, in which the City cost - shares engineering fees for design of energy efficient buildings and systems. • Energy Sale for New Construction - Cash incentives ($150to $400 per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements. • Thermal Energy Storage Feasibility Study - Cost sharing of up to $5,000 for the feasibility study of TES applied to new facilities. 6.9 -3 Prior to issuance of For any buildings requiring a change in electrical service, the property owner /developer shall install Public Utilities (MMP 106) each building permit an underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System. The Underground Department, Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. Electrical Service Fees and other applicable fees will be Engineering assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. 6.10 -1 Prior to the issuance The property owner /developer shall submit plans for review and approval which shall ensure that Public Utilities (MMP 106) of each building buildings are in conformance with the State Energy Conservation Standards for Nonresidential Department, permit buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Administrative Code). Public Utilities Department, Resource Efficiency Resource Efficiency Division Division D. R. Horton Nixed -Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 17 of 18 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Television 6.11 -1 New developments New developments with exteriors over 75 feet in height shall submit a baseline study prior to Planning (MMP 106) with exteriors over issuance of building permits and a final study within 6 months after building completion. A study of Department, 75 feet in height area television reception shall be undertaken bythe property owner /developer and submitted to the Planning Division shall submit a City Engineer for review and approval. If the City of Anaheim determines that the proposed project baseline study prior creates a significant impact on broadcast television reception at local residences and other existing Public Utilities to issuance of hotels /restaurants or other businesses, a signal booster or relay system shall be installed by the Department, building permits and property owner /developer immediately on the roof of the tallest project building to restore television Electrical a final study within 6 reception to its original condition. Engineering months after building completion. D. R. Horton Mxed- Use Project Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 7116105 Page 18 of 18 Attachment - Item No. 4 5. Environmental Analysis .ERRATA SHEET .- Formatted: Font: sold plans are in place for this type of emergency, potential impacts to the project site from dam failure are not considered significant. No additional mitigation is required. j) Inundation by seiche, or mudflow? No Impact. A seiche is a surface wave created when a body of water is shaken, usually by earthquake activity, Seiches are of concern relative to water storage facilities because inundation from a seiche can occur if the wave overflows a containment wall, such as the wall of a reservoir, water storage tank, dam or other artificial body of water. The project site is located approximately 18 miles away from Prado Dam and would not be impacted by a seiche related to the dam. Mudflows are landslide events in which a mass of saturated soil flows downhill as a very thick liquid. The proposed project site is flat and is not located along steep slopes or hillsides. The projectwould be required to submit grading plans to the City of Anaheim for review and approval. The potential for mudflow and landslide events is considered low. Implementation of the project site would not expose people or structures to inundation by seiche or mudflows. k) Substantially degrade water quality by contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? Less Than Significant Impact. Potential impacts to water quality are addressed above in Response 5.8 a). Construction of the proposed project would potentially involve temporary storage of materials, vehicle and equipment fueling, maintenance and washing, waste handling, hazardous materials storage and handling, grading and excavation. Occupation and operation of the project (residential and commercial uses) would involve material storage, storage and handling of minor amounts of hazardous materials, resulting in the potential discharge of pollutants that would impact water quality. Compliance with the applicable water quality regulations, programs, and permits; preparation and implementation of the SWPPP during construction and the WQMP during occupation and operation of the project; and implementation of The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, MMP No. 106, Mitigation Measures 54, and 6.8.3 would reduce potential water quality impacts to less than significant. No additional mitigation is required. I) Substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses (i.e., swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving waters? Less Than Significant Impact. Drainage from the project site directly discharges to the City storm drain system and indirectly discharges to the Santa Ana River (Reach 2) via the Southeastern Anaheim Channel. Beneficial uses have been identified for this reach of the Santa Ana River. Compliance with the requirements of the SWPPP and WQMP, including implementation of BMPs, and implementation of The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, MMP No. 106, Mitigation Measures 5 -1, 5 -4, and 6.8.3 would reduce potential water quality impacts to less than significant MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation Measures, 6-g, and 5 -4 for Hydrology and Water Quality impacts associated with The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, MMP No. 106, would remain applicable In addition, thefollowing Mitigation Measure proposed in conjunction with the updated MMP No. 106 pending adoption replaces Mitigation Measure 5 -1 and. also applicable to the proposed project, and will be included in the consolidated MMP to be adopted for the proposed D.R. Horton project: tnundation Map, Rate 2. August 1985. ME Deleted: 5.1 Deleted: 3 Deleted:, D.R. Horton Mixed -Use Project Initial Study The Planning Center • Page 65 City ofAnaheim July 2005 Attachment - Item No. 4 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Council City of Anaheim c/o City Clerk P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92805 (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005-00004 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING, INC. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005-00004 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page RECITALS......................................................................................................... ............................... Section1. DEFINITIONS ............................................................................ ............................... 1.1 ......................................................................................... ............................... 1.2 Authorizing Ordinance ................................................... ............................... 1 .3 CITY ............................................................................... ............................... 1 .4 Development ................................................................... ............................... 1.5 Development Agreement Date ........................................ ............................... 1.6 Development Agreement Statute .................................... ............................... 1.7 Development Approvals ................................................. ............................... 1 .8 Enabling Ordinance ........................................................ ............................... 1.9 Existing Land Use Regulations . ...................................... ............................... 1 .10 Final Site Plan ................................................................. ............................... 1.11 Gross Floor Area/ GFA .................................................... ............................... 1.12 Interim Development Fee ............................................... ............................... 1 .13 Mortgage ......................................................................... ............................... 1 .14 Mortgagee ....................................................................... ............................... 1 .15 Owner .............................................................................. ............................... 1 .16 Parking Areas .................................................................. ............................... 1.17 Permitted Buildings ........................................................ ............................... 1.18 Platinum Triangle Area ................................................... ............................... 1.19 Procedures Resolution .................................................... ............................... 1 .20 Proiect ............................................................................. ............................... 1 .21 Property ........................................................................... ............................... 1.22 Support Commercial Uses .............................................. ............................... 1 .23 Term ................................................................................ ............................... Section2. TERM ......................................................................................... ............................... Section 3. BINDING COVENANTS .......................................................... ............................... Section 4. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT ...................................................... ............................... Section 5. PROJECT LAND USES ............................................................. ............................... Section 6. PERMITTED BUILDINGS ........................................................ ............................... i Section 7. DENSITY OF PERMITTED BUILDINGS ............................... ............................... 7.1 Permitted Buildings ........................................................ ............................... 7.2 Parking Areas .................................................................. ............................... Section 8. ENFORCEMENT ....................................................................... ............................... Section 9. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES 9.1 Public Park ...................................................................... ............................... 9.2 Utilities (Water, Electrical, Gas, Sewer, & Drainage) .... ............................... 9.2.1 Water Service .................................................................. ............................... 9.2.2 Storm and Sewer Drains ................................................. ............................... 9.3 Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public 12.2.3 Improvements and Facilities ........................................... ............................... 9.4 Traffic Circulation Improvements .................................. ............................... Section 10. REIMBURSEMENT PROVISION ............................................ ............................... Section 11. DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS Section 12. FEES, TAXES AND ASSESSMENT ........................................ ............................... 12.1 Fees, Taxes and Assessments ......................................... ............................... 12.2 Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees ................ ............................... 12.2.1 Electrical Utilities Underg_rounding Fee ......................... ............................... 12.2.2 Fire Facilities Fee ........... ............. ................................. ............................... 12.2.3 General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee ........... ............................... 12.2.4 Library Facilities Fee ...................................................... ............................... 12.2.5 Park Fee .......................................................................... ............................... 12.2.7 Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees 12.2.8 Traffic Impact Fee .......................................................... ............................... 12.3 Excluded Development Fees ........................................... ............................... 12.3.1 Water Utilities Fees ........................................................ ............................... 12.3.2 Electrical Utilities Fees ................................................... ............................... 12.3.3 City Processing Fees ....................................................... ............................... 12.4 Platinum Triangle Area Infrastructure Funding Shortfall Fees ..................... 12.5 Accounting of Funds ....................................................... ............................... 12.6. Imposition of Increased Fees, Taxes or Assessments ..... ............................... Section 13 COVENANTS CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS ........... ............................... Section 14 NEXUS/REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES ... ............................... Section 15. TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT ................................................ ............................... ii Section 16. EXISTING USES AND REZONING ....................................... ............................... 16.1 Existing Uses .................................................................. ............................... 16.2 Rezoning ......................................................................... ............................... Section 17. FUTURE APPROVALS 17.1 Basis for Denying or Conditionally Granting Future Approvals ........................................................................ ............................... 17.2 Standard of Review ......................................................... ............................... 17.3 Future Amendments to Final Site Plan ........................... ............................... Section 18 AMENDMENT 18.1 Initiation of Amendment ................................................. ............................... 18.2 Procedure ........................................................................ ............................... 18.3 Consent ........................................................................... ............................... 18.4 Amendments ................................................................... ............................... 18.5 Effect of Amendment to Development Agreement ........ ............................... Section 19. RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND USES FOR THE PROPERTY .......................... 19.1 Non - Cancellation of Rights ........................................... ............................... Section 20. BENEFITS TO CITY ................................................................. ............................... Section 21. BENEFITS TO OWNER ............................................................ ............................... Section 22. UNDERTAKINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTEMPLATED AND PROMOTED BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATUTE ............................ Section 23. RESERVED AUTHORITY ........................................................ ............................... 23.1 State and Federal Law ..................................................... ............................... 23.2 Building Codes ............................................................... ............................... 23.3 Public Health and Safety ................................................. ............................... Section 24. CANCELLATION ...................................................................... ............................... 24.1 Initiation of Cancellation ................................................ ............................... 24.2 Procedure ........................................................................ ............................... 24.3 Consent of Both Parties .................................................. ............................... Section 25. PERIODIC REVIEW 25.1 Time for Review ............................................................. ............................... 25.2 OWNER's Submission .................................................... ............................... 25.3 Findings .......................................................................... ............................... 25.4 Initiation of Review by City Council .............................. ............................... iii Section 26. EVENTS OF DEFAULT ............................................................ ............................... 26.1 Defaults by OWNER ...................................................... ............................... 26.2 Specific Performance Remedy ........................................ ............................... 26.3 Liquidated Damages Remedy ......................................... ............................... Section 27. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION 27.1 Notice to OWNER .......................................................... ............................... 27.2 Public Hearing ................................................................ ............................... 27.3 Decision .......................................................................... ............................... 27.4 Implementation ............................................................... ............................... 27.5 Schedule for Compliance ................................................ ............................... Section 28. ASSIGNMENT ........................................................................... ............................... 28.1 Right to Assign ............................................................... ............................... 28.2 Release upon Transfer .................................................... ............................... Section 29. NO CONFLICTING ENACTMENTS ....................................... ............................... Section30. GENERAL .................................................................................. ............................... 30.1 Force Maieure ................................................................. ............................... 30.2 Construction of Development Agreement ...................... ............................... 30.3 Severability ..................................................................... ............................... 30.4 Cumulative Remedies ..................................................... ............................... 30.5 Hold Harmless Agreement .............................................. ............................... 30.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge ................. ............................... 30.7 Public Agency Coordination ........................................... ............................... 30.8 Initiative Measures .......................................................... ............................... 30.9 Attorneys' Fees ............................................................... ............................... 30.10 No Waiver ....................................................................... ............................... 30.11 Authority to Execute ....................................................... ............................... 30.12 Notice .............................................................................. ............................... 30.13 Captions .......................................................................... ............................... 30.14 Consent ........................................................................... ............................... 30.15 Further Actions and Instruments ..................................... ............................... 30.16 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute 30.17 Governing Law ............................................................... ............................... 30.18 Effect on Title ................................................................. ............................... 30.19 Mortgagee Protection ...................................................... ............................... 30.20 Notice of Default to Mortgagee: Right of Mortgageeto Cure ....................... 30.21 Bankruptcy ...................................................................... ............................... 30.22 Disaffirmance .................................................................. ............................... 30.23 No Third Party Beneficiaries .......................................... ............................... 30.24 Proiect as a Private Undertaking ..................................... ............................... 30.25 Restrictions ..................................................................... ............................... iv 30.26 Recitals ............................................................................ ............................... 30.27 Recording ........................................................................ ............................... 30.28 Title Report ..................................................................... ............................... 30.29 Entire Agreement ............................................................ ............................... 30.30 Successors and Assigns .................................................. ............................... 30.31 OWNER'S Title to Property ........................................... ............................... 30.32 Exhibits ........................................................................... ............................... LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit "A" Legal Description of the Property Exhibit "B" Final Site Plan Exhibit "C" Conditions of Approval Exhibit "D" Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees Exhibit "D -1" Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee Exhibit "D -2" Fire Facilities Fee Exhibit "D -3" General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee Exhibit "D -4" Library Facilities Fee Exhibit "D -5" Park Fee Exhibit "D -6" Police Facilities Fee Exhibit "D -7" Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees Exhibit "D -8" Traffic Impact Fee Exhibit "D" Development and Maintenance Obligations Exhibit "E" Preliminary Title Report v DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00004 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND WESSTERN PACIFIC HOUSING, INC. This Development Agreement is entered into this day of 2005_, by and between the City of Anaheim, a charter city and municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "CITY ") and Western Pacific Housing, Inc. (hereinafter "OWNER "), pursuant to the authority set forth in Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7, Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Statute "). RECITALS This Development Agreement is predicated upon the following facts: A. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California adopted the Development Agreement Statute, Sections 65864, et seq., of the Government Code. The Development Agreement Statute authorizes CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other things: encourage and provide for the development of public facilities in order to support development projects; provide certainty in the approval of development projects in order to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in project costs and encourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning which will make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public; provide assurance to the applicants of development projects (1) that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, subject to the conditions of approval of such projects and provisions of such development agreements, and (2) encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development. B. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms which are defined in this Development Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. C. On May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00419 setting forth the CITY's vision for development of the City of Anaheim (the "General Plan Amendment "), and certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ( "FEIR No. 330 "), in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General Plan Amendment, amendment of CITY's zoning code, and a series of related actions. D. CITY desires that the approximately 820 -acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north (hereinafter called "The Platinum Triangle Area ") be developed as a combination of high quality industrial, office, commercial and residential uses, as envisioned in the General Plan Amendment. E. In order to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, on August 17, 2004, the City Council approved The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, setting forth the new vision for The Platinum Triangle. F. To further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, the City Council has established The Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (hereinafter the "PTMU Overlay Zone ") consisting of approximately three hundred and seventy -five acres within The Platinum Triangle as depicted in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to provide opportunities for high quality well - designed development projects that could be stand -alone projects or combine residential with non - residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area. G. OWNER represents that it owns in fee approximately 3.49 acres of real property located at 2100 and 2110 East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806, in the City, County of Orange (hereinafter "County "), State of California (hereinafter collectively called the "Property") in The Platinum Triangle and zoned PTMU Overlay and more particularly shown and described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. H. OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Development Agreement by developing 251 for -sale condominium units (1 -3 bedrooms) ranging from 992 SF to 1,527 SF and approximately 9,764 SF of retail and restaurant uses in a 6 -story structure. The commercial uses will be situated on the first floor of the building along the frontage of Katella and along a portion of the eastern side of the building. Parking will be accommodated within a subterranean level and at street level within the structure. There are 92 dedicated parking spaces for the commercial use and 467 spaces for the residents. All residential units will have balconies and all residents will have the use of an on site gym, pool, spa, community room, roof top deck as well as other amenities as more particularly set forth in the Final Site Plan (hereinafter collectively called the "Project "). L CITY desires to accomplish the goals and objectives set forth in the CITY's General Plan and the objectives for the PTMU Overlay Zone as set forth in subsection 18.20.010.020 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and finds that the Project will accomplish said goals and objectives. 2 J. The City Council, as duly recommended by the Planning Commission, adopted Ordinance No.5936 on August 24, 2004, reclassifying the property in The Platinum Triangle, including the Property, into the PTMU Overlay Zone. K. Pursuant to the Final Site Plan, OWNER will submit tentative maps and/or vesting tentative maps, if required. OWNER further anticipates the submission of detailed construction plans and other documentation required by CITY in order for the OWNER to obtain its building permits. L. As consideration for the benefits gained from the vested rights acquired pursuant to the Development Agreement Statute, to conform with the requirements of the PTMU Overlay Zone, and to comply with the applicable mitigation measures imposed by Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130 for the Project, CITY is requiring that OWNER construct and install a number of public improvements, including off -site traffic circulation improvements, and provide other public benefits. M. In order to avoid any misunderstandings or disputes which may arise from time to time between OWNER and CITY concerning the proposed development of the Project and to assure each party of the intention of the other as to the processing of any land use entitlements which now or hereafter may be required for such development, the parties believe it is desirable to set forth their intentions and understandings in this Development Agreement. In order for both CITY and OWNER to achieve their respective objectives, it is imperative that each be as certain as possible that OWNER will develop and that CITY will permit OWNER to develop the Project and public improvements as approved by CITY within the time periods provided in this Development Agreement. N. CITY, as a charter city, has enacted Ordinance No. 4377 on November 23, 1982, which makes CITY subject to the Development Agreement Statute. Pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement Statute, CITY adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (the "Procedures Resolution ") on November 23, 1982. The Procedures Resolution establishes procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application. O. On July 7, 2005 as required by Section 1.0 of the Procedures Resolution, OWNER submitted to the Planning Department an application for approval of a development agreement (hereinafter called the "Application "). The Application included a proposed development agreement (the "Proposed Development Agreement "). P. On June 30, 2005, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 2.1 of the Procedures Resolution, the Planning Director gave public notice of the City Planning Commission's intention to consider a recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of a development agreement. Q. On July 25, 2005, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 2.2 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Application. R. On that date, the City Planning Commission, after considering an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for this Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, found and determined that FEIR No 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Agreement and the Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. S. The Planning Commission further found that the Development Agreement meets the following standards set forth in Section 2.3 of the Procedures Resolution, to wit, that the Proposed Project: (a) is consistent with the CITY's existing General Plan, (b) is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district, (c) is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area and (d) is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of CITY. Based upon the aforesaid fmdings, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Application and this Development Agreement pursuant to Resolution No. PC T. On , 2005, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 3.1 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Clerk caused public notice to be given of the City Council's intention to consider adoption of a development agreement. U. On 2005 as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 3.2 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Council held a public hearing on the Application. V. On that date, the City Council after considering an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for this Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, found and determined that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Agreement and the Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. 11 W. On , 2005 the City Council found and determined that this Development Agreement: (i) is consistent with the CITY's existing General Plan; (ii) is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of CITY; (iii) is entered into pursuant to and constitutes a present exercise of the CITY's police power; and (iv) is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and the Procedures Resolution. X. In preparing and adopting the General Plan and in granting the Development Approvals, CITY considered the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of CITY and prepared in this regard an extensive environmental impact report and other studies. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in preparing and adopting the General Plan and in granting the Development Approvals, the City Council carefully considered and determined the projected needs (taking into consideration the planned development of the Project and all other areas within the CITY) for water service, sewer service, storm drains, electrical facilities, traffic /circulation infrastructure, police and fire services, paramedic and similar improvements, facilities and services within The Platinum Triangle, and the appropriateness of the density and intensity of the development comprising the Project and the needs of the CITY and surrounding areas for other infrastructure. Y. On , 2005, the City Council adopted the Authorizing Ordinance authorizing the execution of this Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Statute, as it applies to CITY, and pursuant to the Enabling Ordinance, the Procedures Resolution and the CITY's inherent powers as a charter city, and pursuant to the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement, and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. 1.1 Assessment District "Assessment District" for purposes of this Development Agreement means a special district, assessment district or benefit area existing pursuant to State law or the charter powers of the CITY for purposes of financing the cost of public improvements, facilities, services and/or public facilities fees within a distinct geographic area of the CITY. 1.2 Authorizing Ordinance The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance No. approving this Development Agreement. 1.3 CITY The "CITY" means the City of Anaheim, a charter city and municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under its charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of California. 1.4 Development "Development' means the improvement of the Property for purposes of effecting the structures, improvements and facilities comprising the Project, including, without limitation: grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Project whether located within or outside the Property; the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.5 Development Agreement Date The "Development Agreement Date" means the later of (i) the date of recordation in the office of the County Recorder of this Development Agreement, or a memorandum thereof, or (ii) the effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance. 1.6 Development Agreement Statute The "Development Agreement Statute" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Development Agreement Date. 1.7 Development Approvals "Development Approvals" means the Final Site Plan and all site specific plans, maps, permits and other entitlements to use of every kind and nature contemplated by the Final Site Plan which are approved or granted by CITY in connection with development of the Property, including, but not limited to: site plans, tentative and final subdivision maps, vesting tentative maps, variances, conditional use permits and grading, building and other similar permits. To the extent any of such site specific plans, maps, permits and other entitlements to use are amended from time to time, "Development Approvals" shall include, if OWNER and CITY agree in writing, such matters as so amended. If this Development Agreement is required by law to be amended in order for 'Development Approvals" to include any such amendments, 'Development Approvals" shall not include such amendments unless and until this Development Agreement is so amended. 1.8 Enabling Ordinance The "Enabling Ordinance" means Ordinance No. 4377 enacted by the CITY on November 23, 1982. 1.9 Existing Land Use Regulations "Existing Land Use Regulations" mean the ordinances and regulations adopted by the City of Anaheim in effect on the Effective Date, including the adopting ordinances and regulations that govern the permitted uses of land, the density and intensity of use, and the design, improvement, construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property, including, but not limited to, the General Plan, the Zoning Code, The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106, Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130, and all other ordinances of the City establishing subdivision standards, park regulations, impact or development fees and building and improvement standards. Existing Land Use Regulations do not include non -land use regulations, which includes taxes. 1.10 Final Site Plan The "Final Site Plan" means the Project as described in this Development Agreement and conditions with respect thereto, as set forth as Exhibit 'B" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. 6 1.1 l Gross Floor Area/GFA "Gross Floor Area" or "GFA" means the gross floor area of any of the Permitted Buildings. 1.12 Interim Development Fees "Interim Development Fees" are the fees imposed within The Platinum Triangle pending adoption of permanent fee programs by the City as set forth in Paragraph 12.2 of this Agreement. 1.13 Mortgage "Mortgage" means a mortgage, deed of trust or sale and leaseback arrangement or other transaction in which the Property, or a portion thereof or an interest therein, is pledged as security. 1.14 Mortgagee "Mortgagee" means the holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage, or the owner of the Property, or interest therein, under a Mortgage. 1.15 Owner "Owner" is Western Pacific Housing, Inc., and any person or entity with which or into which Western Pacific Housing, Inc., may merge, and any person or entity who may acquire substantially all of the assets of Western Pacific Housing, Inc., and any person or entity who receives any of the rights or obligations of under this Development Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Section 28 (Assignment) of this Development Agreement. 1.16 Parking Areas The "Parking Areas" means all parking structure(s), and /or all surface parking servicing the Project. 1.17 Permitted Buildings "Permitted Buildings" include 251 for -sale Condominium building plus retail/restaurant built on six-story above ground structure and the Parking Areas as identified in Section 6 of this Development Agreement and as further set forth in the Final Site Plan. This Development Agreement establishes maximum and minimum characteristics for each of the Permitted Buildings, as set forth in the Final Site Plan. 1.18 Platinum Triangle Area "The Platinum Triangle" means that portion of the City of Anaheim generally bounded on the east by the Santa Ana River, on the south by the Anaheim city limits, on the west by the Santa Ana Freeway, and on the north by the Southern California Edison Easement. 1.19 Procedures Resolution The "Procedures Resolution" is Resolution No. 82R -565 adopted by CITY pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement Statute. 1.20 Project The "Project' means the development project contemplated by the Final Site Plan with respect to the Property, including but not limited to on -site and off -site improvements, as such development project is further defined, enhanced or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Development Agreement. 7 1.21 Property. The "Property" means that certain real property shown and described on Exhibit "A" to this Development Agreement. 1.22 Support Commercial Uses "Support Commercial Uses" are commercial \retail uses which may include retail uses, banking or financial offices, food service, restaurants, service establishments and other similar uses in keeping with the nature of the Project and the required uses needed to support the occupants of office buildings, other office development, sports and entertainment venues and residential development in The Platinum Triangle. 1.23 Term. "Term" is defined in Section 2 of this Development Agreement. Section 2. TERM 2.1 The term (hereinafter called "Term ") of this Development Agreement shall be that period of time during which this Development Agreement shall be in effect and bind the parties hereto. The Term shall commence on the Development Agreement Date and shall extend for a period of five (5) years thereafter, terminating at the end of the day on the fifth anniversary of the Development Agreement Date, subject to the periodic review and modification or termination provisions defined in Section 25 and Section 27, respectively, of this Development Agreement, and further subject to a reasonable extension for completion of the Project in accordance with the Timing of Development schedule set forth in Section 15 of this Development Agreement. 2.2 This Development Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the occurrence of the entry of a final judgment or issuance of a final order, after all appeals have been exhausted, directed to CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against CITY to set aside, withdraw or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Development Agreement or if termination occurs pursuant to the provisions of the Procedures Resolution and such termination is so intended thereby. 2.3 If not already terminated by reason of any other provision in this Development Agreement, or for any other reason, this Development Agreement shall automatically terminate and be of no further force and effect upon completion of the Project pursuant to the terms of this Development Agreement and any further amendments thereto and the issuance of all occupancy permits and acceptance by CITY of all dedications and improvements as required by the development of the Project. Section 3. BINDING COVENANTS The provisions of this Development Agreement to the extent permitted by law shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits of this Development Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. Section 4. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT As a material part of the consideration of this Development Agreement, unless otherwise provided herein, the parties agree that the Existing Land Use Regulations shall be applicable to development of the Project. In connection with all subsequent discretionary actions by CITY required to implement the Final Site Plan and any discretionary actions which CITY takes or has the right to take under this Development Agreement relating to the Project, including any review, approval, renewal, conditional approval or denial, CITY, shall exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which complies and is consistent with the Final Site Plan, the Existing Land Use Regulations (as the same may be modified in accordance with this Development Agreement) and such other standards, terms and conditions expressly contained in this Development Agreement. CITY shall accept and timely process, in the normal manner for processing such matters as may then be applicable, all applications for further approvals with respect to the Project called for or required under this Development Agreement, including, any necessary site plan, tentative map, vesting tentative map, final map and any grading, construction or other permits filed by OWNER in accordance with the Development Approvals. Section 5. PROJECT LAND USES The Property shall be used for such uses as may be permitted by the Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use Regulations. The duration of this Development Agreement, the density and intensity of use, developable GFA, footprint square footage, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings and structures, lot sizes, set back requirements, zoning, public improvements, and the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes shall be those set forth in the Development Approvals, the Existing Land Use Regulations and this Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65865.2 of the Development Agreement Statute. Section 6. PERMITTED BUILDINGS 6.1 Description of Permitted Buildings The Permitted Buildings to be located on the Property shall be as set forth on the Final Site Plan. The Project shall be constructed substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. 6.2 Parking Areas The Parking Areas shall be constructed so that there will be sufficient parking spaces available within the Property as depicted and substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. Prior to commencement of construction of the first 0 Permitted Building, OWNER shall restrict the use of the Parking Areas to, and shall record a covenant against the Property in a form approved by the City Attorney stating that the use of the Parking Areas shall be limited to tenants, visitors, patrons, invitees and other users of the Permitted Buildings. Said covenant shall also provide that the Parking Areas shall not be used to provide public parking for patrons of Angel Stadium of Anaheim, The Grove of Anaheim or the Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim without the prior written approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and the Executive Director of Convention/Sports and Entertainment, which approval shall be at CITY's sole discretion. Section 7. DENSITY OF PERMITTED BUILDINGS The Permitted Buildings shall be between the minimum and maximum sizes, and shall not exceed the maximum heights and maximum footprints set forth on the Final Site Plan. Section 8. ENFORCEMENT Unless this Development Agreement is terminated or cancelled pursuant to the provisions of this Development Agreement, this Development Agreement or any amendment hereto, shall be enforceable by any party hereto notwithstanding any change hereafter in any applicable general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance or building ordinance adopted by CITY which alters or amends the rules, regulations or policies of Development of the Project as provided in this Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65865.4 of the Development Agreement Statute; provided, however, that the limitations of this Section shall not apply to changes mandated by State or Federal laws or other permissible changes or new regulations as more particularly set forth in Section 23 of this Development Agreement. Section 9 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES In addition to performing any other obligations heretofore imposed as conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit "C," as material consideration for the CITY's entering into this Development Agreement, OWNER shall undertake the construction and installation of the following public improvements required to support the Project and to enhance area -wide traffic circulation and emergency police and fire protection service within the time periods as set forth below and in conformance with the Existing Land Use Regulations. CITY shall cooperate with OWNER for the purpose of coordinating all public improvements constructed under the Development Approvals or this Development Agreement to existing or newly constructed public improvements, whether located within or outside of the Property. OWNER shall be responsible for and use good faith efforts to acquire any right(s) -of -way necessary to construct the public facility improvements required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement or any Development Approvals. Should it become necessary due to OWNER's failure or inability to acquire said right(s) -of -way within four months after OWNER begins its efforts to so acquire said right(s) -of -way, CITY shall negotiate the purchase of the necessary right(s) -of -way to construct the public improvements as required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement and, if necessary in 10 accordance with the procedures established by State law, and the limitations hereinafter set forth in this section, CITY may use its powers of eminent domain to condemn said required right(s)-of way. OWNER agrees to pay for all costs associated with said acquisition and condemnation proceedings. If the CITY cannot make the proper findings or if for some other reason under the condemnation laws CITY is prevented from acquiring the necessary right(s) -of -way to enable OWNER to construct the public improvements required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement, then the parties agree to amend this Development Agreement to modify OWNER's obligations accordingly. Any such required modification shall involve the substitution of other considerations or obligations by OWNER (of similar value) as are negotiated in good faith between the parties hereto. Nothing contained in this Section shall be deemed to constitute a determination or resolution of necessity by CITY to initiate condemnation proceedings. 9.1 Public Park If the Property is eight (8) or more acres OWNER shall be required to dedicate, improve and maintain a minimum size of 44 square feet for each residential unit for public park purposes as set forth in the Final Site Plan. The value of the parkland dedication will be credited against overall park in lieu fees paid for the project. Consistent with existing Code requirements and policies, no credit will be given for improvements. 9.2 Utilities (Water, Electrical, Gas, Sewer, and Drainage OWNER shall construct the public improvements necessary for the provision of requisite water, electrical, gas, sewer and drainage requirements for Project as more fully set forth in the Development Approvals. OWNER shall construct and relocate utilities as may be required to provide services to the Permitted Buildings on the Property or that are displaced by the construction of the Permitted Buildings. As OWNER submits detailed construction plans in order to obtain building permits for the Project and/or the size and nature of the Project varies, the utilities that OWNER will construct or relocate may be revised accordingly by the CITY. 9.2.1 Water Service OWNER will provide engineering studies to size the water mains for ultimate development within the Project. Said engineering studies will be conducted prior to rendering of water service or signature approval of the final water improvement plans, whichever occurs first. The studies shall be subject to the approval of the General Manager, Public Utilities Department or authorized designee. The water system may be constructed incrementally, provided that said incremental phasing is adequate to provide municipal demands and fire flow protection for the proposed development phasing. OWNER will conform with Rule 15D of the Water Utility's Rates, Rules and Regulations which provides for, in part, a fee based on GFA and the advancement of additional funds to construct the upgraded water facilities. OWNER shall be entitled to reimbursement in accordance with the terms of Rule 15D for the advancement of additional funds to construct the upgraded water facilities. 9.2.2 Storm and Sewer Drains. Prior to final building and zoning inspections for each Permitted Building, OWNER will construct sewers and storm drains to serve the ultimate development of the Property as provided by areawide engineering studies to be conducted prior to issuance of any building permits for the first Permitted Building and updated prior to the 11 issuance of any building permits for each subsequent Permitted Building. All studies shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. OWNER will construct improvements identified in said studies. The systems may be constructed incrementally provided that said incremental phasing is adequate to provide capacity for the proposed development phasing. 9.3 Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public Improvements and Facilities The timing, phasing and sequence of the construction of public improvements and facilities or the payment of fees therefor shall be constructed or paid in accordance with the timing, phasing and sequence set forth in this Development Agreement and the Final Site Plan 9.4 Traffic Circulation Improvements In order to assist CITY in providing for area -wide traffic circulation as required by this Project, OWNER shall cause to be made the traffic circulation improvements identified for the Project as Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 130 for the Project [or Supplemental EIR No. , as applicable] as shown on the Final Site Plan. Section 10. REIMBURSEMENT PROVISION In the event OWNER is required to construct public improvements which are supplemental to the requirements of the Project for the benefit of other properties, CITY will work with OWNER to establish mechanisms for proportional reimbursement from owners of the benefitted properties. Section 11. DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, OWNER shall irrevocably offer for dedication the rights -of -way, including connector streets and Market Street, if applicable, and other areas as more fully set forth in the Final Site Plan for the uses set forth in the Final Site Plan. These dedications shall be in fee or as an easement at the discretion of CITY, and upon completion and acceptance by CITY of the associated improvements in compliance with the specifications as approved by CITY, CITY shall accept OWNERS offer of dedication. Nothing contained in this Development Agreement, however, shall be deemed to preclude CITY from exercising the power of eminent domain with respect to the Property or the Project, or any part thereof. Section 12. FEES, TAXES, AND ASSESSMENTS 12.1 Fees Taxes and Assessments OWNER shall be responsible for the payment of fees in the amount and at the times set forth in the Existing Land Use Regulations, as said amounts and timing may be modified in accordance with this Development Agreement. 12.2 Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees CITY anticipates that a number of fees will be adopted to pay the costs attributable to new development in The Platinum Triangle. The Interim Development Fees constitute amounts estimated by the applicable Departments to be the approximate fair share of costs attributable to the Project. If an identified fee has been 12 adopted prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, the OWNER shall pay the fee. If an identified fee has not been adopted at the time of issuance of said building permit, the OWNER shall pay the applicable Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees set forth in attached Exhibit "D." If the OWNER has paid a Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fee, and upon subsequent adoption of a corresponding fee it is determined that the OWNER has paid an amount greater than the amount payable pursuant to the adopted fee, the excess amount paid as an Interim Development Fee shall be refunded to the OWNER. CITY shall not be obligated to adopt any of the identified fees. If any such identified fee is not adopted, the parties agree that the Interim Development Fee is adequate to address the impacts of the Project. 12.2.1 Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee OWNER will pay an Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D -1." 12.2.2 Fire Facilities Fee OWNER will pay a Fire Facilities Fee as set forth in Exhibit 12.2.3 General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee OWNER will pay a processing FEE attributable to the cost of creating and establishing the Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone for The Platinum Triangle, as well as the costs of associated environmental documentation, as said additional costs are set forth in Exhibit "D -3." 12.2.4 Library Facilities Fee OWNER will pay a Library Facilities Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D -4." 12.2.5 Park Fee OWNER will pay the Park Fee as set forth on Exhibit "D -5." and, if the Property is eight or more acres in size, OWNER will dedicate, develop and maintain a minipark substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. 12.2.6 Police Facilities Fee OWNER will pay the Police Facilities Fee to defray the costs of capital facilities and equipment as set forth in Exhibit "D -6." 12.2.7 Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees OWNER will pay Public Works Fees for supplemental sewer impacts, storm drain impacts, and arterial highway beautification /aesthetics as set forth in Exhibit "D -7." 12.2.8 Traffic Impact Fee OWNER will pay the Supplemental Traffic Impact Fee for improvements required to provide acceptable traffic service levels in and through the area's Master Plan of Arterial Highways system as set forth in Exhibit "D -8." 12.3 Excluded Development Fees Fees Excluded from Existing Land Use Regulations. The following fees shall not be included among the fees which would otherwise fall within the definition of Existing Land Use Regulations: 13 12.3.1 Water Utilities Fees OWNER will pay all applicable fees in accordance with the Water Utilities Rates, Rules and Regulations in effect at the time of application for service; including Rule 15D which provides for, in part, a fee based on GFA to construct the necessary water facility improvements within The Platinum Triangle. 12.3.2 Electrical Utilities Fees OWNER will pay all fees in accordance with the Electrical Utilities Rates, Rules and Regulations in effect at the time of application for service. 12.3.3 City Processing Fees OWNER shall pay all standard City -wide processing fees for building permits, zoning review, and other similar fees associated with the Development of the Project which are in existence at the time of approval of this Development Agreement at the rate in existence at the time said fees are normally required to be paid to CITY. 12.4 Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and/or Maintenance Assessment District Prior to the date a building or grading permit is issued relating to implementation of the Final Site Plan, or within a period of ninety (90) days from the date of execution of this Development Agreement, whichever occurs first, OWNER shall execute and record an unsubordinated covenant in a form approved by the City Attorney's Office wherein OWNER agrees not to contest the formation of any assessment district(s) which may be formed to finance Platinum Triangle infrastructure and/or maintenance, which district(s) could include the Property. The covenant shall not preclude OWNER from contesting (i) the determination of benefit of such improvements to the Property, (ii) the properties included in said district or area, (iii) the manner in which said fee is determined or (iv) the manner in which said improvement costs are spread. 12.5 Accounting of Funds CITY will comply with applicable requirements of Government Code Section 65865 relating to accounting of funds. 12.6 Imposition of Increased Fees Taxes or Assessments Except as expressly set forth or reserved in this Development Agreement, CITY shall not, without the prior written consent of OWNER, impose any additional fee, tax or assessment on the Project or any portion thereof as a condition to the implementation of the Project or any portion thereof, except such fees, taxes and assessments as are described in or required by this Development Agreement, including the Existing Land Use Regulations or the Development Approvals. The rates of such fees, taxes and assessments shall be the rates in existence at the time said fees, taxes and assessments are normally required to be paid to CITY. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prohibit CITY from imposing fees, taxes or assessments on the Property which are unrelated to the implementation of the project. Section 13. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS. In consideration for CITY entering into this Development Agreement and other consideration set forth in this Agreement, OWNER agrees to record unsubordinated covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC &Rs) applicable to the Property in a form and content satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney incorporating the requirements and obligations set 14 forth in Exhibit "E" to this Agreement, entitled the "Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations." Section 14. NEXUS/REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES OWNER consents to, and waives any right it may have now or in the future to challenge the legal validity of the conditions, requirements, policies or programs required by existing land use regulations or this Agreement including, without limitation, any claim that they constitute an abuse of the police power, violate substantive due process, deny equal protection of the laws, effect a taking of property without payment of just compensation, or impose an unlawful tax. Section 15. TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT Timing of Development shall be as set forth in the Final Site Plan. Section 16. EXISTING USES CITY and OWNER agree that those existing legally established uses on the Property may be retained until the Project is implemented. When those existing uses are demolished, no credit for any such demolished square footage for which Interim Development Fees have not been paid will be given OWNER against Interim Development Fees due on a square footage basis as provided for in this Development Agreement. OWNER will pay the full Interim Development Fees for Permitted Buildings constructed pursuant to the Final Site Plan. Section 17. FUTURE APPROVALS 17.1 Basis for Denying or Conditional Granting Future Approvals Before OWNER can begin grading on the Property or other development of the Property, OWNER must secure several additional permits and/or approvals from CITY. The parties agree that to the extent said Development Approvals are ministerial in nature, CITY shall not, through the enactment or enforcement of any subsequent ordinances, rules, regulations, initiatives, policies, requirements, guidelines, or other constraints, withhold such approvals as a means of blocking construction or of imposing conditions on the Project which were not imposed during an earlier approval period unless CITY has been ordered to do so by a court of competent jurisdiction. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, CITY and OWNER will use their best efforts to ensure each other that all applications for and approvals of grading permits, building permits or other developmental approvals necessary for OWNER to develop the Project in accordance with the Final Site Plan are sought and processed in a timely manner. 17.2 Standard of Review The rules, regulations and policies that apply to any additional Development Approvals which OWNER must secure prior to the Development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations, as defined in this Development Agreement. 15 17.3 Future Amendments to Final Site Plan Future amendments to all or a portion of the Final Site Plan which increase the intensity or density of the Development of the Property, or change the permitted uses of the Property, and are not among those described in Section 18.4 of this Development Agreement may subject the portion or portions of the Project being amended or affected by the amendment to any change in the CITY'S General Plan, zoning designations and rules applicable to the Property and further environmental review and possible mitigation of adverse impacts under CEQA in effect at the time of such amendment. Any such amendment to the Final Site Plan shall be processed concurrently with the processing of an amendment to this Development Agreement. It is the desire and intent of both parties, except as set forth herein, that any such future amendment of the Final Site Plan will not alter, affect, impair or otherwise impact the rights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Development Agreement with respect to the unamended portions of the Final Site Plan. Section 18. AMENDMENT 18.1 Initiation of Amendment Either party may propose an amendment to this Development Agreement. 18.2 Procedure Except as set forth in Section 18.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Development Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Development Agreement in the first instance. Such procedures are set forth in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of the Procedures Resolution. 18.3 Consent Except as provided in Section 25 of this Development Agreement, any amendment to this Development Agreement shall require the consent of both parties. No amendment of this Development Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. 18.4 Amendments Subject to the foregoing provisions of this Section, the parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties under this Development Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development of the Project and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Development Agreement. If and when the parties find that changes or adjustments are necessary or appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Development Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes or adjustments as specified in the Development Approvals. 18.5 Effect of Amendment to Development Agreement The parties agree that except as expressly set forth in any such amendment, an amendment to this Development Agreement will not alter, affect, impair, modify, waive or otherwise impact any other rights, duties or obligations of either party under this Development Agreement. Section 19. RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND USES FOR THE PROPERTY 16 19.1 Non - Cancellation of Rights Subject to defeasance pursuant to Sections 25, 26 or 27 of this Development Agreement, the Final Site Plan and other Development Approvals as provided for in this Development Agreement shall be final and the rights once granted thereby shall be vested in the Property upon recordation of this Development Agreement. Section 20. BENEFITS TO CITY The direct and indirect benefits CITY (including, without limitation, the existing and future anticipated residents of CITY) expects to receive pursuant to this Development Agreement include, but are not limited to, the following: The participation of OWNER in the accelerated, coordinated and more economic construction, funding and dedication to the public, as provided in this Development Agreement, of certain of the vitally needed on -site and area - wide public improvements and facilities, and assurances that the entire Project will be developed as set forth in the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement in order to encourage development of The Platinum Triangle; and The considerations set forth in Sections 9 and 10 of this Development Agreement. Section 21. BENEFITS TO OWNER OWNER has expended and will continue to expend large amounts of time and money on the planning and infrastructure construction for the Project. OWNER asserts that OWNER would not make any additional expenditures, or the advanced expenditures required by this Development Agreement, without this Development Agreement and that any additional expenditures which OWNER makes after the Development Agreement Date will be made in reliance upon this Development Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, this Development Agreement provides for the completion of public improvements and facilities prior to the time when they would be justified economically in connection with the phasing of the Project, and of a size which would be justified only by the magnitude of the Project provided for by the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. The benefit to OWNER under this Development Agreement consists of the assurance that OWNER will preserve the right to develop the Property as planned and as set forth in the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. The parties acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to CITY pursuant to this Development Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. Section 22. UNDERTAKINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTEMPLATED AND PROMOTED BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATUTE. The mutual undertakings and assurances described above and provided for in this Development Agreement are for the benefit of CITY and OWNER and promote the comprehensive planning, private and public cooperation and participation in the provision of public facilities, and the effective and efficient development of infrastructure and facilities 17 supporting development which was contemplated and promoted by the Development Agreement Statute. CITY agrees that it will not take any actions which are intended to circumvent this Development Agreement; provided, however, that any action of the electorate shall not be deemed an action for purposes of this section. Section 23. RESERVED AUTHORITY 23.1 State and Federal Laws and Regulations In the event that the State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after this Development Agreement has been entered into, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of the Development Agreement, such provisions of the Development Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt or undertake any rule, regulation or policy which is inconsistent with this Development Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such rule, regulation or policy is reasonably necessary to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations. 23.2. Building Codes This Development Agreement shall not prevent CITY from applying new rules, regulations and policies contained in model codes, including, but not limited to, the Anaheim Building Code as adopted in Title 15, Section 15.02. 23.3 Public Health and Safety This Development Agreement shall not prevent CITY from adopting new rules, regulations and policies, including amendments or modifications to model codes described in Section 23.2 of this Development Agreement which directly result from findings by CITY that failure to adopt such rules, regulations or policies would result in a condition injurious or detrimental to the public health and safety. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt any such rules, regulations or policies which prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Development Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such rules, regulations or policies are reasonably necessary to correct or avoid such injurious or detrimental condition. Section 24. CANCELLATION 24.1 Initiation of Cancellation Either party may propose cancellation of this Development Agreement. 24.2 Procedure The procedure for proposing a cancellation of and canceling this Development Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Development Agreement in the first instance. Such procedures are set forth in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of the Procedures Resolution and Section 65868 of the Government Code. IM 24.3 Consent of Both Parties Any cancellation of this Development Agreement shall require the mutual consent of OWNER and CITY. Section 25. PERIODIC REVIEW 25.1 Time for Review CITY shall, at least every twelve (12) months after the Development Agreement Date, review the extent of good faith compliance by OWNER with the terms of this Development Agreement. OWNER's failure to comply with the timing schedules set forth in the Final Site Plan shall constitute rebuttable evidence of OWNER's lack of good faith compliance with this Development Agreement. Such periodic review shall determine compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement pursuant to California Government Code Section 65865.1 and other successor laws and regulations. 25.2 OWNER's Submission Each year, not less than forty -five (45) days nor more than sixty (60) days prior to the anniversary of the Development Agreement Date, OWNER shall submit evidence to the City Council of its good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. OWNER shall notify the City Council in writing that such evidence is being submitted to CITY pursuant to the requirements of Section 6.2 of the Procedures Resolution. OWNER shall pay to CITY a reasonable processing fee in an amount as CITY may reasonably establish from time to time on each occasion that OWNER submits its evidence for a periodic review. 25.3 Findings Within forty-five (45) days after the submission of OWNER's evidence, the City Council shall determine, on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not OWNER has, for the period under review, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. If the City Council finds that OWNER has so complied, the review for that period shall be deemed concluded. If the City Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement for the period under review, OWNER shall be given at least sixty (60) days to cure such non - compliance and if the actions required to cure such non- compliance take more than sixty (60) days, then CITY shall give OWNER additional time provided that OWNER is making reasonable progress towards such end. If during the cure period, OWNER fails to cure such noncompliance or is not making reasonable good faith progress towards such end, then the City Council may, at its discretion, proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 27 of this Development Agreement. 25.4 Initiation of Review by City Council In addition to the periodic review set forth in this Development Agreement, the City Council may at any time initiate a review of this Development Agreement upon the giving of written notice thereof to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the City Council of OWNER's good faith compliance with this Development Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the manner as otherwise provided in this Development Agreement. 19 Section 26. EVENTS OF DEFAULT 26.1 Defaults by OWNER Within forty -five (45) days after the submission of OWNER's evidence, the City Council shall determine on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not OWNER has, for the period under review, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. If the City Council finds that OWNER has so complied, the review for that period shall be deemed concluded. If the City Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement for the period under review, OWNER shall be given at least sixty (60) days to cure such non - compliance and if the actions required to cure such non - compliance take more than sixty (60) days, then CITY shall give OWNER additional time provided that OWNER is making reasonable progress towards such end. If during the cure period OWNER fails to cure such non - compliance or is not making reasonable progress towards such end, then the City Council may, at its discretion, proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 27 of this Development Agreement. 26.2 Specific Performance Remedy Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its pre - existing condition once implementation of this Development Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Development Agreement and will be investing even more significant time in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Development Agreement, and it is not possible to determine sum of the money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons, CITY and OWNER agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement. Therefore, specific performance of this Development Agreement is the only remedy which would compensate OWNER if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement, and CITY hereby agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to specific performance in the event of a default by CITY hereunder. CITY and OWNER acknowledge that, if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement, CITY shall have the right to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals which OWNER would otherwise have been entitled to pursuant to this Development Agreement. If CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Development Agreement in reliance upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if OWNER then fails to satisfy such condition, CITY shall be entitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. The CITY's right to specific performance shall be limited to those circumstances set forth above, and CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 20 26.3 Liquidated Damages Remedy The parties hereto agree that this Development Agreement creates an obligation and duty upon OWNER to undertake and complete development of the Project within the time and manner specified herein. In the event OWNER breaches this Development Agreement by failing to undertake and complete development of the Project within the time and manner specified herein, the parties further agree that CITY will suffer actual damages as a result thereof, the amount of which is uncertain and would be impractical or extremely difficult to fix; therefore, OWNER agrees to pay CITY, in the event of any such breach by OWNER, the sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) as liquidated and actual damages which sum shall be in addition to any other remedies available to CITY as a result of such breach pursuant to this Section 26. Section 27. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION If pursuant to Section 26.1 of this Development Agreement, CITY elects to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a revised time schedule for compliance as herein provided, then CITY shall proceed as set forth in this Section. 27.1 Notice to OWNER CITY shall give notice to OWNER of City Council's intention to proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance within ten (10) days of making the CITY's findings. 27.2 Public Hearing The City Council shall set and give notice of a public hearing on modification, termination or a time schedule for compliance to be held within forty-days after the City Council gives notice to OWNER. 27.3 Decision The City Council shall announce its findings and decisions on whether this Development Agreement is to be terminated, how this Development Agreement is to be modified or the provisions of the Development Agreement with which OWNER must comply and a time schedule therefor not more than ten (10) days following completion of the public hearing. 27.4 Implementation Amending or terminating this Development Agreement shall be accomplished by CITY enacting an ordinance. The ordinance shall recite the reasons which, in the opinion of the CITY, make the amendment or termination of this Development Agreement necessary. Not later then ten (10) days following the adoption of the ordinance, one copy thereof shall be forwarded to OWNER. This Development Agreement shall be terminated or this Development Agreement as modified shall become effective on the effective date of the ordinance terminating or modifying this Development Agreement. 27.5 Schedule for Compliance Setting a reasonable time schedule for compliance with this Development Agreement may be accomplished by CITY enacting a resolution. The resolution shall recite the reasons which, in the opinion of CITY, make it advisable to set a schedule for compliance and why the time schedule is reasonable. Not later than ten (10) days following adoption of the resolution, one copy thereof shall be forwarded to OWNER. 21 Compliance with any time schedule so established as an alternative to amendment or termination shall be subject to periodic review as provided in this Development Agreement and lack of good faith compliance by OWNER with the time schedule shall be basis for termination or modification of this Development Agreement. Section 28. ASSIGNMENT 28.1 Right to Assign OWNER shall have the right to sell, mortgage, hypothecate, assign or transfer this Development Agreement, and any and all of its rights, duties and obligations hereunder, to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation at any time during the term of this Development Agreement, provided that any such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof. In the event of any such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer, (a) OWNER shall notify CITY of such event and the name of the transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such transferee and (b) the agreement between OWNER and such transferee shall provide that either OWNER or the transferee or both shall be liable for the performance of all obligations of OWNER pursuant to this Development Agreement and the Development Approvals. Such transferee and/or OWNER shall notify CITY in writing which entity shall be liable for the performance of such obligations, and upon the express written assumption of any or all of the obligations of OWNER under this Development Agreement by such assignee, transferee or purchaser shall, without any act of or concurrence by CITY, relieve OWNER of its legal duty to perform said obligations under this Development Agreement with respect to the Property or portion thereof, so transferred, except to the extent OWNER is not in default under the terms of this Development Agreement. 28.2 Release Upon Transfer It is understood and agreed by the parties that the Property may be subdivided following the Development Agreement Date. One or more of such subdivided parcels may be sold, mortgaged, hypothecated, assigned or transferred to persons for development by them in accordance with the provisions of this Development Agreement. Effective upon such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer, the obligations of OWNER shall become several and not joint, except as to OWNER's obligations set forth in Section 10 of this Development Agreement. Upon the sale, transfer, or assignment of OWNER's rights and interests under this Development Agreement as permitted pursuant to the Section 28.1 above, OWNER shall be released from its obligations under this Development Agreement with respect to the Property, or portion thereof so transferred, provided that (a) OWNER is not then in default under this Development Agreement, (b) OWNER has provided to CITY the notice of such transfer specified in Section 28.1 above, (c) the transferee executes and delivers to CITY a written agreement in which (i) the name and address of the transferee is set forth and (ii) the transferee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the obligations of OWNER under this Development Agreement and the Development Approvals with respect to the property, or portion thereof, so transferred and (d) the transferee provides CITY with security equivalent to any security provided by OWNER to secure performance of its obligations under this Development Agreement or the Development Approvals. Non - compliance by any such 22 transferee with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement shall not be deemed a default hereunder or grounds for termination hereof or constitute cause for CITY to initiate enforcement action against other persons then owning or holding interest in the Property or any portion thereof and not themselves in default hereunder. Upon completion of any phase of development of the Project as determined by CITY, CITY may release that completed phase from any further obligations under this Development Agreement. The provisions of this Section shall be self - executing and shall not require the execution or recordation of any further document or instrument. Any and all successors, assigns and transferees of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER as used in this Development Agreement and the term "OWNER" as used in this Development Agreement shall refer to any such successors, assigns and transferees unless expressly provided herein to the contrary. Section 29. NO CONFLICTING ENACTMENTS By entering into this Development Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining vested rights to proceed with the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement, and in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Development Approvals. By entering into this Development Agreement and relying thereupon, CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and general welfare. CITY therefore agrees that except as provided in Section 23 of this Development Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of CITY shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance or other measure which relates to the rate, timing or sequencing of the Development or construction of all or any part of the Project and which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Development Agreement. Section 30. GENERAL 30.1 Force Maieure The Term of this Development Agreement and the time within which OWNER shall be required to perform any act under this Development Agreement shall be extended by a period of time equal to the number of days during which performance of such act is delayed unavoidably by strikes, lock -outs, Acts of God, failure or inability to secure materials or labor by reason of priority or similar regulations or order of any governmental or regulatory body, initiative or referenda, moratoria, enemy action, civil disturbances, fire, unavoidable casualties, or any other cause beyond the reasonable control of OWNER. 30.2 Construction of Development Agreement The language in all parts of this Development Agreement shall in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Development Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of constructions. This Development Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Development Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental functions of CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the parties understand and agree that this Development Agreement shall 23 not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITY's governmental powers over the Property. 30.3 Severability If any provision of this Development Agreement shall be adjudged to be invalid, void or unenforceable, such provision shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate any other provision hereof, unless such judgment affects a material part of this Development Agreement, the parties hereby agree that they would have entered into the remaining portions of this Development Agreement not adjudged to be invalid, void or illegal. In the event that all or any portion of this Development Agreement is found to be unenforceable, this Development Agreement or that portion which is found to be unenforceable shall be deemed to be a statement of intention by the parties; and the parties further agree that in such event they shall take all steps necessary to comply with such public hearings and/or notice requirements as may be necessary in order to make valid this Development Agreement or that portion which is found to be unenforceable. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Development Agreement, in the event that any material provision of this Development Agreement is found to be unenforceable, void or voidable, OWNER or CITY may terminate this Development Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and the Procedures Resolution. 30.4 Cumulative Remedies In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenant or agreement herein, or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, including suits for declaratory relief, specific performance, relief in the nature of mandamus and actions for damages. All of the remedies described above shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another, and the exercise of any one or more of the remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect to any other available remedy. 30.5 Hold Harmless Agreement OWNER and CITY hereby mutually agree to, and shall hold each other, each other's elective and appointive councils, boards, commissions, officers, partners, agents, representatives and employees harmless from any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, and from claims for property damage which may arise from the activities of the other's or the other's contractors', subcontractors', agents', or employees' which relate to the Project whether such activities be by OWNER or CITY, or by any of the OWNER's or the CITY's contractors, subcontractors, or by any one or more persons indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for OWNER any of the OWNER's or the CITY's contractors or subcontractors. OWNER and CITY agree to and shall defend the other and the other's elective and appointive councils, boards, commissioners, officers, partners, agents, representatives and employees from any suits or actions at law or in equity for damage caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of the aforementioned activities which relate to the Project. 30.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Development Agreement and /or the Development Approvals, the parties hereby agree to cooperate fully with each other in defending said action and the validity of each 24 provision of this Development Agreement, however, OWNER shall be liable for all legal expenses and costs incurred in defending any such action. OWNER shall be entitled to choose legal counsel to defend against any such legal action and shall pay any attorneys' fees awarded against CITY or OWNER, or both, resulting from any such legal action. OWNER shall be entitled to any award of attorneys' fees arising out of any such legal action. 30.7 Public Agency Coordination CITY and OWNER shall cooperate and use their respective best efforts in coordinating the implementation of the Development Approvals with other public agencies, if any, having jurisdiction over the Property or the Project. 30.8 Initiative Measures Both CITY and OWNER intend that this Development Agreement is a legally binding contract which will supersede any initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing or sequencing of the Development or construction of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements approved, issued or granted within the CITY, or portions of the CITY, and which Agreement shall apply to the Project to the extent such initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation is inconsistent or in conflict with this Development Agreement. Should an initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance, or other limitation be enacted by the citizens of CITY which would preclude construction of all or any part of the Project, and to the extent such initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to invalidate or prevail over all or any part of this Development Agreement, OWNER shall have no recourse against CITY pursuant to the Development Agreement, but shall retain all other rights, claims and causes of action under this Development Agreement not so invalidated and any and all other rights, claims and causes of action as law or in equity which OWNER may have independent of this Development Agreement with respect to the project. The foregoing shall not be deemed to limit OWNER's right to appeal any such determination that such initiative, measure, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation invalidates or prevails over all or any part of this Development Agreement. CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in order to keep this Development Agreement in full force and effect, provided OWNER shall reimburse CITY for its out -of- pocket expenses incurred directly in connection with such cooperation and CITY shall not be obligated to institute a lawsuit or other court proceedings in this connection. 30.9 Attorneys' Fees In the event of any dispute between the parties involving the covenants or conditions contained in this Development Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable expenses, attorneys fees and costs. 30.10 No Waiver No delay or omission by either party in exercising any right or power accruing upon non - compliance or failure to perform by the other party under any of the provisions of this Development Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof. A waiver by either party of any of the covenants or conditions to be 25 performed by the other party shall not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of non- performance of the same or other covenants and conditions hereof. 30.11 Authority to Execute The person executing this Development Agreement on behalf of OWNER warrants and represents that he /she has the authority to execute this Development Agreement on behalf of his/her partnership and represents that he /she has the authority to bind OWNER to the performance of OWNER's obligations hereunder. 30.12 Notice 30.12.1 To OWNER Any notice required or permitted to be given by CITY to OWNER under or pursuant to this Development Agreement shall be deemed sufficiently given if in writing and delivered personally to an officer of OWNER or mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed; to OWNER as follows: Western Pacific Housing 16755 Von Karman Ave., Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92606 Attention: Jon Myhre or such changed address as OWNER shall designate in writing to CITY. With copies to: Western Pacific Housing 16755 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92606 Attention: Sandy Sanchez 30.12.2 To CITY Any notice required or permitted to be given to CITY under or pursuant to this Development Agreement shall be made and given in writing, if by mail addressed to: City Council City of Anaheim c/o City Clerk P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 or such changed address as CITY shall designate in writing to OWNER: With copies to: City Manager 26 City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 City Attorney City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 and if personally delivered to the City Clerk, at the Anaheim Civic Center, 200 S. Anaheim. Blvd., Anaheim, California, together with copies marked for the City Manager and the City Attorney or, if so addressed and mailed, with postage thereon fully prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the City Council in care of the City Clerk at the above address with copies likewise so mailed to the City Manager and the City Attorney, respectively and also in care of the City Clerk at the same address. The provisions of this Section shall be deemed permissive only and shall not detract from the validity of any notice given in a manner which would be legally effective in the absence of this Section. 30.13 Captions The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Development Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall in no way define, explain, modify, construe, limit, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any of the provisions of this Development Agreement. 30.14 Consent Any consent required by the parries in carrying out the terms of this Development agreement shall not unreasonably be withheld. 30.15 Further Actions and Instruments Each of the parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performance of all obligations under this Development Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Development Agreement. Upon the request of either party at any time, the other party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Development Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Development Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Development Agreement. 30.16 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute This Development Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute in effect as of the Development Agreement Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 23.1 above, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Development Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Development Agreement unless necessary for this Development Agreement to be enforceable or unless this Development Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Development 27 Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Development Agreement Date. 30.17 Governing Law This Development Agreement, including, without limitation, its existence, validity, construction and operation, and the rights of each of the parties shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 30.18 Effect on Title OWNER and CITY agree that this Development Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Development Agreement has terminated. 30.19 Mortgagee Protection Entering into or a breach of this Development Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of Mortgagees having a mortgage on any portion of the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. No Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Development Agreement to perform OWNERS obligations, or to guarantee such performance prior to any foreclosure or deed in lieu thereof. 30.20 Notice of Default to Mortgagee, Right of Mortgagee to Cure. If the City Clerk timely receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to OWNER under the terms of this Development Agreement, CITY shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to OWNER. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, for a period up to ninety (90) days after the receipt of such notice from CITY to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy the default unless a further extension of time to cure is granted in writing by CITY. If the default is of a nature which can only be remedied or cured by such Mortgagee upon obtaining possession, such Mortgagee shall seek to obtain possession with diligence and continually through foreclosure, a receiver or otherwise, and shall thereafter remedy or cure the default or non - compliance within thirty (30) days after obtaining possession. If any such default or non - compliance cannot, with diligence, be remedied or cured within such thirty (30) day period, then such Mortgagee shall have such additional time as may be reasonably necessary to remedy or cure such default or non - compliance if such Mortgagee commences cure during such thirty (30) day period, and thereafter diligently pursues and completes such cure. 30.21 Bankruptcy Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of Section 30.20 of this Development Agreement, if any Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or pursues and prosecuting foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof by any process or injunction issued by any court or by reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving CITY, the times specified in this Section for commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other proceedings shall be extended for the period of the prohibition. 30.22 Disaffirmance 0 30.22.1 CITY agrees that in the event of termination of this Agreement by reason of any default by CITY, or by reason of the disaffirmance hereof by a receiver, liquidator or trustee for OWNER or its property, CITY, if requested by any Mortgagee, shall enter into a new Development Agreement for the Project with the most senior Mortgagee requesting such new agreement, for the remainder of the Term, effective as of the date of such termination, upon the terms, provisions, covenants and agreements as herein contained to the extent and subject to the law then in effect, and subject to the rights, if any, of any parties then in possession of any part of the Property, provided: 30.22.2 The Mortgagee shall make written request upon CITY for the new Development Agreement for the Project within thirty (30) days after the date of termination; 30.22.3 The Mortgagee shall pay to CITY at the time of the execution and delivery of the new Development Agreement for the Project expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, to which CITY shall have been subjected by reason of OWNER's default; and 30.22.4 The Mortgagee shall perform and observe all covenants herein contained on OWNER's part to be performed, and shall further remedy any other conditions which OWNER under the terminated agreement was obligated to perform under its terms, to the extent the same are curable or may be performed by the Mortgagee. 30.22.5 Nothing herein contained shall require any Mortgagee to enter into a new agreement pursuant to Section 30.22.1 above, nor to cure any default of OWNER referred to above. 30.23 No Third Party Beneficiaries This Development Agreement and all provisions hereof is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of CITY, OWNER and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have right of action based upon any provision in this Development Agreement. 30.24 Project as a Private Undertaking It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the Project is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Development Agreement. No partnership, join venture or other association of any kind is formed by this Development Agreement. The only relationship between CITY and OWNER is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such private property. 30.25 Restrictions Property OWNER shall place in any agreements to sell or convey any interest in the Property or any portion thereof, provisions making the terms of this Development Agreement binding on any successors in interest of OWNER and express provision for OWNER or CITY, acting separately or jointly, to enforce the provisions of this Development Agreement and to recover attorneys' fees and costs for such enforcement. 29 30.26 Recitals The recitals in this Development Agreement constitute part of this Development Agreement and each party shall be entitled to rely on the truth and accuracy of each recital as an inducement to enter into this Development Agreement. 30.27 Recording The City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Development Agreement to be executed by CITY and recorded in the Official Records of Orange County no later than ten (10) days after CITY approves this Development Agreement. 30.28 Title Report CITY is required to sign this Development Agreement only after OWNER has provided CITY with a satisfactory preliminary title report evidencing and showing OWNER'S legal and equitable ownership interest in the Property, current within six (6) months, unencumbered except for the exceptions (hereinafter the "Permitted Exceptions ") set in the preliminary title report for the Property dated June 1, 2005, ,attached hereto as Exhibit "E" (the "Preliminary Title Report"). Any instrument of monetary encumbrance such as a deed of trust or a mortgage entered into subsequent to the date of the Preliminary Title Report and prior to the Development Agreement Date, shall contain language expressly subordinating such instruments of monetary encumbrance to the provisions of this Development Agreement. OWNER shall present evidence, satisfactory to CITY, of OWNER's legal title to Property, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and any such subordinated instruments of monetary encumbrance, at the time of recordation of this Agreement, or a memorandum thereof. 30.29 Entire Agreement This Development Agreement, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Development Agreement, and this Development Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussions and agreements between the parties, and no parol evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof. 30.30 Successors and Assigns The burdens of the Development Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of the Development Agreement inure to all successors in interest and assigns of the parties to the Development Agreement. 30.31 OWNERS Title of Property Neither party hereto shall be bound by any provision of this Agreement unless and until OWNER shall record this Development Agreement or a memorandum thereof, in the office of the County Recorder of the County sufficient to cause this Agreement and the obligations contained herein to attach to and encumber OWNER'S fee title tc Property. 30.32 Exhibits All exhibits, including attachments thereto, are incorporated in this Development Agreement in their entirety by this reference. 30 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and OWNER have executed this Development Agreement as of the date and year first above written. "CITY" CITY OF ANAHEIM, a municipal corporation • .AI Western Pacific Housing, Inc. a Delaware corporation By: By: Mayor Jon J. Myhre Assistant Secretary ATTEST: SHERYLLSCHROEDER City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: JACK L. WHITE, City Attorney 54141.2/smann.7/28/04/lgm 31 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss: COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On this _ day of , 20_, be undersigned, a Notary Public for the State of California duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the person who executed the within instrument as Mayor of the City of Anaheim, the municipal corporation executing the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. [SEAL] STATE OF • 1► r • 0 )ss. On , 20 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who executed the within instrument as on behalf of , the corporation therein named that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) 32 On this _ day of , 20_, BEFORE ME, THE Undersigned, A Notary Public for the State of California, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared SHERYLL SCHROEDER, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the person who executed the within instrument as City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, the municipal corporation executing the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public 33 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF LOT 5, TRACT 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89 59'15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08'00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 59'15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM SAID CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM BY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 7, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010069995, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF TRACT NO. 71, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 10, PAGE 22, MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 34 BEGINNING AT THE POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 17, 1927 IN BOOK 62, PAGE 45, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DISTANT SOUTH 89 59'15" EAST 748.00 FEET FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND (SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE, ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5); THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING, NORTH 0 08'00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 4 AND 5, A DISTANCE OF 595.06 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE 60.00 FEET WIDE, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397 OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000.00 FEET FROM TANGENT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 70 38'28" WEST THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18 1732" A DISTANCE OF 319.26 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO RANDALL RAY BIVENS AND WIFE, BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 5285, PAGE 252, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 0 08' 00" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 538.52 FEET TO SAID SOUTH LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS; THENCE SOUTH 89 59' 15" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, 313.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LAND CONVEYED TO MAURICE E. BIVENS, SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE 60.00 FOOT ROAD ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID TRACT, NOW KNOWN AS PLACENTIA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89 59'15" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND OF BIVENS, 748.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN PARCEL I OF THE DEED TO KAYCO CORPORATION RECORDED DECEMBER 20, 1962 IN BOOK 6367, PAGE 591, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH THE DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, 60.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JULY 8, 1960 IN BOOK 5321, PAGE 397, OF SAID OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT OF INTERSECTION BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN; THENCE SOUTH 0 08'00" EAST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND OF KAYCO CORPORATION, 302.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 59' 15" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LAND, 125.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0 08'00" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF SAID LAND, 267.00 FEET, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH SAID CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH, AND DISTANT 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTELRY FROM SAID 35 CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF LOT 5 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENT NO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY WITH A CURVE WHICH IS CONCENTRIC WITH AND DISTANCE 60.00 FEET SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE CURVED CENTERLINE OF KATELLA AVENUE, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 00 0737" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1060.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10 12'14", A DISTANCE OF 188.78 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF EXCEPTION TO THE LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS PER GRANT DEED RECORDED AS INSTRUMENTNO. 19960377825, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 00 45' 13" WEST 12.23 FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO A POINT ON A NON - TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1072.00 FEET, A RADIAL THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 10 12' 19" EAST; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10 05' 17" A DISTANCE OF 188.75 FEET TO SAID WESTERLY LINE OF LAND CONVEYED TO KAYCO PLAZA PARTNERS; THENCE NORTH 00 0 45' 13" EAST 12.00 FEET ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM IN DEED RECORDED APRIL 24, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 20010245967, OFFICIAL RECORDS. APNS: 232 - 021 -14 AND 232 - 021 -15 36 EXHIBIT `B" FINAL SITE PLAN Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 Anaheim Stadium — Anaheim ESP 2005- 00004— List of Exhibits July 20, 2005 Architectural Plans Sheets Title Exhibit No. 1 Sheet A -02 Site Plan and Summa Exhibit No. 2 Sheet A -04 Ground Level Floor Plan Exhibit No. 3 SheetA -05 Parking Plan Exhibit No. 4 Sheet A -06 1st Floor Plan Exhibit No. 5 Sheet A -07 2nd, 3rd, 4th Floor Building Plan Exhibit No. 6 Sheet A -08 5th Floor Plan Exhibit No. 7 Sheet A -09 Roof Plan Exhibit No. 8 Northeast Corner Renderin Exhibit No. 9 North Elevation Renderin Exhibit No. 10 South Elevation Renderin Exhibit No. 11 Sheet A -00 Colored Street Elevations North/West Exhibit No. 12 Sheet A -01 Colored Street Elevations South /East Exhibit No. 13 Sheet A -10 Building Elevation North/West Exhibit No. 14 Sheet A -11 Building Elevation South /East Exhibit No. 15 Sheet A -12 Building Sections Exhibit No. 16 Sheet A -03 Residential Open Space Analysis Plan Exhibit No. 17 Sheet A -13 Unit Plans 1, 2, and 3 Exhibit No. 18 SheetA -14 Unit Plans 4 and 5 Exhibit No. 19 Sheet A -15 Unit Plans 6 and 7 Exhibit No. 20 Sheet A -16 Enlarged Retail /Restaurant Exhibit No. 21 Sheet A -17 Enlarged Elevations & Wall Sections Exhibit No. 22 Sheet A -18 Trash Enclosure /Chute Details Exhibit No. 23 Sheet A -19 Enlarged Lobby & Recreation Areas Exhibit No. 24 Sheet A -20 Interior Corridor Section and Details Landscape Plans Exhibit No. 25 Sheet L -1 Conceptual Landscape- Street Level Exhibit No. 26 Sheet L -2 Enlarged Street Level Landscape Plan Exhibit No. 27 Sheet L -3 1s Level Outdoor Recreation Plan Exhibit No. 28 Sheet L-4 5 t " Level and Site Furnishings Exhibit No. 29 Sheet L -5 Street Sections, Fencing Plans 37 Lighting Plans Exhibit No. 30 Sheet E -01 Sight Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 31 Sheet E -3 Courtyard Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 32 Sheet E -5 Ground Level Retail/Parking/Security/Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 33 Sheet E -7 Subteranean Parking Light Plan Exhibit No. 34 Sheet E -9 Elevation North and West Lighting Layout Exhibit No. 35 Sheet E -10 Elevation South and West Lighting Layout Exhibit No. 36 Sheet E -11 Lighting Fixture Cut Sheets Other Plans Exhibit No. 37 Sheet 1 of 1 Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 Exhibit No. 38 Sheet 1 of 1 Preliminary Grading Plan Exhibit No. 39 Sheets 3 -13 Si n Plans Exhibit No. 40 Color & Materials Board *All exhibits in this table are incorporated into Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00004; however, the noted exhibits (reduced in size) are attached for ease of reference. Full size sheets of all exhibits are provided in the Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00004 on file in the Planning Department. M EXI"IT "C" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditions of Approval — Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04967 and Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 1. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond for all required sewer improvements /upgrades, including the removal of any abandoned lines and/or off site improvements, as required by CUP2005- 04967, FSP2005- 00004, TIM 16800, and MMP 130 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to occupancy. 2. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond for the installation of all water supply improvements, including all off site improvements and fire hydrants and the abandonment /removal of any existing water lines, as required by CUP2005- 04967, FSP2005- 00004, TTM 16800, and MMP 130 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to occupancy on each parcel. 3. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond for all traffic related street improvements, including but not limited to traffic signals, directional signage, striping, and median islands as required by CUP2005- 04967, FSP2005- 00004, TIM 16800, and MMP 130 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to occupancy. The traffic signal at the intersection of State College Boulevard and the proposed connector street shall be designed prior to issuance of a grading permit and be installed at its ultimate location and be operational prior to occupancy of the first building constructed within the project. 4. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for undergrounding of all overhead electrical utility structures located on the property as required by CUP2005- 04967, FSP2005- 00004, TIM 16800, and MMP 130 referenced herein. All improvements /undergrounding shall be completed prior to any occupancy of the project. 5. That prior to assignment of rights of DAG 2005 - 00004, OWNER shall post bonds for project -wide improvements as indicated in these conditions. 6. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall submit water improvement plans for the entire project to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, for review and approval. The plan shall identify the location of large water meters with easements, fire lines, and backflow devices for each parcel. That OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the CITY an easement for all domestic above - ground water meters in addition to providing a 5 -foot wide clearance around the water meter pads and a 20 -foot wide access easement along the water lines /or water laterals from the street to the water meter pads for maintenance. 8. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at OWNER's expense. Landscape and/or hardscape screening of all pad- mounted equipment shall be required 39 outside the easement area of the equipment. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 9. That OWNER shall provide satellite or other cable /transmission television wiring (concealed from outside the building) to each unit and shall not allow individual television service involving the installation of individual dish receivers /transmitters on the exterior of the building. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 10. That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 402, 436, 470, 471 and 475 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 11. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 12. That prior to issuance of building permits, all vehicular ramps and grades shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 402, and be approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 13. That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval in conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the wall/fence location. 14. That prior to issuance of building permits, all internal streets shall be posted with "No Stopping Any Time" including the Katella Avenue frontage. 15. That prior to issuance of building permits, the proposed loading and unloading on private streets shall comply with Engineering Standard Plan No. 474. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 16. That prior to the building occupancy, the developer shall design and construct dual eastbound left -turn lanes or extend the single left -turn lane as required by the City, at the Katella Avenue and Sportstown intersection. 17. That prior to building occupancy, OWNER shall provide traffic signal modification plans and reconstruct the signal for the Katella Avenue and Sportstown intersection. The plan shall depict modifications needed due to the widening of Katella Avenue at the southeast quadrant of the intersection as well as introduction of dual eastbound left -turn lane or extension of the left turn lane. Construction improvements shall be completed prior to building occupancy or as approved by the City Engineer. 18. That prior to issuance of building permits, signs shall be posted indicating no on- street parking shall be allowed on the adjacent streets except where designated turn-out areas are provided for loading and unloading. Such signs shall be shown on plans submitted for the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. M 19. That prior to issuance of building permits, installation of any gates shall conform to the Engineering Standard Plan No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to the issuance of the first building permit. 20. That prior to issuance of building permits, all driveways to the project site shall be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 21. That prior to issuance of building permits, assigned parking spaces shall be provided for each residential unit. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 22. That prior to issuance of building permits, visitor parking spaces shall be posted, "No Overnight Parking, Except by Permission of the Management." Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. STREETS AND SANITATION 23. That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted providing a separate Knox box for the trash truck at each applicable gate entrance. 24. That between the hours of 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. that a minimum horizontal clearance of 14 feet shall be maintained on the ground floor parking structure to allow access for the trash bin retrieval vehicle. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 25. That prior to issuance of building permits, the proposed development shall submit a final written solid waste management plan signed by the property owner to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval. The OWNER shall then operate in accordance with the approved written solid waste management plan, as it may be modified from time to time subject to written approval by the Director of Public Works. Said solid waste management plan shall be referred to in the Maintenance Covenant which is recorded for the property. 26. That prior to issuance of building permits, trash storage areas and trash chutes shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with exhibits approved in conjunction with this Conditional Use Permit, on file with the Planning Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 27. That prior to issuance of building permits, an on -site trash truck turn- around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division. Said turn- around area shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 41 WATER ENGINEERING 28. That prior to issuance of building permits, a private water system with separate water service for fire protection and domestic water shall be provided. Said information shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 29. That individual water service and/or fire line connections shall be required for each parcel and/or residential and commercial unit per Rule 18 of the City of Anaheim's Water Rates, Rules and Regulations. 30. That prior to issuance of building permits, all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area except as permitted by conditional use permit in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division outside of the street setback area except as permitted by conditional use permit in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for approval by the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 31. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modification, relocation, or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through and reviewed for approval by the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 32. That prior to issuance of building permits, because this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 33. That prior to issuance of building permits, all existing water services shall conform to current Water Utility Standards on file in the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. Any existing water services that are not approved by the Utility for continued use shall be upgraded to current standards, or abandoned by the property owner /developer. The owner /developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or abandon any water service or fire line. 34. That prior to issuance of building permits, the legal OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim an easement twenty (20) feet in width for water service mains and/or an easement for above ground large meters and other public water facilities to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. Backflow devices and large meters shall be located above ground and properly screened. Such information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 35. That prior to issuance of building permits, or submittal of water improvement plans, the OWNER shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department for review and approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on- site water system to meet the project's water demands and fire protection requirements. 42 36. That prior to issuance of building permits or application for water meters, fire lines or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the OWNER shall submit to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department, an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall be done in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules, and Regulations. 37. That prior to issuance of building permits or rendering water service, the OWNER shall submit a set of improvement plans for Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, review and approval in determining the conditions necessary for providing water service to the project. 38. That prior to issuance of building permits, a minimum clearance of ten (10) feet shall be provided between the water and sewer line and that the water line shall be a minimum of 5 feet from the curb line. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for review and approval by the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division. PUBLIC WORKS 39. That prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the OWNER shall submit to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: • Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). • Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements, identifies the responsible parties, and funding mechanisms for the Treatment Control BMPs. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. • Describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 40. That all grading shall conform to the requirements of Chapter 17.04 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Grading plans shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works, Development Services Division for review and approval. 41. That prior to issuance of building permits, the OWNER shall submit street, sewer and landscape improvement plans for the public improvements along Katella Avenue and the private street to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division. A bond shall be posted in an amount approved by the City Engineer and a form approved by the 43 City Attorney prior to issuance of a building permit or plan approval whichever occurs first. A Right -of -Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the Development Services Division for all work performed in the right -of -way. The improvements shall be constructed prior to certificate of occupancy. 42. That all private streets, private sewers and private storm drains shall be privately maintained. 43. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Supplemental Sewer Impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $430/ 1,000 GSF for building floor area developed between the 0.4 and the 1.0 floor area ratio developments. 44. That prior to approval of the grading plan, the City of Anaheim Drainage Impact Mitigation Fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $35,000/ net acre. Credit will be applied for the current development. The project architect or engineer shall document the existing impervious area and the proposed impervious area. If the impervious area remains the same or decreases, no fee is due. If the impervious area increases, the fee will be proportional to the increase. 45. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Arterial Highway beautification /aesthetics impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $12,500/ gross acre. 46. That prior to issuance of building permits, vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue except at street intersections, shall be relinquished to the City of Anaheim. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 47. That prior to issuance of building permits, the OWNER shall irrevocable offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for emergency, public utility and other public purposes for the fire access along the west property line, over the private street to the westerly curb and gutter. 48. That prior to issuance of building permits, the OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for street, public utility and other public purposes for Katella Avenue to the ultimate right -of -way and a corner cut -off at Katella Avenue and Sportstown. 49. That prior to issuance of building permits, the OWNER shall acquire the necessary dedications from the adjacent property owner for the other portion of the Fire Access outside the tract boundary to be irrevocably offered for dedication to the City of Anaheim an easement for emergency, public utility and other public purposes. 50. That a drainage report shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section for review and approval prior to grading plan approval. 51. That all connections to the Orange County Flood Control District (OCSD) channel shall be approved by the OCFCD. 52. That any median trees that are removed due to the median reconfiguration on Katella Avenue at Sportstown shall be relocated to a location determined by the Public Works Department. If at such time relocation is not appropriate, the trees may be used elsewhere .. with a reimbursement to the City for the value of the trees as determined by the Public Works Department. PLANNING 53. That the OWNER shall provide disclaimers to prospective buyers indicating that they are purchasing property that is within close proximity to Angel Stadium, the Grove of Anaheim and the Arrowhead Pond and that the nature of these venues include potentially audible noise (such as crowd noise, vehicular traffic noise, fireworks, and amplified sound) during events, and traffic delays during event times. 54. That the development /site may not charge for "event parking" either for the Grove or the Angel Stadium unless approved by the City. 55. That the hours of delivery shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 56. That prior to issuance of building permits, all above - ground utility devices shall be located on private property and outside any required street setback area except where specifically permitted by conditional use permit. Said information shall be shown on plans submitted for the first building permits. 57. That prior to issuance of building permits, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 58. That prior to issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully screened by architectural devices and /or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 59. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 60. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. 61. That the OWNER shall be responsible for compliance with all mitigation measures within the assigned time frames and any direct costs associated with the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 130 as established by the City of Anaheim and as required by Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code to ensure implementation of those identified mitigation measures. 62. That signage for this project shall be limited to that shown on the approved Conditional Use Permit exhibits submitted by the project applicant, on file in the Planning Department. The building elevation signage (excluding window signs) shall be of the same type for all units. Any additional signage shall be subject to approval by the Planning Director. 63. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, the OWNER shall undertake and implement the maintenance of certain landscaping, private street and private utilities, and the performance of other obligations, as set forth herein. Prior to the 45 first final building and zoning inspection, OWNER shall execute and record with the Orange County Recorder an unsubordinated covenant to run with the land, satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney, creating maintenance obligations to maintain the following areas and facilities (collectively referred to hereinafter as the "Maintenance Areas and Facilities ") as indicated below: • Private Street at the east portion of the project including sidewalks, landscaping, street lighting, signage, striping and parkways. • Private sewer lines, grease interceptors, and clean outs. • Private storm drain lines, area drains, inlets, and catch basins. • Water Quality Management Plan Best Management Practices. • Internal landscape areas, courtyards, common areas. • Internal hardscape. • Parkway landscaping. • Parkway hardscape. • Onsite fountains and art elements. • Enclosed parking structures with mail facilities, rubbish collection areas, and bicycle storage. • Appliances in each dwelling unit including washer, dryer, stove, refrigerator, microwave, and dishwasher. • HVAC equipment in each dwelling unit. • Recreational amenities areas including pools & spas, barbecue areas, clubhouse meeting room(s) and workout room. • Public restrooms. • Site lighting systems. • Trash collection and facilities including the Solid Waste Management Plan for the project as approved by the City. 46 • Squeal -free surface in parking structure. • Maintenance of on -site signs and awnings. • Outdoor seating and dining areas. The obligations described above and depicted in the Maintenance Exhibit shall collectively be referred to as the "Maintenance Obligations." OWNER shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Maintenance Areas and Facilities and performance of the Maintenance Obligations, including any additional obligations, which may be specified herein. The Covenant may provide any of the Maintenance Obligations may be assumed by a duly formed Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and /or Maintenance Assessment District subject to CITY'S written approval. The covenant set forth herein constitutes a general scheme for the development, protection and maintenance of the Property. Said covenant is for the benefit of the Property and shall bind all successor owners thereof. Such covenant shall be a burden upon, and a benefit to, not only the OWNER but also its successors and assigns. Such covenant is intended to be and shall be declared to be running with the land or equitable servitudes upon the land, as the case may be. The Covenant shall provide that amendment of any provision thereof, which may negatively impact performance of the Maintenance Obligations, shall require prior written consent of the City. Termination of this Covenant is not a release of Declarant with regard to Declarant's independent obligations in connection with development and approval of the Project or with regard to obligations and liabilities incurred prior to such termination. 64. That the OWNER is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. 65. That the mail delivery parking stall shall be posted with a sign that indicates that it is a reserved space for mail delivery during the hours of potential mail service. POLICE 66. That prior to issuance of building permits, closed circuit television (CCTV) security cameras shall be installed to monitor the parking structures and the mailrooms to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department. CCTV cameras shall be strategically located throughout the parking structure, mailroom and lobby, covering all areas, especially all pedestrian and vehicular access points. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 67. That prior to issuance of building permits, each individual building and unit shall be clearly marked with its appropriate building number and address. These numbers shall be positioned so they are easily viewed from vehicular and pedestrian pathways throughout the complex. Main building numbers shall be a minimum of 12 inches in height. Main building 47 numbers and address numbers shall be illuminated during hours of darkness. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 68. That prior to issuance of building permits, 4 -foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of each building in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from view of the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 69. That prior to issuance of building permits, pedestrian and vehicular access control shall be required to prevent unwanted entry. A digital keypad entry system shall be included to facilitate quick response by emergency personnel. The system's entry code shall be provided to the Anaheim Police Department Communications Bureau and the Anaheim Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 70. That prior to issuance of building permits, that adequate lighting on all levels of the parking structures, including circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on -site. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 71. That prior to issuance of building permits, common rooms, such as gym facilities, recreation areas, laundry rooms, conference rooms, etc., should have transparent doors, have view panels installed in solid doors, or have a window installed next to the door for increased visibility into the room. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 72. That prior to issuance of building permits, a minimum lighting level of one (1) foot - candle measured at the parking surface shall be maintained for the parking structure with a maximum to minimum ratio no greater than 10:1. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. POLICE — ABC 73. At all times when the premise is open for business, the premise shall be maintained as a bona fide restaurant and shall provide a menu containing an assortment of foods normally offered in such restaurant. 74. Petitioner shall not share any profits, or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person, based upon monies collected as a door charge, cover charge, or any other form of admission charge, including minimum drink orders, or the sale of drinks. 75. There shall be no pool tables or amusement devices maintained upon the premises at any time unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim. 76. The gross sales of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed 40 percent of the gross sales of all retail sales during any three (3) month period. The applicant shall maintain records on a quarterly basis indicating the separate amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages and other items. These records shall be made available for inspection by any City of Anaheim official when requested. 77. There shall be no live entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted on the premise at any time unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim. 78. The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premise shall be prohibited. 79. There shall be no exterior advertising of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. 80. The activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties. 81. That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premise (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a public premise as defined in Section 23039 of the Business and Professions Code. 82. There shall be no admission fee, cover charge, nor minimum purchase required. 83. That the parking lot serving the premises shall be equipped with lighting of sufficient power to illuminate and make easily discernible the appearance and conduct of all persons on or about the parking lot. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminated the windows of nearby residences. 84. That all doors serving subject restaurant shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed at all times during the operation of the premises except for ingress /egress, permit deliveries and in cases of emergency. 85. That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and Profession Code so as not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit - sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. 86. At all times that entertainment or dancing is permitted, security measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct on the part of employees or patrons, and promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, and to prevent disturbance to the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises. 87. There shall be no public telephones on the property that are located outside the building . 88. Any and all security officers provided shall comply with all State and Local ordinances regulating their services, including, without limitation, Chapter 11.5 of Division 3 of the California Business and Profession Code. (Section 4.16.070 Anaheim Municipal Code) FIRE 89. That prior to structural framing, fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and approved by the Fire Department. .. 90. That an all- weather access road as approved by the Fire Department shall be provided during project construction. 91. That prior to issuance of building permits, fire hydrants shall meet minimum Fire Department Specifications and Requirements for spacing, distance to structure and available fire flow. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 92. That prior to issuance of building permits, emergency vehicular access shall be provided and maintained in accordance with Fire Department Specifications and Requirements. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 93. That prior to issuance of building permits, an automatic fire sprinkler system shall be designed, installed and maintained as required by the Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 94. That prior to issuance of building permits, a fire alarm system shall be designed, installed and maintained as required by the Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 95. That prior to issuance of building permits, lockable pedestrian and/or vehicular access gates shall be equipped with Knox devices as required and approved by the Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 96. That prior to issuance of building permits, any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at OWNER expense. Landscape and/or hardscape screening of all pad - mounted equipment shall be required outside the easement area of the equipment. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 97. That prior to issuance of building permits, the legal property owner shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement along /across high voltage lines, low voltage lines crossing private property and around all pad mounted transformers, switches, capacitors, etc. for electrical service lines to be determined as electrical design is completed to the satisfaction of the Electrical Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. Said easement shall be submitted to the City of Anaheim prior to connection of electrical service. 98. That the property is to be served with underground utilities per the Electrical Rates, Rules, and Regulations, and the City of Anaheim Underground Policy. 99. Prior to issuance of building permits, streetlights shall be installed along Katella Avenue and the proposed private street according to The Platinum Triangle Guidelines and Specifications. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 100. That prior to issuance of building permits, the OWNER shall underground overhead facilities if required and provide easements in a location acceptable to the Anaheim Public Utilities Department that shall interface with and /or replace the existing overhead 12kV and communication distribution systems. 50 101. That the relocation of existing facilities and/or installation of new systems shall be timed to coincide with the level of development that would require this improvement, to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department and other utility companies. 102. That prior to approval of grading plans and street improvement plans, the property owner /developer shall coordinate site development with the Anaheim Public Utilities Department — Electrical Engineering Division to ensure proper locating of electrical service equipment (transformers, switches, vaults, etc.) in accordance with the Electrical Engineering Construction Standards, Anaheim's Rates, Rules and Regulations and standard design criteria. 103. That prior to approval of grading plans the OWNER shall meet and confer with Anaheim Public Utilities Department — Electrical Engineering Division regarding special service requirement for large multiple story mixed -use buildings maximizing lot coverage. 104. That prior to issuance of building permits, the OWNER of the property shall coordinate its service requirements and relocation issues with Anaheim and the other utility companies involved. 105. That prior to issuance of building permits, all electrical facilities that are located on the project boundary shall be relocated underground and all existing services that are fed from the overhead system shall be converted to underground a the expense of the developer /owner. 106. That this Conditional Use Permit is granted subject to adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 2005- 00435, Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Permit No. 2005- 00113), Zoning Code Amendment No. 2005 - 00044, Development Agreement No. 2005 -00004 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16800, now pending. 107. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by project applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 40, and as conditioned herein. Conditions of Approval — Tentative Tract Map No. 16800 108. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder (Subdivision Map Act, Section 66499.40). 109. That prior to final tract map approval, the vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue except at street intersection shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. 110. That prior to final tract map approval, the OWNER of subject property shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for street, public utility and other public purposes for Katella Avenue. 51 I 11. That prior to final tract map approval, the legal owner of subject property shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for emergency, public utility and other public purposes for the westerly Fire Access over the private street. 112. That prior to final map approval, the OWNER shall furnish a Subdivision Agreement to the City of Anaheim, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney's Office, agreeing to complete the public improvements required as conditions of the map at the legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and shall than be recorded concurrently with the final map. All public improvements shall be constructed within one year of recordation of the final map. 113. That prior to final map approval, a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's Office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities including compliance with an approved Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall also include provisions for regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash and debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. This covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 114. That the developer will be responsible to construct a 15" & 18" sewer line in Katella Avenue to the State College Boulevard trunk line. The project's civil engineer shall prepare final construction drawings for the complete sewer line. Costs associated with the design and construction of the sewer line may be used to offset the sewer impact fees. If the developer's costs exceed the required sewer impact fees, the developer may request creation of a reimbursement agreement to provide for the reimbursement of the constructed sewer line at such time as the adjacent properties develop and connect to the sewer line. 115. That prior to final map approval, improvement plans for construction 15" and 18" sewer line for Katella Avenue along the project frontage to the State College Blvd. trunk line shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and bonds shall be posted in an amount approved by the City Engineer and form approved by the City Attorney's office prior to issuance of a building permit or plan approval whichever occurs first. The improvements shall be constructed prior to final building and zoning inspections. 116. That prior to grading plan approval, grading shall conform to requirements of Chapter 17.04 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Submit the grading plan to the Department of Public Works, Development Services Division for review and approval. A grading permit is required for cut or fills exceeding 500 cubic yards. Allow at least 8 weeks to obtain a grading permit. 117. That prior to grading plan approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number. The applicant shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City review on request. 52 118. That all private streets, private sewers and private storm drains shall be privately maintained. 119. That prior to final map approval, all existing structures shall be demolished. The OWNER shall obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division. 120. That prior to final map approval, all units shall be assigned street addresses by the Building Division. Street names for any new public or private street (if requested by the developer or required by the City) shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Division. 121. That prior to final tract map approval, the OWNER to acquire the necessary dedications from the adjacent property owner for the other part of the Private Street/Fire Access outside the tract boundary to be irrevocably offered for dedication to the City an easement for emergency, public utility and other public purposes. 122. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Supplemental Sewer Impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $430/ 1,000 GSF for floor building area developed between the 0.4 and the 1.0 floor area ratio developments. 123. That prior to approval of the grading plan, the City of Anaheim Drainage Impact Mitigation Fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $35,000/ net acre. Credit will be applied for the current development. The project architect or engineer must document the existing impervious area and the proposed impervious area. If the impervious area remains the same or decreases, no fee is due. If the impervious area increases, the fee will be proportional to the increase. 124. That prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Anaheim Arterial Highway beautification /aesthetics impact fee shall be paid. The fee is currently $12,500/ gross acre. 125. That prior to final map approval, street and landscape improvement plans for Katella Avenue and Private Street/Fire Access shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and bonds shall be posted in an amount approved by the City Engineer and form approved by the City Attorney's office prior to issuance of a building permit or plan approval whichever occurs first. The improvements shall be constructed prior to certificate of occupancy. 126. That prior to the issuance of grading permit, the OWNER shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: • Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMP's) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMP's as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMP's as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMP's. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's, and 53 • Describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's. 127. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the OWNER shall: • Demonstrate that all structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. • Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. 128. That prior to final tract map approval, an agreement for maintaining all the Water Quality Management Plan BMP's, which treat or prevent pollutants which do or could flow to a common drainage area (including but not limited to street sweeping and treatment control BMPs in the common private street/fire access road), shall be obtained from the property to the west and shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's Office. The agreement shall include provisions for responsibility of maintenance of private facilities and a maintenance exhibit. The agreement shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 129. That prior to grading plan approval, a Drainage Report shall be submitted to Subdivision Section for review and approval prior to grading plan approval. 130. That any connection to OCFCD channel shall be subject to approval of the OCFCD. 131. That prior to final tract map approval, an easement for the proposed 10'x10' RCB shall be irrevocably offered for dedication on the Tentative Tract Map 16800. A storm drain alignment study is required if a storm drain easement is to not dedicated within this Tract 16800. A study shall be submitted to Development Services Division of the Public Works Department on the storm drain re- alignment to determine where it should be placed. The study should consider the existing buildings to the north of the site, the existing RCB, existing underground utilities in Katella Avenue, design slope, minimum radii and geometric constraints for a box culvert, etc. Prior to Tentative Tract Map 16800 approval, the study of the proposed 10'x10' box alignment shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department Development Services Division. 132. That prior to final map approval, tract fees shall be paid and tract bonds shall be posted. 133. That prior to final map approval, an unsubordinated use covenant/agreement shall be recorded for shared use of the emergency fire access. The covenant/agreement shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney's office and the Fire Department. 134. That prior to final map approval, the City Engineer and City Attorney shall approve and the OWNER shall record a maintenance covenant providing for the continued operation and maintenance of the street as a private street. 135. That prior to the recordation of the tract map associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for the undergrounding of all overhead electrical utility structures located on the property and the construction of streetlights as required by CUP2005- 04967, 54 FSP2005- 00004, TIM 16800, and MMP. 130 referenced herein. All improvements /under grounding shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 55 EXHIBIT "D" PLATINUM TRIANGLE INTERIM DEVELOPMENT FEES 56 EXHIBIT "D -1" ELECTRIC UTILITIES UNDERGROUNDING FEE Residential Uses $11.42 per unit 251 units x $11.42 = $2,866.42 The Anaheim Master Land Use Plan and the Underground Conversion Program envision that the public utilities along Katella Avenue, between the State College Boulevard and Anaheim Way will need to be undergrounded. The City -owned facilities will be undergrounded using City funds, pursuant to the Rule No. 20 of the City of Anaheim Rates, Rules & Regulations Some of the facilities along Katella Avenue are owned by Southern California Edison (SCE). Moneys available to underground City -owned facilities may not be used to underground SCE facilities. The interim fee will collect the funds necessary to underground the SCE lines, and thereby significantly improve the appearance of The Platinum Triangle. The cost to underground the SCE lines is estimated at $104, 775. These funds will collected by imposing an interim fee on the Mixed -used residential units planned in The Platinum Triangle. The formula for calculating the fee is the following: Cost to Underground SCE lines = Per -Unit Fee Number of mixed -use residential units The Per -Unit fee is calculated at: $104,775 = $11.42 per Unit 9,175 Units 57 EXIIIBIT "D -2" FIRE FACILITIES FEE Residential Uses $350.00 per unit Commercial/Office Uses $ 0.20 per square foot 251 units x $350.00 = $87,850.00 9,764 s.f. Commercial x $0.20 = $1,952.80 Total: $89,802.80 The purpose of establishing a Fire Protection Fee is to finance improvements and additions to facilities and equipment to support fire protection and paramedic services made necessary by new development and expansion of and additions to existing development within The Platinum Triangle. Development will generate additional need for protection and paramedic services in The Platinum Triangle. There is a need in The Platinum Triangle for expansion of fire protection and paramedic services and for new and expanded development to contribute its fair share towards the costs of additional and improved facilities and equipment. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the described fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment and the impacts of the types of development proposed for The Platinum Triangle, for which the corresponding Fire Protection Fee described above is charged. There is also a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the type of development for which the fee is charged, in that these fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment provide support for fire protection and paramedic services and accommodate additional demand generated by development. The cost estimates set forth below are reasonable cost estimates for adding to fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment in The Platinum Triangle. The Fire Protection Fees collected pursuant to this agreement shall be used to finance only the additional facilities described, which additional facilities are needed to augment existing fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment serving The Platinum Triangle, to offset the impacts of new development and expansion of and additions to existing development within The Platinum Triangle. FIRE FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT Fire truck company with equipment $1,000,000 Fire engine company with equipment $ 750,000 Fire station $3,500,000 TOTAL $5,250,000 M EXIIIBIT "D -3" GENERAL PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSING FEE Residential Uses: $8.00 per unit Commercial/Office Uses: $0.01 per square foot 251 units x $8.00 = $2,008.00 9,764 s.L Commercial x $0.01= $97.64 Total: $2,105.64 The General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee is based on the following: Intent: Recover partial costs incurred to develop the Mixed -Use Overlay designation for the Platinum Triangle, including the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report Contract Costs Incurred: $146,000 New Development Allowed in Platinum Triangle: 7,044,300 sq.ft. of non - residential uses 9,175 residential units (assume average unit size of 800 sq.ft. = 7,340,000 sq.ft.) 7,044,300+ 7,340,000 14,384,300 total square feet $146,000/14,384,300 = $.01 per square foot 7,340,000 x $.01 = $73,400 $73,400/9175 = $8 per dwelling unit Planning Entitlement Fee 59 EXHIBIT "D -4 LIBRARY FEES Residential Uses $144.39 per unit 251 units x $144.39 = $36,241.89 The amount of the Library fee is based upon the current fee structure for East Santa Ana Canyon residential development for single family residential uses. The 2004 fee for such residential uses is $317.67, based upon an estimated 3.3 persons per dwelling. Using an estimate of 1.5 persons per unit in The Platinum Triangle, the proposed interim developer fee for The Platinum Triangle is $144.39 per unit. .1 EXIIIBIT "D -5" PLATINUM TRIANGLE PARK FEES Residential Uses $7055.74 per unit 251 units x $7,055.74 = $1,770,990.70 Park fees are established by implementing various values identified for The Platinum Triangle into the Park Dedication fee formula, as established by Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapters 17.08 and 17.34, which is as follows: ( Land Acquisition Costs + Land Development Costs) x 2 x DU density proposed =fee 1,000 Land acquisition costs are estimated by Keyser- Marsten to be $50 /sq. ft. of property purchased (for industrial properties, including goodwill and relocation costs *). This equals $2,178,000/ac. Land Development costs have been established by the City Council at $173,913.33/ac. ** City Park Acreage Standard of 2 acres /1,000 population was incorporated in the formula set forth in Chapters 17.08 and 17.34, as approved by City Council. Estimated dwelling unit density of 1.5 persons /unit for both the single family attached and apartment complexes as estimated in Final Environmental Impact Report, No. 330, Table 4.3 -1, for the City of Anaheim's General Plan and Zoning Code Update. Using the above figures the park fee is $7,055.74 per unit. ($2,178,000+$173,913.33) 2 x 1.5 = $7,055.74 per unit 1,000 Parkland dedication will be required for each 8 acre or larger parcel proposed for residential development. The City's Platinum Triangle consultant, EDAW, has recommended that each dwelling unit for parcels of 8 acres or larger dedicate 44 sq. ft. of public parkland per each dwelling unit proposed. * ** The value of the parkland dedication will be credited against overall park in lieu fees paid for the project. Consistent with existing zoning and policies, no credit will be given for improvements. As an example, if a subdivision were required to dedicate a.5 acre park, credit would be given against the Land Acquisition value, established above, of $2,178,000 per acre. Accordingly the Developer would be entitled to a credit of $1,089,000 for the dedication. 61 Notes: * Memorandum by Keyser - Marsten dated December 29, 2004 and updated January 15, 2004 by James Rabe of Keyser Marsten, available in the Parks Division office. * * As approved by the City Council in Resolution No. 2004R -128, dated June 15, 2004. * ** The square foot figure for required recreational space per dwelling unit in The Platinum Triangle is lower than the figure used elsewhere in the City, as set forth in Section 17.08. The lower figure is recommended because of the type of residential projects anticipated for The Platinum Triangle. The mixed use type of neighborhoods proposed require smaller human scale parks within a walking distance of 2.5 to 5 minutes of each dwelling unit. 62 EXHIBIT "D -6" POLICE FACILITIES FEE Residential Uses $31.62 per unit Office Uses $ .10 per square foot Commercial Uses $ .21 per square foot 251 units x $31.62 = 7,936.62 9,764 s.f. Commercial x $0.21= $2,050.44 The Revenue and Cost Specialists Consulting firm is still in the process of establishing fee guidelines for The Platinum Triangle area. During the interim the foregoing formula will be applicable to offset the equipment cost for police services in The Platinum Triangle area. The interim fee will be replaced with a one -time capital facilities fee which will be applicable to the Project. 63 EXHMIT "D -7" PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLEMENTAL FEES SUPPLEMENTAL SEWER IMPACT FEE All Land Uses $430.00 per 1,000 gross square foot $430.00 x 384.341 = $165,266.63 Gross Floor Building Area developed between 0.4 and 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) ARTERIAL HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION /AESTHETIC IMPACTS FEE All Land Uses $12,500.00 per gross acre 4.02 acres x $12,500 = $50,250.00 SUPPLEMENTAL STORM DRAIN IMPACT FEE (Drainage District 27)* Residential Uses $24,500.00 per net acre Non - Residential Uses $35,000.00 per net acre $35,000.00 x.18 acre of new impervious area = $6,300.00 *Drainage District Maps are available in the Public Works Department. 64 EXHIBIT "D -8" TRAFFIC FEE Residential Uses $871.00 per unit Office Uses $3,384.00 per 1,000 square foot Commercial Uses $10,552.00 per 1,000 square foot 251 units x $643.00 = $161,393.00 9.464 t.s.f. Commercial x $10,522.00 = $99,580.21 The Supplemental Traffic Fee is based upon the following: PLATINUM TRIANGLE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE CALCULATION 1 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, hourly trip rate between 3 & 7 pm weekdays in Platinum Triangle 2 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, average trip length during PM peak hour in Platinum Triangle. 3 PM trip rate multiplied by average length, then divided by OCTA standard 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane. 4 Construction plus right -of -way (no landscaping, derived from State College/Lincoln project data below: PM 95 construction of St.College/Lincoln intersection widening. 4087 linear feet (11) of project length. PEAK AVERAGE CAPACITY COSTPER IMPACT 2,044,0 TRIP coast cost/mile 774,05 LAND USE UNIT RATE 1 LENGTH (MI) 2 CONSUMED 3 LANE MILE 4 FEE/UNIT 5 Residential dwelling 0.49 1.67 0.00048086 $ 2,818,092 $ 871 Office tsf 1.36 1.67 0.00133330 $ 2,818,092 $ 3,384 Commercial tsf 3.89 1.67 0.00382504 $ 2,818,092 $ 10,552 1 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, hourly trip rate between 3 & 7 pm weekdays in Platinum Triangle 2 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, average trip length during PM peak hour in Platinum Triangle. 3 PM trip rate multiplied by average length, then divided by OCTA standard 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane. 4 Construction plus right -of -way (no landscaping, derived from State College/Lincoln project data below: 5 Impact Fee is exclusive of Citywide Traffic and Transportation Improvement Fee, which also is due. 65 1,582,1 95 construction of St.College/Lincoln intersection widening. 4087 linear feet (11) of project length. 387.13 per if (no landscape costs included) 2,044,0 39 coast cost/mile 774,05 3 row cost/mile 5 Impact Fee is exclusive of Citywide Traffic and Transportation Improvement Fee, which also is due. 65 EXHIBIT "'E" DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS As a condition of approval of Development Agreement No. 2005- 00004, the City requires OWNER to undertake and implement the maintenance of certain slopes, landscaping, [a park (if Property is 8 or more acres)] private streets and private utilities, and the performance of other obligations, as set forth herein. Prior to the earlier of either the sale of the first [residential] lot or the issuance of the temporary or permanent "Certificate of Occupancy" for the first [residential dwelling unit] in Tract Map 16800, OWNER shall execute and record with the Orange County Recorder a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ( "CC &Rs ") satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney creating maintenance obligations for an incorporated association ( "Association ") to establish a financial mechanism or financial mechanisms to maintain those areas and facilities (collectively referred to hereinafter as the "Common Area ") depicted on Attachment No. 1 attached hereto. Such Area shall include those items indicated within Condition No. 63 of Exhibit C to this Development Agreement. The obligations described above and depicted in the Maintenance Exhibit shall collectively be referred to as the "Maintenance Obligations." Until such time as the Association is formed, the CC &Rs are recorded, the Common Area is conveyed in fee to the Association, and the Association has assumed responsibility to maintain the Common Area and perform the Maintenance Obligations, OWNER shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Common Area and performance of the Maintenance Obligations, including any additional obligations which may be specified herein. Reconveyance of all or part of the Common Area or any property interest therein to a party other than the Association shall require (i) the prior written consent of the City, (ii) appurtenant easements over the Common Area for the benefit of each and every lot in the Property and (iii) that the reconveyance expressly affirm that the provisions of Civil Code Section 1367 relating to lien rights to enforce delinquent assessments and the CC &Rs shall remain applicable. The CC &Rs may provide any of the Maintenance Obligations may be assumed by a duly formed Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and/or Maintenance Assessment District subject to CITY's written approval. The covenants and restrictions set forth herein constitute a general scheme for the development, protection and maintenance of the Property for the benefit of all owners. Said covenants and restrictions are for the benefit of the Property and shall bind all owners thereof. Such covenants and restrictions shall be a burden upon, and a benefit to, not only the OWNER but also its successors and assigns. All of such covenants and restrictions are intended to be and shall be declared in the CC &Rs to be covenants running with the land or equitable servitudes upon the land, as the case may be. The CC &R's shall provide that termination of the CC &R's or amendment of any provision which may negatively impact performance of the Maintenance Obligations shall require prior written consent of the City. Termination of this Declaration is not a release of Declarant with regard to Declarant's independent obligations in connection with development and approval of the Project or with regard to RORO obligations and liabilities incurred prior to such termination. ROTC EXHIBIT "F" PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT RWR ITEM NO. 1 -A I RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 55 -56 -19 RCL 54 -55 -42 WHIRLPOOL I RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 55 -56 -19 RCL 54 -55 -42 CUP 2273 CUP 2813 STADIUM BUS. PARK I RCL 99 -00-15 tes. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 55 -56 -19 RCL 54 -55 -42 VAR 2019 CUP 847 MR. STOX RESTAURANT I (PTMU) TTM 16832 RCL 2004 -00129 RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 I RCL 54 -55 -42 RCL 55 -56 -19 CUP 2185 CUP 1971 VAR 4304 VAR 3146 S DAG 2005 -00007 FSP 2005 -00006 RAMADA INN I (PTMU) TTM 16831 RCL 2004 -00129 RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 54 -55 -02 RCL 55 -56 -19 VAR 3775 DAG 2005 -00001 DAG 2005 -00002 DAG 2005 -00003 SMALL IND. FIRMS 966' S LEWIS ST. 355 KATELLA AVENUE I CDC RCL 99 -00-15 1 BAKERY (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 2004 -00128 I RCL 66 -67 -36 ANAHEIM HVAC RCL 99 -00 -15 RCL 60-61 -113 SUPERCENTER (Res. of Int. to SE) I (PTMU) RCL 55 -56 -19 RCL 54 -55 -42 RCL 54 -55-42 RCL 99 -00-15 CUP 1455 CUP 2001 -04384 VAR 4123 (Res. of Int. to SE) OMNI DUCT SYSTEMS WAREHOUSING RCL 56 -57 -93 RCL 87 -88-14 AND STORAGE I RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 55 -56 -19 RCL 54 -55 -42 WHIRLPOOL I RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 55 -56 -19 RCL 54 -55 -42 CUP 2273 CUP 2813 STADIUM BUS. PARK I RCL 99 -00-15 tes. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 55 -56 -19 RCL 54 -55 -42 VAR 2019 CUP 847 MR. STOX RESTAURANT I (PTMU) TTM 16832 RCL 2004 -00129 RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 I RCL 54 -55 -42 RCL 55 -56 -19 CUP 2185 CUP 1971 VAR 4304 VAR 3146 S DAG 2005 -00007 FSP 2005 -00006 RAMADA INN I (PTMU) TTM 16831 RCL 2004 -00129 RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 54 -55 -02 RCL 55 -56 -19 VAR 3775 DAG 2005 -00001 DAG 2005 -00002 DAG 2005 -00003 SMALL IND. FIRMS 966' S LEWIS ST. 355 KATELLA AVENUE I RCL 99 -00 -15 1 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 99 -00-15 RCL 66 -67 -14 (Res. of Int. to SE) I (PTMU) CUP 2002 -04544 RCL 65 -66 -84 RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 99 -00-15 CUP 2946 1670 66 -67 -14 (Res. of Int. to SE) CUP 2134 CUP 1 RCL 56 -57 -93 RCL 87 -88-14 CUP 1879 RCL 99 -00 -15 CUP 575 (Res of Intent to CO) CUP 1842 D -H (Res. of Int. to SE) GPA2005 -00434 RCL 66£7 -14 CUP 1587 IND. FIRMS RCL 66 -67 -14 VAC. IND. RCL 56 -57 -93 ADJ 2003 -00236 I--� CUP 1670 IND. FIRMS BLDG. IND. FIRMS Development Agreement No. 2005 -00007 Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00006 Subject Property Tentative Tract Map No. 16832 Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: EAST KATELLA PARTNERSHIP Q.S. No. 107 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00007 - REQUEST TO ADOPT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND 1331 EAST KATELLA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC AND EAST KATELLA PARTNERSHIP TO CONSTRUCT A 336 -UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT, RETAIL SPACE AND ASSOCIATED PUBLIC STREET. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16832 - TO ESTABLISH A 3 -LOT, 336 -UNIT AIRSPACE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION. 1221 and 1331 East Katella Avenue - Platinum Triangle Condominium Development 1915 Jk 4= Mil... f Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Development Agreement No. 2005 -00007 Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00006 Subject Property Tentative Tract Map No. 16832 Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: EAST KATELLA PARTNERSHIP Q.S. No. 107 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00007 - REQUEST TO ADOPT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND 1331 EAST KATELLA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC AND EAST KATELLA PARTNERSHIP TO CONSTRUCT A 336 -UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT, RETAIL SPACE AND ASSOCIATED PUBLIC STREET. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16832 - TO ESTABLISH A 3 -LOT, 336 -UNIT AIRSPACE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION. 1221 and 1331 East Katella Avenue - Platinum Triangle Condominium Development 1915 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 5a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 136 (Motion) 5b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16832 (Motion) 5c. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00007 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped, 4.9* acre property has a frontage of 355 feet on the north side of Katella Avenue, a maximum depth of 600 feet and is located 966 feet east of the centerline of Lewis Street (1221 and 1331 East Katella Avenue - Platinum Triangle Condominium Development). :Advertised as 5.37 acres REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of the following: Tentative Tract Map No. 16832 — to establish a 3 -lot, 336 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision- Development Agreement No. 2005 -00005 - to recommend City Council adoption of a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and 1331 East Katella Development Company and East Katella Partnership for the Platinum Triangle Condominium Development to construct a 336 -unit residential and commercial (1,248 square foot retail component) mixed use project and associated public street. The Planning Commission's role is to review the land use aspects of the Agreement, specifically to determine if the eligibility criteria has been met, if the Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and if the project implemented by the Agreement is compatible with the development of the surrounding area. The City Council will consider approval of the Agreement- BACKGROUND (3) This property is currently developed with a one- and two -story hotel complex and is zoned I (PTMU) and O -L (PTMU) (Industrial; Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay and Low Intensity Office; Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property as well as properties to the east and south (across Katella Avenue) for Mixed Use land uses. The adjacent properties to the west and north are designed for High - Intensity Office and Low - Intensity Office land uses, respectively. The PTMLUP further indicates the property is located in the Katella District of the PTMU Overlay. (4) The proposed project would include a division into three lots consisting of a total of 336 multiple - family units and a 1,248 square foot commercial tenant space and the construction of an associated public street. The development would be comprised of three separate buildings constructed in the "podium" style, with four levels of residential units situated above two levels of subterranean parking. Vehicle access to the site would be provided on the proposed connector street that would border the proposed project site on the east. Pedestrian access into the development would be provided via the connector street and Katella Avenue. Site amenities would include a clubhouse, exercise room, roof terraces, swimming pool and spa. SR- DAG2005- 00007eyt Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16832 DISCUSSION (5) The tentative tract map indicates the subdivision would consist of three (3) lots for condominium purposes for 336 airspace attached residential condominium units and one commercial tenant space. y - JJ View of property looking north from Katella Avenue (6) On August 17, 2004, the City Council approved the PTMLUP to implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle including serving as a blueprint for future development and street improvements. The City Council also adopted the PTMU Overlay Zone (Chapter 1820 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) and an associated standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement. The PTMU Overlay Zone encompasses approximately 375 acres and five districts (the Katella, Gene Autry, Gateway, Arena and Stadium Districts) within The Platinum Triangle, as depicted on the PTMLUP. The PTMU Overlay Zone provides opportunities for high quality well- designed development projects that could be stand -alone residential projects or combined with non - residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area. Properties encompassed by the PTMU Overlay Zone can be operated, developed or expanded under their existing underlying zone or, if the property owner chooses, developed under the PTMU Overlay Zone standards. Ordinances adopting the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements and reclassifying certain properties to the PTMU Overlay Zone (those properties designated for Mixed Uses by the General Plan) were finalized on September 23, 2004. (7) Development in the PTMU Overlay Zone is implemented through the administrative processing of a Final Site Plan (to show compliance with the Code) and entering into the standardized Development Agreement with the City. The Code requires the Final Site Plan to be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Director Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 as to conformance with the provisions of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone. Once approved, the Final Site Plan is incorporated into the Development Agreement as an exhibit. (8) The applicant submitted Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00006 to provide for the development of the project. Based upon a review of the plans and in accordance with the authority set forth in Section 1820.170 (Implementation) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, on July 14, 2005, the Planning Director approved Final Site Plan No. 2005 - 00006, subject to the approval of Tentative Tract Map No 16832 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00007. This approval was based upon the determination that the Final Site Plan is in conformance with the provisions of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone. The approved Final Site Plan is attached as Exhibit "B" to the Development Agreement. Part of this approval included an analysis of the amount of approved commercial square footage allowed by the General Plan Update and the subsequent PTMLUP. The Katella District provides for up to 544,300 square feet of commercial retail space. General Plan Amendment No. 2005 -00435 which is being requested as part of DR Horton's project (Item No. 4 on today's agenda) will propose an additional 5,608 square feet of commercial retail to the Katella District because the project proposes 9,764 square feet of commercial thereby using the remaining 4,156 square feet in the district. This project proposes to demolish 105,472 square feet of commercial retail space and add a 1,248 square foot retail tenant space. This would result in a net surplus of 104,224 square feet of commercial retail space credited back to the Katella District for use by future commercial retail projects within the District. Following is a summary of the approved Final Site Plan: (9) Primary access to the project would be via a proposed connector street located at the eastern boundary of the site from a proposed signalized intersection at Katella Avenue. A secondary vehicular entry (right in /right out) would be provided via a private drive from Katella Avenue, adjacent to the western site boundary. Each of the three buildings would include two levels of subterranean parking with a total of 671 parking spaces (the PTMU Overlay requires a minimum of 660 spaces based on the unit mix). The three parking structures are separate from one another and each meets the minimum number of spaces based on the unit mix for the building which it serves. Each parking structure includes a secured area for residents, as well and an unsecured area for guests, separated by a remote controlled gate. A total of seven (7) parking spaces have been dedicated for employees of the commercial tenant space which would be located within the unsecured parking area on Site 1. No on- street parking would be allowed on the connector street or Page 3 Platinum Triangle Development Standard Condominiums Code Requirement 336 units Site Area (acres) 4.45 (net) N/A Minimum 50 units DU /Acre 76 required and maximum 100 du /acre Lot Coverage 53% 75% maximum Recreation /Leisure Area 77,206 s.f. total 200 s.f/ unit minimum 230 s.f. per unit Height Building 1 - 63 feet 100 feet maximum Buildings 2, 3 - 53 feet 1 11 (9) Primary access to the project would be via a proposed connector street located at the eastern boundary of the site from a proposed signalized intersection at Katella Avenue. A secondary vehicular entry (right in /right out) would be provided via a private drive from Katella Avenue, adjacent to the western site boundary. Each of the three buildings would include two levels of subterranean parking with a total of 671 parking spaces (the PTMU Overlay requires a minimum of 660 spaces based on the unit mix). The three parking structures are separate from one another and each meets the minimum number of spaces based on the unit mix for the building which it serves. Each parking structure includes a secured area for residents, as well and an unsecured area for guests, separated by a remote controlled gate. A total of seven (7) parking spaces have been dedicated for employees of the commercial tenant space which would be located within the unsecured parking area on Site 1. No on- street parking would be allowed on the connector street or Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 along the project frontage on Katella Avenue. Three (3) moving plazas would be provided for the project: two (2) along the private drive between Sites 2 and 3 and one (1) on the new connector street, adjacent to Sites 1 and 2. In addition to functioning as a residential loading area, the moving plaza on the connector street would also be utilized for delivery of items to the commercial tenant space, at the corner of the connector street and Katella Avenue. (10) The site plan indicates building setbacks would be 10 feet from the connector street on the east and 18 feet from Katella Avenue on the south. Interior setbacks would be 10 feet along the north property line and 30 feet (5 feet fully landscaped) along the west property line. Interior property lines would contain a six -foot high decorative wall, with stucco finish and planted with flowering vines. (11) The floor plans show that Site 1 one includes mezzanines in all units on the third and fourth floors and that Sites 2 and 3 include mezzanines in all units on the fourth floors. There are numerous floor plans throughout the three buildings, which range from 632 square feet for a studio to 1,962 square feet for a two- bedroom unit with a den and loft. The majority of the units are two bedroom units, many with an additional den /office. The average unit size is 1,095 square feet. Floor plans also indicate that each building contains a lobby, which include seating areas, mail rooms and "business centers" which may be reserved by residents for small meetings. (12) The elevation plans show distinct architectural styles for each of the three buildings. Site 1, adjacent to Katella Avenue would be constructed in a contemporary style, as indicated by the proposed exterior building materials, rooflines, and architectural accents. Exterior finishes would include four different colors of painted smooth - textured stucco, two variations of stone veneer, metal cladding and concrete tile roofs. Focal points include a bowed roof with a brushed metal finish to emphasize the main entrance to the building and a circular tower element at the southeast corner of the property to highlight the retail component. Further, both the retail space and lobby would be constructed at grade in order to achieve a higher ceiling height of approximately 14 feet. Architectural accents include a metal canopy encircling the retail tenant space, decorative bracing and corbels and horizontal steel railing for balcony enclosures at upper levels. Further, metal awnings and perforated metal balcony panels are proposed on the south elevation to further enhance the view from Katella Avenue. The main entry into the lobby from Katella Avenue (as seen above) includes a large curved metal canopy and would be framed by metal cladding at either side of the tower. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 (13) Site 2, would be constructed in a classic style, as indicated by the proposed exterior building materials, rooflines, and architectural accents. Exterior finishes would include three different colors of painted stucco, a deep red brick veneer and concrete tile roof. Focal points include a corner tower element with copper finial at the northeast corner and lobby entrance enhanced with brick veneer and a covered wraparound arcade. Architectural accents include gable cornices, arches with keystone detail, decorative wrought iron balcony railings and patio gates. (14) The proposed exterior building materials, rooflines, and architectural accents indicate a Mediterranean style for Site 3. Exterior finishes would include various natural shades of painted stucco, stone veneer and concrete barrel tile roofs in a terracotta color. Focal points include the corner lobby, which includes a wraparound arcade with arches finished in stone veneer, a cupola visible to the connector street and covered balconies with arched openings. Architectural accents include decorative bracing beneath balconies, columns and hand - forged decorative wrought iron railings and gates. Page 5 Proposea Site 2 east elevation (Facing Proposea connector street) Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 (15) Ground level units for all three buildings would contain patio areas that would provide connectivity to public pedestrian access ways. As required by the PTMU Overlay, the patio areas along the newly proposed connector street would provide secondary access directly from the public sidewalk into the ground floor units. The finished floor of all units adjacent to the right -of -way would be at least 18 inches above grade and entry porches would consist of decorative paving to provide distinction between public and private areas. (16) The landscape plans show the proposed landscaping for the project as well as depictions of the various recreational and leisure areas. These areas would be planted with a variety of evergreen and flowering trees, shrubs and groundcover, and clinging vines to cover solid walls. An 18 -foot wide building setback would be provided adjacent to Katella Avenue with up to an 8 -foot encroachment for private patios, allowing a minimum 10 foot fully landscaped area. Magnolia, Italian Cypress and Brisbane Box trees, flowering shrubs and groundcover would be installed within the setback area along Katella Avenue. The parkway would contain Fortnight Lily below a row of Date Palms matching the height and spacing of trees within a future median in conformance with the Landscape Identity Plan of the Platinum Triangle MLUP. The 10 -foot wide building setback along the new connector street would be fully landscaped, with the exception of private patios, which are permitted to encroach up to seven feet within the setback. The connector street would contain parkways planted with Magnolia trees and Daylilies, while the setback would be planted with Kentia Palms, Italian Cypress, Evergreen Pear, and Brisbane Box trees and various flowering shrubs. (17) The majority of the common recreation areas would be located on Site 1 and would be shared by all three buildings. Amenities within this main recreation area would include a pool and spa, open lawn areas, dining terrace with barbeques, double -sided fireplace with seating areas and various water features. Indoor amenities for this project would include a 1,665 square -foot recreation room containing seating areas, television, kitchenette and pool table with a 1,245 square -foot fitness room above. Other recreation areas would be provided in the form of rooftop terraces on Buildings 2 and 3 and would contain such features as fire pits, barbeques, shade cabanas on sand, lounge chairs on wood decks and a putting green. The roof terraces would include trees within pots and planters, a "green screen" to separate recreation areas from other parts of the roof and decorative concrete paver decking. Buildings 2 and 3 would also contain a total of four (4) "passive" interior courtyards, which would include benches, seat walls with cushions, decorative metal arches or pergolas with flowering vines, water features and decorative stone pavement. Interior courtyard areas would be landscaped with a ratio of 1:1 hardscape to landscape, as required by the PTMU Overlay. These courtyard areas would further contain raised planter boxes at varying heights of 24- and 42- inches. Private patios facing the interior courtyard would have decorative gates allowing residents to enter recreation areas directly from their unit. (18) Lighting within the project would consist of pedestrian- oriented acorn light poles along the private drives to match those proposed on the connector street, courtyard light poles to match the individual architectural styles of each building. Various areas would be accented with Tivoli lights strung from decorative poles and roof decks would contain contemporary light bollards. (19) Project construction would commence near the beginning of 2006, and be completed by early 2008. Grading for the project would generate approximately 112,726 cubic yards of material for export, which would be disposed of at a legal disposal site approved for this type of material. Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00007 DISCUSSION: (20) In 1982, the Legislature of the State of California adopted Section 65864, et. Seq. of the California Government Code authorizing a city and an applicant for a development project to enter into a development agreement, permitting cities to contract with property owner /developers for their mutual benefit in a manner not otherwise available to the parties. A development agreement is a contract for development which provides a property owner /developer a vested right to proceed with an approved development, "freezing' the entitlement along with established regulations and fees, in exchange for the City obtaining benefits over and above what would otherwise be required by existing regulations and ordinances. (21) On November 23, 1982, the City enacted Ordinance No. 4377 making the City subject to the Statute and adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (Procedures Resolution) establishing procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application by the City. On August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No- 2004-179 approving a standardized form for the Platinum Triangle Development Agreement to implement projects in the PTMU Overlay Zone. The Platinum Triangle Development Agreement is intended to provide the property owner /developer with a maximum amount of flexibility while ensuring development and maintenance of high quality projects that carry out the vision for The Platinum Triangle. (22) Pursuant to the Procedures Resolution, the Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation to the City Council relative to the proposed Development Agreement. The Planning Commission must determine whether the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the Development Agreement by finding the project satisfies one or more of the eligibility requirements set forth below: (a) That the project shall occupy at least 50 acres; or (b) That, upon completion, the project shall result in the construction of at least 250 dwelling units, 250,000 square feet of commercial - office space, or 250,000 square feet of industrial space; or (c) That the project will be constructed in phases over an anticipated period of not less than 5 years; or (d) That the Planning Director finds that the public health, safety or general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim will best be served by accepting an application for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. The Planning Commission must also determine whether the proposed Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district, compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area; and not otherwise detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of Anaheim. (23) Staff has reviewed the proposed Development Agreement and finds that the Agreement has been prepared in conformance with the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement approved per Resolution No. 2004 -179. Further, the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the Development Agreement since the project will result in the construction of 336 residential dwelling units for the development of the Platinum Triangle Condominium Project, which is consistent with and implements the goals and policies of the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation for The Platinum Triangle and Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan by providing for a high - quality residential project. The Development Agreement would ensure completion of the development as proposed. The plans associated with the project depict a high - quality multiple - family development that incorporates a variety of rooflines, prominent entry features, and numerous architectural details with common and semi - private open space enhanced by landscaping, decorative paving treatments, and low garden walls and detailed wrought iron fencing. The plans would also provide for an associated public street, widening of Katella Avenue, and associated right -of -way landscaping and hardscape improvements. Further, in approving the Final Site Plan for the Platinum Triangle Condominium Project, the Planning Director determined that the Final Site Plan was consistent with the PTMU Overlay Zoning requirements, subject to approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 16832 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00007. The Development Agreement contains exhibits for the entire project, as well as conditions of approval associated with the overall development, the tentative tract map, associated development of street improvements, as well as ongoing maintenance associated with the proposal. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (24) On May 25, 2004, the City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans (including an Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle) (FEIR No. 330) under Resolution No. 2004 -04, in conjunction with the consideration and adoption of the citywide General Plan and Zoning Code Update Program and a series of related actions. (25) On August 24, 2004, the City Council determined that the previously certified FEIR No. 330 was adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone, the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement and other related reclassification actions. It was also determined that future individual development projects and infrastructure improvements which are proposed to implement The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone would require further environmental review and analysis of potential site specific environmental impacts in conjunction with the processing of discretionary applications. Projects that precede certification of the Subsequent EIR require independent environmental review and documentation. (26) A Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated to public agencies and interested parties on June 28, 2005, for a 20 -day comment period. The NOI and associated Initial Study outlined the environmental issues to be addressed in Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 136, including: Aesthetics/Visual, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Transportation/Traffic, Utilities /Service Systems, and Cumulative Impacts. (27) On July 14, 2005, the Anaheim City School District submitted a Response to the NOI associated with this project (attached), indicating that while they do not agree with an assertion made in the MND regarding the student generation rate used by the District, they acknowledge that a lower student generation rate than what is typical for the City based on the high density residential construction being proposed. State Senate Bill 50 provides that the payment of developer fees is the only legal requirement for mitigating school facilities impacts. Measure 6.5 -1 of Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106 (applicable to this project) requires that the property owner /developer provide proof to the Building Division of the Planning Department that school impact fees have been paid consistent with State statutes prior to issuance of building permits. Page 8 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 (28) On July 14, 2005, Caltrans submitted a response (attached), indicating their concerns pertaining to the methodology used for the traffic impact analysis and indicated that the future traffic impacts should be projected to the year 2025 and not 2007. John Lower, Traffic and Transportation Manager, has prepared the attached response letter that validates the methodology used as part of the MND and asserts that the traffic analysis associated with the General Plan Update last year, including build out of The Platinum Triangle, projects to the year 2025. (29) On July 18, 2005, the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission submitted a response (attached), noting that their concerns have been addressed and that due to the heights of the proposed buildings, the development would not conflict with existing helicopter flight paths. (30) Staff has reviewed the Initial Study for the proposed project, a copy of which has been provided to the Planning Commission and is available for review in the Planning Department, and finds that with the incorporation of mitigation measures set forth in Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136, no significant environmental impacts would result from the proposed project not already analyzed under FEIR No. 330 that could not be adequately mitigated and, therefore, recommends that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Planning Commission that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- FINDINGS (31) The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to include in all motions approving, or recommending approval of a tract map, a specific finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan. Further, the law requires that the Commission make any of the following findings when denying or recommending denial of a tract map: 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. Page 9 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 5 That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision- RECOMMENDATION (32) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion recommend that the City Council, as lead agency for the project, based upon its independent review and analysis of the Initial Study prepared for the Proposed Actions, pursuant to CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, unless additional information or contrary information is received during the public hearing, find and determine, based upon said Initial Study and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Actions, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed Actions and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared. (b) By motion approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16832; to establish a 3 -lot, 336 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision with a 1,248 square foot commercial component. (c) By resolution based on the findings contained therein, recommend to the City Council that the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into this Development Agreement; that the Agreement meets the criteria set forth in the PTMU Overlay and the standardized development agreement language adopted in conjunction with Resolution No. 2004 -179; and, that Development Agreement No. 2005 -00007 be approved and entered into by the City of Anaheim with 1331 East Katella Development Company and East Katella Partnership. Page 10 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - "" A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCILAPPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00007 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND 1331 EAST KATELLA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND EAST KATELLA PARTNERSHIP, AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATED THERETO (1221 AND 1331 EAST KATELLAAVENUE) WHEREAS, Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7 (commencing with Section 65864) of the Government Code of the State of California (hereinafter the "Statute ") authorizes a city to enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of the property as provided in said Statute; and WHEREAS, upon request of an applicant, cities are required to establish procedures and requirements by resolution or ordinance for the consideration of development agreements; and WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim (hereinafter the "City ") heretofore on November 23, 1982, enacted Ordinance No. 4377 (hereinafter the "Enabling Ordinance ") which makes the City subject to the Statute; and WHEREAS, pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65865 of the Statute, the City heretofore on November 23, 1982, adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (hereinafter the "Procedures Resolution ") establishing procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application by the City; and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim ( "General Plan Amendment "), and certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ( "FEIR No. 330 "), in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General Plan Amendment, amendment of the City's zoning code, and a series of related actions; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment sets forth a vision for development of Mixed Uses, Office High, Office Low, Industrial and Institutional land uses within an approximately 820 -acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north ( "hereinafter referred to as The Platinum Triangle "); and WHEREAS, in order to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, on August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -177, approving The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, setting forth the new vision for The Platinum Triangle; and WHEREAS, to further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle and pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 18.76 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, on August 24, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5378 amending Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to establish zoning and development standards for the Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (the "PTMU Overlay Zone ") and Ordinance No. 5936, amending the zoning map to reclassify approximately three hundred and seventy -five acres within The Platinum Triangle into the PTMU Overlay Zone as depicted in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to provide opportunities for high quality well- designed development projects that could be stand -alone projects or that combine residential with non- residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area; and WHEREAS, the PTMU Overlay Zone requires an approved Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement between the property owner and the City of Anaheim to implement all development Cr1PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- in the Katella, Gene Autry and Gateway Districts of the PTMU Overlay Zone, except as otherwise exempt under the Code; and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -179, approving the form of the Standard Development Agreement for the PTMU Overlay Zone; and WHEREAS, in connection with adoption of The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone, and the form of the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle, the City Council by resolution, as lead agency for the proposed actions, determined that FEIR No. 330 and the associated Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, were in compliance with CEQA and the state and City CEQA guidelines and were adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for said actions based upon findings set forth in said motion; and WHEREAS, on May 4, 2005, pursuant to the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance, and the Procedures Resolution (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Development Agreement Law "), 1331 East Katella Development Company, ( "Applicant "), submitted an application to the Planning Department for approval of Development Agreement No. 2005 -00006 (the "Application "), which included a proposed development agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "Development Agreement ") prepared in conformance with the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle to vest certain project entitlements and address the implementation of the Platinum Triangle Condominium Project; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement pertains to 4.88 acres of real property in the City of Anaheim and proposed development, owned by the Applicant, commonly known as 1221 and 1331 East Katella Avenue (the "Property "), which is located in The Platinum Triangle and zoned PTMU Overlay ( Katella District), and more particularly shown and described on Exhibit "A ", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the Applicant desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement by developing a multiple family residential project consisting of 336 residential dwelling units, one retail tenant space and a 671 space parking structure, as more particularly set forth in Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00006 and Tentative Tract Map No 16832 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Project'); and WHEREAS, on July 14, 2005, the Planning Director approved Final Site Plan No. 2005- 00006 to provide for the development of the Platinum Triangle Condominium Project, contingent upon the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 16832 and Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00007, by the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July25, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to hear and consider evidence for and against said Development Agreement and Tentative Tract Map No. 16832 and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has demonstrated that the Project meets the eligibility requirements of the Procedures Resolution to enter into the Development Agreement by showing that, upon completion, the Project will result in the construction of 336 dwelling units and a 671 space parking structure within a period of not more than five (5) years; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of and based upon all of the evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine that the Development Agreement meets the following standards set forth in the Procedures Resolution: That the Project is consistent with the City's existing General Plan in that it is in conformance with the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation and with the goals, policies and objectives for The Platinum Triangle as set forth in the General Plan- -2- PC2005- 2. That the Project is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district because the Project is in compliance with the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements as set forth in Final Site Plan No. 2005 - 00006, which was approved by the Planning Director on July 20, 2005, and Tentative Tract Map No. 16832, which was approved by the Planning Commission on July 25, 2005. 3. That the Project is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area in that it is in conformance with and implements The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements. 4. That the Project is not otherwise detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 5. That the Development Agreement constitutes a lawful, present exercise of the City's police power and authority under the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution. 6. That the Development Agreement is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with its charter powers and the requirements of Section 65867 of the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution. 7. That * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the Development Agreement in conjunction with the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 16832; and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FOR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Development Agreement and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon the applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions set forth in Development Agreement No. 2005 -00007 and Tentative Tract Map No. 16832. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon the aforesaid findings and determinations, the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council the approval of the Application and the Development Agreement. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. ATTEST: CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2005- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand this day of , 2005. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2005- July 25, 2005 Ian Ellis West Millennium Homes 1849 Sawtelle Boulevard, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. 6a- 6b- 6c- Owner Bradley Redelsperger, Stadium Land Partners, LLC. c/o Newport Federal 4425 Jamboree Road, Suite 250, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Agent: Ian Ellis, West Millennium Homes, 1849 Sawtelle Boulevard, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90025 Location: 1221 and 1331 East Katella Boulevard. Property is 4.88 acres, having a frontage of 355 feet on the north side of Katella Avenue, a maximum depth of 600 feet and is located 966 feet east of the centerline of Lewis Street. Tentative Tract Map No. 16832 - to establish a 3 -lot, 336 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision. Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00006 between the City of Anaheim and 1331 East Katella Development Company and East Katella Partnership for the Platinum Triangle Condominium Development to construct a 336 -unit residential and commercial (a 1,248 square foot retail component) mixed use project and associated public street. The Planning Commission's role is to look at the land use aspects of the Agreements, specifically whether the eligibility criteria has been met, whether the Agreements are consistent with the General Plan and whether the project implemented by the agreements is compatible with the development of the surrounding area. The City Council will consider whether to approve the Agreements. ACTION: Commissioner "* offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner "' and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the Development Agreement in conjunction with the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 16832; and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA'), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Development Agreement and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement and Tentative Tract Map. Commissioner * ** offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner * ** and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the proposed tentative map, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan, and does therefore approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16832, to establish a 3 -lot, 336 -unit airspace attached residential condominium subdivision subject to the following conditions 1 - That prior to final map approval, the City Engineer and City Attorney shall approve and OWNER shall record a maintenance covenant providing for the continued operation and maintenance of the street as a private street until such time as the City accepts the offer of dedication. 2. That prior to final map approval, OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate an easement to the City of Anaheim for road, public utilities and other public purposes 72 -feet from the centerline of Katella Avenue and the internal Connector Street, as shown on exhibits approved in conjunction with this Development Agreement, on file in the Planning Department. 3. That prior to final map approval, OWNER shall acquire necessary dedications from the adjacent property owner for the other part of the Connector Street outside the tract boundary to be irrevocably offered for dedication to the City of Anaheim for an easement for road and public utility purposes. 4. That prior to final map approval, a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's Office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with approved Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map, including regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 5. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder (Subdivision Map Act, Section 66499.40). 6. That prior to final map approval, vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue except at street intersections shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. 7. That prior to final map approval, OWNER shall submit a reciprocal access and parking agreement to the Subdivision Section. Said agreement shall be prepared in a form approved by the City Attorney's Office and shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 8. That prior to final map approval, OWNER shall furnish a Subdivision Agreement to the City of Anaheim, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney's Office, agreeing to complete the public improvements required as conditions of the map at the legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and shall than be recorded concurrently with the final map. All public improvements shall be constructed within one year of recordation of the final map. 9. That prior to the issuance of grading permit, OWNER shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: o Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMP's) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. o Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMP's as defined in the Drainage Area Management Pian- o Incorporates Treatment Control BMP's as defined in the DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMP's. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's, and describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's. 10. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, OWNER: o Demonstrate that all structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. o Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. o Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMP's. 11. Prior to grading plan approval, OWNER shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NO[) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number. The applicant shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City review on request. 12. That prior to final map approval, all existing structures shall be demolished. OWNER shall obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division. 13. That prior to final map approval, all units shall be assigned street addresses by the Building Division. Street names for any new public or private street shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Division. 14. That prior to the recordation of the tract map associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for the undergrounding of all overhead electrical utility structures located on the property and the construction of streetlights as required by FSP2005- 00006, TTM 16832, and MMP. 136 referenced herein. All improve mentslunder grounding shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim Planning Commission RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Council City of Anaheim c/o City Clerk P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92805 (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00007 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND 1331 EAST KATELLA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC and EAST KATELLA PARTNERSHIP, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00007 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANABEIM AND 1331 EAST KATELLA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC and EAST KATELLA PARTNERSHIP, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP TABLE OF CONTENTS Page RECITALS........................................................................................................ ..............................1 Section 1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21 1.22 1.23 Section 2. Section 3. Section 4. Section 5. DEFINITIONS ........................................................................... ..............................5 TERM ........................................................................................ ..............................8 BINDING COVENANTS ......................................................... ..............................8 EFFECT OF AGREEMENT ..................................................... ..............................9 PROJECT LAND USES 9 i Section 6. PERMITTED BUILDINGS Section 7. DENSITY OF PERMITTED BUILDINGS ........ 7.1 Permitted Buildings .. ............................... 7.2 Parking Areas ............ ............................... Section S. ENFORCEMENT ............... ............................... Section 9. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES 19 .................. .............................10 9.1 Public Park ........................................ ............................... 9.2 Utilities (Water, Electrical, Gas, Sewer, & Drainage) ..... 9.2.1 Water Service ....................................... ............................... 9.2.2 Storm and Sewer Drains ................... ............................... 9.3 Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public Improvements and Facilities ............. ............................... 9.4 Traffic Circulation Improvements .... ............................... Section 10. REIMBURSEMENT PROVISION .10 10 12 Section 11. DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS ....................................... .............................12 Section 12. FEES TAXES AND ASSESSMENT ...................................... .............................12 12.1 Fees, Taxes and Assessments ....................................... .............................12 12.2 Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees .................. .............................12 12.2.1 Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee ........................... .............................13 12.2.2 Fire Facilities Fee .............................................................. .............................13 12.2.3 General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee ............. .............................13 12.2.4 Library Facilities Fee ........................................................ .............................13 12.2.5 Park Fee ............................................................................ .............................13 12.2.7 Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees ... 13 12.2.8 Traffic Impact Fee ............................................................ .............................13 12.3 Excluded Development Fees ......................................... .............................13 12.3.1 Water Utilities Fees ...................................................... .............................13 12.3.2 Electrical Utilities Fees ................................................. .............................14 12.3.3 City Processing Fees ..................................................... .............................14 12.4 Platinum Triangle Area Infrastructure Funding Shortfall Fees .................14 12.5 Accounting of Funds ..................................................... .............................14 12.6. Imposition of Increased Fees, Taxes or Assessments ... .............................14 Section 13 COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS ......... .............................14 Section 14 NEXUS /REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES ..... .............................14 Section 15. TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT .............................................. .............................15 ii Section 16. EXISTING USES AND REZONING ..................................... .............................15 16.1 Existing Uses .................................................................. ............................... 16.2 Rezoning ......................................................................... ............................... Section 17. FUTURE APPROVALS ........................................................... .............................15 17.1 Basis for Denying or Conditionally Granting Future Approvals ...................................................................... .............................15 17.2 Standard of Review ....................................................... .............................15 17.3 Future Amendments to Final Site Plan ......................... .............................15 Section 18 AMENDMENT ......................................................................... .............................16 .............................18 18.1 Initiation of Amendment ............................................... .............................16 .............................18 18.2 Procedure ...................................................................... .............................16 .............................18 18.3 Consent ......................................................................... .............................16 .............................18 18.4 Amendments ................................................................. .............................16 .............................18 18.5 Effect of Amendment to Development Agreement ...... .............................16 .............................18 Section 19. RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND USES FOR THE PROPERTY ...................... 16 19.1 Non - Cancellation of Rights ......................................... .............................16 Section 20. BENEFITS TO CITY ............................................................... .............................17 Section 21. BENEFITS TO OWNER .......................................................... .............................17 Section 22. UNDERTAKINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTEMPLATED AND PROMOTED BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATUTE ........................17 Section 23. RESERVED AUTHORITY ...................................................... .............................18 23.1 State and Federal Law ................................................... .............................18 23.2 Building Codes ............................................................. .............................18 23.3 Public Health and Safety ............................................... .............................18 Section 24. CANCELLATION .................................................................... .............................18 24.1 Initiation of Cancellation .............................................. .............................18 24.2 Procedure ...................................................................... .............................18 24.3 Consent of Both Parties ................................................ .............................18 Section 25. PERIODIC REVIEW ..................................................................... .............................19 25.1 Time for Review ........................................................... .............................19 25.2 OWNER's Submission .................................................. .............................19 25.3 Findings ........................................................................ .............................19 25.4 Initiation of Review by City Council ............................ .............................19 Section 26. EVENTS OF DEFAULT .......................................................... .............................19 iii 26.1 Defaults by OWNER ................... 26.2 Specific Performance Remedy 26.3 Liquidated Damages Remedy Section 27. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION 27.1 Notice to OWNER ....................... 27.2 Public Hearing ............................. 27.3 Decision ........ ............................... 27.4 Implementation ............................ 27.5 Schedule for Compliance ............. ............................... .............................20 ............................... .............................20 ............................... .............................20 Section 28. ASSIGNMENT ......................................................................... .............................22 28.1 Right to Assign ............................................................. .............................22 28.2 Release upon Transfer .................................................. .............................22 Section 29. NO CONFLICTING ENACTMENTS ..................................... .............................23 Section30. GENERAL ................................................................................ .............................23 30.1 Force Mateure ............................................................... .............................23 30.2 Construction of Development Agreement .................... .............................23 30.3 Severability ................................................................... .............................23 30.4 Cumulative Remedies ................................................... .............................24 30.5 Hold Harmless Agreement ............................................ .............................24 30.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge ............... .............................24 30.7 Public Agency Coordination ........................................ .............................25 30.8 Initiative Measures ........................................................ .............................25 30.9 Attorneys' Fees ............................................................. .............................25 30.10 No Waiver ..................................................................... .............................25 30.11 Authority to Execute ..................................................... .............................25 30.12 Notice ............................................................................ .............................26 30.13 Captions ........................................................................ .............................27 30.14 Consent ......................................................................... .............................27 30.15 Further Actions and Instruments ................................... .............................27 30.16 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute 30.17 Governing Law ............................................................. .............................27 30.18 Effect on Title ............................................................... .............................27 30.19 Mortgagee Protection .................................................... .............................28 30.20 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgageeto Cure ...................28 30.21 Bankruptcy .................................................................... .............................28 30.22 Disaffirmance ................................................................ .............................28 30.23 No Third Party Beneficiaries ........................................ .............................29 30.24 Project as a Private Undertaking ................................... .............................29 30.25 Restrictions .............................. ................................... .............................29 30.26 Recitals .......................................................................... .............................29 iv 30.27 Recording ...................................................................... .............................29 30.28 Title Report ................................................................... .............................30 30.29 Entire Agreement .......................................................... .............................30 30.30 Successors and Assigns ................................................ .............................30 30.31 OWNER'S Title to Property ......................................... .............................30 30.32 Exhibits ......................................................................... .............................30 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit "A" Legal Description of the Property Exhibit "B" Final Site Plan Exhibit "C" Conditions of Approval Exhibit "D" Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees Exhibit "D -1" Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee Exhibit "D -2" Fire Facilities Fee Exhibit "D -3" General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee Exhibit "D -4" Library Facilities Fee Exhibit "D -5" Park Fee Exhibit "D -6" Police Facilities Fee Exhibit "D -7" Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees Exhibit "D -8" Traffic Impact Fee Exhibit "D" Development and Maintenance Obligations Exhibit "E" Preliminary Title Report v DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005 -00007 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND 1331 EAST KATELLA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC and EAST KATELLA PARTNERSHIP, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP This Development Agreement is entered into this _ day of 2005, by and between the City of Anaheim, a charter city and municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "CITY ") and 1331 East Katella Development Company, LLC ( "EKD ") and East Katella Partnership, a California general partnership ( "EKP ") ( EKD and EKP collectively hereinafter "OWNER "), pursuant to the authority set forth in Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7, Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Statute "). RECITALS This Development Agreement is predicated upon the following facts: A. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California adopted the Development Agreement Statute, Sections 65864, et seq., of the Government Code. The Development Agreement Statute authorizes CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other things: encourage and provide for the development of public facilities in order to support development projects; provide certainty in the approval of development projects in order to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in project costs and encourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning which will make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public; provide assurance to the applicants of development projects (1) that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, subject to the conditions of approval of such projects and provisions of such development agreements, and (2) encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development. B. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms which are defined in this Development Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. C. On May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim (the "General Plan Amendment "), and certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ( "FEIR No. 330 "), in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General Plan Amendment, amendment of CITY's zoning code, and a series of related actions. D. CITY desires that the approximately 820 -acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north (hereinafter called "The Platinum Triangle Area ") be developed as a combination of high quality industrial, office, commercial and residential uses, as envisioned in the General Plan Amendment. E. In order to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, on August 17, 2004, the City Council approved The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, setting forth the new vision for The Platinum Triangle. F. To further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, the City Council has established The Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (hereinafter the "PTMU Overlay Zone ") consisting of approximately three hundred and seventy -five acres within The Platinum Triangle as depicted in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to provide opportunities for high quality well - designed development projects that could be stand -alone projects or combine residential with non - residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area. G. OWNER represents that it owns in fee approximately 4.88 acres of real property located at 1221 & 1331 East Katella Avenue, in the City, County of Orange (hereinafter "County "), State of California (hereinafter collectively called the "Property ") in The Platinum Triangle and zoned PTMU Overlay and more particularly shown and described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. H. OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Development Agreement by developing a mixed use project consisting of 336 residential condominiums, 1,248 square feet of retail, 1,665 square feet of clubroom, a 1,245 square foot exercise room and a 671 space subterranean garage. Project density is roughly 77 units per acre. Condominium units are an average size of approximately 1,086 sf. The common recreation area will include a fitness facility, pool, spa, outdoor fireplace with lounging areas, and dining terrace with built -in barbeques. All as more particularly set forth in the Final Site Plan (hereinafter collectively called the "Project "). I. CITY desires to accomplish the goals and objectives set forth in the CITY's General Plan and the objectives for the PTMU Overlay Zone as set forth in subsection 18.20.010.020 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and finds that the Project will accomplish said goals and objectives. J. The City Council, as duly recommended by the Planning Commission, adopted Ordinance No. 5936 on August 24, 2004, reclassifying the property in The Platinum Triangle, including the Property, into the PTMU Overlay Zone. K. Pursuant to the Final Site Plan, OWNER will submit tentative maps and /or vesting tentative maps, if required. OWNER further anticipates the submission of detailed construction plans and other documentation required by CITY in order for the OWNER to obtain its building permits. 2 L. As consideration for the benefits gained from the vested rights acquired pursuant to the Development Agreement Statute, to conform with the requirements of the PTMU Overlay Zone, and to comply with the applicable mitigation measures imposed by Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106, as it may be amended from time to time and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 136 for the Project , CITY is requiring that OWNER construct and install a number of public improvements, including off -site traffic circulation improvements, and provide other public benefits. M. In order to avoid any misunderstandings or disputes which may arise from time to time between OWNER and CITY concerning the proposed development of the Project and to assure each party of the intention of the other as to the processing of any land use entitlements which now or hereafter may be required for such development, the parties believe it is desirable to set forth their intentions and understandings in this Development Agreement. In order for both CITY and OWNER to achieve their respective objectives, it is imperative that each be as certain as possible that OWNER will develop and that CITY will permit OWNER to develop the Project and public improvements as approved by CITY within the time periods provided in this Development Agreement. N. CITY, as a charter city, has enacted Ordinance No. 4377 on November 23, 1982, which makes CITY subject to the Development Agreement Statute. Pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement Statute, CITY adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (the "Procedures Resolution ") on November 23, 1982. The Procedures Resolution establishes procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application. O. On May 4, 2005, as required by Section 1.0 of the Procedures Resolution, OWNER submitted to the Planning Department an application for approval of a development agreement (hereinafter called the "Application "). The Application included a proposed development agreement (the "Proposed Development Agreement "). P. On June 27, 2005, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 2.1 of the Procedures Resolution, the Planning Director gave public notice of the City Planning Commission's intention to consider a recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of a development agreement. Q. On July 25, 2005, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 2.2 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Application. R. On that date, the City Planning Commission, after considering an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for this Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, found and determined that FEIR No 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. as it may be amended from time to time, for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Agreement and the Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No.136, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. S. The Planning Commission farther found that the Development Agreement meets the following standards set forth in Section 2.3 of the Procedures Resolution, to wit, that the Proposed Project: (a) is consistent with the CITY's existing General Plan, (b) is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district, (c) is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area and (d) is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of CITY. Based upon the aforesaid findings, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Application and this Development Agreement pursuant to Resolution No. PC T. On , 20 as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 3.1 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Clerk caused public notice to be given of the City Council's intention to consider adoption of a development agreement. U. On , 20 as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 3.2 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Council held a public hearing on the Application. V. On that date, the City Council after considering an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for this Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, found and determined that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, as it may be amended from time to time, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Agreement and the Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. W. On , 20_, the City Council found and determined that this Development Agreement: (i) is consistent with the CITY's existing General Plan; (ii) is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of CITY; (iii) is entered into pursuant to and constitutes a present exercise of the CITY's police power; and (iv) is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and the Procedures Resolution. X. In preparing and adopting the General Plan and in granting the Development Approvals, CITY considered the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of CITY and prepared in this regard an extensive environmental impact report and other studies. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in preparing and adopting the General Plan and in granting the Development Approvals, the City Council carefully considered and determined the projected needs (taking into 11 consideration the planned development of the Project and all other areas within the CITY) for water service, sewer service, storm drains, electrical facilities, traffic /circulation infrastructure, police and fire services, paramedic and similar improvements, facilities and services within The Platinum Triangle, and the appropriateness of the density and intensity of the development comprising the Project and the needs of the CITY and surrounding areas for other infrastructure. Y On , 20, the City Council adopted the Authorizing Ordinance authorizing the execution of this Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Statute, as it applies to CITY, and pursuant to the Enabling Ordinance, the Procedures Resolution and the CITY's inherent powers as a charter city, and pursuant to the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement, and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. 1. 1 Assessment District "Assessment District" for purposes of this Development Agreement means a special district, assessment district or benefit area existing pursuant to State law or the charter powers of the CITY for purposes of financing the cost of public improvements, facilities, services and /or public facilities fees within a distinct geographic area of the CITY. 1.2 Authorizing Ordinance The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance No. approving this Development Agreement. 1.3 CITY. The "CITY" means the City of Anaheim, a charter city and municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under its charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of California. 1.4 Development "Development" means the improvement of the Property for purposes of effecting the structures, improvements and facilities comprising the Project, including, without limitation: grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Project whether located within or outside the Property; the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.5 Development Agreement Date The "Development Agreement Date" means the later of (i) the date of recordation in the office of the County Recorder of this Development Agreement, or a memorandum thereof, or (ii) the effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance. 1.6 Development Agreement Statute The "Development Agreement Statute" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Development Agreement Date. 0 1.7 Development Approvals 'Development Approvals" means the Final Site Plan and all site specific plans, maps, permits and other entitlements to use of every kind and nature contemplated by the Final Site Plan which are approved or granted by CITY in connection with development of the Property, including, but not limited to: site plans, tentative and final subdivision maps, vesting tentative maps, variances, conditional use permits and grading, building and other similar permits. To the extent any of such site specific plans, maps, permits and other entitlements to use are amended from time to time, 'Development Approvals" shall include, if OWNER and CITY agree in writing, such matters as so amended. If this Development Agreement is required by law to be amended in order for 'Development Approvals" to include any such amendments, "Development Approvals" shall not include such amendments unless and until this Development Agreement is so amended. 1.8 Enabling Ordinance The "Enabling Ordinance" means Ordinance No. 4377 enacted by the CITY on November 23, 1982. 1.9 Existing Land Use Regulations "Existing Land Use Regulations" mean the ordinances and regulations adopted by the City of Anaheim in effect on the Effective Date, including the adopting ordinances and regulations that govern the permitted uses of land, the density and intensity of use, and the design, improvement, construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property, including, but not limited to, the General Plan, the Zoning Code, The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106, Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136, and all other ordinances of the City establishing subdivision standards, park regulations, impact or development fees and building and improvement standards, but only to the extent the Zoning Ordinance and such other regulations are not inconsistent with this Development Agreement. Existing Land Use Regulations do not include non -land use regulations, which includes taxes. 1.10 Final Site Plan The "Final Site Plan" means the Project as described in this Development Agreement and conditions with respect thereto, as set forth as Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. 1.11 Gross Floor Area/GFA "Gross Floor Area" or "GFA" means the gross floor area of any of the Permitted Buildings. 1.12 Interim Development Fees "Interim Development Fees" are the fees imposed within The Platinum Triangle pending adoption of permanent fee programs by the City as set forth in Paragraph 12.2 of this Agreement. 1.13 Mortgage "Mortgage" means a mortgage, deed of trust or sale and leaseback arrangement or other transaction in which the Property, or a portion thereof or an interest therein, is pledged as security. 6 1. 14 Mortgagee "Mortgagee" means the holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage, or the owner of the Property, or interest therein, under a Mortgage. 1.15 Owner "Owner" is 1331 East Katella Development Company, LLC, a California limited liability company and East Katella Partnership, a California general partnership, and any person or entity with which or into which 1331 East Katella Development Company, LLC, a California limited liability company and East Katella Partnership, a California general partnership may merge, and any person or entity who may acquire substantially all of the assets of 1331 East Katella Development Company, LLC, a California limited liability company and East Katella Partnership, a California general partnership, and any person or entity who receives any of the rights or obligations of under this Development Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Section 28 (Assignment) of this Development Agreement. 1.16 Parking Areas The 'Parking Areas" means all parking structure(s), and /or all surface parking servicing the Project. 1.17 Permitted Buildings 'Permitted Buildings" include mixed -use structure(s) including residential condominiums, clubroom, retail uses and the Parking Areas as identified in Section 6 of this Development Agreement and as further set forth in the Final Site Plan. This Development Agreement establishes maximum and minimum characteristics for of each of the Permitted Buildings, as set forth in the Final Site Plan. 1.18 Platinum Triangle Area "The Platinum Triangle" means that portion of the City of Anaheim generally bounded on the east by the Santa Ana River, on the south by the Anaheim city limits, on the west by the Santa Ana Freeway, and on the north by the Southern California Edison Easement. 1.19 Procedures Resolution The 'Procedures Resolution" is Resolution No. 82R -565 adopted by CITY pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement Statute. 1.20 Project The 'Project' means the development project contemplated by the Development Plan with respect to the Property, including but not limited to on -site and off -site improvements, as such development project is further defined, enhanced or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Development Agreement. 1.21 Property. The 'Property" means that certain real property shown and described on Exhibit "A" to this Development Agreement. 1.22 Support Commercial Uses "Support Commercial Uses" are commercial \retail uses which may include retail uses, banking or financial offices, food service, restaurants, service establishments and other similaruses in keeping with the nature of the Project and the required uses needed to support the occupants of office buildings, other office development, sports and entertainment venues and residential development in The Platinum Triangle. 7 1.23 Term "Term" is defined in Section 2 of this Development Agreement. Section 2. TERM 2.1 The term (hereinafter called "Term ") of this Development Agreement shall be that period of time during which this Development Agreement shall be in effect and bind the parties hereto. The Term shall commence on the Development Agreement Date and shall extend for a period of five (5) years thereafter, terminating at the end of the day on the fifth anniversary of the Development Agreement Date, subject to the periodic review and modification or termination provisions defined in Section 25 and Section 27, respectively, of this Development Agreement, and further subject to a reasonable extension for completion of the Project in accordance with the Timing of Development schedule set forth in Section 15 of this Development Agreement. 2.2 This Development Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the occurrence of the entry of a final judgment or issuance of a final order, after all appeals have been exhausted, directed to CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against CITY to set aside, withdraw or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Development Agreement or if termination occurs pursuant to the provisions of the Procedures Resolution and such termination is so intended thereby. 2.3 If not already terminated by reason of any other provision in this Development Agreement, or for any other reason, this Development Agreement shall automatically terminate and be of no further force and effect upon completion of the Project pursuant to the terms of this Development Agreement and any further amendments thereto and the issuance of all occupancy permits and acceptance by CITY of all dedications and improvements as required by the development of the Project. Section 3. BINDING COVENANTS The provisions of this Development Agreement to the extent permitted by law shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits of this Development Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. Section 4. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT As a material part of the consideration of this Development Agreement, unless otherwise provided herein, the parties agree that the Existing Land Use Regulations shall be applicable to development of the Project. In connection with all subsequent discretionary actions by CITY required to implement the Final Site Plan and any discretionary actions which CITY takes or has the right to take under this Development Agreement relating to the Project, including any review, approval, renewal, conditional approval or denial, CITY, shall exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which complies and is consistent with the Final Site Plan, the Existing Land Use Regulations (as the same may be modified in accordance with this Development Agreement) and such other standards, terms and conditions expressly contained in this Development Agreement. 3 CITY shall accept and timely process, in the normal manner for processing such matters as may then be applicable, all applications for further approvals with respect to the Project called for or required under this Development Agreement, including, any necessary site plan, tentative map, vesting tentative map, final map and any grading, construction or other permits filed by OWNER in accordance with the Development Approvals. Section 5. PROJECT LAND USES The Property shall be used for such uses as may be permitted by the Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use Regulations. The duration of this Development Agreement, the density and intensity of use, developable GFA, footprint square footage, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings and structures, lot sizes, set back requirements, zoning, public improvements, and the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes shall be those set forth in the Development Approvals, the Existing Land Use Regulations and this Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65865.2 of the Development Agreement Statute. Section 6. PERMITTED BUILDINGS 6.1 Description of Permitted Buildings The Permitted Buildings to be located on the Property shall be as set forth on the Final Site Plan. The Project shall be constructed substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. 6.2 Parking Areas The Parking Areas shall be constructed so that there will be sufficient parking spaces available within the Property as depicted and substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. Prior to commencement of construction of the first Permitted Building, OWNER shall restrict the use of the Parking Areas to, and shall record a covenant against the Property in a form approved by the City Attorney stating that the use of the Parking Areas shall be limited to tenants, visitors, patrons, invitees and other users of the Permitted Buildings. Said covenant shall also provide that the Parking Areas shall not be used to provide public parking for patrons of Angel Stadium of Anaheim, The Grove of Anaheim or the Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim without the prior written approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and the Executive Director of Convention /Sports and Entertainment, which approval shall be at CITY's sole discretion. Section 7. DENSITY OF PERMITTED BUILDINGS The Permitted Buildings shall be between the minimum and maximum sizes, and shall not exceed the maximum heights and maximum footprints set forth on the Final Site Plan. Section 8. ENFORCEMENT Unless this Development Agreement is terminated or cancelled pursuant to the provisions of this Development Agreement, this Development Agreement or any amendment hereto, shall be enforceable by any party hereto notwithstanding any change hereafter in any applicable general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance or building ordinance adopted by CITY 0 which alters or amends the rules, regulations or policies of Development of the Project as provided in this Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65865.4 of the Development Agreement Statute; provided, however, that the limitations of this Section shall not apply to changes mandated by State or Federal laws or other permissible changes or new regulations as more particularly set forth in Section 23 of this Development Agreement. Section 9 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES In addition to performing any other obligations heretofore imposed as conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit "C," as material consideration for the CITY's entering into this Development Agreement, OWNER shall undertake the construction and installation of the following public improvements required to support the Project and to enhance area -wide traffic circulation and emergency police and fire protection service within the time periods as set forth below and in conformance with the Existing Land Use Regulations. CITY shall cooperate with OWNER for the purpose of coordinating all public improvements constructed under the Development Approvals or this Development Agreement to existing or newly constructed public improvements, whether located within or outside of the Property. OWNER shall be responsible for and use good faith efforts to acquire any right(s) -of -way necessary to construct the public facility improvements required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement or any Development Approvals. Should it become necessary due to OWNER'S failure or inability to acquire said right(s) -of -way within four months after OWNER begins its efforts to so acquire said right(s) -of -way, CITY shall negotiate the purchase of the necessary right(s) -of -way to construct the public improvements as required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement and, if necessary in accordance with the procedures established by State law, and the limitations hereinafter set forth in this section, CITY may use its powers of eminent domain to condemn said required right(s)-of way. OWNER agrees to pay for all costs associated with said acquisition and condemnation proceedings. If the CITY cannot make the proper findings or if for some other reason under the condemnation laws CITY is prevented from acquiring the necessary right(s) -of -way to enable OWNER to construct the public improvements required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement, then the parties agree to amend this Development Agreement to modify OWNER's obligations accordingly. Any such required modification shall involve the substitution of other considerations or obligations by OWNER (of similar value) as are negotiated in good faith between the parties hereto. Nothing contained in this Section shall be deemed to constitute a determination or resolution of necessity by CITY to initiate condemnation proceedings. 9.1 Public Park If the Property is eight (8) or more acres OWNER shall be required to dedicate, improve and maintain a minimum size of 44 square feet for each residential unit forpublic park purposes as set forth in the Final Site Plan. The value of the parkland dedication will be credited against overall park in lieu fees paid for the project. Consistent with existing Code requirements and policies, no credit will be given for improvements. 9.2 Utilities (Water, Electrical, Gas, Sewer, and Drainage OWNER shall construct the public improvements necessary for the provision of requisite water, electrical, gas, sewer and 10 drainage requirements for Project as more fully set forth in the Development Approvals. OWNER shall construct and relocate utilities as may be required to provide services to the Permitted Buildings on the Property or that are displaced by the construction of the Permitted Buildings. As OWNER submits detailed construction plans in order to obtain building permits for a Permitted Building and/or the size and nature of the Project varies, the utilities that OWNER will construct or relocate may be revised accordingly by the CITY. 9.2.1 Water Service OWNER will provide engineering studies to size the water mains for ultimate development within the Project. Said engineering studies will be conducted prior to rendering of water service or signature approval of the final water improvement plans, whichever occurs first. The studies shall be subject to the approval of the General Manager, Public Utilities Department or authorized designee. The water system may be constructed incrementally, provided that said incremental phasing is adequate to provide municipal demands and fire flow protection for the proposed development phasing. OWNER will conform with Rule 15D of the Water Utility's Rates, Rules and Regulations which provides for, in part, a fee based on GFA and the advancement of additional funds to construct the upgraded water facilities. OWNER shall be entitled to reimbursement in accordance with the terms of Rule 15D for the advancement of additional funds to construct the upgraded water facilities. 9.2.2 Storm and Sewer Drains. Prior to final building and zoning inspections for each Permitted Building, OWNER will construct sewers and storm drains to serve the ultimate development of the Property as provided by area wide engineering studies to be conducted prior to issuance of any building permits for the first Permitted Building and updated prior to the issuance of any building permits for each subsequent Permitted Building. All studies shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. OWNER will construct improvements identified in said studies. The systems may be constructed incrementally provided that said incremental phasing is adequate to provide capacity for the proposed development phasing. 9.3 Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public Improvements and Facilities The timing, phasing and sequence of the construction of public improvements and facilities or the payment of fees therefor shall be constructed or paid in accordance with the timing, phasing and sequence set forth in this Development Agreement and the Final Site Plan 9.4 Traffic Circulation Improvements In order to assist CITY in providing for area -wide traffic circulation as required by this Project, OWNER shall cause to be made the traffic circulation improvements identified for the Project as Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for the Project as shown on the Final Site Plan. Section 10. In the event OWNER is required to construct public improvements which are supplemental to the requirements of the Project for the benefit of other properties, CITY will work with OWNER to establish mechanisms for proportional reimbursement from owners of the benefited properties. 11 Section 11. DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS Priorto issuance of the first building permit for the Project, OWNER shall irrevocably offer for dedication the rights -of -way, including connector streets and Market Street, if applicable, and other areas as more fully set forth in the Final Site Plan for the uses set forth in the Final Site Plan. These dedications shall be in fee or as an easement at the discretion of CITY, and upon completion and acceptance by CITY of the associated improvements in compliance with the specifications as approved by CITY, CITY shall accept OWNERS offer of dedication. Nothing contained in this Development Agreement, however, shall be deemed to preclude CITY from exercising the power of eminent domain with respect to the Property or the Project, or any part thereof. Section 12. FEES, TAXES, AND ASSESSMENTS 12.1 Fees, Taxes and Assessments OWNER shall be responsible for the payment of fees in the amount and at the times set forth in the Existing Land Use Regulations, as said amounts and timing may be modified in accordance with this Development Agreement. 12.2 Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees CITY anticipates that a number of fees will be adopted to pay the costs attributable to new development in The Platinum Triangle. The Interim Development Fees constitute amounts estimated by the applicable Departments to be the approximate fair share of costs attributable to the Project. If an identified fee has been adopted prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, the OWNER shall pay the fee. If an identified fee has not been adopted at the time of issuance of said building permit, the OWNER shall pay the applicable Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees set forth in attached Exhibit "D." If the OWNER has paid a Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fee, and upon subsequent adoption of a corresponding fee it is determined that the OWNER has paid an amount greater than the amount payable pursuant to the adopted fee, the excess amount paid as an Interim Development Fee shall be refunded to the OWNER. CITY shall not be obligated to adopt any of the identified fees. If any such identified fee is not adopted, the parties agree that the Interim Development Fee is adequate to address the impacts of the Project. 12.2.1 Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee OWNER will pay an Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D -1." 12.2.2 Fire Facilities Fee OWNER will pay a Fire Facilities Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D- 2." 12.2.3 General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee OWNER will pay a processing FEE attributable to the cost of creating and establishing the Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone for The Platinum Triangle, as well as the costs of associated environmental documentation, as said additional costs are set forth in Exhibit "D -3." 12.2.4 Library Facilities Fee OWNER will pay a Library Facilities Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D-4." 12 12.2.5 Park Fee OWNER will pay the Park Fee as set forth on Exhibit "D -5." and, if the Property is eight or more acres in size, OWNER will dedicate, develop and maintain a minipark substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. 12.2.6 Police Facilities Fee OWNER will pay the Police Facilities Fee to defray the costs of capital facilities and equipment as set forth in Exhibit "D -6." 12.2.7 Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees OWNER will pay Public Works Fees for supplemental sewer impacts, storm drain impacts, and arterial highway beautification /aesthetics as set forth in Exhibit "D -7." 12.2.8 Traffic Impact Fee OWNER will pay the Supplemental Traffic Impact Fee for improvements required to provide acceptable traffic service levels in and through the area's Master Plan of Arterial Highways system as set forth in Exhibit "D -8." 12.3 Excluded Development Fees Fees Excluded from Existing Land Use Regulations. The following fees shall not be included among the fees which would otherwise fall within the definition of Existing Land Use Regulations: 12.3.1 Water Utilities Fees OWNER will pay all applicable fees in accordance with the Water Utilities Rates, Rules and Regulations in effect at the time of application for service including Rule 15D which provides for, in part, a fee based on GFA to construct the necessary water facility improvements within The Platinum Triangle. 12.3.2 Electrical Utilities Fees OWNER will pay all fees in accordance with the Electrical Utilities Rates, Rules and Regulations in effect at the time of application for service. 12.3.3 City Processing Fees OWNER shall pay all standard City -wide processing fees for building permits, zoning review, and other similar fees associated with the Development of the Project which are in existence at the time of approval of this Development Agreement at the rate in existence at the time said fees are normally required to be paid to CITY. 12.4 Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and/or Maintenance Assessment District Prior to the date a building or grading permit is issued relating to implementation of the Final Site Plan, or within a period of ninety (90) days from the date of execution of this Development Agreement, whichever occurs first, OWNER shall execute and record an unsubordinated covenant in a form approved by the City Attorney's Office wherein OWNER agrees not to contest the formation of any assessment district(s) which may be formed to finance Platinum Triangle infrastructure and/or maintenance, which district(s) could include the Property. The covenant shall not preclude OWNER from contesting (i) the determination of benefit of such improvements to the Property, (ii) the properties included in said district or area, (iii) the manner in which said fee is determined or (iv) the manner in which said improvement costs are spread. 13 12.5 Accounting of Funds CITY will comply with applicable requirements of Government Code Section 65865 relating to accounting of funds. 12.6 Imposition of Increased Fees Taxes or Assessments Except as expressly set forth or reserved in this Development Agreement, CITY shall not, without the prior written consent of OWNER, impose any additional fee, tax or assessment on the Project or any portion thereof as a condition to the implementation of the Project or any portion thereof, except such fees, taxes and assessments as are described in or required by this Development Agreement, including the Existing Land Use Regulations or the Development Approvals. The rates of such fees, taxes and assessments shall be the rates in existence at the time said fees, taxes and assessments are normally required to be paid to CITY. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prohibit CITY from imposing fees, taxes or assessments on the Property which are unrelated to the implementation of the project. Section 13. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS. In consideration for CITY entering into this Development Agreement and other consideration set forth in this Agreement, OWNER agrees to record unsubordinated covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC &Rs) applicable to the Property in a form and content satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney incorporating the requirements and obligations set forth in Exhibit "E" to this Agreement, entitled the "Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations." Section 14. NEXUS/REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES OWNER consents to, and waives any right it may have now or in the future to challenge the legal validity of the conditions, requirements, policies or programs required by existing land use regulations or this Agreement including, without limitation, any claim that they constitute an abuse of the police power, violate substantive due process, deny equal protection of the laws, effect a taking of property without payment of just compensation, or impose an unlawful tax. Section 15. TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT Timing of Development shall be as set forth in the Final Site Plan. Section 16. EXISTING USES CITY and OWNER agree that those existing legally established uses on the Property may be retained until the Project is implemented. When those existing uses are demolished, no credit for any such demolished square footage for which Interim Development Fees have not been paid will be given OWNER against Interim Development Fees due on a square footage basis as provided for in this Development Agreement. OWNER will pay the full Interim Development Fees for Permitted Buildings constructed pursuant to the Final Site Plan. Section 17. FUTURE APPROVALS 14 17.1 Basis for Denying or Conditional Granting Future Approvals Before OWNER can begin grading on the Property or other development of the Property, OWNER must secure several additional permits and/or approvals from CITY. The parties agree that to the extent said Development Approvals are ministerial in nature, CITY shall not, through the enactment or enforcement of any subsequent ordinances, rules, regulations, initiatives, policies, requirements, guidelines, or other constraints, withhold such approvals as a means of blocking construction or of imposing conditions on the Project which were not imposed during an earlier approval period unless CITY has been ordered to do so by a court of competent jurisdiction. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, CITY and OWNER will use their best efforts to ensure each other that all applications for and approvals of grading permits, building permits or other developmental approvals necessary for OWNER to develop the Project in accordance with the Final Site Plan are sought and processed in a timely manner. 17.2 Standard of Review The rules, regulations and policies that apply to any additional Development Approvals which OWNER must secure prior to the Development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations, as defined in this Development Agreement. 17.3 Future Amendments to Final Site Plan Future amendments to all or a portion of the Final Site Plan which increase the intensity or density of the Development of the Property, or change the permitted uses of the Property, and are not among those described in Section 18.4 of this Development Agreement may subject the portion or portions of the Project being amended or affected by the amendment to any change in the CITY's General Plan, zoning designations and rules applicable to the Property and further environmental review and possible mitigation of adverse impacts under CEQA in effect at the time of such amendment. Any such amendment to the Final Site Plan shall be processed concurrently with the processing of an amendment to this Development Agreement. It is the desire and intent of both parties, except as set forth herein, that any such future amendment of the Final Site Plan will not alter, affect, impair or otherwise impact the rights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Development Agreement with respect to the unamended portions of the Final Site Plan. Section 18. AMENDMENT 18.1 Initiation of Amendment Either party may propose an amendment to this Development Agreement. 18.2 Procedure Except as set forth in Section 18.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Development Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Development Agreement in the first instance. Such procedures are set forth in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of the Procedures Resolution. 18.3 Consent Except as provided in Section 25 of this Development Agreement, any amendment to this Development Agreement shall require the consent of both parties. No amendment of this Development Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. 15 18.4 Amendments Subject to the foregoing provisions of this Section, the parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties under this Development Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development of the Project and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Development Agreement. If and when the parties find that changes or adjustments are necessary or appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Development Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes or adjustments as specified in the Development Approvals. 18.5 Effect of Amendment to Development Agreement The parties agree that except as expressly set forth in any such amendment, an amendment to this Development Agreement will not alter, affect, impair, modify, waive or otherwise impact any other rights, duties or obligations of either party under this Development Agreement. Section 19. RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND USES FOR THE PROPERTY 19.1 Non - Cancellation of Rights Subject defeasance pursuant to Sections 25, 26 or 27 of this Development Agreement, the Final Site Plan and other Development Approvals as provided for in this Development Agreement shall be final and the rights once granted thereby shall be vested in the Property upon recordation of this Development Agreement. Section 20. BENEFITS TO CITY The direct and indirect benefits CITY (including, without limitation, the existing and future anticipated residents of CITY) expects to receive pursuant to this Development Agreement include, but are not limited to, the following: The participation of OWNER in the accelerated, coordinated and more economic construction, funding and dedication to the public, as provided in this Development Agreement, of certain of the vitally needed on -site and area -wide public improvements and facilities, and assurances that the entire Project will be developed as set forth in the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement in order to encourage development of The Platinum Triangle; and The considerations set forth in Sections 9 and 10 of this Development Agreement. Section 21. BENEFITS TO OWNER OWNER has expended and will continue to expend large amounts of time and money on the planning and infrastructure construction for the Project. OWNER asserts that OWNER would not make any additional expenditures, or the advanced expenditures required by this Development Agreement, without this Development Agreement and that any additional expenditures which OWNER makes after the Development Agreement Date will be made in reliance upon this 16 Development Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, this Development Agreement provides for the completion of public improvements and facilities prior to the time when they would be justified economically in connection with the phasing of the Project, and of a size which would be justified only by the magnitude of the Project provided for by the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. The benefit to OWNER under this Development Agreement consists of the assurance that OWNERwill preserve the right to develop the Property as planned and as set forth in the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. The parties acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to CITY pursuant to this Development Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. Section 22. UNDERTAKINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTEMPLATED AND PROMOTED BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATUTE. The mutual undertakings and assurances described above and provided for in this Development Agreement are for the benefit of CITY and OWNER and promote the comprehensive planning, private and public cooperation and participation in the provision of public facilities, and the effective and efficient development of infrastructure and facilities supporting development which was contemplated and promoted by the Development Agreement Statute. CITY agrees that it will not take any actions which are intended to circumvent this Development Agreement; provided, however, that any action of the electorate shall not be deemed an action for purposes of this section. Section 23. RESERVED AUTHORITY 23.1 State and Federal Laws and Regulations In the event that the State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after this Development Agreement has been entered into, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of the Development Agreement, such provisions of the Development Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt or undertake any rule, regulation or policy which is inconsistent with this Development Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such rule, regulation or policy is reasonably necessary to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations. 23.2. Building Codes This Development Agreement shall not prevent CITY from applying new rules, regulations and policies contained in model codes, including, but not limited to, the Anaheim Building Code as adopted in Title 15, Section 15.02. 23.3 Public Health and Safety This Development Agreement shall not prevent CITY from adopting new rules, regulations and policies, including amendments or modifications to model codes described in Section 23.2 of this Development Agreement which directly result from findings by CITY that failure to adopt such rules, regulations or policies would result in a condition injurious or 17 detrimental to the public health and safety. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt any such rules, regulations or policies which prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Development Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such rules, regulations or policies are reasonably necessary to correct or avoid such injurious or detrimental condition. Section 24. CANCELLATION 24.1 Initiation of Cancellation Either party may propose cancellation of this Development Agreement. 24.2 Procedure The procedure for proposing a cancellation of and canceling this Development Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Development Agreement in the first instance. Such procedures are set forth in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of the Procedures Resolution and Section 65868 of the Government Code. 24.3 Consent of Both Parties Any cancellation of this Development Agreement shall require the mutual consent of both parties. Section 25. PERIODIC REVIEW 25.1 Time for Review CITY shall, at least every twelve (12) months after the Development Agreement Date, review the extent of good faith compliance by OWNER with the terms of this Development Agreement. OWNERS failure to comply with the timing schedules set forth in the Final Site Plan shall constitute rebuttable evidence of OWNERS lack of good faith compliance with this Development Agreement. Such periodic review shall determine compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement pursuant to California Government Code Section 65865.1 and other successor laws and regulations. 25.2 OWNERS Submission Each year, not less than forty -five (45) days nor more than sixty (60) days prior to the anniversary of the Development Agreement Date, OWNER shall submit evidence to the City Council of its good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. OWNER shall notify the City Council in writing that such evidence is being submitted to CITY pursuant to the requirements of Section 6.2 of the Procedures Resolution. OWNER shall pay to CITY a reasonable processing fee in an amount as CITY may reasonably establish from time to time on each occasion that OWNER submits its evidence for a periodic review. 25.3 Findings Within forty-five (45) days after the submission of OWNERS evidence, the City Council shall determine, on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not OWNER has, for the period under review, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. If the City Council finds that OWNER has so complied, the review for that period shall be deemed concluded. If the City Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement for the period under review, OWNER shall be given at least sixty (60) days to cure such m non - compliance and if the actions required to cure such non - compliance take more than sixty (60) days, then CITY shall give OWNER additional time provided that OWNER is making reasonable progress towards such end. If during the cure period, OWNER fails to cure such noncompliance or is not making reasonable good faith progress towards such end, then the City Council may, at its discretion, proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 27 of this Development Agreement. 25.4 Initiation of Review by City Council In addition to the periodic review set forth in this Development Agreement, the City Council may at any time initiate a review of this Development Agreement upon the giving of written notice thereof to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the City Council of OWNER's good faith compliance with this Development Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the manner as otherwise provided in this Development Agreement. Section 26. EVENTS OF DEFAULT 26.1 Defaults by OWNER Within forty -five (45) days after the submission of OWNER's evidence, the City Council shall determine on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not OWNER has, for the period under review, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. If the City Council finds that OWNER has so complied, the review for that period shall be deemed concluded. If the City Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement for the period under review, OWNER shall be given at least sixty (60) days to cure such non - compliance and if the actions required to cure such non - compliance take more than sixty (60) days, then CITY shall give OWNER additional time provided that OWNER is making reasonable progress towards such end. If during the cure period OWNER fails to cure such non - compliance or is not making reasonable progress towards such end, then the City Council may, at its discretion, proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 27 of this Development Agreement. 26.2 Specific Performance Remedy Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its pre- existing condition once implementation of this Development Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Development Agreement and will be investing even more significant time in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Development Agreement, and it is not possible to determine sum of the money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons, CITY and OWNER agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement. Therefore, specific performance of this Development Agreement is the only remedy which would compensate OWNER if CITY fails to cart' out its obligations under this 19 Development Agreement, and CITY hereby agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to specific performance in the event of a default by CITY hereunder. CITY and OWNER acknowledge that, if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement, CITY shall have the right to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals which OWNER would otherwise have been entitled to pursuant to this Development Agreement. If CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Development Agreement in reliance upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if OWNER then fails to satisfy such condition, CITY shall be entitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. The CITY's right to specific performance shall be limited to those circumstances set forth above, and CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 26.3 Liquidated Damages Remedy The parties hereto agree that this Development Agreement creates an obligation and duty upon OWNER to undertake and complete development of the Project within the time and manner specified herein. In the event OWNER breaches this Development Agreement by failing to undertake and complete development of the Project within the time and manner specified herein, the parties further agree that CITY will suffer actual damages as a result thereof, the amount of which is uncertain and would be impractical or extremely difficult to fix; therefore, OWNER agrees to pay CITY, in the event of any such breach by OWNER, the sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars($100,000) as liquidated and actual damages which sum shall be in addition to any other remedies available to CITY as a result of such breach pursuant to this Section 26. Section 27. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION If pursuant to Section 26.1 of this Development Agreement, CITY elects to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a revised time schedule for compliance as herein provided, then CITY shall proceed as set forth in this Section. 27.1 Notice to OWNER CITY shall give notice to OWNER of City Council's intention to proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance within ten (10) days of making the CITY's findings. 27.2 Public Hearing The City Council shall set and give notice of a public hearing on modification, termination or a time schedule for compliance to be held within forty -days after the City Council gives notice to OWNER. 27.3 Decision The City Council shall announce its findings and decisions on whether this Development Agreement is to be terminated, how this Development Agreement is to be modified or the provisions of the Development Agreement with which OWNER must comply and a time schedule therefor not than ten (10) days following completion of the public hearing. 27.4 Implementation Modifying or terminating this Development Agreement shall be accomplished by CITY enacting an ordinance. The ordinance shall recite the reasons which, in the 20 opinion of the CITY, make the modification or termination of this Development Agreement necessary. Not later then ten (10) days following the adoption of the ordinance, one copy thereof shall be forwarded to OWNER. This Development Agreement shall be terminated or this Development Agreement as modified shall become effective on the effective date of the ordinance terminating or modifying this Development Agreement. 27.5 Schedule for Compliance Setting a reasonable time schedule for compliance with this Development Agreement maybe accomplished by CITY enacting a resolution. The resolution shall recite the reasons which, in the opinion of CITY, make it advisable to set a schedule for compliance and why the time schedule is reasonable. Not later than ten (10) days following adoption of the resolution, one copy thereof shall be forwarded to OWNER. Compliance with any time schedule so established as an alternative to modification or termination shall be subject to periodic review as provided in this Development Agreement and lack of good faith compliance by OWNER with the time schedule shall be basis for termination or modification of this Development Agreement. Section 28. ASSIGNMENT 28.1 Right to Assign OWNER shall have the right to sell, mortgage, hypothecate, assign or transfer this Development Agreement, and any and all of its rights, duties and obligations hereunder, to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation at any time during the term of this Development Agreement, provided that any such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof. In the event of any such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer, (a) OWNER shall notify CITY of such event and the name of the transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such transferee and (b) the agreement between OWNER and such transferee shall provide that either OWNER or the transferee or both shall be liable for the performance of all obligations of OWNER pursuant to this Development Agreement and the Development Approvals. Such transferee and/or OWNER shall notify CITY in writing which entity shall be liable for the performance of such obligations, and upon the express written assumption of any or all of the obligations of OWNER under this Development Agreement by such assignee, transferee or purchaser shall, without any act of or concurrence by CITY, relieve OWNER of its legal duty to perform said obligations under this Development Agreement with respect to the Property or portion thereof, so transferred, except to the extent OWNER is not in default under the terms of this Development Agreement. 28.2 Release Upon Transfer It is understood and agreed by the parties that the Property may be subdivided following the Development Agreement Date. One or more of such subdivided parcels may be sold, mortgaged, hypothecated, assigned or transferred to persons for development by them in accordance with the provisions of this Development Agreement. Effective upon such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer, the obligations of OWNER shall become several and not joint, except as to OWNER's obligations set forth in Section 10 of this Development Agreement. Upon the sale, transfer, or assignment of OWNERS rights and interests under this Development Agreement as permitted pursuant to the Section 28.1 above, OWNER shall be released from its obligations under this Development Agreement with respect to the Property, or portion 21 thereof so transferred, provided that (a) OWNER is not then in default under this Development Agreement, (b) OWNER has provided to CITY the notice of such transfer specified in Section 28.1 above, (c) the transferee executes and delivers to CITY a written agreement in which (i) the name and address of the transferee is set forth and (ii) the transferee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the obligations of OWNER under this Development Agreement and the Development Approvals with respect to the property, or portion thereof, so transferred and (d) the transferee provides CITY with security equivalent to any security provided by OWNER to secure performance of its obligations under this Development Agreement or the Development Approvals. Non- compliance by any such transferee with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement shall not be deemed a default hereunder or grounds for termination hereof or constitute cause for CITY to initiate enforcement action against other persons then owning or holding interest in the Property or any portion thereof and not themselves in default hereunder. Upon completion of any phase of development of the Project as determined by CITY, CITY may release that completed phase from any further obligations under this Development Agreement. The provisions of this Section shall be self - executing and shall not require the execution or recordation of any further document or instrument. Any and all successors, assigns and transferees of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER as used in this Development Agreement and the term "OWNER" as used in this Development Agreement shall refer to any such successors, assigns and transferees unless expressly provided herein to the contrary. Section 29. NO CONFLICTING ENACTMENTS By entering into this Development Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining vested rights to proceed with the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement, and in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Development Approvals. By entering into this Development Agreement and relying thereupon, CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and general welfare. CITY therefore agrees that except as provided in Section 23 of this Development Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of CITY shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance or other measure which relates to the rate, timing or sequencing of the Development or construction of all or any part of the Project and which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Development Agreement. Section 30. GENERAL 30.1 Force Majeure The Term of this Development Agreement and the time within which OWNER shall be required to perform any act under this Development Agreement shall be extended by a period of time equal to the number of days during which performance of such act is delayed unavoidably by strikes, lock -outs, Acts of God, failure or inability to secure materials or labor by reason of priority or similar regulations or order of any governmental or regulatory body, initiative or referenda, moratoria, enemy action, civil disturbances, fire, unavoidable casualties, or any other cause beyond the reasonable control of OWNER. 30.2 Construction of Development Agreement The language in all parts of this Development Agreement shall in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair 22 meaning. The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Development Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of constructions. This Development Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Development Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental functions of CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the parties understand and agree that this Development Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITY's governmental powers over the Property. 30.3 Severability If any provision of this Development Agreement shall be adjudged to be invalid, void or unenforceable, such provision shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate any other provision hereof, unless such judgment affects a material part of this Development Agreement, the parties hereby agree that they would have entered into the remaining portions of this Development Agreement not adjudged to be invalid, void or illegal. In the event that all or any portion of this Development Agreement is found to be unenforceable, this Development Agreement or that portion which is found to be unenforceable shall be deemed to be a statement of intention by the parties; and the parties further agree that in such event they shall take all steps necessary to comply with such public hearings and/or notice requirements as may be necessary in order to make valid this Development Agreement or that portion which is found to be unenforceable. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Development Agreement, in the event that any material provision of this Development Agreement is found to be unenforceable, void or voidable, OWNER or CITY may terminate this Development Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and the Procedures Resolution. 30.4 Cumulative Remedies In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenant or agreement herein, or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, including suits for declaratory relief, specific performance, relief in the nature of mandamus and actions for damages. All of the remedies described above shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another, and the exercise of any one or more of the remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect to any other available remedy. 30.5 Hold Harmless Agreement OWNER and CITY hereby mutually agree to, and shall hold each other, each other's elective and appointive councils, boards, commissions, officers, partners, agents, representatives and employees harmless from any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, and from claims for property damage which may arise from the activities of the other's or the other's contractors', subcontractors', agents', or employees' which relate to the Project whether such activities be by OWNER or CITY, or by any of the OWNER'S or the CITY's contractors, subcontractors, or by any one or more persons indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for OWNER any of the OWNER's or the CITY's contractors or subcontractors. OWNER and CITY agree to and shall defend the other and the other's elective and appointive councils, boards, commissioners, officers, partners, agents, representatives and employees from any suits or actions at law or in equity for damage caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of the aforementioned activities which relate to the Project. 23 30.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Development Agreement and/or the Development Approvals, the parties hereby agree to cooperate fully with each other in defending said action and the validity of each provision of this Development Agreement, however, OWNER shall be liable for all legal expenses and costs incurred in defending any such action. OWNER shall be entitled to choose legal counsel to defend against any such legal action and shall pay any attorneys' fees awarded against CITY or OWNER, or both, resulting from any such legal action. OWNER shall be entitled to any award of attorneys' fees arising out of any such legal action. 30.7 Public Agency Coordination CITY and OWNER shall cooperate and use their respective best efforts in coordinating the implementation of the Development Approvals with other public agencies, if any, having jurisdiction over the Property or the Project. 30.8 Initiative Measures Both CITY and OWNER intend that this Development Agreement is a legally binding contract which will supersede any initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing or sequencing of the Development or construction of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use approved, issued or granted within the CITY, or portions of the CITY, and which Agreement shall apply to the Project to the extent such initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation is inconsistent or in conflict with this Development Agreement. Should an initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance, or other limitation be enacted by the citizens of CITY which would preclude construction of all or any part of the Project, and to the extent such initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to invalidate or prevail over all or any part of this Development Agreement, OWNER shall have no recourse against CITY pursuant to the Development Agreement, but shall retain all other rights, claims and causes of action under this Development Agreement not so invalidated and any and all other rights, claims and causes of action as law or in equity which OWNER may have independent of this Development Agreement with respect to the project. The foregoing shall not be deemed to limit OWNER's right to appeal any such determination that such initiative, measure, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation invalidates or prevails over all or any part of this Development Agreement. CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in order to keep this Development Agreement in full force and effect, provided OWNER shall reimburse CITY for its out -of- pocket expenses incurred directly in connection with such cooperation and CITY shall not be obligated to institute a lawsuit or other court proceedings in this connection. 30.9 Attorneys' Fees In the event of any dispute between the parties involving the covenants or conditions contained in this Development Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable expenses, attorneys fees and costs. 24 30. 10 No Waiver No delay or omission by either party in exercising any right or power accruing upon non - compliance or failure to perform by the other party under any of the provisions of this Development Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof. A waiver by either party of any of the covenants or conditions to be performed by the other party shall not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of non - performance of the same or other covenants and conditions hereof. 30.11 Authority to Execute The person executing this Development Agreement on behalf of OWNER warrants and represents that he /she has the authority to execute this Development Agreement on behalf of his /her partnership and represents that he /she has the authority to bind OWNER to the performance of OWNER's obligations hereunder. 30.12 Notice 30.12.1 To OWNER Any notice required or permitted to be given by CITY to OWNER under or pursuant to this Development Agreement shall be deemed sufficiently given if in writing and delivered personally to an officer of OWNER or mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, addresse; to OWNER as follows: 1331 East Development Company, LLC c/o West Millennium Homes, Inc. 1849 Sawtelle Blvd. , Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Attention: Ian Ellis or such changed address as OWNER shall designate in writing to CITY. 30.12.2 To CITY Any notice required or permitted to be given to CITY under or pursuant to this Development Agreement shall be made and given in writing, if by mail addressed to: City Council City of Anaheim c/o City Clerk P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 or such changed address as CITY shall designate in writing to OWNER: With copies to: City Manager City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 25 Anaheim, California 92803 City Attorney City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 and if personally delivered to the City Clerk, at the Anaheim Civic Center, 200 S. Anaheim. Blvd., Anaheim, California, together with copies marked for the City Manager and the City Attorney or, if so addressed and mailed, with postage thereon fully prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the City Council in care of the City Clerk at the above address with copies likewise so mailed to the City Manager and the City Attorney, respectively and also in care of the City Clerk at the same address. The provisions of this Section shall be deemed permissive only and shall not detract from the validity of any notice given in a manner which would be legally effective in the absence of this Section. 30.13 Captions The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Development Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall in no way define, explain, modify, construe, limit, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any of the provisions of this Development Agreement. 30.14 Consent Any consent required by the parries in carrying out the terms of this Development agreement shall not unreasonably be withheld. 30.15 Further Actions and Instruments Each of the parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performance of all obligations under this Development Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Development Agreement. Upon the request of either party at any time, the other party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Development Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Development Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Development Agreement. 30.16 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute This Development Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute in effect as of the Development Agreement Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 23.1 above, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Development Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Development Agreement unless necessary for this Development Agreement to be enforceable or unless this Development Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Development Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Development Agreement Date. 26 30.17 Governing Law This Development Agreement, including, without limitation, its existence, validity, construction and operation, and the rights of each of the parties shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 30.18 Effect on Title OWNER and CITY agree that this Development Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Development Agreement has terminated. 30.19 Mortgagee Protection Entering into or a breach of this Development Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of Mortgagees having a mortgage on any portion of the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. No Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Development Agreement to perform OWNERS obligations, or to guarantee such performance prior to any foreclosure or deed in lieu thereof. 30.20 Notice of Default to Mortgagee, Right of Mortgagee to Cure If the City Clerk timely receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to OWNER under the terms of this Development Agreement, CITY shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to OWNER. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, for a period up to ninety (90) days after the receipt of such notice from CITY to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy the default unless a further extension of time to cure is granted in writing by CITY. If the default is of a nature which can only be remedied or cured by such Mortgagee upon obtaining possession, such Mortgagee shall seek to obtain possession with diligence and continually through foreclosure, a receiver or otherwise, and shall thereafter remedy or cure the default or non - compliance within thirty (30) days after obtaining possession. If any such default or non - compliance cannot, with diligence, be remedied or cured within such thirty (30) day period, then such Mortgagee shall have such additional time as may be reasonably necessary to remedy or cure such default or non - compliance if such Mortgagee commences cure during such thirty (30) day period, and thereafter diligently pursues and completes such cure. 30.21 Bankruptcy Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of Section 30.20 of this Development Agreement, if any Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or pursues and prosecuting foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof by any process or injunction issued by any court or by reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving CITY, the times specified in this Section for commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other proceedings shall be extended for the period of the prohibition. 30.22 Disaffirmance 30.22.1 CITY agrees that in the event of termination of this Agreement by reason of any default by CITY, or by reason of the disaffirmance hereof by a receiver, liquidator or trustee for 27 OWNER or its property, CITY, if requested by any Mortgagee, shall enter into a new Development Agreement for the Project with the most senior Mortgagee requesting such new agreement, for the remainder of the Term, effective as of the date of such termination, upon the terms, provisions, covenants and agreements as herein contained to the extent and subject to the law then in effect, and subject to the rights, if any, of any parties then in possession of any part of the Property, provided: 30.22.2 The Mortgagee shall make written request upon CITY for the new Development Agreement for the Project within thirty (30) days after the date of termination; 30.22.3 The Mortgagee shall pay to CITY at the time of the execution and delivery of the new Development Agreement for the Project expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, to which CITY shall have been subjected by reason of OWNER'S default; and 30.22.4 The Mortgagee shall perform and observe all covenants herein contained on OWNER's part to be performed, and shall further remedy any other conditions which OWNER under the terminated agreement was obligated to perform under its terms, to the extent the same are curable or may be performed by the Mortgagee. 30.22.5 Nothing herein contained shall require any Mortgagee to enter into anew agreement pursuant to Section 30.22.1 above, nor to cure any default of OWNER referred to above. 30.23 No Third Party Beneficiaries This Development Agreement and all provisions hereof is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of CITY, OWNER and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have right of action based upon any provision in this Development Agreement. 30.24 Proiect as a Private Undertaking It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the Project is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Development Agreement. No partnership, join venture or other association of any kind is formed by this Development Agreement. The only relationship between CITY and OWNER is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such private property. 30.25 Restrictions Property OWNER shall place in any agreements to sell or convey any interest in the Property or any portion thereof, provisions making the terms of this Development Agreement binding on any successors in interest of OWNER and express provision for OWNER or CITY, acting separately or jointly, to enforce the provisions of this Development Agreement and to recover attorneys' fees and costs for such enforcement. 30.26 Recitals The recitals in this Development Agreement constitute part of this Development Agreement and each party shall be entitled to rely on the truth and accuracy of each recital as an inducement to enter into this Development Agreement. 0 30.27 Recording The City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Development Agreement to be executed by CITY and recorded in the Official Records of Orange County no later than ten (10) days after CITY approves this Development Agreement. 30.28 Title Report CITY is required to sign this Development Agreement only after OWNER has provided CITY with a satisfactory preliminary title report evidencing and showing OWNER's legal and equitable ownership interest in the Property, current within six (6) months, unencumbered except for the exceptions (hereinafter the "Permitted Exceptions ") set in the preliminary title report for the Property dated May 2, 2005, attached hereto as Exhibit "E" (the "Preliminary Title Report"). Any instrument of monetary encumbrance such as a deed of trust or a mortgage entered into subsequent to the date of the Preliminary Title Report and prior to the Development Agreement Date, shall contain language expressly subordinating such instruments of monetary encumbrance to the provisions of this Development Agreement. OWNER shall present evidence, satisfactory to CITY, of OWNER's legal title to Property, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and any such subordinated instruments of monetary encumbrance, at the time of recordation of this Agreement, or a memorandum thereof. 30.29 Entire Agreement This Development Agreement, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Development Agreement, and this Development Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussions and agreements between the parties, and no evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof. 30.30 Successors and Assigns The burdens of the Development Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of the Development Agreement inure to all successors in interest and assigns of the parties to the Development Agreement. 30.31 OWNERS Title of Property Neither party hereto shall be bound by any provision of this Agreement unless and until OWNER shall record this Development Agreement or a memorandum thereof, in the office of the County Recorder of the County sufficient to cause this Agreement and the obligations contained herein to attach to and encumber OWNER'S fee title to Property. 30.32 Exhibits All exhibits, including attachments thereto, are incorporated in this Development Agreement in their entirety by this reference. 29 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and OWNER have executed this Development Agreement as of the date and year first above written. "CITY' CITY OF ANAHEIM, a municipal corporation C Mayor ATTEST: SHERYLLSCHROEDER City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: JACK L. WHITE, City Attorney 54141.2/smann.7/28/04/lgm • NO 1331 East Development Company, LLC a California limited liability company. By: West Millennium Homes, Inc. a California corporation Its: Managing Member By: Name: Title: East Katella Parntership, a California general partnership By: Name: Title: 30 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss: COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On this _ day of , 20 be undersigned, a Notary Public for the State of California duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the person who executed the within instrument as Mayor of the City of Anaheim, the municipal corporation executing the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. [SEAL] STATE OF • L r •I )ss. On 20_, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who executed the within instrument as on behalf of the corporation therein named that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. [SEAL] 31 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On this _ day of , 20 BEFORE ME, THE Undersigned, A Notary Public for the State of California, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared SHERYLL SCHROEDER, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the person who executed the within instrument as City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, the municipal corporation executing the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public 32 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY Parcels 1 and 2 of Parcel Map No. 79 -265, as shown on a map filed in Book 145, Page 50 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of Orange County, California. APN: 082 - 260 -06 33 EXHIBIT `B" FINAL SITE PLAN Development Agreement No. 2005 -00007 Platinum Triangle Condominiums — Anaheim ESP 2005- 00006— List of Exhibits July 14, 2005 ARCHITECTUAL PLANS — Paul Essick Architects Exhibit No. I Sheet 2 Combined Site Plan Exhibit No. 2 Sheet 2a Recreational/Leisure Area Exhibit Exhibit No. 3 Sheet 3 Combined Site Sections COLORED ELEVATIONS Exhibit No. 4 Sheet 4 Site 1 Elevations COLOR Exhibit No. 5 Sheet 5 Site 1 Elevations COLOR Exhibit No. 6 Sheet 6 Site 2 Elevations COLOR Exhibit No. 7 Sheet 7 Site 2 Elevations COLOR Exhibit No. 8 Sheet 8 Site 3 Elevations COLOR Exhibit No. 9 Sheet 9 Site 3 Elevations COLOR SITE 1 Exhibit No. 10 Sheet B 1 -1.1 Site and Garage Plan Exhibit No. 11 Sheet B 1 -1.2 First, Second and Third Floor Plans Exhibit No. 12 Sheet B 1 -1.3 Fourth Floor, Third and Fourth Floor Mezzanine and Roof Plans Exhibit No. 13 Sheet B 1 -2.1 Building Elevations Exhibit No. 14 Sheet B 1 -2.2 East and West Elevation Enlargements Exhibit No. 15 Sheet B 1 -2.3 South Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 16 Sheet B 1 -2.4 North Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 17 Sheet B 1 -3.1 Building Sections Exhibit No. 18 Sheet B 1 -4.1 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 19 Sheet B 1 -4.2 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 20 Sheet B 1 -4.3 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 21 Sheet B 1 -4.4 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 22 Sheet B 1 -4.5 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 23 Sheet B 1 -4.6 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 24 Sheet B 1 -4.7 Exercise, Recreation, Lobb 34 SITE 2 Exhibit No. 26 Sheet B2 -1.1 and Retail Floor Plans Exhibit No. 25 1 Sheet BI-5.1 I Enlarged Details SITE 2 Exhibit No. 26 Sheet B2 -1.1 Site and Garage Plan Exhibit No. 27 Sheet 132 -1.2 First, Second and Third Floor Plans Exhibit No. 28 Sheet 132 -1.3 Fourth Floor, Fourth Floor Mezzanine and Roof Plans Exhibit No. 29 Sheet 132 -2.1 Building Elevations Exhibit No. 30 Sheet 132 -2.2 East and West Elevation Enlargements Exhibit No. 31 Sheet 132 -2.3 North Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 32 Sheet 132 -2.4 South Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 33 Sheet 132 -3.1 Building Sections Exhibit No. 34 Sheet 132 -4.1 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 35 Sheet 132 -4.2 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 36 Sheet 132 -4.3 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 37 Sheet 132 -4.4 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 38 1 Sheet 132 -4.5 1 Unit and Lobby Floor Plans Exhibit No. 39 1 Sheet 132 -5.1 1 Enlarged Details SITE 3 Exhibit No. 40 Sheet B3 -1.1 Site and Garage Plan Exhibit No. 41 Sheet 133 -1.2 First, Second and Third Floor Plans Exhibit No. 42 Sheet 133 -1.3 Fourth Floor, Fourth Floor Mezzanine and Roof Plans Exhibit No. 43 Sheet 133 -2.1 Building Elevations Exhibit No. 44 Sheet 133 -2.2 East and West Elevation Enlargements Exhibit No. 45 Sheet 133 -2.3 South Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 46 Sheet 133 -2.4 North Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 47 Sheet 133 -3.1 Building Sections Exhibit No. 48 Sheet 133 -4.1 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 49 Sheet 133 -4.2 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 50 Sheet 133 -4.3 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 51 Sheet 133 -4.4 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 52 Sheet 133 -4.5 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 53 Sheet 133 -4.6 Unit and Lobby Floor Plans Exhibit No. 54 Sheet 133 -5.1 Enlarged Details 35 LANDSCAPE PLANS —MIS Design Group Exhibit No. 55 Sheet C -1 Plant Material and Site Exhibit No. 68 Sheet C -2 Furniture Exhibit COLOR Exhibit No. 56 Sheet L -1.0 Landscape Concept Plan COLOR SheetL -L1 Rooftop Terraces Exhibit No. 57 Exhibit No. 58 Sheet L -1.2 Recreation Enlargement Plan COLOR Exhibit No. 59 Sheet L -1.3 Rooftop Terrace Enlargement COLOR Exhibit No. 60 Sheet L -1.4 Building 1 Courtyard Enlargement COLOR Exhibit No. 61 Sheet L -1.5 Building 2 Courtyard Enlargement COLOR Exhibit No. 62 Sheet L -1.6 Building 3 Courtyard Enlargement COLOR Exhibit No. 63 Sheet L -1.7 Gate Details Exhibit No. 64 Sheet L -2.0 Landscape Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 65 Sheet L -2.1 Lighting Fixture Details Exhibit No. 66 Sheet L -3.0 Pedestrian Connectivity Exhibit CIVIL, ENGINEERING PLANS — Huitt- Zollars Exhibit No. 67 Sheet C -1 Preliminary Gradin Exhibit No. 68 Sheet C -2 Utility Exhibit Exhibit No. 69 Sheet C -3 Tentative Tract Map Exhibit SET OF PHOTOGRAPHS Exhibit No. 70 Set of Photographs of Current Site PROJECT DESCRIPTION Exhibit No. 71 Project Description COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARDS Exhibit No. 72 Site 1 Color and Material board Exhibit No. 73 Site 2 Color and Material board Exhibit No. 74 Site 3 Color and Material board All exhibits in this table are incorporated into Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00007. Full size sheets of all exhibits are provided in the Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00006 on file in the Planning Department. 36 EXHIBIT "C" Development Agreement Nos. DAG 2005 -00007 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Tract Map 16832 That prior to final map approval, the City Engineer and City Attorney shall approve and OWNER shall record a maintenance covenant providing for the continued operation and maintenance of the street as a private street until such time as the City accepts the offer of dedication. 2. Thatprior to final map approval, OWNER shall irrevocably offerto dedicate an easement to the City of Anaheim for road, public utilities and other public purposes 72 -feet from the centerline of Katella Avenue and the internal Connector Street, as shown on exhibits approved in conjunction with this Development Agreement, on file in the Planning Department. 3. That prior to final map approval, OWNER shall acquire necessary dedications from the adjacent property owner for the other part of the Connector Street outside the tract boundary to be irrevocably offered for dedication to the City of Anaheim for an easement for road and public utility purposes. 4. That prior to final map approval, a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's Office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with approved Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map, including regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 5. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office of the Orange County Recorder (Subdivision Map Act, Section 66499.40). 6. That prior to final map approval, vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue except at street intersections shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. 7. That prior to final map approval, OWNER shall submit a reciprocal access and parking agreement to the Subdivision Section. Said agreement shall be prepared in a form approved by the City Attorney's Office and shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 8. That prior to final map approval, OWNER shall furnish a Subdivision Agreement to the City of Anaheim, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney's Office, agreeing to complete the public improvements required as conditions of the map at the legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and 37 shall than be recorded concurrently with the final map. All public improvements shall be constructed within one year of recordation of the final map. 9. That prior to the issuance of grading permit, OWNER shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: o Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMP's) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. o Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMP's as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. o Incorporates Treatment Control BMP's as defined in the DAMP. o Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMP's. o Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's, and describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMP's. 10. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, OWNER: o Demonstrate that all structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. o Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP o Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. o Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMP's. 11. Prior to grading plan approval, OWNER shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number. The applicant shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City review on request. 12. That prior to final map approval, all existing structures shall be demolished. OWNER shall obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division. M 13. That prior to final map approval, all units shall be assigned street addresses by the Building Division. Street names for any new public or private street shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Division. 14. That prior to the recordation of the tract map associated with the project, OWNER shallpost a bond to the City for the undergrounding of all overhead electrical utility structures located on the property and the construction of streetlights as required by FSP2005- 00006, TIM 16832, and MMP. 136 referenced herein. All improvements /under grounding shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Development Agreement No. DAG 2005 -00007 15. That prior to issuance of the grading permits associated with the project, OWNER shall submit street improvement plans for Katella Avenue and the proposed Connector Street to the Development Services Division of the Public Works Department and post a bond prior to issuance a building permit to the City for the installation and improvements of all dedicated connector streets, Katella Avenue street widening, private streets, sidewalks, lighting and landscaping as required by FSP2005- 00006, TIM 16832, and MMP No. 136 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of occupancy. 16. That prior to issuance of the grading permits associated with the project, OWNER shall submit storm drain and sewer improvement plans to the Development Services Division of the Public Works Department and post a bond to the City for the installation of improvements prior to issuance a building permit as required by FSP2005- 00006, TIM 16832, and MMP No. 136 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of occupancy. 17. That OWNER shall construct within his property said connector street to 26 feet (curb to curb), five feet sidewalk and five feet landscape prior to first occupancy associated with the project to allow for two -way traffic (13 -foot wide) lanes. The eastern boundary of said connector street shall be an asphalt berm until such time as the property to the east is developed. The asphalt berm shall be replaced with curb, gutter, five feet landscape and five feet sidewalk shall be constructed at the time that full improvements are made. 18. That OWNER shall provide three loading spaces to serve the property. One loading space shall be provided on the proposed connector street along the eastern boundary of the site, and the other two loading spaces shall be provided along the private drive between Buildings 2 and 3. 19. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for the installation of all water supply improvements, including all off 39 site improvements and fire hydrants and the abandonment/removal of any existing water lines, as required by FSP2005- 00006, TIM 16832, and MMP No. 136 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of occupancy on each parcel. 20. That prior to commencement of structural framing, OWNER shall install fire hydrants as required and approved by the Fire Department. 21. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for all traffic related street improvements, including but not limited to traffic signals, directional signage, striping, and median islands as required by FSP2005- 00006, TTM 16832, and MMP No. 136 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of occupancy. The traffic signal at the intersection of Katella Avenue and the proposed connector street shall be designed prior to issuance of a grading permit and be installed at its ultimate location and be operational prior to occupancy of the first building constructed within the project. 22. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall post a bond to the City for all required sewer improvements /upgrades, including the removal of any abandoned lines and/or off site improvements, as required by FSP2005- 00006, TIM 16832, and MMP No. 136 referenced herein. All improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of occupancy. 23. That OWNER shall construct a "reverse sewer line" in Katella Avenue to the downstream manhole located approximately 575 feet west of State College Boulevard. Prior to issuance of building permits, OWNER shall prepare final construction drawings for the complete sewer line required. Costs associated with the design and construction of the sewer line may be used to offset the sewer impact fees. If the developer's costs exceed the required sewer impact fees, the developer may request creation of a reimbursement agreement to provide for the reimbursement of the constructed sewer line at such time as the adjacent properties develop and connect to the sewer line. 24. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, OWNER shall submit water improvement plans for the entire project to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, for review and approval. The plan shall identify the location of large water meters with easements, fire lines, and backflow devices for each parcel. 25. That OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim an easement for all domestic above - ground water meters in addition to providing a 5 -foot wide clearance around the water meter pad and a 20 -foot wide access easement along the water line /or water lateral from the street to the water meter pad for maintenance. 26. That OWNER shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim easements for emergency, public utility and other public purposes over the private drives. M 27. That OWNER shall install a minimum of two water connections from the project to the public water main. OWNER shall ensure a minimum clearance of ten feet is maintained between the water line and the sewer and the curb and any other underground utilities. 28. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division above ground and outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for approval by the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 29. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Utility Standards. Any existing water services and/or fire lines that are not approved by the Utility for continued use shall be upgraded to current standards, or abandoned by the property owner /developer. If the existing services are no longer needed, they shall be abandoned by the property owner /developer. 30. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 31. That prior to submitting the water improvement plans; the property owner /developer shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department for review and approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on -site water system to meet the project's water demands and fire protection requirements. 32. That prior to application for water meters, fire lines or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the property owner /developer shall submit to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department, an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall be done in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules, and Regulations. 33. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, all units shall be assigned street addresses. Street names for any new public or private street (if requested by the developer or required by the City) shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Division. 34. That prior to structural framing on each parcel, fire hydrants shall be installed and charged as required and approved by the Fire Department. 41 35. That an all- weather access road as approved by the Fire Department shall be provided during project construction. 36. Prior to issuance of building permits, because this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 37. That the proposed development shall submit a final written solid waste management plan signed by the OWNER to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval. The property owner shall then operate in accordance with the approved written solid waste management plan, as it may be modified from time to time subject to written approval by the Director of Public Works. Said solid waste management plan shall be referred to in the Maintenance Covenant which is recorded for the property. 38. That prior to issuance of building permits, all above - ground utility devices shall be located on private property and outside any required setback area, adjacent to the public right -of- way. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 39. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at OWNER's expense per Electrical Rates, Rules, and Regulations. Landscape and/or hardscape screening of all pad - mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 40. That the property is to be served with underground utilities per the Electrical Rates, Rules, and Regulations. 41. That prior to issuance of building permits, the OWNER shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement (per final electrical design), along /across high voltage lines, low voltage lines crossing private property, and around all pad- mounted transformers, switches, capacitors, etc. Said easement shall be submitted to the City of Anaheim prior to connection of electrical service. 42. That prior to issuance of building permits, closed circuit television (CCTV) security cameras shall be installed to monitor the parking structures and the mailrooms to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department. CCTV cameras shall be strategically located throughout the parking structure, covering all areas, especially all pedestrian and vehicular access points. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 43. That prior to issuance of building permits, each individual building and unit shall be clearly marked with its appropriate building number and address. These numbers shall be positioned so they are easily viewed from vehicular and pedestrian pathways throughout the 42 complex. Main building numbers shall be a minimum of 12 inches in height. Main building numbers and address numbers shall be illuminated during hours of darkness. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 44. That prior to issuance of building permits, 4 -foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of each building in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from view of the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 45. That pedestrian and vehicular access control shall be required to prevent unwanted entry. A digital keypad entry system shall be included to facilitate quick response by emergency personnel. The system's entry code shall be provided to the Anaheim Police Department Communications Bureau and the Anaheim Fire Department. 46. That prior to issuance of building permits, all levels of the parking structures, including circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on -site. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 47. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, OWNER shall finalize the abandonment of any existing public utilities easements to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division of the Public Works Department and the Electrical Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. 48. That prior to issuance of building permits, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 49. That prior to issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully screened by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 50. That OWNER shall provide satellite or other cable /transmission television wiring (concealed from outside the building) to each unit and shall not allow individual television service involving the installation of individual dish receivers /transmitters on the exterior of the building. 51. That OWNER shall be responsible for compliance with all mitigation measures within the assigned time frames and any direct costs associated with the attached Mitigation Monitoring 43 Plan No. 136 as established by the City of Anaheim and as required by Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code to ensure implementation of those identified mitigation measures. 52. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to the Engineering Standard Plan No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to the issuance of the first building permit. 53. That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 402, 436, 470, 471, 472, 473 and 475 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 54. That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager indicating how the vehicular security gates and vehicle turn- around lanes shall function. Any proposed security gates shall meet the minimum requirements as required by the Fire Department. 55. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 56. That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for review and approval in conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for signs or wall/fence locations. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 57. That prior to issuance of building permits, all vehicular ramps and grades shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 402, and be approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. 58. That all internal streets shall be posted with "No Parking Any Time." 59. That prior to issuance of building permits, assigned parking spaces shall be provided for each residential unit. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 60. That prior to issuance of building permits, visitor parking spaces shall be posted, "No Overnight Parking, Except by Permission of the Management." Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 61. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by project applicant and which plans are on .. file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 68, and as conditioned herein. 62. That the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. 63. That prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with the project, the OWNER shall undertake and implement the maintenance of certain landscaping, private streets and private utilities, and the performance of other obligations, as set forth herein. Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, OWNER shall execute and record with the Orange County Recorder an unsubordinated covenant to run with the land, satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney, creating maintenance obligations to maintain the following areas and facilities (collectively referred to hereinafter as the "Maintenance Areas and Facilities ") as indicated below: • Private Street, including sidewalks, landscaping, street lighting, signage, striping and all other appurtenances to the private alleyway. • Private sewer lines, grease interceptor, and clean outs. • Private storm drain lines, area drains, inlets, and catch basins. • Internal landscape areas, courtyards, common areas. • Internal hardscape. • Parkway landscaping. • Parkway hardscape. • Onsite fountains and art elements. • Enclosed parking structures with mail facilities, rubbish collection areas, and bicycle storage. • Recreational amenities areas including the pool and spa, barbecue areas, clubhouse, meeting room(s) and exercise room. • Site lighting systems. 45 • Trash collection and facilities including the Solid Waste Management Plan for the project as approved by the City. • Squeal -free surface in parking structure. • Maintenance of on -site signs and awnings. The obligations described above and depicted in the Maintenance Exhibit shall collectively be referred to as the "Maintenance Obligations." OWNER shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Maintenance Areas and Facilities and performance of the Maintenance Obligations, including any additional obligations, which may be specified herein. The Covenant may provide any of the Maintenance Obligations may be assumed by a duly formed Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and/or Maintenance Assessment District subject to CITY'S written approval. The covenant set forth herein constitutes a general scheme for the development, protection and maintenance of the Property. Said covenant is for the benefit of the Property and shall bind all successor owners thereof. Such covenant shall be a burden upon, and a benefit to, not only the OWNER but also its successors and assigns. Such covenant is intended to be and shall be declared to be running with the land or equitable servitudes upon the land, as the case may be. The Covenant shall provide that amendment of any provision thereof, which may negatively impact performance of the Maintenance Obligations, shall require prior written consent of the City. Termination of this Covenant is not a release of Declarant with regard to Declarant's independent obligations in connection with development and approval of the Project or with regard to obligations and liabilities incurred prior to such termination. 46 EXHIBIT "D" PLATINUM TRIANGLE INTERIM DEVELOPMENT FEES 47 EXHIBIT "D -1" ELECTRIC UTILITIES UNDERGROUNDING FEE Residential Uses $11.42 per unit 336 units x $11.42 = $3,837.12 The Anaheim Master Land Use Plan and the Underground Conversion Program envision that the public utilities along Katella Avenue, between the State College Boulevard and Anaheim Way will need to be undergrounded. The City -owned facilities will be undergrounded using City funds, pursuant to the Rule No. 20 of the City of Anaheim Rates, Rules & Regulations Some of the facilities along Katella Avenue are owned by Southern California Edison (SCE). Moneys available to underground City -owned facilities may not be used to underground SCE facilities. The interim fee will collect the funds necessary to underground the SCE lines, and thereby significantly improve the appearance of The Platinum Triangle. The cost to underground the SCE lines is estimated at $104, 775. These funds will collected by imposing an interim fee on the Mixed -used residential units planned in The Platinum Triangle. The formula for calculating the fee is the following: Cost to Underground SCE lines = Per -Unit Fee Number of mixed -use residential units The Per -Unit fee is calculated at: $104.775 = $11.42 per Unit 9,175 Units EXIIIBIT "D -2" FIRE FACILITIES FEE Residential Uses $350.00 per unit Commercial/Office Uses $ 0.20 per square foot 336 units x $350.00 = $117,600.00 1,248 s.L Commercial x $0.20 = $249.60 Total: $117,849.60 The purpose of establishing a Fire Protection Fee is to finance improvements and additions to facilities and equipment to support fire protection and paramedic services made necessary by new development and expansion of and additions to existing development within The Platinum Triangle. Development will generate additional need for protection and paramedic services in The Platinum Triangle. There is a need in The Platinum Triangle for expansion of fire protection and paramedic services and for new and expanded development to contribute its fair share towards the costs of additional and improved facilities and equipment. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the described fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment and the impacts of the types of development proposed for The Platinum Triangle, for which the corresponding Fire Protection Fee described above is charged. There is also a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the type of development for which the fee is charged, in that these fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment provide support for fire protection and paramedic services and accommodate additional demand generated by development. The cost estimates set forth below are reasonable cost estimates for adding to fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment in The Platinum Triangle. The Fire Protection Fees collected pursuant to this agreement shall be used to finance only the additional facilities described, which additional facilities are needed to augment existing fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment serving The Platinum Triangle, to offset the impacts of new development and expansion of and additions to existing development within The Platinum Triangle. FIRE FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT Fire truck company with equipment $1,000,000 Fire engine company with equipment $ 750,000 Fire station $3,500,000 TOTAL $5,250,000 .. EXIIIBIT "D -3" GENERAL PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSING FEE Residential Uses: $8.00 per unit Commercial/Office Uses: $0.01 per square foot 336 units x $8.00 = $2,688.00 1,248 s.t Commercial x $0.01 = $12.48 Total: $2,700.48 The General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee is based on the following: Intent: Recover partial costs incurred to develop the Mixed -Use Overlay designation for the Platinum Triangle, including the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report Contract Costs Incurred: $146,000 New Development Allowed in Platinum Triangle: 7,044,300 sq.ft. of non - residential uses 9,175 residential units (assume average unit size of 800 sq.ft. = 7,340,000 sq.ft.) 7,044,300+ 7,340,000 14,384,300 total square feet $146,000/14,384,300 = $.01 per square foot 7,340,000 x $.01 = $73,400 $73,400/9175 = $8 per dwelling unit Planning Entitlement Fee 50 EXHIBIT "D -4 LIBRARY FEES Residential Uses $144.39 per unit 336 units x $144.39 = $48,515.04 The amount of the Library fee is based upon the current fee structure for East Santa Ana Canyon residential development for single family residential uses. The 2004 fee for such residential uses is $317.67, based upon an estimated 3.3 persons per dwelling. Using an estimate of 1.5 persons per unit in The Platinum Triangle, the proposed interim developer fee for The Platinum Triangle is $144.39 per unit. 51 EXIIIBIT "D -5" PLATINUM TRIANGLE PARK FEES Residential Uses $7055.74 per unit 336 units x $7,055.74 = $2,370,728.60 Park fees are established by implementing various values identified for The Platinum Triangle into the Park Dedication fee formula, as established by Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapters 17.08 and 17.34, which is as follows: ( Land Acquisition Costs + Land Development Costs) x 2 x DU density proposed =fee 1,000 Land acquisition costs are estimated by Keyser - Marsten to be $50 /sq. ft. of property purchased (for industrial properties, including goodwill and relocation costs *). This equals $2,178,000/ac. Land Development costs have been established by the City Council at $173,913.33/ac. ** City Park Acreage Standard of 2 acres/ 1,000 population was incorporated in the formula set forth in Chapters 17.08 and 17.34, as approved by City Council. Estimated dwelling unit density of 1.5 persons /unit for both the single family attached and apartment complexes as estimated in Final Environmental Impact Report, No. 330, Table 4.3 -1, for the City of Anaheim's General Plan and Zoning Code Update. Using the above figures the park fee is $7,055.74 per unit. ($2,178,000+$173,913.33) x 2 x 1.5 = $7,055.74 per unit 1,000 Parkland dedication will be required for each 8 acre or larger parcel proposed for residential development. The City's Platinum Triangle consultant, EDAW, has recommended that each dwelling unit for parcels of 8 acres or larger dedicate 44 sq. ft. of public parkland per each dwelling unit proposed.*** The value of the parkland dedication will be credited against overall park in lieu fees paid for the project. Consistent with existing zoning and policies, no credit will be given for improvements. As an example, if a subdivision were required to dedicate a .5 acre park, credit would be given against the Land Acquisition value, established above, of $2,178,000 per acre. Accordingly the Developer would be entitled to a credit of $1,089,000 for the dedication. 52 Notes: *Memorandum by Keyser - Marsten dated December 29, 2004 and updated January 15, 2004 by James Rabe of Keyser Marsten, available in the Parks Division office. * * As approved by the City Council in Resolution No. 2004R -128, dated June 15, 2004. * * * The square foot figure for required recreational space per dwelling unit in The Platinum Triangle is lower than the figure used elsewhere in the City, as set forth in Section 17.08. The lower figure is recommended because of the type of residential projects anticipated for The Platinum Triangle. The mixed use type of neighborhoods proposed require smaller human scale parks within a walking distance of 2.5 to 5 minutes of each dwelling unit. 53 EXHIBIT "D -6" POLICE FACILITIES FEE Residential Uses $31.62 per unit Office Uses $ .10 per square foot Commercial Uses $ .21 per square foot 336 units x $31.62 = 10,624.32 1,248 s.f. Commercial x $0.21= $262.08 The Revenue and Cost Specialists Consulting firm is still in the process of establishing fee guidelines for The Platinum Triangle area. During the interim the foregoing formula will be applicable to offset the equipment cost for police services in The Platinum Triangle area. The interim fee will be replaced with a one -time capital facilities fee which will be applicable to the Project. 54 EXHMIT "D -7" PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLEMENTAL FEES SUPPLEMENTAL SEWER IMPACT FEE All Land Uses $430.00 per 1,000 gross square foot $430.00 x 365.664 = $157,235.52 Gross Floor Building Area developed between 0.4 and 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) ARTERIAL HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION /AESTHETIC IMPACTS FEE All Land Uses $12,500.00 per gross acre 4.88 acres x $12,500 = $61,000.00 SUPPLEMENTAL STORM DRAIN IMPACT FEE (Drainage District 27)* Residential Uses $24,500.00 per net acre Non - Residential Uses $35,000.00 per net acre *Drainage District Maps are available in the Public Works Department. 55 EXHIBIT "D -8" TRAFFIC FEE Residential Uses $871.00 per unit Office Uses $3,384.00 per 1,000 square foot Commercial Uses $10,552.00 per 1,000 square foot 336 units x $643.00 = $216,048.00 1.248 t.s.f. Commercial x $10,522.00 = $13,131.46 The Supplemental Traffic Fee is based upon the following: PLATINUM TRIANGLE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE CALCULATION 1 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, hourly trip rate between 3 & 7 pm weekdays in Platinum Triangle. 2 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, average trip length during PM peak hour in Platinum Triangle. 3 PM trip rate multiplied by average length, then divided by OCTA standard 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane. 4 Construction plus right -of -way (no landscaping, derived from State College/Lincoln project data below: $1,582,195 construction of St.College/Lincoln intersection widening. $4087 linear feet (11) of project length. $38713 per if (no landscape costs included) $2,044,039 contt cost/mile $774,053 row cost/mile 5 Impact Fee is exclusive of Citywide Traffic and Transportation Improvement Fee, which also is due. 56 PM PEAK AVERAGE CAPACITY COST PER IMPACT LAND USE UNIT TRIP RATE 1 LENGTH (MI) 2 CONSUMED 3 LANE MILE 4 FEE/UNIT 5 Residential dwelling 0.49 1.67 0.00048086 $ 2,818,092 $ 871 Office tsf 136 1.67 0.00133330 $ 2,818,092 $ 3,384 Commercial tsf 3.89 1.67 0.00382504 $ 2,818,092 $ 10,552 1 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, hourly trip rate between 3 & 7 pm weekdays in Platinum Triangle. 2 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, average trip length during PM peak hour in Platinum Triangle. 3 PM trip rate multiplied by average length, then divided by OCTA standard 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane. 4 Construction plus right -of -way (no landscaping, derived from State College/Lincoln project data below: $1,582,195 construction of St.College/Lincoln intersection widening. $4087 linear feet (11) of project length. $38713 per if (no landscape costs included) $2,044,039 contt cost/mile $774,053 row cost/mile 5 Impact Fee is exclusive of Citywide Traffic and Transportation Improvement Fee, which also is due. 56 EXHIBIT "'E" DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS As a condition of approval of Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00007, the City requires OWNER to undertake and implement the maintenance of certain slopes, landscaping, [a park (if Property is 8 or more acres)] private streets and private utilities, and the performance of other obligations, as set forth herein. Prior to the earlier of either the sale of the first [residential] lot or the issuance of the temporary or permanent "Certificate of Occupancy" for the first [residential dwelling unit] in Tract Map No. 16832, OWNER shall execute and record with the Orange County Recorder a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ( "CC &Rs ") satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney creating maintenance obligations for an incorporated association ( "Association ") to establish a financial mechanism or financial mechanisms to maintain those areas and facilities (collectively referred to hereinafter as the "Common Area ") depicted on Attachment No. 1 attached hereto. Such Area shall include those items indicated within Condition No. 63 of Exhibit C to this Development Agreement. The obligations described above and depicted in the Maintenance Exhibit shall collectively be referred to as the "Maintenance Obligations." Until such time as the Association is formed, the CC &Rs are recorded, the Common Area is conveyed in fee to the Association, and the Association has assumed responsibility to maintain the Common Area and perform the Maintenance Obligations, OWNER shall be responsible for the maintenance of the Common Area and performance of the Maintenance Obligations, including any additional obligations which may be specified herein. Reconveyance of all or part of the Common Area or any property interest therein to a party other than the Association shall require (i) the prior written consent of the City, (ii) appurtenant easements over the Common Area for the benefit of each and every lot in the Property and (iii) that the reconveyance expressly affirm that the provisions of Civil Code Section 1367 relating to lien rights to enforce delinquent assessments and the CC &Rs shall remain applicable. The CC &Rs may provide any of the Maintenance Obligations may be assumed by a duly formed Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and/or Maintenance Assessment District subject to CITY'S written approval. The covenants and restrictions set forth herein constitute a general scheme for the development, protection and maintenance of the Property for the benefit of all owners. Said covenants and restrictions are for the benefit of the Property and shall bind all owners thereof. Such covenants and restrictions shall be a burden upon, and a benefit to, not only the OWNER but also its successors and assigns. All of such covenants and restrictions are intended to be and shall be declared in the CC &Rs to be covenants running with the land or equitable servitudes upon the land, as the case may be. The CC &R's shall provide that termination of the CC &R's or amendment of any provision which may negatively impact performance of the Maintenance Obligations shall require prior written consent of the City. Termination of this Declaration is not a release of Declarant with regard to Declarant's independent obligations in connection with development and approval of w NOCC the Project or with regard to obligations and liabilities incurred prior to such termination. RDNOOR EXHIBIT "F" PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT RDNOUR Attachment - Item No. 5 To: Sheri Vander Dussen, Planning Director From: Elaine Thienprasiddhi, Planner Date: July 20, 2005 RE: FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2005 -00006 PLATINUM TRIANGLE CONDOMINIUMS (1221 and 1331 EAST KATELLA AVENUE) The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PIMU) Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) requires an approved Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement between the property owner and the City of Anaheim for all development that implements the PTMU Overlay Zone in the Katella District, except as otherwise exempt under the Code. A Final Site Plan Application is required to be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Director as to conformance with the provisions of the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. The approved Final Site Plan is then attached as an exhibit to the Development Agreement. The Agreement is submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council for review at a noticed public hearing. The project applicant (1331 East Katella Partnership) has submitted Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00006 to the Planning Department to provide for the development of the Platinum Triangle Condominiums (a 336 -unit "podium - style" condominium project within three separate buildings, comprised of four stories of residential over two stories of subterranean parking and including one 1,200 square foot retail tenant space) in the PTMU Overlay Zone, Katella District. The project site encompasses approximately 4.45 acres on the north side of Katella Avenue, between State College Boulevard and Lewis Street and is currently developed with a two story hotel and restaurant. The tentative tract map (TIM No. 16832) and development agreement (DAG2005- 00007) applications are agendized for a Planning Commission public hearing on July 25, 2005, with an anticipated City Council public hearing date of August 16, 2005. July 20, 2005 Final Site Plan Review No. 2005 -00006 Page 2 of 2 Staff has reviewed the submitted Final Site Plan application, including the exhibits listed on Attachment `A' to this memo which are on file and available for review in the Planning Department and Attachment `B', Development Intensities for the Katella District. Staff has determined that the Final Site Plan application is in conformance with the provisions of the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Director, by signature below, approve Final Site Plan No. 2005 - 00006. Approval of Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00006 is contingent upon the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 16832 and Development Agreement No. 2005 -00007 by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Approved by: Sheri Vander Dussen, Planning Director Date Attachment - Item No. 5 Attachment "A" FINAL SITE PLAN Development Agreement No. 2005 -00007 Platinum Triangle Condominiums — Anaheim FSP 2005- 00006— List of Exhibits July 14, 2005 ARCHITECTS PLANS — Paul Essick Architects Exhibit No. 1 Sheet 2 Combined Site Plan Exhibit No. 2 Sheet 2a Recreational/Leisure Area Exhibit Exhibit No. 3 Sheet 3 Combined Site Sections COLORED ELEVATIONS Exhibit No. 4 Sheet 4 Site 1 Elevations (COLOR) Exhibit No. 5 Sheet 5 Site 1 Elevations (COLOR) Exhibit No. 6 Sheet 6 Site 2 Elevations COLOR Exhibit No. 7 Sheet 7 Site 2 Elevations COLOR Exhibit No. 8 Sheet 8 Site 3 Elevations (COLOR) Exhibit No. 9 Sheet 9 Site 3 Elevations COLOR SITE 1 Exhibit No. 10 Sheet B 1 -1.1 Site and Garage Plan Exhibit No. 11 Sheet B 1 -1.2 First, Second and Third Floor Plans Exhibit No. 12 Sheet B 1 -1.3 Fourth Floor, Third and Fourth Floor Mezzanine and Roof Plans Exhibit No. 13 Sheet B 1 -2.1 Building Elevations Exhibit No. 14 Sheet B 1 -2.2 East and West Elevation Enlargements Exhibit No. 15 Sheet B 1 -2.3 South Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 16 Sheet B 1 -2.4 North Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 17 Sheet B 1 -3.1 Building Sections Exhibit No. 18 Sheet B 1 -4.1 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 19 Sheet B 1 -4.2 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 20 Sheet B 1 -4.3 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 21 Sheet B 1 -4.4 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 22 Sheet B 1 -4.5 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 23 Sheet B 1 -4.6 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 24 Sheet B 1 -4.7 Exercise, Recreation, Lobby and Retail Floor Plans Exhibit No. 25 Sheet B 1 -5.1 Enlarged Details SITE 2 Exhibit No. 26 Sheet 132 -1.1 Site and Garage Plan Exhibit No. 27 Sheet 132 -1.2 First, Second and Third Floor Plans Exhibit No. 28 Sheet 132 -1.3 Fourth Floor, Fourth Floor Mezzanine and Roof Plans Exhibit No. 29 Sheet 132 -2.1 Building Elevations Exhibit No. 30 Sheet 13212.2 East and West Elevation Enlargements Exhibit No. 31 Sheet 132 -2.3 North Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 32 Sheet 132 -2.4 South Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 33 Sheet 132 -3.1 Building Sections Exhibit No. 34 Sheet 132 -4.1 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 35 Sheet 132 -4.2 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 36 Sheet 132 -4.3 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 37 Sheet 132 -4.4 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 38 1 Sheet 132 -4.5 1 Unit and Lobby Floor Plans Exhibit No. 39 1 Sheet 132 -5.1 1 Enlarged Details SITE 3 Exhibit No. 40 Sheet 133 -1.1 Site and Garage Plan Exhibit No. 41 Sheet 133 -1.2 First, Second and Third Floor Plans Exhibit No. 42 Sheet 133 -1.3 Fourth Floor, Fourth Floor Mezzanine and Roof Plans Exhibit No. 43 Sheet 133 -2.1 Building Elevations Exhibit No. 44 Sheet 133 -2.2 East and West Elevation Enlargements Exhibit No. 45 Sheet 133 -2.3 South Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 46 Sheet 133 -2.4 North Elevation Enlargement Exhibit No. 47 Sheet 133 -3.1 Building Sections Exhibit No. 48 Sheet 133 -4.1 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 49 Sheet 133 -4.2 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 50 Sheet 133 -4.3 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 51 Sheet 133 -4.4 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 52 Sheet 133 -4.5 Unit Floor Plans Exhibit No. 53 Sheet 133 -4.6 Unit and Lobby Floor Plans Exhibit No. 54 Sheet 133 -5.1 Enlarged Details LANDSCAPE PLANS —MIS Design Group Exhibit No. 55 Plant Material and Site Furniture Exhibit COLOR Exhibit No. 56 Sheet L -1.0 Landscape Concept Plan COLOR Exhibit No. 57 Sheet L -1.1 Rooftop Terraces Exhibit No. 58 Sheet L -1.2 Recreation Enlargement Plan COLOR Exhibit No. 59 Sheet L -1.3 Rooftop Terrace Enlargement COLOR Exhibit No. 60 Sheet L -1.4 Building 1 Courtyard Enlargement COLOR Exhibit No. 61 Sheet L -1.5 Building 2 Courtyard Enlargement COLOR Exhibit No. 62 Sheet L -1.6 Building 3 Courtyard Enlargement (COLOR) Exhibit No. 63 Sheet L -1.7 Gate Details Exhibit No. 64 Sheet L -2.0 Landscape Lighting Plan Exhibit No. 65 Sheet L -2.1 Lighting Fixture Details Exhibit No. 66 Sheet L -3.0 Pedestrian Connectivity Exhibit CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANS — Huitt- Zollars Exhibit No. 67 Sheet C -1 Preliminary Grading Exhibit No. 68 Sheet C -2 Utility Exhibit Exhibit No. 69 Sheet C -3 Tentative Tract Map Exhibit SET OF PHOTOGRAPHS Exhibit No. 70 Set of Photographs of Current Site PROJECT DESCRIPTION Exhibit No. 71 1 1 Project Description COLORS AND MATERIALS BOARDS Exhibit No. 72 Site 1 Color and Material board Exhibit No. 73 Site 2 Color and Material board Exhibit No. 74 Site 3 Color and Material board All exhibits in this table are incorporated into Development Agreement No. 2005 - 00007. Full size sheets of all exhibits are provided in the Final Site Plan No. 2005 -00006 on file in the Planning Department. Attachment - Item No. 5 ATTACHMENT "B" Development Intensities for the Katella, Gene Autry and Gateway Districts Amendment to the Katella District - Residential (Platinum Triangle Condominiums, PC Date 7/25/05) District PTMIJ overlay Table 20 -D Residential (Dwelling Units) Approved by Previous Entitlements Existing' Approved 2' Remaining Proposed New Construction by FSP 2005 -00006 Demolition Remaining' Katella 4,250 0 1,326 2,924 336 0 2,588 Gene Autry 1,000 0 2 1'000 0 0 1,000 Gateway 1,750 0 618 1,132 0 0 1,132 Total 7,000 0 0 5,056 0 0 4,720 District PTMIJ overlay Table 20 -D Office (Square Feet) Approved by Previous Entitlements Existing' Approved Remaining Proposed by FSP 2005 -00006 New Construction Demolition Remaining' Katella 775,000 385,160 -44,100 419,840 0 0 419,840 Gene Autry 100,000 0 0 100,000 0 0 100,000 Gateway 530,000 408,000 0 122,000 0 0 122,000 Total 1,405,000 793,160 0 641,840 0 0 641,840 District PTMIJ overlay Table 20 -D Commercial (Square Feet) Approved by Previous Entitlements Existing' Approved Remaining Proposed by FSP2005 -00006 New Construction Demolition Remaining' Katella 549,908 524,300 25,608 0 1,248 105,472 104,224 Gene Autry 50,000 5,230 0 44,770 0 0 44,770 Gateway 50,000 1,330 0 48,670 0 0 48,670 Total 644,300 530,860 0 93,440 0 0 197,664 ' Existing at time of EIR No. 330 was circulated (March 18, 2004) 2 Approved is net approved (amount proposed minus amount demolished) 2' Approved is net approved, including dwelling units and commercial square footage proposed by the Anaheim Stadium Mixed Use Project ' Following approval of FSP No. 2005 -00006 ° Negative number indicates demoliton 5 Commercial square footage for the Katella District incorporates additional square footage proposed as part of GPA2005 -00435 Attachment - Item No. 5 ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT OPERATIONS CENTER 1411 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel 714 - 517 -7549 . Fax 714 - 517 -8768 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Paul Burkart July 14, 2005 Elaine Thienprasiddhi, Planner City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, CA 92803 ANAHEIM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Re: Response to Mitigated Negative Declaration for Platinum Centre Residential Development Dear Ms. Thienprasiddhi: The Anaheim City School District (District) appreciates the opportunity to provide the following comments regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Platinum Centre Residential Development Project (Project). The assertion on page 95 of the MND that "the generation factors used... are based on the number of students expected to be generated from a single - family residential development..." is incorrect. The District's current student generation rate of 0.397 is a blended number including all residential unit types, including single - family detached, single family attached, and multi- family unit types. As for a realistic student generation rate for the Project, the District acknowledges the fact that this type of residential construction is unique in comparison to the type of housing that currently exists in the City and will likely have a different (i.e., lower) student generation rate. However, the District is not inclined to assume that waterfront development in Long Beach will necessarily be comparable to the Project in terms of buyer profile. Thank you again for giving the District the opportunity to submit the preceding comments. If you have any questions or need clarification, please call me at (714) 517 -7549. Sincerely, Tom Rizzuti Facilities Planner cc: Paul Burkart Gordon Itow City Of Anaheim Attachment - Item No. 5 PLANNING DEPARTMENT www.anaheim.net July 20, 2005 Tom Rizzuti Facilities Planner Anaheim City School District 1411 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim CA 92805 Re: Response to Comments to Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Platinum Triangle Condominiums —1221 and 1331 East Katella Avenue Mr. Rizzuti: Thank you for taking the time to respond to our public notice and thank you for sharing the District's concerns pertaining to the potential impact this project may have on school facilities within the District's boundaries. The City of Anaheim acknowledges your input you provided pertaining to the District's generation rate (being a "blended" rate rather than generated from a single family residential project). The recent Anaheim City General Plan Update (FEIR No. 330) acknowledged the fact that the school district is currently enrolled beyond capacity (specifically that Guinn, Sunkist, and Juarez Elementary Schools have enrollments above their current capacity and would not be able to serve students generated from The Platinum Triangle residential projects). The City of Anaheim will continue to work with the District to address the adequacy of school facilities as a result of projected growth within the District's boundaries. To ensure that adequate resources are available to allow future school site expansions, the following measure is included in FEIR No. 330: "5.13 -1 The City of Anaheim will work cooperatively with school districts to identify sites for new schools and school expansions in West and Central Anaheim and the Platinum Triangle area." Additionally, the City of Anaheim is requiring that this developer pay appropriate school district development fees (as all developers are required if their project meets the appropriate threshold) prior to issuance of any building permits associated with the project (based on the provisions of Senate Bill 50). Thank you again for your comments. The District's comments are noted and will be provided to the decision makers for consideration at the public hearings on the 200 South Anaheim Boulevard P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 TEL (714) 765 -5139 project. Please let me know if you have any further questions regarding this matter. I can be reached at (714) 765 -5139, extension 56746, or by e -mail at ethien(aanaheim.net Sincerely, ^ Elaine Thienprasiddlu Planner City of Anaheim - Item No. 5 DEPART117.ENT OF TR DiMet 12 3337 Michelson Dive, quite 380 trvim, CA 92612-8894 Tel: (949) 724 -2267 Fait (949) 724-2592 Post.le Fax Note 7671 5l Ako July 14, 2005 Ms, Elaine Thienpra City of Anaheim, Pt 200 South Anaheim Anaheim, California Subject: The Pl 16832 (EIR 330) Dear Ms. Nile: iGRICEQA rtmeut SCH #: None Suite 162 Log #: 1.580 I -5 & SR -57 Triangle Condominiums Development, Tentative ti si± Flee your pmverl B, AnargpArciazz, Map No Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Inteni; to adopt an Expanded Mitigated Negative Declaration for The Platinum Triangle el, ndommiums Development. The §roposed development consists of three 6 -level buildings (two alre four stories of residential units, leach above a two level subterranean Parking structure; one is jour stories of residential/reereatioil room/commercial over two subterranean parking levels) The project consists of 336 residential condominium units, with an approximate 1300 square f t commercial component, 660 parking spaces and associated driveways, sidewalks, landseapiz, recreational areas, and infrastru4ture improvements. The project site is located on the north hide of Katella Avenue between Le Street to the west and State College Boulevard to the eas irl the City of Anaheim. The site ig' located east of I -5 and west of SIt -57. i d Caltrans District �2 status is a reviewing agency on this project. Due to heavy traffic cnngestion on i -5 and SR -57, Caltrans is concerned about cumulative traffic imPitcts caused by the intensification cif land use in the project vicinity and how it may impact the state facilities. Please revise the project traffic study to include the following: '1 I. Traffic Operations does not agree with the assessment of section XV Transp")rtation/Traffic of the above dopument. Traffic impact evaluation of State facilities (Intersections 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13 and 114) shall be performed using ACM methodology. Impact anysis on State facilities shall Lie done following Caltrans "Guide for the Preparation of , t raffic Impact. Studies" 2. For your reviemu and consideration please see Caltrans previous cor - esponden�e an Anaheim General Plan a'nd Zoning Code update (EHL 330) dated 4/30/04, and 515/02 (copies attached). All balculations shall be based on highway Capacity Manua! 'methodologies (HCM), not Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. The computation of the new generated traffic shall be done using the Lislitute of Transportation Un&ccring (ITE) data. Please provide detailed information on how the new generated, traffic: is distributed. Caltrans cannon verify the new generated traffic calculations with Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAV,. "!'nitrnns Ympmves mobtllp. across Caitfornia" ' i i i i ,' JI 3. Although the total trip generation by the proposed project match ITE data, the! IN and OUT distribution does' not. 'fable F of the Traffic Impact Analysis shall show 2o° /u:, IN and So % OUT traffic duri,bg the AM period and 65% IN and 35% OUT during the P141 period. The distribution presented in the report is not realistic and thercforc can not be usd to evaluate the impact of the, proposed project. 4. Future Traffic Impacts of the project shall be for year 2025, not year 2007, n C Please continue to i cep us informed of this project and any future developments, which could potentially impact the transportation facilities. If you have any questions or needlto contact us, please do.not hesitate to call Maryam,M,olavi at (949) 724 -2267. Sincerely, ROBERT F, JUShF,,1 Ctner IGR/Community Planning Branch C- Terry Roberts, OYfflce of Planning and Research Terri Pencovic, C°;a trans HQ IGR/Community Planning Gale McIntyre, beputy District Director Isaac Alonso Fjc�, Traffic Operations, North "Colhws improws moblUv a wx Cahfomia" City of Anaheim Attachment - Item No. 5 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS July 18, 2005 Mr. Robert F. Joseph, Chief IGR/Community Branch Department of Transportation 3337 Michelson Dr., Suite 380 Irvine, CA 92612 -8894 RE: THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE CONDOMINIUMS DEVELOPMENT, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16832 Dear Mr. Joseph: Thank you for your comments on the subject Condominiums projects Traffic Impact Study conducted for the City of Anaheim. The City of Anaheim approved its comprehensive General Plan Update and certified ElR No. 330 in May 2004. As part of that effort, the City's Circulation Element was adopted by the Council. California Planning Law mandates that Circulation Elements directly correlate with the adopted Land Use Element. The Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) reflects trips generated by the City's Land Use Plan as well as regional (i.e., SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan) and sub - regional (i.e., Orange County) traffic growth. ATAM was approved in conformance with the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM 2) by OCTA. That General Plan level analysis environmentally cleared the year 2025 General Plan build out, of which this project is a part. The City of Anaheim does not require Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) analyses. The Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology has been the long- standing approach for traffic impact studies by cities in Orange County. This traffic study is intended to identify construction phasing needs for previously identified impacts. Should have any further questions or comments, please call me at (714) 654 -5183. Lower, AICP is and Transportation Manager www.anaheim.net Attachment H:\ADMIN \LETTERS \TRAFFIC \T1;JLCALTRANS Platinum Triangle condominimus.DOC c Taher Jalai Linda Johnson Alfred Yalda File P.O. Box 3222. Anaheim, California 92803 TEL (714) 765 -5176 FAX (714) 765 -5225 Attachment - Item No. 5 GRANGE COUNTY A IRPORT LAND S); COM MISSION FOR ORANGE COUNTY 3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 , 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 July 18, 2005o' `' 0 ' , °has JUL 2005 R ECEfVE Q Ms. Elaine Thienprasiddhi, Planner a pa rmEhj Planning Department \'o City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Subject: Notice Of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration — The Platinum Triangle Condominium Development Project Dear Ms. Thienprasiddhi: Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment on this Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Platinum Triangle Condominium Development Project. We are pleased to note that you have addressed the various helicopter training operations and associated flight paths used by the Anaheim Police Department and the North Net Fire Training Center. Additionally, you have included information regarding the UCI Medical Center Heliport and indicated that it is approximately one mile south of the project site. Since the highest elevation of your condominium development project is less than 200 ft. above mean sea level, there does not appear to be a conflict with flights from this heliport. Because the Platinum triangle development is located adjacent to the intersection of three major freeways, all of which serve as official FAA VFR (Visual Flight Rules) helicopter routes (they are used as easily recognizable surface features), please include information in the final Mitigated Negative Declaration which would address whether or not the project would have an impact on these VFR routes. Our ALUC is committed to assisting local agencies by making them aware of these statutory requirements. If you have any questions, I can be reached at the ALUC office at (949) 252 -5170 or at ieolding(2cocair.com S Sincerely, Joan S. Golding U Executive Officer Attachment - Item No. 5 I1 %IrNutrr[110 [110 111$]910 a ll "►7: 11 2 11399 e FOR PLATINUM TRIANGLE CONDOMINIUMS DEVELOPMENT CEOA Action: Mitigated Negative Declaration ProiectDescription: The proposed project includes the demolition of the Ramada Inn hotel complex and construction of 336 residential condominium units and a 1,300 - square -foot commercial element subdivided into three developable lots. Proposed buildings consist of four stories built over two fully subterranean parking levels. The project would provide a total of 80,200 square feet of recreational/leisure area on site. Recreational/leisure areas include a swimming pool, spa, barbeque /outdoor dining court, lounge area with outdoor fireplace and common area room, landscaped courtyards, and private patios and balconies. Project Location: The approximately 4.45 -acre project site is located on the north side of Katella Avenue between Lewis Street and State College Boulevard in the City of Anaheim, Orange County, California. The site is located east of Interstate 5 (I -5) and west of State Route 57 (SR -57) and is bordered by industrial buildings on the north and east, Katella Avenue on the south, and restaurant and industrial uses on the west Terms and Definitions 1. Property Owner/Developer — Any owner or developer of real property within the Platinum Triangle Condominiums Development 2. Environmental Equivalent/Timing — Any Mitigation Measure and timing thereof, subject to the approval of the City of Anaheim, which will have the same or superior result and will have the same or superior effect on the environment. The Planning Department, in conjunction with any appropriate agencies or City departments, shall determine the adequacy of any proposed "environmental equivalent/timing" and, if detemiined necessary, may refer said determination to the Planning Commission. Any cost associated with the information required in order to make a determination of environmental equivalency /timing shall be home by the property owner /developer. Staff time for reviews will be charged on a time and materials basis at the rate in the City of Anaheim's adopted fee schedule. 3. Timing — This is the point where a mitigation measure must be monitored for compliance. In the case where multiple action items are indicated, it is the first point where compliance associated with the mitigation measure must be monitored. Once the initial action item has been complied with, no additional monitoring pursuant to the Mitigation Monitoring Program will occur, as routine City practices and procedures will ensure that the intent of the measure has been complied with. For example, if the timing is "to be shown on approved building plans' subsequent to issuance of the building permit consistent with the approved plans will be final building and zoning inspections pursuant to the building permit to ensure compliance. 4. Responsibility of Monitoring — Shall mean that compliance with the subject mitigation measure(s) shall be reviewed and determined adequate by all departments listed for each mitigation measure. 5. Ongoing Mitigation Measures — The mitigation measures that are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this mitigation monitoring program will be monitored in the form of an annual letter from the property owner /developer in January of each year stating how compliance with the subject measure(s) has been achieved. When compliance with a measure has been demonstrated for a period of one year, monitoring of the measure will be deemed to be satisfied and no further monitoring will occur. For measures that are to be monitored "Ongoing During Construction ", the annual letter will review those measures only while construction is occurring, monitoring will be discontinued after construction is completed. P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MMPs/Appmdix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Page I Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Completed I. AESTHETICS V -1 Prior to the issuance of Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner /developer shall submit an Planning a building permit exterior lighting plan to the City of Anaheim Planning Department, Planning Services Department, Division, for review and approval to ensure that there are no significant exterior lighting- Planning Services related light and glare impacts to adjacent properties and their occupants. Lighting Division fixtures shall be designed to minimize glare on the proposed residential units, adjacent properties, and into the night sky. The lighting plan shall include the following lighting criteria: • Lighting fixtures shall include directional light mounts illuminating inward and downward toward the site to minimize off -site impacts. • Lighting fixtures shall include nonglare hoods to reduce the potential light and glare impact on the residential uses associated with the project and on the surrounding commercial and industrial land uses. • Flashing, blinking, or oscillating lighting shall not be allowed. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES No Mitigation Required N/A III. AIR QUALITY AQ -1 Prior to issuance of Prior to issuance of building permits, the City Building Department will ensure that Planning building permits project plans include notes requiring the contractors use of precoated/natural materials, Department, low VOC paints, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency to Building Division reduce the emissions associated with architectural coatings. 2 -1 Similar to Ongoing during The following measures are to be implemented by the contractor and verified by South Coast Air AMP No. 106 grading and SCAQMD and City Public Works field staff: Quality construction a) The contractor will ensure that all construction equipment is being properly Management serviced and maintained to reduce operational emissions. District b) Where feasible, the contractor shall use low emission mobile construction. Public Works c) The contractor shall utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean- Department, Field fuel generators rather than temporary power generators where feasible. Engineering Division 2 -2 Similar to Ongoing during The following measures shall also be implemented by the property owner /developer South Coast Air MMP No. 106 grading and during grading and construction (and verified by SCAQMD and City Public Works and Quality construction Planning Staff) in order to reduce PM10 emissions: Management a) The property owner /developer shall implement standard mitigation measures in District accordance with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403, to control fugitive dust emissions and Public Works ensure that nuisance dust conditions do not occur during construction. Department, Field b) In addition to the standard measures, the property owner /developer shall implement Engineering P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 2 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 3 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Completed supplemental measures as feasible to reduce fugitive dust emissions to the extent Division feasible during construction operations. To assure compliance, the City shall verify Planning compliance that these measures have been implemented during normal construction Department, site inspections. The measures to be implemented are listed below: Planning Division • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave onsite haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Restore landscaping and irrigation that are removed during construction in coordination with local public agencies. • Sweep streets on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. • Suspend grading operations during high winds in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Wash off trucks leaving site. • Maintain a minimum 12 -inch freeboard ratio on haul trucks. • Cover payloads on trucks hauling soil using tarps or other suitable means. 2 -4 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to the approval of The property owner /developer shall submit evidence that high - solids or water -based low South Coast Air each building permit emissions paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in Quality compliance with SCAQMD regulations. This information shall be denoted on the project Management plans and specifications. Additionally, the property owner /developer shall specify the use District of high volume /low pressure spray equipment or hand application. Air atomized spray techniques shall not be permitted. 2 -5 (AIMP No. 106) Timing as required by The following measures shall be implemented by the property owner /developer to reduce Public Works Traffic and long -term operational CO, NO ROG, and PM10 emissions: Department, Traffic Transportation • Traffic lane improvements and signalization as outlined in the traffic study and MPAH and Transportation Manager shall be implemented as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager. Division • The property owner /contractor shall place bus benches and/or shelters as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager at locations along any site frontage routes as needed. 2 -6 Similar to Prior to the issuance of While mobile source emission do present the greatest source of impact, all emissions add Planning MMP No. 106 building permits to the cumulative total and further mitigation is warranted to reduce stationary source Department, emissions as well. These emissions will be reduced though the following: Building Division • The property owner /contractor shall specify the installation of energy efficient lighting, air conditioning, water heaters, and appliances. • The property owner /contractor as feasible shall specify the installation of insulation in P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 3 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 4 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Completed excess of Title 24 requirements. 2 -7 Similar to Prior to issuance of Implementation of energy conservations techniques (i.e., installation of energy saving Public Works MMP No. 106 building permits devices, construction of electrical vehicle charging stations, use of sunlight filtering Department, window coatings or double -paned windows, utilization of light - colored roofing materials Engineering as opposed to dark - colored roofing materials, and placement of shady trees next to Division, Traffic habitable structures) shall be indicated on plans and verified through City P1anCheck. and Transportation Division, Planning Department, Building Division _ IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES B -1 Prior to the issuance of To the extent feasible and practical, any vegetation removal will be conducted outside the Planning demolition permits or likely breeding season for raptors and migratory birds in the area (February 1 —July 15). Department, commencement of any Should the above activities be scheduled within the breeding season, prior to the issuance Building Division construction activity, of demolition permits or commencement of any construction activity, whichever occurs whichever occurs first first, the property owner /developer shall be responsible for the submittal of a survey report to the Planning Department from a qualified biologist indicating the results of a pre - construction survey. Said report shall indicate whether any migratory bird occupied nests were found during the pre - construction survey. If migratory bird occupied nests were found, the location of said nests shall be mapped on the construction plans and p rotected from disturbance until the nesting activity has ended. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES CR -1 Similar to Prior to approval of a The property owner /developer shall submit a letter to the Public Works/Engineering Public Works 8 -1 (MMP No. 106) grading plan as Department, Development Services Division, and the Planning Services Department, Department, required by the Public Planning Division, identifying the certified archaeologist that has been hired to ensure that Development Works Department the following actions are implemented: Services Division, Planning a) The archaeologist must be present at the pregrading conference in order to establish Department, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, Planning Division identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. Monitoring will be conducted during construction activities if those activities are in native, undisturbed sediments. Monitoring will not exceed and may be less than 20 hours per week. The Monitoring Archaeologist will determine when monitoring is necessary by communicating with the construction supervisor regarding scheduling and location of earth- moving activities within the project area. If artifacts are uncovered and determined to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner /developer for exploration and/or salvage. b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be curated at an appropriate educational or research institution. P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 4 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 5 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Completed c) Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. d) A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted to the City Engineer. Upon completion of the grading, the archaeologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted. CR -2 Similar to Prior to approval of a The property owner /developer shall submit a letter to the Public Works/Engineering Public Works 8 -2 (MMP No. 106) grading plan as Department, Development Services Division, and the Planning Services Department, Department, required by the Public Planning Division, identifying a certified paleontologist that has been hired to ensure that Development Works Department and the following actions are implemented: Services Division, ongoing during Planning construction a) The paleontologist must be present at the pregrading conference in order to establish Department, procedures to temporarily halt or redirect work to permit the sampling, identification, Planning Division and evaluation of fossils; if potentially significant, the paleontological observer shall determine the appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner /developer for exploration and/or salvage. b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c) Any paleontological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered during grading operations when the paleontological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area. d) A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted. Upon the completion of the grading, the paleontologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted. CR -3 Ongoing during The City of Anaheim Planning Department, Building Division, shall be provided with Public Works grading and documentation that If human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Department, construction Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner Development has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Services Division, Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the Planning remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner is required to notify the Native Department, American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which would determine and notify a Most Planning Division Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the owner of the land or his/her authorized representative, the descendant may inspect the site of the discovery. The descendant shall complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 5 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 6 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Completed VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS GS -1 Prior to the issuance of Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the property owner /developer shall submit Planning a building permit grading and architectural plans to the City Planning Department, Building Division, Department, which comply with the recommendations of the geotechnical report for the project dated Building Division August 30, 2004 (Appendix D) for review and approval. Architectural plans shall incorporate the recommendations in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project (Geomatrix Consultants, Inc., August 2004), and subsequent reports as may be required by the City, into the site grading and structural design of the buildings. GS -2 Prior to issuance of All earthwork shall be performed under the observation and testing of a qualified Planning grading and/or geotechnical engineer. The observations and testing shall be documented with field Department, demolition permits and memos on an ongoing basis during grading operations documenting identification and Building Division ongoing during grading treatment of any unsuitable soils, excavations, importation or removal of soils, and operations compaction of soils to recommended levels. The documentation will be submitted to and accepted by the City Planning Department, Building Division prior to the issuance of building permits. Observations will be conducted as specified in the in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project (Geomatrix Consultants, Inc., August 2004), and in subsequent reports as maybe required by the City, and shall include site clearance, excavation, recom action, fill and backfill, and construction of structural foundations. 4 -1 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to approval of a The property owner /developer shall submit to the Public Works Department, Public Works grading plan if within Development Services Division, a site specific report in compliance with DMG Special Department, Seismic Hazard Zone Publication 117 "Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in Development California." The report shall be prepared by an engineering geologist and geotechnical Services Division engineer. All grading shall be in conformance with Title 17 of the City of Anaheim Municipal Code. 4 -3 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to the issuance of The property owner /developer shall submit a report prepared by a geotechnical engineer Planning each foundation permit that investigated the subject foundation excavations. The report shall be submitted to the Department, City of Anaheim Planning Department, Building Division, for review and approval. Building Division 4 -6 (AIMP No. 106) Ongoing during grading The property owner /developer shall implement standard practices from City Ordinance Public Works operations (Title 17) and policies. Department, Field Engineering Division VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HM -1 Prior to the issuance of Prior to issuance of any demolition permits, the project applicant shall either provide South Coast Air any demolition permits evidence to the City Engineer that there are no lead -based paints or ACMs present on site, Quality and ongoing during or predemolition surveys for asbestos - containing materials and lead -based paint Management demolition activities (including sampling and analysis of all suspected building materials) shall be performed. District, Planning All inspections, surveys, and analyses shall be performed by appropriately licensed and Department, qualified individuals in accordance with applicable regulations (e.g., ASTM E 1527 -00, Building Division, and 40 CFR, Subchapter R, Toxic Substances Control Act TSCA , Part 716. All Public Works P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 6 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 7 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Completed identified asbestos - containing materials and lead -based paint shall be removed, handled, Department, and properly disposed of by appropriately licensed contractors according to all applicable Development regulations during demolition of structures (40 CFR, Subchapter R, TSCA, Parts 745, Services 761, 763). Air monitoring shall be completed by appropriately licensed and qualified Department individuals in accordance with applicable regulations both to ensure adherence to applicable regulations and to provide safety to workers and the adjacent community (e.g., SCAQMD). The project applicant shall provide documentation (including all required waste manifests, sampling, and air monitoring analytical results etc.) to the City Engineer, that abatement of any asbestos - containing materials and lead -based paint has been completed in full compliance with all applicable regulations and approved by the appropriate regulatory agency(ies) (40 CFR, Subchapter R, TSCA, Parts 716, 745, 761, 763, 795 ). FIM -2 Prior to issuance of The Planning Department, Building Division, shall ensure that, prior to issuance of Planning demolition permits demolition permits, or any disturbances to the existing light fixtures, a PCB light ballasts Department, survey shall be performed by an appropriately licensed and qualified individual under Building Division contract to the developer to identify whether PCB - containing light ballasts were installed for fluorescent light fixtures. Any identified PCB ballasts shall be properly disposed of by incineration or recycled within authorized facilities. 11M -3 Similar to 7 -1 Ongoing during In the event that hazardous waste is discovered during site preparation or construction, the Orange County (MMP No. 106) demolition, grading and property owner /developer shall ensure that the identified hazardous waste and/or Health Care construction hazardous material is handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State of Agency, Fire California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Department Chapter 6.5) and according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. HM -4 Similar to 7 -2 Ongoing during project Ongoing during project construction and operation, the property owner /developer shall Fire Department (MMP No. 106) operation handle and dispose of all hazardous materials and wastes during the operation and maintenance of facilities in accordance with the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5) and the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. 7 -3 Similar to Prior to the issuance of The property owner /developer shall send a Notification Letter to businesses in proximity Planning MMP No. 106 the first residential to the project to inform them of the presence of the proposed sensitive use (i.e., residential Department, building permit land uses). The letter shall request that the residential project property owners /residents be Building Division notified of any accident at the nearby businesses that may involve the release of hazardous substances. The Good Neighbor Program shall also require that the project property owner /developer prepare a Safety Plan, which shall be implemented ongoing during project operation and includes: staff training, emergency tools, and first -aid provisions; supervision of children or other individuals in an emergency situation; and a shelter -in- lace program for when evacuation is not appropriate or practicable. 7 -4 Similar to Prior to final building The owner /developer shall prepare a Safety Plan, which shall be implemented ongoing Planning MMP No. 106 and zoning inspections dun project operation that includes staff t aim , emergency tools, and first -aid Department, P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 7 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 8 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure _ Monitor Completed provisions, supervision of children or other individuals in an emergency situation, and a Building Division shelter -in- lace program for when evacuation is not appropriate or practicable. 7 -5 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to final building For any residential project within 1,000 feet o a use that has the potential to release and zoning inspections substantial amounts of airborne hazardous materials (determined to be "Category 1, 2, or 3" hazardous materials), the project property owner /developer shall submit a shelter -in -place program to the Planning Director for review and approval. The shelter -in -place program shall require the property owner /developer to purchase a subscription to a service that provides "automated emergency notification" to individual residents (subject to meeting minimum standards set by the City) of the project The shelter -in -place program shall include the following: • The property owner /developer shall be required to purchase a minimum 10 -year subscription to such a service that would include periodic testing (at least annually). • The CC &Rs for each individual project shall require that each property owner and/or project Homeowners Association (HOA): • Maintain a subscription following expiration of the initial purchased subscription. • Maintain in a timely manner the database of resident phone numbers in conjunction with the service. • Provide appropriate agencies (police, fire, other emergency response as identified by the City) with information on how to activate the notification via the service provider. The CC &Rs for each individual project shall require that each resident provide the property owner/HOA with a current phone number for the residence and/or individual residents; this would include timely notification following the sale of a unit and would require notification if the unit were rented or leased or subject to any other change in occupancy. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY WQ -1 Prior to issuance of The developer shall provide evidence to the Planning Department, Building Division, that Planning grading permits the following has been complied with Prior to issuance of grading permits and ongoing Department, during construction, determine if dewatering of ground water will be necessary during Building Division construction of the project, any dewatering will require compliance with the State General Permit for discharges to land with a low threat to water quality or an individual permit from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, consistent with NPDES requirements. Once it receives and reviews the Notice of Intent, the Regional Water Quality Control Board will decide which permit is applicable and whether sampling and analysis are required. P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 8 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 9 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Completed 5 -1 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to the issuance of The property owner /developer shall submit a detailed drainage plan to the City of Public Works building permits Anaheim Public Works Department and the Orange County Flood Control District for Department, review and approval. This drainage plan shall be in conformance with the City's Master Development Plan of Drainage, Drainage District Map 27. The drainage plan shall demonstrate that Services Division runoff will effectively be conveyed to the surrounding offsite drainage system and runoff rates would not affect receiving drainage facilities. More specifically, the drainage plan Orange County shall examine the existing and the proposed conditions within the project limits and detail Flood Control drainage deficiencies based upon the water elevations of the Santa Ana River in District accordance with Drainage District Map 27. All drainage components shall be designed to the minimum requirements of the City and County. 5 -2 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to the issuance of The property owner /developer shall submit plans documenting that the design of all Planning a grading permit aboveground structures (with the exception of parking structures) shall be at least 3 feet Department, higher that the 100 -year flood zone, where applicable, unless otherwise required by the Building division City Engineer. All structures below this level shall be flood - proofed to prevent damage to property or harm to people. 5 -3 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to the issuance of The property owner /developer shall demonstrate project conformance with the City's Planning a building permit Flood Hazard Reduction Ordinance No. 4136 (Chapter 17.28 of the Anaheim Municipal Department, Code) to the City of Anaheim Public Works Department, which pertains to properties that Building Division lie within the "A99" Special Flood Hazard Zone (Anaheim Floodplain Overlay Zone.) IX. LAND USE PLANNING No Mitigation Required N/A X. MINERAL RESOURCES No Mitigation Required N/A XI. NOISE N -1 Prior to the issuance of Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner /developer shall be Planning the first building responsible for the submittal of plans stating that the following measures will be Department, permit; to be implemented to reduce long -term traffic noise impacts resulting from the proposed Building Division implemented prior to project: final building and zoning inspections Building facade upgrades such as double -paned windows with a minimum STC -28 would be required for all residential units fronting Katella Avenue. Figure 10 shows the locations of the units requiring building facade upgrades. • All residential units within 672 feet of the roadway centerline of Katella Avenue that are directly exposed to traffic noise require a mechanical ventilation system, such as an air - conditioning system, to achieve the interior noise standard. N -2 Prior to issuance of the Prior to the issuance of the first demolition or grading permit, the property Planning first demolition or owner/developer shall be responsible for the submittal of plans stating that the following Department, P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 9 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 10 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Completed grading permits measures will be implemented to reduce short-term construction - related noise impacts Building Division resulting from the proposed project, • During all project site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers' standards. • The construction contractor shall limit all construction - related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. 3 -1 Similar to Ongoing during Ongoing and during grading, demolition, and construction, the property owner /developer Planning MMP No. 106 demolition, grading, shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to Department, and construction limit construction - related noise: Building and Code Enforcement a) Noise generated by construction shall be limited by the property owner /developer to Divisions 60 dBA along the property boundaries, before 7:00 a.m. and after 7:00 p.m., as governed by Chapter 6.7, Sound Pressure Levels, of the Anaheim Municipal Code. b) Limit the hours of operation of equipment that produces noise levels noticeably above general construction noise levels to the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. c) All internal combustion engines on all of the construction equipment shall be p roperly outfitted with well maintained mufflers stems. 3 -5 Prior to issuance of a New development project property owner /developers shall use the most current available Planning building permit Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource for evaluating heliport Department, and airport operations as well as land use compatibility and land use intensity in the Building Division roximit of Los Alamitos Joint Training Base and Fullerton Municipal Airport. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING No Mitigation Required N/A XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES 6.1 -1 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to approval of a The property owner /developer shall submit an emergency fire access plan to the Fire Fire Department Grading Plan Department for review and approval to ensure that service to the site is in accordance with Fire Department requirements. 6.1 -4 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to the issuance of The property owner /developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan, which Fire Department each building permit shall include detailed design plans for accessibility of emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant location, and any other construction features required by the Fire Marshal. The property owner /developer shall be responsible for securing facilities acceptable to the Fire Department and hydrants shall be operational with require fire flow. 6.1 -6 (AIMP No. 106) Prior to issuance of Projects shall be reviewed by the City of Anaheim on an individual basis and will be Planning building permits required to comply with requirements in effect at the time building permits are issued i.e., Department, P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 10 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 11 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Completed impact fees, etc.) or if an initial study is prepared and the City determines the impacts to Building Division, be significant, then the project will be required to comply with appropriate mitigation Fire Department measures (i.e., fire station sites, etc.). 6.2 -2 Similar to Prior to the issuance of The property owner /developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and Police Department MMP No. 106 building permits for approval indicating the provision of closed circuit monitoring and recording or other each parking structure substitute security measures as maybe approved by the Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections. 6.2 -4 Similar to Ongoing during project If the Anaheim Police Department or Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) Police Department, MMP No. 106 operation personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property Public Works owner /developer shall reimburse the City, on a fairshare basis, if applicable, for Department, Traffic reasonable costs associated with such services. Management Center 6.5 -1 (MMP No. 106) Prior to issuance of The property owner /developer shall provide proof to the Building Division of Planning Planning each building permit Department that school impact fees have been paid consistent with State statutes. Department, Building Division 6.8 -2 (MMP No. 106) Prior to issuance of a A detailed drainage analysis will be required to determine if any project design features Public Works building permit (construction of landscape berms or other barriers) will retard or take storm runoff outside Department, the limits of the public rights -of -way. Measures will be required to avoid any flooding Development effects on downstream properties. Applicable storm drain improvements will be required Services Division p er the SCAMPI). 6.8 -3 (MMP No. 106) Prior to issuance of a The property owner /developer shall apply for a National Pollution Discharge Elimination Public Works grading permit System (NPDES) construction permit. This permit would require the preparation of a Department, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan to mitigate the erosion that may occur from storm Development water runoff during construction periods. Services Division 6.8 -4 (MMP No. 106) Prior to final occupancy The property owner /developer shall be required to construct a reverse sewer line in Katella Public Works Avenue to the downstream manhole constructed by the Stadium Lofts, as required by the Department, City Engineer, to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the Engineering applicable sewer deficiency study, prior to acceptance for maintenance of public Division, Planning improvements by the City, or final building and zoning inspection for the Department, building /structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner /developer Building Division shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program if adopted for the project area, as determined by the City Engineer, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. XIV. RECREATION No Mitigation Required N/A XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC 1 -5 Similar to Prior to issuance of Appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees Public Works MMP No. 106 each building permit shall be paid by the property owner /developer to the City of Anaheim in amounts Department, Traffic determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building and Transportation permit with credit given for City - authorized improvements provided by the property Division, Planning owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts Department, P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 11 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 12 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure Monitor Com leted which have been established. Building Division XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS U -1 Prior to the approval of Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, Public Works a final subdivision map whichever occurs first, the developer shall obtain a will -serve letter from the Orange Department, or issuance of a grading County Sanitation District for each project. Additionally, the property owner /developer Engineering or building permit, shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program for the project area as Division, Planning whichever occurs first determined by the City Engineer, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, Department, construction, or a combination thereof. Building Division 6.3 -3 Similar to Prior to issuance of a The property owner /developer shall submit a Demolition and Import/Export Plans, if Planning MMP No. 106 demolition permit determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Department, (same as 2 -3) Division and /or Street and Sanitation Division. The plans shall include identification of Building Division offsite locations for material export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The property owner /developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private fines or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if all cannot be reused on the project site. 6.6 -1 Similar to As required by the Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, Public Utilities, MMP No. 106 Public Works and the property owner /developer shall comply with Rule 15D of the Water Utilities Rates, Water Engineering, Utilities Departments Rules, and Regulations. Rule 15D shall be amended to include construction of a new well Public Works with a minimum 1,500 GPM capacity with The Platinum Triangle. Department, Development Contract Administration 6.6 -3 Similar to Prior to the issuance of Submitted landscape plans shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities MMP No. 106 a building permit adopted the Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines. This ordinance is in compliance Department, with the State of California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act (AB 325). Resource Efficiency Division Among the measures to be implemented with the project are the following: • Use of water - conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible; • Use of vacuums and other equipment to reduce the use of water for wash down of exterior areas, • Low -flow fittings, fixtures and equipment including low flush toilets and urinals, • Use of self - closing valves for drinking fountains, • Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors, • Infrared sensors on sinks, toilets and urinals, P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 12 P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 13 Responsible Measure Agency To Date No. Timing Measure_ Monitor Completed • Low -flow shower heads in hotels; • Infrared sensors on drinking fountains, • Use of irrigation systems primarily at night, when evaporation rates are lowest, • Water- efficient ice machines, dishwashers, clothes washers, and other water using appliances; • Cooling tower recirculating system; • Use of low flow sprinkler heads in irrigation system, • Use of waterway re- circulation systems, • Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation; and • Use of reclaimed water for irrigation and washdown when it becomes available. In conjunction with submittal of landscape and building plans, the applicant shall identify which of these measures have been incorporated into the plans. 6.6 -4 Similar to Prior to issuance of the The applicant will provide engineering studies, including network analysis, to size the Public Utilities MMP No. 106 first building permit water mains for ultimate development within the project. This includes detailed water Department, Water usage analysis and building plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering reviews and Engineering approval in determining project water requirements and appropriate water assessment fees. 6.8 -1 (MMP No. 106) Prior to approval of a Projects contained within the 100 -year floodplain shall submit a detailed flood study to Public Works grading plan determine elevation of proposed buildings above the 100 -year floodplain. Department, Development Services Division 6.9 -2 Similar to Prior to issuance of In order to conserve energy, the property owner /developer shall implement energy - saving Public Utilities MMP No. 106 each building permit practices in compliance with Title 10, which may include the following: Department, • High- efficiency air - conditioning with EMS (computer) control. Resource Efficiency • Variable Air Volume (VAV) air distribution. Division; • Outside air (100 percent) economizer cycle. Planning • Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads. Department, • Isolated HVAC zone control by floors /separable activity areas. Building Division • Specification of premium- efficiency electric motors (i.e., compressor motors, air - handling units, and fan -coil units). • Use of occupancy sensors in appropriate spaces. • Use of compact fluorescent lamps in place of incandescent lamps. • Use of T -8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified. • Use of metal - halide or high-pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 13 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible Agency To Monitor Date Completed outdoor lighting and parking lots. • Consideration of thermal energy storage air conditioning for hotel buildings, meeting facilities, theaters, or other intermittent -use spaces or facilities that may require air - conditioning during summer, day -peak periods. • Consideration for participation in Resource Efficiency's Programs such as: • New Construction Design Review, in which the City cost - shares engineering fees for design of energy efficient buildings and systems. • Energy Sale for New Construction - Cash incentives ($150 to $400 per kW reduction in load) for efficiency that exceeds Title 24 requirements. Thermal Energy Storage Feasibility Study - Cost sharing of up to $5,000 for the feasibility study of TES applied to new facilities. 6.9 -3 Similar to Prior to issuance of For any buildings requiring a change in electrical service, the property owner /developer Public Utilities MMP No. 106 each building permit shall install an underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution Department, System. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Electrical Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. Electrical Engineering Service Fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications for Underground Systems. P:AWMH433VDratt MND- MAPs/Appendix K MAP NO 136.doc «06/22/05» Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 136 Platinum Triangle Condominiums Page 14 ITEM NO. 5 Attachment "A" Project Description — 1331 East Katella The condominium project located at 1331 E. Katella is in the Katella District of the Mixed -Use Overlay Zone within the City of Anaheim's Platinum Triangle. The 4.88 acre site is bounded by Katella Ave. on the South, Mr. Stox restaurant on the West, Industrial properties on the North, and the proposed Stadium Park Project (BRE) on the East which will be separated from this project by a new proposed connector street being constructed on equal parts of the two properties. Vehicular access will be via a private drive which will be accessed from the new proposed connector street along the easterly property line. There will be one curb cut provided on the connector street to serve as loading and delivery area. There will be two additional curb cuts along the private drive as well. The project will consist of three separate buildings, each with their own independent parking structure, comprising a total of 336 dwelling units ranging in size from 780square feet to 1962 square feet and 1248 square feet of retail space. There will be a total of 671 parking stalls located entirely within the sub- terannean garages for both residents (secured) and guests (unsecured). A more detailed summary of the units and parking provided can be found on the following page. Site 1 is located along Katella Ave. This site will contain the retail space, at the corner of Katella and the new connector street, as well as the Common Homeowners Recreation Room and exercise facility. Site 1 has a main pedestrian lobby with raised ceilings located on Katella Ave. Sites 2 and 3 are located behind Site 1 along the new proposed connector street respectively. Each of these sites have entrance lobbies located at the comer of the Connector Street and the private drive and are accessed by vehicles via the private drive. Recreational amenities will be shared by all three sites. These amenities include a two story recreation/club room which may include game tables, lounging area, indoor kitchen, and an exercise facility on the second floor with an open rail to below. Outdoor amenities are located directly adjacent to the club room between sites 1 and 2 and may include a pool, spa, outdoor fire place and lounging area, dining court with outdoor barbeques, cabanas, lawn areas with outdoor benches and raised shade structures, and multiple water features. There are also passive recreation areas located within the interior courtyards of the separate buildings which may include raised planters with seat walls, benches, and water features. There will also be roof decks on buildings 2 and 3 which may include cabanas, sun decks, turf areas, built in fire -pits, built in barbeques, and a putting green. Site Summary 1331 East Katella Ave. Total Dwelling Units 336 Gross Site Acre 4.88 Density 69 Site 1 Plan Bedrooms SF # Units % of Total Al 2 1338 3 3.26% A1L 3 1599 10 10.87% A2 2 1461 6 6.52% B1 2 1064 8 8.70% B11- 3 1273 8 8.70% B3 2 1343 4 4.35% B& 3 1565 4 4.35% B4 2 1164 4 4.35% B41- 3 1349 4 4.35% C1 1 1012 8 8.70% CIL 2 1175 8 8.70% D1 1 744 1 1.09% D2 2 1029 1 1.09% D21- 3 1200 2 2.17% E1 1 873 4 4.35% E1L 2 1066 4 4.35% F1 1 743 4 4.35% F1L 2 912 4 4.35% GL 3 1962 2 2.17% J1 1 1165 1 1.09% K1L 2 1210 2 2.17% total 199 197 92 100.00% Provided Required 1 Bed 27 27 2 Bed 88 88 3 Bed + 75 75 Retail 7 7 Extra 2 0 total 199 197 92 100.00% Site Summary 1331 East Katella Ave. Total Dwelling Units 336 Gross Site Acre 4.88 Density 69 Site 2 Plan Bedrooms SF # Units % of Total Provided Required Al 2 1167 11 9.32% 1 Bed 65 65 Al L 3 1353 4 3.39% 2 Bed 118 118 B1 2 1060 10 8.47% 3 Bed + 40 40 B11- 3 1243 4 3.39% Extra 7 0 B2 2 1149 4 3.39% Total 230 223 B3 2 1042 8 6.78% B31- 3 1222 4 3.39% C1 1 780 18 15.25% C11- 2 956 6 5.08% D1 1 913 19 16.10% D1L 2 1049 6 5.08% F1 2 1051 12 10.17% F1L 3 1212 4 3.39% H1 1 632 2 1.69% H2 1 790 4 3.39% H21- 2 940 2 1.69% 118 100.00% Site Summary 1331 East Katella Ave. Total Dwelling Units 336 Gross Site Acre 4.88 Density 69 Site 3 Plan Bedrooms SF # Units 1 % of Total Al 2 1209 5 3.97% A1L 3 1404 2 1.59% B1 2 1082 29 23.02% B11- 3 1259 10 7.94% B2 2 1192 3 2.38% B21L 3 1393 1 0.79% C1 1 859 36 28.57% C1L 2 1062 12 9.52% D1 1 913 6 4.76% D1L 2 1049 2 1.59% E1 1 1116 3 2.38% E1L 2 1343 1 0.79% F1 2 1663 3 2.38% F11- 3 1919 1 0.79% G1 2 1321 3 2.38% G11- 3 1550 1 0.79% H1 1 683 2 1.59% H2 1 841 4 3.17% H2L 2 1007 2 1.59% 126 100.00% Provided Required 1 Bed 77 77 2 Bed 120 120 3 Bed + 38 38 Extra 2 0 Total 237 235 126 100.00% ITEM NO. 1 -A T ADJ 0124 CHURCH 0 - 61. - 1 4 oFF` S�_DG ce PPPZj'�U O S ER 61 0 �jE �oo GREEN p -v qtt S E MED PAOTEI RpL 6 00404221 O pU GUP 1 6 69 G 5 ,b BB9 w O EEN R GU C --5 W AVENUE DA GO GUEEN n� ADO RCL 63b4-2' G .G CUP 166 ST RE .iN aN aE-rurveu GUP 626 GU? jj3 OFFICES ID1 pG 1 g 500 - 04221 , OFFICE V A , 952 OFFICE BLDG NO ERGREEN VAR 8 4 "'SING HGME ".REMSE R GUP 75 3 63 Mg g 7N RCLINIC CUP t6i RCL 5] -51 IC N NOME 20018 -� 1 116 PARKIG VAR 10U WEINEV�R� J/ S1REE� ER w LU n RCL 9 _J P 3966 O V HR 9 AR 3 AX3 w C-G VAR 19455 C --5 W AVENUE O RC152 aE-rurveu TUNE] -53- UP 20 10 B JP 2004 4901 ' ".REMSE R 159 R 159CUP (VAR 1948 - 17 1 116 PARKIG ARPET. EHwsE LIN COLN AVE T ADJ 0 184 Conditional Use Permit No- 2005 -04997 Requested By: MYRON TRUST 0 61Z'30 u_ a CUP2793 w LU n _J O M Q w U` UNDERHILL W AVENUE O 0 I I� Lu H a N 1 CENTER STREET GG >_ 0 CL 5354 -12 RS -2 P 2002 -04502 F a CBP iso6 1 DUEP IN IN THE BO% —Y a 2002M502 RCL 53-54-12 d CUP 16W CUP2803 VAR 1046 Z _ RS -2 TAM PICO D CL 5354 -12 MOTEL U 1 DU AI P ZZAH C -G WARD TERRACE RCL 65 -66-66 RCL99963 VAR 1948 -6 lR eci nitl° RS -2 ADJ 0167 Aod 0161 1 DU EACH WALGREENS PHARMACY a °�� `o Z w a O m CL6869 -109 �jZ CL 6819 -1 (2) U� CUP 1841 TI Or 9 PTnMRTPV 1 DU EACH I Subject Property Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: V=200' Q -S- No- 112 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER AND A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE - THROUGH AND OUTDOOR SEATING WITH WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM LANDSCAPED SETBACKADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL ZONE BOUNDARY (B) MINIMUM SETBACK FOR TRASH ENCLOSURE ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL ZONE BOUNDARY (C) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES 100 and 130 North State College Boulevard 1911 BLANCHARD AVE r ' m 1 d•� _40V i Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04997 BLANCHARD AVE in Iii o UNDERHILLAVENUE r a 1 rr ■� i ,ENTER STREET �I I Q F.�r�y� •wJa4i +�' "�� zR Y t WARD TERRACE a Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Subject Property Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: MYRON TRUST Q.S. No. 112 REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER AND A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE - THROUGH AND OUTDOOR SEATING WITH WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM LANDSCAPED SETBACKADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL ZONE BOUNDARY (B) MINIMUM SETBACK FOR TRASH ENCLOSURE ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL ZONE BOUNDARY (C) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES 100 and 130 North State College Boulevard 1911 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 6 6a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 6b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) 6c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04997 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 0.8 -acre property is located at the northeast corner of Center Street and State College Boulevard, having frontages of 135 feet on the north side of Center Street and 273 feet on the east side of State College Boulevard (100 and 130 North State College Boulevard). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section No. 18.08.030.040.0402 to construct a commercial retail center and a fast food restaurant with a drive - through and outdoor seating with waivers of the following: (a) SECTION NO. 18.08.060.010.0101 Minimum landscaped setback adiacent to a residential zone boundary (10 feet required, 5 feet proposed) (b) SECTION NO. 18.08.060.020 (c) SECTION NOS. 18.08.070 AND 18.42.040.010 BACKGROUND: Minimum setback for a trash enclosure adjacent to a residential zone boundary (10 feet required; 5 feet proposed) Minimum number of parking spaces (55 required; 47 proposed and recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager) (3) This property is currently developed with a fast -food and a freestanding restaurant (to be demolished) and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Land Use Element Map of the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for General Commercial land uses. Surrounding properties to the north and south are also designated for General Commercial land uses, to the east for Low Density Residential land uses and to the west (across State College Boulevard) for Mixed Use land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property: (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 1031 (to establish a walk -up restaurant) was approved by the City Council June 3, 1968. The previously- approved walk -up restaurant is no longer operating, and staff recommends that this permit be terminated. SR- CUP2005- 04997akv Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 6 (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 1228 (to permit on -sale beer and wine in a restaurant) was approved by the Planning Commission on March 22, 1971. The previously- approved restaurant is no longer operating, and staff recommends that this permit be terminated. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (5) The applicant requests a conditional use permit to construct a new fast food (Taco Bell), drive - through restaurant and a 3 -unit commercial retail center. The existing fast food restaurant (also a Taco Bell) and freestanding restaurant (Carrow's) would be demolished. Existing Taco Bell (to be demolished) Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 6 (6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the following proposed setbacks: (7) The applicant is proposing to relocate a segment of the existing alley currently located between the two existing restaurant properties and running east -west to along the southeast property line. Access to the site would be provided by three driveways to be accessed from Underhill Avenue, State College Boulevard and the relocated alley. The site plan also indicates 47 total parking spaces available for this commercial retail center and fast food restaurant. Code requires 55 spaces based on the following chart- Code Code Direction Required /Proposed Required /Proposed Building Setback Landscape Setback North (adjacent 10 feet/10 feet 10 feet/10 feet Underhill Avenue) South (adjacent to 10 feet/10 feet 10 feet /10 feet Center Street) Retail East (adjacent to 10 feet/ 77 feet 10 feet/5 feet residential zone) West (adjacent to State 15 feet/15 feet 15 feet/15 feet College Blvd.) 37.4 Restaurant (7) The applicant is proposing to relocate a segment of the existing alley currently located between the two existing restaurant properties and running east -west to along the southeast property line. Access to the site would be provided by three driveways to be accessed from Underhill Avenue, State College Boulevard and the relocated alley. The site plan also indicates 47 total parking spaces available for this commercial retail center and fast food restaurant. Code requires 55 spaces based on the following chart- Page 3 CODE-REQUIRED PARKING USE SQUARE FEET PARKING RATIO REQUIRED (per 1,000 sq. ft.) Retail 3,300 5.5 spaces 18.1 Fast Food 2,340 16 spaces 37.4 Restaurant TOTAL 55 Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 6 View of existing alley looking east from State College Boulevard (8) The floor plan for the fast food restaurant (Exhibit No. 2) indicates that the fast food restaurant would have an indoor dining room with 52 seats, a service area with counter, kitchen, office, storage, 2 restrooms, employee room, walk -in freezer and pantry. (9) The elevation plans (Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4) indicate a contemporary building design incorporating features such as a metal awnings and trellises, varied building walls, stone veneer, exterior cement plaster, and enhanced lighting. The colors and material proposed for the retail center building and the fast food restaurant would be complementary. (10) The sign program (Exhibit Nos. 5 through 13) indicates the following signs, all of which are in conformance with Code Size I t PF Number Type (Height x Width �g North, South, East A 4 View of existing alley looking east from State College Boulevard (8) The floor plan for the fast food restaurant (Exhibit No. 2) indicates that the fast food restaurant would have an indoor dining room with 52 seats, a service area with counter, kitchen, office, storage, 2 restrooms, employee room, walk -in freezer and pantry. (9) The elevation plans (Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4) indicate a contemporary building design incorporating features such as a metal awnings and trellises, varied building walls, stone veneer, exterior cement plaster, and enhanced lighting. The colors and material proposed for the retail center building and the fast food restaurant would be complementary. (10) The sign program (Exhibit Nos. 5 through 13) indicates the following signs, all of which are in conformance with Code Page 4 Size Sin Number Type (Height x Width Location North, South, East A 4 Wall Taco Bell logo) 4'8" x 5' and West Elevations North, South and B 3 Wall Taco Bell letters 9" x 9'7" East Elevations (1) Driveway (State C 2 Drive - through 4'x 1'8" College Blvd.) (2) directional Entrance of drive- through lane (1) Driveway (alley) D 2 Directional 4'x 1'8" 2 Drive-though exit Landscape planter E 1 Monument 8' x 9' adjacent to State Colle a Blvd. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 6 (11) No sign plans were submitted for the proposed retail building since specific tenants have not been identified at this time. As a recommended condition of approval, the applicant will be required to submit a final detailed sign program for staff review once the specific sign design and the tenants have been determined for the retail center. (12) The landscape plans (Exhibit Nos. 14 and 15) indicate a 15 -foot wide landscape planter along State College Boulevard and a 10 -foot wide landscape planter along Center street and Underhill Avenue. The plan further reflects a 5 -foot wide landscaped setback area along the east property line adjacent to the alley and the existing residential properties. This landscaped area consists of five (5) Mexican Fan Palms (12 -foot minimum brown trunk height) and four (4) Chinese Flame trees (24 -inch box in size). The planter would also consist of ground cover (daylilies and Ligustrum) and clinging vines (Boston Ivy) within this area and along the new 8 -foot high block wall. The plan also indicates landscaped fingers within the parking area planted with trees, shrubs and groundcover. Code requires one tree for every 20 lineal feet of street frontage (14 trees on State College Boulevard, 5 trees on Underhill Avenue and 7 trees on Center Street) and fast growing shrubbery of clinging vines planted on 3 -foot centers for the trash enclosure. Code further requires that at least one (1) tree per 3,000 square feet of parking area and /or vehicular accessways be distributed throughout the parking area with an average of forty -eight (48) square feet of planter area provided per required tree, with a minimum planter dimension of five (5) feet. With the exception of the requested waiver, the landscape plans comply with Code. (13) An outdoor seating area is shown on the site plan between the proposed fast food building and Center Street. This outdoor area is designed with enhanced paving, potted plants, tables and chairs and is separated from the street by the drive - through lane and landscaped setback. (14) The hours of operation, employee information and tenant mix are unknown for the commercial retail spaces at this time. The applicant has indicated in the letter of operation that the drive - through, fast food restaurant would be a Taco Bell. The restaurant would be open daily from 9 a.m. to 2 a.m., with 7 to 9 employees per shift, for three (3) separate shifts. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (15) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- EVALUATION (16) Commercial retail centers (two or more tenant spaces) and fast -food restaurants with a drive - through are permitted in the C -G zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (17) Waiver (a) pertains to the minimum landscaped setback adjacent to a residential zone. Code requires a 10 foot wide landscaped buffer between any commercial property and residential zone boundary and plans indicated a setback of 5 feet. Currently, the existing fast food and sit -down restaurant parking lots are located directly adjacent to the residential Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 6 zone boundary. The applicant is also proposing to construct an 8 foot high block wall on the property line and plant enhanced landscaping next to the residential zone boundary consisting of four (4) Chinese Flame trees (24 -inch box in size), ground cover (daylilies and Ligustrum) and clinging vines (Boston Ivy) within this area. Staff feels that the design of the proposed project is an improvement to the existing condition and can be justified by the narrow shape of the property, constraints associated with having three street frontages and the fact that there are similar circumstances of reduced setbacks along State College Boulevard due to street widening. Therefore, staff recommends approval of waiver (a). Photograph of east property line (abutting residential zone boundary) (18) Waiver (b) pertains to the minimum setback for the trash enclosure. Code requires a minimum setback of 10 feet adjacent to a residential zone boundary and 5 feet is proposed. Staff is in support of granting waiver (b) for the same reasons as waiver (a) namely, the unique constraints of the property and that similar nonconforming setbacks exist in the vicinity. The design and location of the trash enclosure has been reviewed and approved by the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department. The proposed location would maintain all of the loading and unloading on -site, and would provide the least amount of trash truck trips within the alley. Further, the alley would also provide a buffer from the existing homes. (19) Waiver (c) pertains to the minimum number of parking spaces. Code requires a minimum of 55 spaces for the fast -food restaurant and retail center and plans indicate 47 proposed spaces. The applicant has submitted a parking analysis prepared by LSA Associates, Inc., dated April 25, 2005, to substantiate the requested parking waiver. The City Traffic and Transportation Manager has reviewed the parking analysis and has determined that the proposed parking areas referenced in the study are sufficient for the proposed uses on the property. Based upon the City Traffic and Transportation Manager's analysis and recommendation, staff recommends approval of this waiver based on the following findings: "(a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 6 The observed parking demand of a similar Taco Bell restaurant is 62 spaces per 1,000 square feet. Application of this rate would result in a peak demand of 17 parking spaces at the proposed site. The project would provide a total of 47 parking spaces. As a result, the project will provide adequate off - street parking to accommodate all vehicles attributable to the project under normal operation. (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. As demonstrated in this parking study, the project will provide adequate parking on- site to accommodate parking demand under normal operation. Residual parking of up to 52 percent is forecast to account for other adjacent parking demand or increase in the attraction of the proposed project. On- street parking is not anticipated for this use. (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The project will provide adequate parking on the project site to accommodate its parking generation. No demand for parking on adjacent private property is forecasted. (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use. Design and layout of parking considers good traffic flow and minimizes the need to circulate to find parking. The retail use and the Taco Bell restaurant will provide adequate parking on site. Therefore, traffic congestion is not anticipated with implementation of the project. (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The project is proposing to provide vehicular access to the site along State College Boulevard and Center Street. The locations of the proposed driveways will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties. Furthermore, it has been established previously that a sufficient supply of off - street parking will be provided to meet the forecasted parking demand. Therefore, no stacking onto the public street nor blocking an adjacent driveway would be expected to occur." (20) Goal 6.1 of the Community Design Element of the General Plan reads as follows: "Focus activity centers at the intersections of selected major corridors to provide convenient and attractive concentration of retail and office uses." Several policies are indicated in order to implement this goal. In summary, the design policies include the following: • Locate buildings close to the street with shielded parking • Encourage pedestrian -scale features such as public art and awnings • Incorporate architectural interest through varied rooflines, colors, materials and lighting Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 6 • Link newly developed retail centers to residential and /or office uses through clear safe pedestrian and bicycle connections • Provide layered landscaping • Provide people gathering spaces such as outdoor eating areas, water features, courtyards, etc. • Screen utilities (21) Several of the design features indicated in the Design Element have been incorporated into the proposed project. Examples include an outdoor seating area, awnings, varied building facades, quality materials, layered landscaping along street frontages, screened utility equipment and parking located behind the buildings. (22) Staff is supportive of this request to construct a new fast food restaurant and commercial retail center. Careful consideration has been given to the design and functionality of the proposed retail center. The architect has worked closely with staff to provide a quality design that is consistent with the Community Design Element of the General Plan. Based upon the projects compliance with recommended conditions and the quality project design, staff recommends approval of the project- FINDINGS (23) Section 18.42.110 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings which are required to be made before a parking waiver is approved by the Planning Commission: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use. (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any variance pursuant to this section, the granting of the variance shall be deemed contingent upon operation of the proposed use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of the use as contained in the Parking Demand Study that formed the basis for approval of the variance. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of the assumptions as contained in the Parking Demand Study shall be deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon the variance, which shall subject the waiver to revocation or modification pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.60200 (City - Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits). Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 6 (24) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships result from strict enforcement of the Zoning Code, a modification may be granted for the purpose of assuring that no property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, shall be deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The sole purpose of any variance is to prevent discrimination and none shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other similar properties. Therefore, before any variance is granted by the Commission, it shall be shown: (a) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other identically zoned properties in the vicinity; and (b) That strict application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. (25) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (26) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission approve this request by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 9 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - "" A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04997 BE GRANTED (100 and 130 NORTH STATE COLLEGE BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL 1: LOT 85 AND THE WESTERLY 14.00 FEET OF LOT 84 OF TRACT NO. 1843, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 53, PAGES 45 AND 46 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF LAND TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, BY DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 30, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NA 2003001335345 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL 2: TRACT NO. 1635, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 49, PAGES 1 AND 2 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. I=411]g21l0 HI. 1MI V09 0i1 LTA I1.1N7_F9EiM71IIII9q1111S1 X61 ALSO EXCEPTION THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, IN DEED RECORDED MAY 22, 1962 IN BOOK 6117, PAGE 980, OFFICIAL RECORDS. PARCEL 3: THE EAST 62.50 FEET OF THE WEST 127.50 FEET OF LOT 98 OF TRACT NO. 1635, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 49, PAGES 1 AND 2 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 "Procedures ", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the petitioner requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section No. 18.08.030.040.0402 to construct a commercial retail center and a fast food restaurant with a drive - through and outdoor seating with waivers of the following: (a) SECTION NO. 18.08.060.010.0101 Minimum landscaped setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary (L feet required; 5 feet proposed) (b) SECTION NO. 18.08.060.020 Minimum setback for a trash enclosure adjacent to a residential zone boundary (10 feet required; 5 feet proposed) CR \PC2005- -1- PC2005- (c) SECTION NOS. 18.08.070 AND Minimum number of parking spaces 18.42.040.010 (55 required; 47 proposed and recommended by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager) 2. That the above - mentioned waiver (a) pertaining to the minimum landscaped setback adjacent to a residential zone boundary and waiver (b) pertaining to the minimum setback for a trash enclosure adjacent to a residential zone boundary are hereby granted based on the existing narrow shape of the property, constraints associated with having three street frontages and the fact that there are similar circumstances of reduced setbacks along State College Boulevard due to street widening and therefore, strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other commercial properties along State College Boulevard that have setbacks adjacent less that 10 feet adjacent to residential zone boundaries. Further, the location would maintain all of the loading and unloading on -site, and would provide the least amount of trash truck trips within the alley. 3. That the above - mentioned waiver (c) pertaining to the minimum number of parking spaces is hereby granted based on the parking analysis prepares by LSA Associates, Inc. and the Traffic and Transportation Manager's analysis and recommendation, this waiver is granted based on the following findings: "(a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off- street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. The observed parking demand of a similar Taco Bell restaurant is 62 spaces per 1,000 square feet. Application of this rate would result in a peak demand of 17 parking spaces at the proposed site. The project would provide a total of 47 parking spaces. As a result, the project will provide adequate off - street parking to accommodate all vehicles attributable to the project under normal operation. (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. As demonstrated in this parking study, the project will provide adequate parking on -site to accommodate parking demand under normal operation. Residual parking of up to 52 percent is forecast to account for other adjacent parking demand or increase in the attraction of the proposed project. On- street parking is not anticipated for this use. (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The project will provide adequate parking on the project site to accommodate its parking generation. No demand for parking on adjacent private property is forecasted. (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use. Design and layout of parking considers good traffic flow and minimizes the need to circulate to find parking. The retail use and the Taco Bell restaurant will provide adequate parking on site. Therefore, traffic congestion is not anticipated with implementation of the project. (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. -2- PC2005- The project is proposing to provide vehicular access to the site along State College Boulevard and Center Street. The locations of the proposed driveways will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress form adjacent properties. Furthermore, it has been established previously that a sufficient supply of off - street parking will be provided to meet the forecasted parking demand. Therefore, no stacking onto the public street nor blocking an adjacent driveway would be expected to occur." 4. That the proposed fast food restaurant and commercial retail building as conditioned herein would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located. 5. That the size and shape of the site is adequate to allow full development of the proposal in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health and safety. 6. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not, under the conditions imposed, impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the design of the fast food restaurant and commercial retail center provide adequate access from State College Boulevard, Underhill Avenue and the public alley. 7. That granting this conditional use permit will not, under the conditions imposed, be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim and will provide an additional outlet for the purchase of goods and services. 8. That "* indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to construct a commercial retail center and a fast food restaurant with a drive - through and outdoor seating permit a four -unit commercial retail building and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That no convenience markets and /or retail sales of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted unless a separate conditional use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 2. That no video, electronic or other amusement devices shall be permitted on the premises. 3. That all public phones shall be located inside the building. 4. That adequate lighting of parking lots, driveway, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles on -site. Said lighting shall be directed, positioned and shielded in such a manner so as not to unreasonably illuminate the window areas of the adjacent residential properties. Light fixtures shall be a maximum of 12 -feet in height. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department, Community Services Division approval. 5. That all trash generated from this fast -food restaurant and commercial retail center shall be properly contained in trash bins located within approved trash enclosures. The number of bins shall be adequate and the trash pick -up shall be as frequent as necessary to ensure the sanitary handling and -3- PC2005- timely removal of refuse from the property. The Community Preservation Division of the Planning Department shall determine the need for additional bins or additional pick -up. All costs for increasing the number of bins or frequency of pick -up shall be paid by the business owner. 6. That any tree or other landscaping planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 7. That no roof - mounted balloons or other inflatable devices shall be permitted on the property. 8. That no outdoor vending machines shall be permitted on the property. 9. That 4 -foot high street address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the building in a color that contrasts with the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from the streets or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 10. That there shall be no outdoor storage permitted on the premises. 11. That the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Services Division requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 1031 (to establish a walk -up restaurant) and Conditional Use Permit No. 1228 (to permit on -sale beer and wine in a restaurant). 12. That roof - mounted equipment shall be screened from view in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.38.170 pertaining to the C -G (General Commercial) Zone. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 13. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by the provision of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 14. That the number of tenant spaces for this commercial retail center shall be limited to three (3), including the fast -food restaurant. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 15. That the design, size, and placement of the wall signage and monument signage shall be limited to that which is shown on the exhibits submitted by the petitioner and approved by the Planning Commission. Final sign plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval as to placement, design and materials. Any decision by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a 'Reports and Recommendations" item. 16. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground and outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by the Water Engineering Department. 17. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonments of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. 18. That since this project has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed in compliance with Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 19. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Service Standards Specifications. Any water service and /or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use if necessary or abandoned if the existing water service is no longer needed. The owner /developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service of fire line- -4- PC2005- 20. That prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: • Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. • Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. • Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in DAMP. • Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs. • Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs, and describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 21. That prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: • Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. • Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP • Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Projects WQMP are available onsite. • Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMPs. 22. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, a Lot Line Adjustment shall be submitted to and approved by the Public Works Department and then recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. 23. That an unsubordinated reciprocal parking, maintenance and access agreement shall be executed in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, and recorded with the Office of the Orange County Recorder. A copy of the recorded agreement shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division prior to the issuance of a building permit. 24. That gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 609 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 25. That the locations for future above - ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.). 26. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. 27. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. 28. That plans shall be submitted to the Traffic and Transportation manager for his review and approval showing conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the monument sign and wall /fence location. 29. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval in conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 436, and 470 -5- PC2005- pertaining to parking standards and driveway location. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 30. That the drive - through lane shall be designed to meet the radius standards (minimum 16 feet interior and 26 feet outer radius). Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 31. That an on -site trash truck turn around area be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 and as required by the Maintenance Divisions. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 32. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage, collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 33. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum one - gallon size clinging vines planted on maximum three -foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 34. That the project shall provide for truck deliveries on -site. Such information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 35. That an Emergency Listing Card, Form ADP -281 shall be completed and submitted in a completed form to the Anaheim Police Department. 36. That final elevation plans indicating opaque windows for the west elevation facing State College Boulevard shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division. Said plans shall be designed to preclude the visibility of interior storage for the individual tenants from State College Boulevard. Any decision by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a 'Reports and Recommendations" item. 37. That all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be fully screened by architectural devices and /or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 38. That a final landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. Said plans shall specify minimum 24 -inch box sized trees and landscaped fingers every ten (10) parking stalls. Any decision by staff may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a "Reports and Recommendations" item. 39. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department Exhibit Nos. 1 through 15, and as conditioned herein. 40. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 4, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 and 39 above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 41. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition No. 20 shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code- -6- PC2005- 42. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 21, 36 and 39, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 43. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon the applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting on July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005 by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 1 2005- SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -7- PC2005- 'Attachment - Item No. 6 PETITIONER'S STATEMENT OF JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE /CODE WAIVER (NOT REQUIRED FOR PARKING WAIVER) REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF CODE SECTION: PERTAINING TO: R0,lx,,(' se��r ` l' /cJL (A separate statement is required for each Code waiver) Sections 18.03.040.030 and 18.12.060 of the Anaheim Municipal Code require that before any variance or Code waiver may be granted by the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission, the following shall be shown: 1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity; and 2. That, because of such special circumstances, strict application of the zoning code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity. In order to determine if such special circumstances exist, and to assist the Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission to arrive at a decision, please answer each of the following questions regarding the property for which a variance is sought, fully and as completely as possible. If you need additional space, you may attach additional pages. k. 1. Are there special c' instances that apply to the property in matters such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings ?' yes No. answer 2. Are the special circumstances thaj apply to the property different from other properties in the vicinity which are in the same zone as your property? �i e No 6 4. ca&66E yr v The sole purpose of any variance or Code waiver shall be to prevent discrimination, and no variance or. Code waiver shall be approved which would have the effect of granting a special privilege not shared by other property in the same vicinity and zone which is not othe wise expressly uthorized by zon regulations governing property. Use variances are not permitted. �� ti Q Signature of Property Owner or Authorized Agent Date 376251DECEMBER 12, 2000 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE NO. Justification Waiver. dot cu" NO 2005 - 049 Do the special circumstances applicable to the-property deprive it of privileges currently enjoyed by neighboring properties located within the same zone? \/ nse _No w ere me ect circumstances created by causes beyond the control of the property owner (or previous property owners)? _ es —No Item No. 6 EEF -EIF: Ck C(14�D'E L [ _.066E 71 CsF :Elr FALN SFRINGS FE.x. CCLMA FCIA] FSCEMCND ERN Ll 0b:SFC Mr. Peter Capriotti 11 Cotti Foods Corporation 26111 Antonio Parkv,'ar. Suite 100 Las Flores. CA 92688 Subject: Parking Demand Analysis for 100 and 130 North Stale College Boulevard in the City of Anaheim Dear Mr. Capriotti 11: LSA Associates. Inc. (LSA) is pleased to submit this parking analysis for the proposed construction of the Taco Bell restaurant and retail center located at 100 and 130 North State College Boulevard in the Chy of Anaheim (Cite). Currently. an existing Taco Bell restaurant is located on 130 North State College Boulevard. and a vacam CarroxN s restaurant is located on 100 North State College Boulevard. The project proposes to demolish the existing land uses to construct 3.300 square feet of retail use and a 2340- square- foot Taco Bell restaurant. The project will provide 19 parking spaces for the retail center and 29 parking spaces for the Taco Bell restaurant. The project site plan is shoran in Figure 1 (attached). ]t should be noted that the retail center provides adequate parking supply based on the City's narking Fequirement. lloxsever. the proposed parking supple for the Taco Bell does nol provide adequate parking per City code. The purpose of this analysis is to demonstrate whether the proposed parking supple for the Taco Bell restaurant can accommodate the forecasted parking demand. This analysis has been prepared consistent Kith Chapter 18.06 of the Cin's Municipal Code. evaluating m hether the parking demand of the proposed Taco Bell restauram will be less than the requirement stated in Senion 18.06.050.0233 of the- Ciry's code. A discussion of the project's consistence with the five conditions required for a parking variance. as outlined in Section 18.06.080 of the Cin's code. is provided in this anal} sis. The project proposes to construct a 2.340- square -foot restaurant_ Fa ith 27 standard parking spaces and m o handicap spaces. for a total of 29 parking spaces Anaheim's Citn code states that off- street parking for fast -food restaurants shall be provided at the rate of 16 spaces per 1.000 square feet. Application of the City's requirement to the proposed 2340- square-fom restaurant would result in a parking requirement of 38 spaces. The project is proposing 29 parking spaces. 9 spaces fearer than the City - s requirement. To determine the parking demand for a stand -alone Taco Bell restaurant aaith a drive- through facility. parking accumulation surveys were conducted at an existing Taco Bell restaurant located at 6001 Beach Boulevard in the Cite of Buena Park. It should be noted that LSA confirmed the adequacy of the location for the parking surveys as ith Cite staff. Parking surveys were conducted hN Southland Car Counters on Wednesday. March 23. 2005: Saturday. March 26. 2005: and Thursdaa. March 29. 2005. 'between 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. to document the existing parking demand. The existing Buena Park Taco Bell restaurant is approximatcly 2.250 square feet. as itlt a iota] of 23 parking spaces (including one handicap). Table A ( anached) provides the parking counts for the Taco Bell parking tot for each half -hour behaaeen 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on ail three da.s. The highgst observed parking demand aaas 14 vehicles at 12:30 :TOtRF (F \_= b.Fllllmp A!,1 s is reiiled llpd :.. CUP NQ, 2005 -04997 lE O 2C 0Y.!�E LCC V TF LE h16 April 25. 2005 EEF -EIF: Ck C(14�D'E L [ _.066E 71 CsF :Elr FALN SFRINGS FE.x. CCLMA FCIA] FSCEMCND ERN Ll 0b:SFC Mr. Peter Capriotti 11 Cotti Foods Corporation 26111 Antonio Parkv,'ar. Suite 100 Las Flores. CA 92688 Subject: Parking Demand Analysis for 100 and 130 North Stale College Boulevard in the City of Anaheim Dear Mr. Capriotti 11: LSA Associates. Inc. (LSA) is pleased to submit this parking analysis for the proposed construction of the Taco Bell restaurant and retail center located at 100 and 130 North State College Boulevard in the Chy of Anaheim (Cite). Currently. an existing Taco Bell restaurant is located on 130 North State College Boulevard. and a vacam CarroxN s restaurant is located on 100 North State College Boulevard. The project proposes to demolish the existing land uses to construct 3.300 square feet of retail use and a 2340- square- foot Taco Bell restaurant. The project will provide 19 parking spaces for the retail center and 29 parking spaces for the Taco Bell restaurant. The project site plan is shoran in Figure 1 (attached). ]t should be noted that the retail center provides adequate parking supply based on the City's narking Fequirement. lloxsever. the proposed parking supple for the Taco Bell does nol provide adequate parking per City code. The purpose of this analysis is to demonstrate whether the proposed parking supple for the Taco Bell restaurant can accommodate the forecasted parking demand. This analysis has been prepared consistent Kith Chapter 18.06 of the Cin's Municipal Code. evaluating m hether the parking demand of the proposed Taco Bell restauram will be less than the requirement stated in Senion 18.06.050.0233 of the- Ciry's code. A discussion of the project's consistence with the five conditions required for a parking variance. as outlined in Section 18.06.080 of the Cin's code. is provided in this anal} sis. The project proposes to construct a 2.340- square -foot restaurant_ Fa ith 27 standard parking spaces and m o handicap spaces. for a total of 29 parking spaces Anaheim's Citn code states that off- street parking for fast -food restaurants shall be provided at the rate of 16 spaces per 1.000 square feet. Application of the City's requirement to the proposed 2340- square-fom restaurant would result in a parking requirement of 38 spaces. The project is proposing 29 parking spaces. 9 spaces fearer than the City - s requirement. To determine the parking demand for a stand -alone Taco Bell restaurant aaith a drive- through facility. parking accumulation surveys were conducted at an existing Taco Bell restaurant located at 6001 Beach Boulevard in the Cite of Buena Park. It should be noted that LSA confirmed the adequacy of the location for the parking surveys as ith Cite staff. Parking surveys were conducted hN Southland Car Counters on Wednesday. March 23. 2005: Saturday. March 26. 2005: and Thursdaa. March 29. 2005. 'between 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. to document the existing parking demand. The existing Buena Park Taco Bell restaurant is approximatcly 2.250 square feet. as itlt a iota] of 23 parking spaces (including one handicap). Table A ( anached) provides the parking counts for the Taco Bell parking tot for each half -hour behaaeen 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on ail three da.s. The highgst observed parking demand aaas 14 vehicles at 12:30 :TOtRF (F \_= b.Fllllmp A!,1 s is reiiled llpd :.. CUP NQ, 2005 -04997 Item No. 6 j1. ckio( :Pl l.`1 l p.m. on WednesdaN. 13 vehicles at 7:30 p.m. on Thursday. and 7 ] y hicIes at 12:00 p.m. on Saturday. The peak parking demand of 14 occupied space=_ is equal to approximately 60 percent utilization of the parking lot. Applying the peak demand of 14 vehicles to the existing 2?50- square -foot Taco Bell restaurant results in an observed parking demand rate of 62 spaces per 1.000 square f ect. Application of this rate to the proposed 2340- square4001 restaurant results in a forecasted parking demand of 15 spaces. The project will provide 27 standard spaces plus two handicap. for a total of 29 parking spaces. The forecast parking space demand of 15 spaces is equivalent to 52 percent utilization of the available parking on site. resulting in a surplus of 13 parking space=_. The proposed parking supply would be adequate to meet the demand of the proposed project. should it operate similar to the boo] Beach Boulevard restaurant. In addition_ parking accumulation surveys were conducted at the existing Taco Bell restaurant located at ] 30 North State College Boulevard in the Cite of Anaheim. ]t should be noted that the existing Taco Bell facility does not provide drive- through service. Therefore. the parking rate may be higher than a restaurant that provides drive - through service. At the request of City staff. parking =Surveys were conducted by Southland Car Counters on Friday. April 8. 2005. and Monday. April IL 2005. between 1 1:3D a.m. and 130 p.m. and between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. to document the existing parking demand. The existing Taco Bell restaurant is approximately 1.470 square feet. with a total of 29 parking'spaces (including one handicap space). Table B (anached) provides the parking counts for the existing Taco Bell parking lot. The highest parking demand Nvas 17 vehicles at 12:30 p.m. or, Friday and 13 vehicles at 1:00 p.m. on Monday. The existing parking space demand of 17 spaces is equivalent :o 59 percent utilization of the available parking on site. Consistency pith Chapter 18.06.080 of the City's Code Section 18.06.080 of the Cit.'s. Municipal Code outlmes fie condirions that must be met for a parking variance to be granted. The five conditions. along, wi *,h an explanation of the projects compliance with these conditions. are provided below. 18.06.080.010 That the variance. under the conditions imposed if any. will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. The observed parking demand of a similar Taco Bell restaurant is 62 spaces per 1:000 square feet. Application of this rate would result in a peak demand of 15 parking spaces at the proposed site. The project will provide a total of 31 parking spaces. As a result- the project will provide adequate off - street parking to accommodate all vehicles attributable to the project under normal operation. 18.06.080.020 That the variance. under the conditions imposed if any. will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. As demonstrated it this parking stud. the project w ill prop ide adequate parking on site to accommodate parking demand under normal operation of the restauram. Residual parking of up to 52 percent is forecasi 4' ^2 0;<P: CFN` 0 Pa;6int An311 -;t rei ised %cpd» CUP NO. 2005 -04997 Item No. 6 L)A s by011 Al £. 1. l, . to account for other adjacent parking demand or increase in the attraction of the proposed Taco Bell. On- street parking is not anticipated for this use. 18.06.080.030 That the variance. under the conditions imposed if am. will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private propern in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which propert} is not expressl% provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section 18.06.010.020 of this code). 'The project will provide adequate parking on the project site to accommodate parking demand under normal operation of the restaurant. The project will provide adequate parking on site to accommodate its parking veneration. No demand for parking on adjacent private propert} is forecasted. 18.06.080.040 That the variance. under the conditions imposed. if any. will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use. Design and layout of parking considers good traffic flow and minimizes the need to circulate to find parking. The retail use and the Taco Bell restaurant will provide adequate parking on site. Therefore, traffic congestion is not anticipated with implementation of the project. 18.06.080.050 That the variance. under the conditions imposed. if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The project is proposing to provide vehicular access to the site along State College Boulevard and Center Street. The locations ci the proposed driveways will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties. Furthermore. it has been established previously that a sufficient supply of off-street parking will be provided to meet the forecasted parking demand. Therefore. no stacking onto the public street nor blocking an adjacent driveway would be expected to occur. Conclusion Based on the parkine survevs conducted on Wednesday. March 21,2005: Sawrday. March 26. 2005: and Tuesday. March 29. 2005. the peak parking demand of the existing Buena Park Taco Bell restaurant is 14 vehicles. or 62 spaces per 1.000 square feet Application of this rate results in a forecasted parking demand of 15 spaces. The project will provide a total of 29 spaces. or 13 more spaces than the forecasted demand. In addition. parking accumulation surveys were conducted at the existing Taco Bell restaurant located at 130 North State College Boulevard in the City of Anaheim. These survevs were conducted on Friday. April 8.2005. and Monday. April 11. 2005. between 11:30 a.m. and 1:30p.rn. and bem een 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. to document the existing parking demand. The highest parking demand was i % vehicles at 12:30 p.m. on Friday and 13 vehicle=_ at 1:00 p.m. on Monday. 4'_ ff<<P CF' (]Parkins. Anakci� revised. e'pd >> CUP NO. 2005 - 9 4 9 9 7 Item No. 6 )gn I s 10(1 A] L]. I n C. I trust i -ou xa ill find this information useful for N our planning purposes. If you have an% questi or, s. please contact me al (949) 553 -0666. Sincere]. LSA ASSOCIATES Edward G . egre Senior Transportation Planner Leslie E. Card Principal in Charge Attachments: Figure 1: Project Site Plan Table A: Parking Accumulation Survey (6001 Beach Boulevard) Table B: Parking .Accumulation Survey (1 10 North State College Boulevard) cc: Holly Sandler. JL Hare Associates I* � ie7 s'_" -0 >t P C .`?O,Parklq Anah5is [e; ise6 4 Expo. 3oS CUP N0: 2005 -04997 C 6 O FEE SOURCE: Dexiyr., I:1CFR:i %(PSire t^iui.cn 14'34x.'1 Item No. 6 - Arwheir loco BellAe4cid Site p CUP N0. 2005 -049 L $ A FIGURE 1 Item No. 6 Table A: Parking Accumulation Survey (6001 Beacb Boulevard. Buena Park. CA) Time Wednesday. Marcb 23.2005 Saturday, Marcb 26, 2005 Tuesday. March 29, 2005 8:00 AM 8:30 AM 9 A I\9 4 5 6 4 3 2 2 2 2 0 I i 9.30 AM 10:00 AM 2 2 4 10 AM 4 6 4 8 11 :00 AM 6 8 12 7 1 1:30 AM 12 :00 PM 8 10 11 8 12:30 PM 1:00 PM 1:30 PM 14 10 9 10 9 ] 3 ] 1 8 1.3 _ 2:00 PM l0 6 l0 - -- 2:30P 9 7 - 5 . 7 3:00 PM 8 6 6 6 4 3: 30 PM 4 3 4:00 PM 3 4.30 PM 7 2 3 5 :00 PM 5:30 PM 6 7 1 2 4 3 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7 6 - 2 6 - 7 7:00 PM 6 2 9 7:30 PM 5 1 8 8 :00 PM 4 — 5 4 2 — 1 — 4 8 :30 PM 9: 00 PM 9:30 PM 10:00 PM 1 1 2 2 2 l 4 3 1 Source: Southland Car Counters, 2005. Shading indicates peal: how of parked Vehicles. - C:,:= O��k:r, tsh,e.>: ci,e=,.,= - -.KZ' CUP Nth. 2005 — 0 49 9 7 Item No. 6 Table B: Parking Accumulation Survey (130'x. State College Bled, Anabeim. C.A) Time Friday, April 8, 2005 Monday, April 11, 200 11:30 AM 12:00 P 12:30 PM 1:00 PM 10 12 17 8 10 8 14 12 8 9 13 1:30 PM 6.00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM 1 0 7 7 5 4 12 7:30 PM 11 8:00 PM 9 3 Source: Southland Car Counters. 2005. Shading indicates peak hour of parked N chic] e=_: CUP NO. Z005 -04997 Item No. 6 r w' Orange Ity Office: 1450 Non, Tustin Avenue, Suite 105 Santa Ana, California 92705 714.245.9760 714.245.9761 fax w JLHARE.com Inland Empire Office: 250 East Rincon Street, Suite 108 Corona, California 92879 951.549.8080 951.549.8081 fax ENTITLEMENTS • PERMITS • PROJECT MANAGEMENT May 24, 2005 City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 South Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: Application for Conditional Use Permit New Taco Bell and Retail Structure 900 & 130 North State College Blvd. s On behalf of Cotti Foods Corporation, I respectfully submit for you review an application for a new Taco Bell and Retail Structure at the addresses referenced above. The project sites are currently developed with an existing Taco Bell and vacant restaurant (formerly Carrow's). The two existing structures will be removed and replaced with a new Taco Bell (on the Carlow's site) and a new retail structure (on the Taco Bell site). Based on the square footage of the proposed structures 55 parking spaces are required: 37 for Taco Bell and 18 for the retail structure. The number of provided parking spaces is: 29 for Taco Bell and 19 for the retail structure, for a total of 48. As apart of this application, we request to share the provided parking, as access will be available via both project sites. LSA has generated a Parking Study to demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed number of parking space for these specific land uses. The Traffic Division of the Public Works Department is currently reviewing the parking study. The hours of operation for the Taco Bell will be from 9am to 2am Monday through Sunday. There will be between 7 - 9 employees per shift, three shifts. The hours of operation and number of employees for the retail structure will be determined when the tenants are selected. In addition to this application for conditional use permit, we are currently in the process of abandoning the existing alley, and relocating it along the rear property line of the vacant Carrow's site. This will mitigate the issue of an alley leading to a major thoroughfare as well as increase the applicant's ability to share the proposed parking configuration. The applicant is also in process of purchasing excess land that the city no longer has a need for along Central, which will increase the existing lot size. Both actions are being processed under case # ABA 2004- 00099. Thank you for your consideration of this request. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact my office at 714- 245 -9760 ext. 14 or via email at holly a?iIhare.com CUP N0. 2005 ~ 0 4 9 9 7 ITEM NO. 1 -A w z z BLOSSOM UN T O�P� RCL 75 -76 -32 (Res. of Int. to RS -7200) RS -2 RCL 2005 -00163 O Q� RM-4 VAR 2005 -04653 R 67 - 6& - 85 TPM 32 0 CUP 10 8 � 15 DU CANT VACANT OQ �" 1 DU U EACH / 26 ' �� 133 - 889'to the centerlirre _ greet �— BURTON ST BURTON ST N ofA er M 775T-76T32 RS-2 FULLERTON CITY LIMITS N rvm RCL- 1 D EACH in (Res of Intent to RS -7200) RCL 56 -57- 1 :] r ANA HEIM CITY, LIMITS RIVERSIDE FREEWAY (SR -91) RS -2 1 DU EACH =: ROSEWOOD AVE RS -2 1 DU EACH RS-2 p 1 DU EACH O O 2 RS-2 RS-2 = J 1 DU EACH 1 DU EACH N U a Gen :5 PINEWOOD AVE MERONA PL ° N V Reclassification No. 2005 -00163 Subject Property Variance No. 2005 -04653 Date: June 27, 2005 Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: EVART C. FOUNTAIN Q.S. No. 91 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00163 - REQUEST RECLASSIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM THE T (TRANSITION) ZONE TO THE RS -2 (RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE - FAMILY) ZONE, OR LESS INTENSE ZONE. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04653 - REQUESTS WAIVERS OF: (A) MINIMUM LOT WIDTH (B) MINIMUM LOT AREA TO CONSTRUCT FOUR SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCES. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005 -132 - REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A4 -LOT, 4 -UNIT DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. 1400 East Burton Street 1869 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 7 7a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion for continuance) 7b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00163 7c. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04653 7d. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005 -132 7e. WAIVER OF COUNCIL POLICY NO. 542 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped property consists of two parcels. Parcel 1 is an irregularly- shaped parcel having a frontage of 133 feet on the south side of Burton Street, a maximum depth of 129 feet and is located 889 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street. Parcel 2 is an irregularly- shaped parcel having a frontage of 26 feet on the south side of Burton Street, a maximum depth of 129 feet and is located 1022 feet west of the centerline of Acacia Street (1400 East Burton Street). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of the following: (a) Reclassification No. 2005 -00163 — to reclassify this property from the T (Transition) zone to the RS -2 (Residential, Single - Family) zone, or less intense zone. (b) Variance No. 2005 -04653 — waivers of minimum lot width and minimum lot area to construct four single - family residences (c) Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -132 — to establish a 4 -lot, 4 -unit detached single - family residential subdivision. (d) Waiver of Council Policy No. 542 — waiver of Council Policy No. 542 pertaining to sound attenuation for residential projects- BACKGROUND (3) This property is currently vacant resulting from the SR -91 (Riverside) freeway improvements and is zoned T (Transition). The City of Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Low Density Residential land uses. Surrounding General Plan land use designations are Low Density Residential in all directions. The applicant states the property was developed with a single - family residence surrounded by other single - family homes and apartments prior to the freeway widening. (4) The applicant, Alan Nguyen, has submitted the attached letter dated July 6, 2005, requesting a continuance to the September 7, 2005 (Wednesday), Commission meeting due to an unexpected family emergency preventing attendance at today's hearing- RECOMMENDATION (5) That the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the September 7, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. CONT- RCL2005- 00163CDF 072505.doc Page 1 Attachment - Item No. 7 July 6, 2005 Ms. Cheryl Flores City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162 Anaheim, California 92805 Tel: (714) 765 -5017 Fax: (714) 765 -5280 RE: LETTER OF CONTINUANCE 7/25/05 Planning Commission Hearings 1400 E. & 13302 W. BURTON STREET ANAHEIM, CA 92805 PARCEL#: 073 - 344 -03 & 073 - 344-17 ZONING: T Dear Ms. Flores: Regretfully, I have to inform you that it is unlikely that I can keep the scheduled July 25, 2005 Planning Commission Hearings date due to an unexpected family urgency. Looking into the situation, it is best if I can delay the hearings until September 7, 2005. Please give me call at your earliest convenience so we can discuss the issue further. Thank you for your time and consideration. I am looking forward to hearing from you soon. Best regards, * Alan Nguyen 15401 Fimrona Avenue Lnvndak CA 90250 Cell- (3 10) 720- 8307 — EmaiL Eau 'yo aal cnm Z'd SibL- 9L9 -OTG uele eb0:90 SO 90 inr ITEM NO. 1 -A G -G 1 ,40 " RG g095g1 S 2 G -G 0 R GUP G \ ( \ZES RNL4 R 0 �� 26 SEPP p,R� RCL 71-72- 444(10) RCL 70 G U'1 0 Al ob c -c RCL 70.71 -33 G \3? 1 8S c 70 -71 -26 T VPR4,151 p aloe VAR 2553 RCL 70 -71 -33 VPRSS. lc S5ab) CONDOS T -CUP 2001 -04459 UP aya3 CUP 2809 CUP 6 VAR 4218 SENIOR CITIZEN'S R 10' 00 T APARTMENTS C P 0 5,0 5 0 4 Sq SH GPP \NR RCL 70.71 -33 G , G 4 , o CU �Op 399? GENTS CUP 2809 Cy"I� 1 Go '340 VAR 4218 > A Rcv �o.lra VPR 6118 VACANT p c°�o1, yq v 4 g GUP3655 2 01 352 G GUp aa4� S GUP 3 43 5 PUp sa,2 G UP 3525} � p y y °al GUP 169 11 � 3 3 503} P 1 CU 5 3gp )R CITIZEN'S C -C 4,0 P S C-C .RTMENTS Rd 71-33 vPR g11a Rc1 - �oa 1- C_G R d9 0- 1 1.26 V PR R CL 10 .11. 2 00 RCL 77 -783 (2) RC p05A50h5'\ OPP \NC' RCL p0 5- 0 RCL 73 -74 -46 CUP 2 -0 Sc GUP 22.0p1-0,31 RCL 71 -72 -44 /li GUP G& 3 3611 RCL 70.71 -26 C' 11'10 C CUP 434 05 RCL 70. 411 71 -33 y \J 65 CUP 2622 Rd. �p�1 - 3 6011 1 Mpg Q CUP 2397 CJ? 2003g �cUP 350 Q RM-4 PC C -G (PC) (SC) ^. GUP 3311 IIGUP RCL 71-72-44 �" 5 (10 RCL 77- 78 -63(1) .✓ G 196 p"� RCL 70.71 -26 ) 73 -74 -4 RCL 73 -74 -06 CUP 4, 3 4,0 S ��\ 71 -72 -44 RCL 71 -72 -04 1J 4118 E \ RVAR2553 71 - 3 3 ZCL 77 -78 -63(2) RCL 70 -71 -26 �OPYGPR Q` CONDOS RCL 70 -71 -33 O �� RCL 70 -71 -33 VAR 4172 ADJ 0156 CUP 2622 MEDICAL CUP CUP 1981 S OFFICES O -L (PC) (SC) C -G (PC) (SC) RCL 74 -75 -40 RCL 77 -78-63 (1) RCL 71 -72 -44 CL 7 4-46 RCL 73 -74-46 CUP 1981 S RCL 70.71 -26 C 1 -72-44 RCL 71 -72-44 RCL 70.71 -33 ,.L 70 -71 -26 RCL 70 -71 -33 OFFICES RCL 70 -71 -26 VAR 4172 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05000 Subject Property Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: AMERICAN INVESTMENTS /CHINO LLC Q.S. No. 192 REQUEST TO PERMIT A RETAIL MARKET (FRESH VEGETABLES AND FRUIT) WITHIN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER. 464 South Anaheim Hills Road 1912 2 ��. t..• r !��w tro w • "�, ; t o 4 O Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05000 Subject Property Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: 1" = 200' Requested By: AMERICAN INVESTMENTS /CHINO LLC Q.S. No. 192 REQUEST TO PERMIT A RETAIL MARKET (FRESH VEGETABLES AND FRUIT) WITHIN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER. 464 South Anaheim Hills Road 1912 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 8 8a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION -CLASS 1 (Motion) 8b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05000 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped 10.6 -acre property consists of several parcels located north and east of the northeast corner of Nohl Ranch Road and Anaheim Hills Road with frontages of 517 feet on the north side of Nohl Ranch Road and 430 feet on the west side of Canyon Rim Road (464 South Anaheim Hills Road - Anaheim Hills Plaza). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Code Section 18.08.030.0402 to permit a retail market (fresh vegetables and fruit) within an existing commercial shopping center- BACKGROUND (3) This property is currently developed with a 72,434 square foot commercial center and is zoned CG (SC) (General Commercial, Scenic Corridor Overlay). The General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Neighborhood Commercial land uses. Properties to the north and west (across Anaheim Hills Road) are designated for Low - Medium Density Residential land uses and properties to the east (across Canyon Rim Road) and south (across Nohl Ranch Road) are designated for Office Low land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) The following zoning actions pertain to this property: (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2001 -04454 (to permit on- premise sales and consumption of beer and wine in conjunction with a full - service restaurant in an existing commercial retail shopping center) was approved by the Planning Commission on November 1, 2001 (430 -D South Anaheim Hills Road). (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 3997 (to permit a 2,100 square foot full - service veterinary clinic within an existing commercial center) was approved by the Commission in 1998 (430 South Anaheim Hills Road, suites G, H, I and J). (c) Conditional Use Permit No. 3877 (to permit a 2,484 square foot expansion, outdoor seating and sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption for an existing 2,400 square foot restaurant (total of 4,884 square feet) with waiver of permitted number of wall signs) was approved by the Planning Commission in 1996 (470 — 478 South Anaheim Hills Road — Bella Cucina). (d) Variance No. 4178 (waiver of permitted type of freestanding signage and permitted location of freestanding signs to construct a 6 -foot high, 60 square foot shopping center identification sign and to retain a 6 -foot high, 60 square foot shopping center identification sign) was approved by the Planning Commission in 1992. (e) Conditional Use Permit No. 2866 (to permit a child day care center with waivers of maximum fence height, minimum structural setback, and maximum number of wall signs) was approved by the City Council in 1987 following approval by the Planning Commission (490 South Anaheim Hills Road). SR- CUP2005- 05000mn Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 8 PROPOSAL: (5) The applicant proposes to establish a small retail produce market (5000 square feet) offering fresh vegetables, fruits, and blended fruit juices within an existing commercial retail shopping center. View of Anaheim Hills Shopping Center from Anaheim Hills Road (6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates that the proposed retail market would occupy an existing 5,000 square foot tenant space within a commercial retail shopping center and the floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates that the proposed market will include an approximate 436 square foot juice shop area that can accommodate up to 8 seats, an approximate 1,560 square foot preparation /storage area, and men's and women's restrooms. The elevation plan (Exhibit No. 3) indicates no significant modifications are proposed to the building's exterior. Page 2 View of Proposed Retail Market Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 8 (7) The submitted sign plan (Exhibit No. 4) indicates a 32 square foot (a maximum 2 feet high x 16 feet long) wall sign which is less than 10 percent (or 117.8 square feet in this case) of the area of the building's elevation to which it is attached. The sign will read "Anaheim Hills Farm" in red channel letters and will be located on the building's east elevation. (8) Submitted plans and staff inspections indicate access via one driveway on Canyon Rim Road and one driveway on Nohl Ranch Road. Plans indicate a total of 425 existing parking spaces and Code requires 394 spaces based on the following: Address (Anaheim Hills Road ) Use Square Footage Code Required Spaces (per 1,000 s.f. of GFA Parking Required 408 Vacant 1 5.5 8 409 Day Care 6 CUP No. 2866 14 410 Learning Center 2 5.5 15 412 Dentist 1 6 7 414 Dentist 1 6 8 416 Hair Salon 1 5.5 8 430 -A Tutoring Center 1 5.5 7 430 -B Salon 900 5.5 5 430 -C Donut shop 900 5.5 5 430 -D Restaurant 1,500 8 12 430 -F Dentist 1,200 6 7 430 -G, H, I ,J Veterinary Clinic 3,000 6 17 430 -K -L Ladies Fitness 1800 5.5 10 430 -M Art Studio 1,500 5.5 8 440 -A Proposed Small Market 5,000 5.5 28 440 -B Vacant 2,800 5.5 15 446 Mail Services 1,200 5.5 7 450 Fitness Trainer 1 5.5 10 456 Cleaners 1,200 5.5 7 460 Sav -On 24,650 5.5 136 464 Liquor store 2,000 5.5 11 466 Coffee Shop 1,200 5.5 7 468 Subway 1,600 5.5 9 470 -478 Bella Cucina Restaurant 4,884 per CUP3877 8 33 TOTAL 394 (9) The attached letter of operation indicates the market will employ a staff of 4 persons. The proposed hours of operation are 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. daily. The market will sell fresh vegetables, fruit and juices. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (10) The Planning Director's authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and is, Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 8 therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare further environmental documentation- EVALUATION (11) Small markets with the retail sales of fresh produce and the sale of prepared food or beverages for on -site consumption that has less than 25% of the gross floor area (1,250 square feet is allowed; 436 square feet is proposed) are permitted within the CG (SC) Zone, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (12) Community Preservation Division has indicated that staff has been working with the property owner of this shopping center since 2003 in an effort to correct code violations relative to unscreened roof - mounted equipment and improper maintenance of the property. Specifically, deferred maintenance has resulted in unsightly stucco, cracked or damaged wood fascia boards, rafter tails, beams or joists, etc. The property owner was issued a building permit on August 8, 2004; however, no work has been initiated at this time. (13) No changes are proposed to the existing landscaping or building exterior within this commercial retail center as a consequence of this request- FINDINGS (14) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (15) Staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing that the Planning Commission take approve this request by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 4 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05000 BE GRANTED (464 SOUTH ANAHEIM HILLS ROAD — ANAHEIM HILLS PLAZA) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL A: PARCELS 1, 2, 4 AND 5, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 63, PAGE 5 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PARCEL B: PARCEL 3, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 50, PAGE 43 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL C: APPURTENANT EASEMENT AS SAID EASEMENT ARE SET FORTH IN SECTION 3 "COMMON AREA" OF THAT CERTAIN DECLARATION OF ESTABLISHMENT OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS AND GRANT OF EASEMENTS RECORDED OCTOBER 17, 1974 IN BOOK 11266 PAGE 268 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, 2005, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 "Procedures ", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed small market in the existing commercial shopping center is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section No. 18.08.030.040.0402. 2. That the use as a small market would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is located. 3. That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health, safety. 4. That the traffic generated by the proposed small market would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area. 5. That granting of this conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not be detrimental to the peace, health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. That * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit the small market in the existing commercial shopping center and has determined that the project is within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 1, Cr\PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- Section 15301, (Existing Facilities), as defined in the CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim 1 - That, as stipulated by the applicant, the hours of operation for the market (including deliveries) shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. daily. 2. That the juice bar area shall accommodate no more than 10 seats and shall comprise no more than 25% of the gross floor area of the market. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 3. That no alcoholic beverages shall be sold or consumed on the premises. 4. That all trash generated from this facility shall be properly contained in trash bin(s) contained within approved trash enclosure(s). The number of bins shall be adequate and the trash pick -up shall be as frequent as necessary to ensure the sanitary handling and timely removal of refuse from the property. The Community Preservation Division of the Planning Department shall determine the need for additional bins or additional pick -up. All costs for increasing the number of bins or frequency of pick -up shall be paid by the business owner. 5. That the existing trash enclosure gates shall be replaced per City Standard. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Streets and Sanitation Division approval. 6. That no shopping carts shall be stored outside the market. 7. That no video, electronic or other amusement devices or games shall be permitted in conjunction with this market. 8. That no outdoor storage, display or sales of merchandise of fixtures shall be permitted. 9. That window signs shall not exceed the area allowed by the Sign Code. 10. That the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to surrounding properties. 11. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside the building. 12. That the business owner shall obtain a valid business license from the Business License Division of the Planning Department. 13. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, and as conditioned herein. 14. That a Burglar /Robbery Alarm permit application, Form APD 516, and an Emergency Listing Card, APD -281 shall be obtained, completed and submitted to the Anaheim Police Department. 15. That no outdoor vending machines shall be permitted. 16. That all fixtures, displays, merchandise and other materials shall be setback a minimum of three (3) feet from all window areas. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 17. That rear entrance doors shall be numbered with the same address numbers or suite number of the business- -2- PC2005- 18. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 2, 5 and 16, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 19. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 12, 13 and 14, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 20. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the property owner /developer is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 7 days of the issuance of the final invoice, prior to the issuance of building permits or commencement of activity for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) 1, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 1 2005- SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2005- ITEM NO. 1 -A . I Subsequent EIR No. 332 © Subject Property General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00420 Reclassification No. 2004 -00134 Date: July 25, 2005 Zoning Code Amedment No. 2004 -00036 Scale: Graphic Miscellaneous Case Nos. 2004 - 00089, 2005 - 00114, 2005 -00115 Requested By: CITY OF ANAHEIM Q.S. No. n/a REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE TO THE AUGUST 22, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. The Platinum Triangle 1914(7- 20 -05) Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 9 9a. SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 332 (Motion for continuance) AND UPDATED AND MODIFIED MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 106A 9b. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2004 -00420 (Tracking No. GPA 2005- 00432) 9c. RECISSION IN -PART OF THE RESOLUTION OF INTENT PERTAINING TO THE RECLASSIFICATION OF THE NORTH NET FIRE TRAINING SITE (MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2005 - 00115) 9d. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2004 -00134 9e. AMENDMENT TO THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN (MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2004 - 00089) 9F. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2004 -00036 9g. AMENDMENT TO THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE STANDARDIZED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2005 - 00114) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) The Platinum Triangle ( "Project Area ") encompasses approximately 820 acres located at the confluence of the Interstate 5 Freeway and the SR -57 Freeway, in the City of Anaheim in Orange County, California. The Project Area is located generally east of the Interstate 5 Freeway, west of the Santa Ana River channel and SR -57 Freeway, south of the Southern California Edison easement, and north of the Anaheim City limit. REQUEST: (2) The proposed City- initiated project actions include the following: (A) Certification Of Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 And Updated And Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council certification of Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332, including adoption of a Statement of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A for The Platinum Triangle. SEIR No. 332 has been prepared to serve as the primary environmental document for subsequent actions within the Project Area related to the adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, The Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement. Implementation is intended to include, but not be limited to, the approval of subdivision maps, grading permits, street improvement plans, final site plans, development agreements and other related actions for properties located within The Platinum Triangle. Future developments that require additional discretionary review will utilize this document for CEQA purposes to the extent possible, consistent with Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. This SEIR is also intended to provide the additional environmental documentation for proposed city- initiated amendments to the General Plan, The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone and the Standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement described below. (B) General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00420 (Tracking No. GPA 2005 - 00432) — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council adoption of an amendment to the City of Anaheim General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements to provide for the following: (1) Land Use Element: To (A) redesignate a 321 -acre property located at the southeast corner of Orangewood Avenue and Rampart Street and further identified as 2400 East Orangewood Avenue ( "North Net Fire Training Center') from the Office -High to G PA2004- 00432con't. com Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 9 the Mixed -Use land use designation and (B) to provide for an additional 325 dwelling units and up to 210,100 square feet of additional commercial square footage in The Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use land use designation. This amendment would increase the maximum overall residential density from 9,175 to 9,500 dwelling units and the maximum overall commercial density from 2,044,300 to 2,254,400 square feet. (2) Circulation Element: To (A) redesignate a portion of Cerritos Avenue between State College Boulevard and Douglass Road from a Primary Arterial Highway (six lanes divided with no parking or four lanes divided with left turn pockets and two parking lanes with a typical right -of -way width of 106 feet) to a Secondary Arterial Highway (four undivided lanes with parking on either side with a typical right -of -way width of 90 feet) to be consistent with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways and respective lane configurations; and (B) to provide for Gene Autry Way between Betmor Lane and State College Boulevard to be up to 170 feet in width to provide for the construction of the "Grand Parkway" (this segment of Gene Autry Way is designated as a Primary Arterial with a current typical width of up to 106 feet). (C) Miscellaneous Case No. 2005 -00115 — Request for Planning Commission to rescind in part Resolution No. PC2004 -83 and recommend that the City Council rescind in part Resolution No. 2004 -180 pertaining to Reclassification No. 2004 -00127 in order to rescind resolutions of intent pertaining to the reclassification of a 321 -acre property located at the southeast corner of Orangewood Avenue and Rampart Street and further identified as 2400 East Orangewood Avenue ( "the North Net Fire Training Center") from the PR (Public Recreational) Zone to the O -H (High Intensity Office) Zone. (D) Reclassification No. 2004 -00134 — Request for Planning Commission to reclassify a 321 - acre property located at the southeast corner of Orangewood Avenue and Rampart Street and further identified as 2400 East Orangewood Avenue ( "the North Net Fire Training Center") from the PR (Public Recreational) Zone to the PR (PTMU) (Public Recreation — Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use Overlay) Zone. (E) Amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No- 2005-00089) — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council adoption of an amendment to The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to incorporate the following: an adjustment to the boundaries of the mixed -use districts to include the North Net Fire Training Center in the PTMU Overlay Zone Gateway District and add 325 units to said district (321 of said units would be designated for the North Net Fire Training Center); a modification to the PTMU Overlay Zone commercial density to add 210,100 square feet of additional commercial square footage (190,000 square feet of this square footage would be designated for future required ground floor commercial uses on Market Street and Gene Autry Way in the Katella and Gene Autry Districts and 20,000 square feet for other commercial uses in the Katella District); and, additional technical refinements and clarifications, including, but not limited to, refinements to street cross - sections and density descriptions to reflect the above -noted changes. (F) Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004 -00036 — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council adoption of an amendment to the PTMU Overlay Zone to incorporate the following: an adjustment to the boundaries of the mixed -use districts to include the North Net Fire Training Center in the PTMU Overlay Zone Gateway District and add 325 units to said district (321 of said units would be designated for the North Net Fire Training Center); a modification to the PTMU Overlay Zone commercial density to add 210,100 square feet of additional commercial square footage (190,000 square feet of this square footage would be designated for future required ground floor commercial uses on Market Street and Gene Autry Way in the Katella and Gene Autry Districts and 20,000 square feet for other commercial uses in the Katella District); and, additional technical refinements and clarifications, including, but not limited to, refinements to density G PA2004- 00432con't. com Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 9 descriptions to reflect the above -noted changes and other City Code requirements (the proposed changes are set forth in Appendix C to Subsequent EIR No. 332). (G) Amendment to The Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement (Miscellaneous Case No. 2005 - 00114) — Request for Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council adoption of refinements to The Platinum Triangle Standard Development Agreement to reflect mitigation measure requirements set forth in the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A, editorial refinements and updated fees- DISCUSSION (3) The Subsequent EIR No. 332 was circulated for a 45 -day public review period which ended on July 15, 2005. Staff is requesting that this item be continued to the August 22, 2005, Planning Commission meeting in order to allow staff time to prepare the EIR Response to Comments document prior to the Commission meeting. RECOMMENDATION: (4) That the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the August 22, 2005, Planning Commission meeting in order for staff to complete the EIR Response to Comments document prior to said meeting. G PA2004- 00432con't. com Page 3 ITEM NO. 1 -A CUP 2469 I PARKING LOT Z F- 1 MOTEL& RESTAURANT D (n WESTANAHEIM COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS U 1 REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT f 98-99-11 V RCL } Z d Z �� RCL 57 -58 -35 W O AREA N0.4 CUP 3267 Q O C1 (LOCAL BUSINESS) VAR 648 C7 U U RCL 2005-00147 CUP 3159 1 MEDICAL OFFICE STONYBROOK DRIVE 1 C -G AREA NO. 4. RCL 98 -99-11 C1 (LOCAL BUSINESS) RCL 58- 59-111 F T I]7F] ORANGE COUNTY LIMITS RCL 2005 -0047 OFFICE BLDG ANAHEIM CITY LIMITS GG RCL 98 -99-11 GG RM-4 RCL 58 -59 -34 RCL 98 -99-11 RCL 57 -58 -26 RCL 67 -68 -86 APARTMENTS CUP 3145 RCL 62-63 -113 SHOPS & RCL 54-55-7 L COCKTAIL LOUNGE T -CUP 004 -04931 1 r 120' COLCHESTER DRIVE CUP 2004 -04868 C -G CUP 2317 RCL 98 -99-11 CUP 2181 RM-4 �o�iry RCL 58 -59-34 CUP 1977 RCL 58 -59 -34 mAd; RCL 57 -58 -26 VAR 1918 W mNNmy CUP 3342 RCL 57 -58-26 W U''66 �� CUP 3866 W BALLHURST PLAZ APARTMENTS U� iO �� GOOD YEA DJ SHOPPING CENTE (n U�U�U�UU rn } GG U) O RCL 58 -59 -34 RM -4 RCL 57 -58 -26 APARTMENTS 00 CUP 2961 U) BROOKMORE APARTMENTS CUP 1354 AVE. VANCOUVER DRIVE CUa lszo VAR lasa 2 Y O -L I I RCL 98 -99-11 I C-G `�m� RCL63- 64-108 I I I I RCL 98 -99-11 c�� ° q�Q �' O RCL 62-63-113 I I RCL 57-58-26 omo�� BANK I I ITI T -CUP 2005 -05006 o�am m RM-2 I I CUP 2005-04983 Ud 1 4 1 RCL 78 -79-45 I w I CUP 2005 -04960 U 1 } 1 RCL 54 -55-40 I W I CUP 3649 GG W CUP 982 I TI CUP 1662 RGL9 &W1I 1 1 Z I CUP 1220 1 0 1 1 VAR 1323 RGL 5x55 -7 0 1 60 D.U. CONDO I w l (CUP 200404861) SUBWAAV 1 101 1 F 1 1 (CUP 3458) SANDWICH SHOP 1 I I I I — I (CUP2284) I I 1 ( te n 1 1 (CUP 1583) C -G GO 1 I I I 1 SHOPS CUP 3980 RGL 9499 -11 -- - - - - -- `------ - - - - -- ' - - - -y RCL54-5S7 CUP 2003 -04768 RESTAURANT ON � W rAHE1M COMMERCIALFCORRIDORS RGL 9 &9}11 CUP 14 C -G REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT C -G RGL 54557 VAGAP VAR 2005 C - G VAR 1211 S E CUP 2003 - 04768 RCL 98 - 99 - 11 BROOKHURST SHOPPIN G POST OFFICE RCL 54 - 55 - 40 CENTER CUP 2003 - 04768 CUP 2002 - 04529 CUP 3980 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04960 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05006 Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: JUAN CASTRO Q.S. No. 34 A CITY - INITIATED REQUEST TO CONSIDER THE REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04960 (FOR A PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED CHURCH IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER). 2230 West Colchester Drive, Suites 1 -5 - Victory Outreach Church 1933 Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04960 Subject Property TRACKING NO. CUP2005 -05006 Date: July 25, 2005 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: JUAN CASTRO Q.S. No. 34 A CITY - INITIATED REQUEST TO CONSIDER THE REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -04960 (FOR A PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED CHURCH IN CONJUNCTION WITH A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER). 2230 West Colchester Drive, Suites 1 -5 - Victory Outreach Church 1933 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 10 10a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION —CLASS 21 (Motion) 10b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04960 —CITY INITIATED REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION PROCEEDINGS (Resolution) (TRACKING NO. CUP2005- 05006) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION (1) This 0.87 acre property is located at the southwest corner of Colchester Drive and Colony Street, having frontage of 120 feet on the south side of Colchester Drive and 309 feet on the east side of Colony Street (2230 West Colchester Drive, Suites 1 -5 - Victory Outreach Church). REQUEST: (2) This is a City- initiated request (Planning Commission) to consider revocation or modification of Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04960 (to permit and retain an existing church in conjunction with a commercial retail center) under authority of Code Section 18.60200. BACKGROUND (3) At the June 27, 2005, Commission meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to initiate revocation or modification proceedings for Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04960 as authorized by Section 18.60200 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. (4) This property is developed with an existing non - conforming commercial retail center, is zoned CG (BCC) (General Commercial — Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Overlay) and is located within the West Anaheim Commercial Corridors Project of the Merged Anaheim Redevelopment Area. The Anaheim General Plan designates this property and all surrounding properties except the property to the south for Medium Density Residential land uses. The property to the south is designated for Neighborhood Commercial land uses. (5) Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04960 (to permit and retain an existing church (Victory Outreach Church Suites 1 -5) within an existing non - conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) was approved by the Commission on March 21, 2005 for a period of two (2) years. (6) Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04861 (to permit and retain two existing churches, a narcotics anonymous meeting hall, and to establish land use conformity with the City's zoning code requirements for an existing non - conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) was withdrawn by the property owner's agent at the January 10, 2005, Commission meeting. CUP2005- 05006 -S R- PC07 -25 -05 Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 10 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (7) The Planning Director's authorized representative has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15321, Class 21 (Enforcement Actions by Regulatory Agencies ), as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare further environmental documentation- DISCUSSION (8) The original application for this permit was a the result of a Code Enforcement investigation based upon a request for service pertaining to a thrift store operating as a Twelve -Step Recovery Program, the overall condition of the property, vagrancy, and smoking within the building. Upon responding to the request for service, staff identified a number of Code violations pertaining to the property, including, but not limited to, the following: • Two (2) unpermitted churches • An unpermitted narcotics anonymous meeting hall • An unpermitted comedy club (operating as part of the meeting hall) • An unpermitted storage unit • Trash, refuse and discarded furniture along the rear of the building (9) The commercial center on the property consists of five (5) businesses within sixteen (16) tenant spaces located in two (2) buildings on the property. There are two small landscaped areas and a trash enclosure within the parking lot. The petitioner of this original application. Victory Outreach Church, occupies Suites 1 -5 ; the Orange County Recovery Center (and comedy club) occupies Suites 6 -8; and the Ministerio Impacto Nuevo Church occupies Suites 13 -16. The recovery center is operating without the benefit of appropriate land use approval and required building permits, and the second church was granted a conditional use permit on June 1 of this year. As of the preparation of this staff report, no contact from the second church has been made to the City to fulfill their conditions of approval. (10) Due to the extensive Code Enforcement history pertaining to this property, staff had conducted field inspections of the interior of the entire building, including this tenant space (see Attached letter to Joseph Curd, property owner's agent, dated November 3, 2004, regarding staffs inspection). Staff observations included, but were not limited to, unpermitted improvements to the interior of the tenant spaces, insufficient building ingress /egress, substandard exiting mechanisms on the doors, as well as unpermitted electrical and plumbing modifications. Regardless of the land use entitlement request approved, the property owner is obligated to correct Building Code and Fire Code violations as determined by the Building Division and Fire Department. To date, these violations have not been addressed. (11) The interior portion of this tenant space where the church currently operates has undergone interior tenant improvements without proper review and approval by the Fire Department and Building Division. This commercial tenant space has been converted into assembly area and has not been evaluated for conformance to the Fire and Building Codes related to occupancy and exiting requirements. Because these modifications to the building may compromise the safety of members of the church, staff included the following condition within the resolution of Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 10 approval (Resolution No. PC200541) requiring the operator and /or the property owner to submit plans and obtain appropriate building permits for all outstanding tenant improvements within sixty (60) days of the Planning Commission's approval (May 20, 2005). `7. That the following items observed at staff's physical inspection on October 14, 2004, shall be addressed within a period of sixty (60) days. The appropriate permits shall be obtained for any necessary work as follows: • Provide address numbers on front of building. CFC Section 901.4.4 • The owner shall hire a licensed architect to 1) conduct a comprehensive facility investigation, 2) prepare accurate as- built' plans to reflect the existing tenant improvements and obtain permits for items indicated below, 3) modify the plans in order to fully comply with the applicable codes, and 4) submit new "Tenant Improvement" plans for permits and inspections. • Interior walls constructed without permits. • Opening in masonry wall on south side of the tenant space requires review and approval. • Upgrade restrooms, exit doors, and new counter top for handicap accessibility. • Mechanical, electrical, plumbing works (electrical fixtures, outlets, a/c distributions, gas, water line, sewer cleanout at the middle of pavement, etc.) require permits. • Reduce the number of chairs in Victory Outreach (Units #1 -5) to 49. • Obtain approval of occupancy change from the Building Division (before occupancy may exceed 49). • The owner is required to hire a licensed architect to conduct a comprehensive facility investigation. A licensed architect shall prepare the plans because they involve "Assembly" occupancies (potential of increased risk for fire related injuries). • Change of Occupancy from B to A3 is required if occupancy exceeds 49." Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 10 View of Parking Lot during Services View of Interior of Tenant Spaces — Number of Chairs and Occupants Exceed 49 Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 10 (12) The attached memorandum from the Community Preservation Division, dated July 18, 2005, summarizes observations made by staff during an on site inspection conducted on July 15, 2005, in the evening. Community Preservation staff observed an evening service being conducted and identified the following violations: • Several cars double parked in front of the church. • There were 147 chairs set up in the church and there 58 people sitting and attending the church service at the time of our inspection. • There was child care services (approximately 15 -20 children, three adults) being conducted in the south rear rooms of unit # 5. • There was miscellaneous refuse being stored at the rear of the units. The Victory Outreach Church was in violation of all of the building, fire, health and safety codes in their conditions of approval with the exception of the following which has been corrected: • Address numbers were mounted to the front of the building. • Two fire extinguishers were installed inside the church. • Tape was removed from the circuit breakers. • All extension cords were removed. • The gate was unlocked on the westside of the property. A review of City records indicate that no building permits or architectural plans have been submitted for approval regarding the unpermitted tenant improvements in suites 1 -5. (13) The owner of the property and the applicant have been aware of these life and safety issues since October of 2004 (9 months ago) and have addressed only the most minor of issues. Staff has been in contact with the operators of the church several times since this conditional use permit approval to track progress and advise the applicant that it is important to comply with the conditions of approval as specified by the Commission. The applicant has indicated that the lack financial resources has kept them from completing the above - referenced condition and has indicated that they will be relocating; however, they have not indicated a specific time frame for such relocation. As of the writing of this report, the above - referenced condition has not been fulfilled. (14) Staff provided the Planning Commission an update at the preliminary study session on June 13, 2005, indicating that this condition had not been completed as specified (by May 20, 2005). Because the use is being exercised contrary to the conditions of approval, and in violation of the Uniform Building Code and Uniform Fire Code, and as such is detrimental to the public health and safety (namely the congregants of the church), staff believes revocation of this permit is reasonably necessary- FINDINGS (15) Section 18.60200 of the Zoning Code describes the process for modifying or revoking a permit. The process requires a motion of the Commission to initiate the proceedings. The item is then advertised for public hearing with notice provided to the applicant/permit holder ten days prior to the hearing. The Commission may consider whether to revoke or modify the permit on Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission July 25, 2005 Item No. 10 the basis of evidence and testimony submitted at the future public hearing and based on the following findings: (a) That the approval was obtained by fraud; or (b) That the use or variance for which such approval is granted is not being exercised within the time specified in such permit; or (c) That the use or variance for which such approval was granted has ceased to exist or has been suspended or inoperative for any reason for a period of six (6) consecutive months or more; or (d) That the permit granted is being, or recently has been, exercised contrary to the terms or conditions of such approval, or in violation of any statute, ordinance, law or regulation; or (e) That the use or variance for which the approval was granted has been so exercised as to be detrimental to the public health or safety, or so as to constitute a nuisance; or (f) That the use or variance for which the approval was granted has not been exercised and that, based upon additional information or due to changed circumstances, the facts necessary to support one or more of the required findings for the original approval of such entitlement as set forth in this chapter no longer exist; or (g) That any such modification, including the imposition of any additional conditions, is reasonably necessary to protect the public peace, health, safety or general welfare, or necessary to permit reasonable operation under the permit as granted. As part of the revocation /modification process, the Planning Commission may change conditions or add new conditions as necessary to correct problems or violations relating to the use. The Planning Commission may also modify conditions or add new conditions to preserve the integrity and character of the zoning district or to secure the general purposes of the zoning ordinance and the General Plan- RECOMMENDATION (16) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the meeting, the Commission revoke this conditional use permit by adopting the attached resolution including the findings contained therein. Page 6 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2005 -"* A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION REVOKING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -04960 (2230 WEST COLCHESTER DRIVE, SUITES 1 -5) WHEREAS, on March 21, 2005, the Anaheim City Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2005 -41 to permit and retain an existing church with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces (213 required; 64 existing and approved); and WHEREAS, the property for which this entitlement was granted consists of certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as LOTS 1, 2 3 AND 4 OF TRACT NO. 2701, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 115, PAGES 5 AND 6 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. WHEREAS, on the June 27, 2005, Commission meeting, the Planning Commission made a motion to initiate revocation or modification proceedings for Conditional Use Permit No. 2005- 04960 as authorized by Section 18.60200 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on July 25, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60 "Procedures ", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the permit granted is being, or recently has been, exercised contrary to the terms or conditions of such approval, or in violation of any statute, ordinance, law or regulation, as the use is being exercised contrary to the conditions of approval, and in violation of the Uniform Building Code and Uniform Fire Code; and 2. That the use for which the approval was granted has been so exercised as to be detrimental to the public health or safety, as such violations of the Uniform Building Code and Uniform Fire Code pertaining to assembly uses create a potentially dangerous situation and are detrimental to the public health and safety (namely the congregants of the church); and 3. That " "" indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed revocation of Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -04960 (to permit and retain an existing church [Victory Outreach Church Suites 1 -51 within an existing non - conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces) and has determined that the action falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Class 21, Section 15321, (Enforcement Actions by Regulatory Agencies), as defined in the CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 - 04960, to permit and retain an existing church CR \PC2005 -0 -1- PC2005- Tracking No. CUP2005 -05006 (Victory Outreach Church Suites 1 -5) within an existing non - conforming commercial retail center with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of July 25, 2005. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. ATTEST: CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on July 25, 2005, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , 2005. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -2- Attachment - Item No. 10 MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Preservation Division DATE: JULY 18, 2005 TO: JOHN RAMIREZ, ASSOCIATE PLANNER FROM: ROGER BENNION, COMMUNITY PRESERVATION SUPERVISOR SUBJECT: REQUEST TO CONSIDER THE REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #2005 -04960 (VICTORY OUTREACH CHURCH) LOCATED AT 2230 W. COLCHESTER SUITES I - 5 On 7- 15 -05, at approximately 7:50 p.m. Senior Community Preservation Officer Don Yourstone and I inspected the property located at 2230 W. Colchester Suites 1 -5 to observe if Victory Outreach Church was operating within their approved conditions of approval. We met with Paula Elias, treasurer of Victory Outreach and she was present during our inspection. We observed the following conditions: • Several cars were double parked in front of the church. • There were 147 chairs set up in the church and there 58 people sitting and attending the church service at the time of our inspection. • There was child care services (approximately 15 -20 children, three adults) being conducted in the south rear rooms of unit # 5. • There was miscellaneous refuse being stored at the rear of the units. (see photos) The Victory Outreach Church was in violation of all of the building, fire, health and safety codes in their conditions of approval with the exception of the following which had been corrected: • Address numbers were mounted to the front of the building. • Two fire extinguishers were installed inside the church. • Tape was removed from the circuit breakers. • All extension cords were removed. • The gate was unlocked on the westside of the property. It should be noted that a check of City records indicate that no building permits or architectural plans have been submitted for approval regarding the unpermitted tenant improvements in suites 1 -5. If you have any additional questions need additional information regarding this inspection, feel free to contact me at ext. 4470. Victory outreacb /rb City of Anaheim Attachment - Item No. 10 PLANNING DEPARTMENT I'VE November 3, 2064 Joseph Curd Curd, Galindo & Smith, L.L.P. 301 East Ocean Blvd. # 460 Long Beach, Ca. 90802 Re: 2230 West Colchester Drive Dear Mr. Curd: This letter is a follow up to the City's physical inspection of the above referenced address on October 14, 2004. City staff from the Fire Department, Building Division, Code Enforcement Division, City Attorney's Office, and the Planning Services Division met with you and your client on site and conducted a physical 'inspection of the interior and exterior spaces to determine the nature and extent of any code violations /health and safety issues pertaining to property. Your client requested this inspection at the September 8, 2004, meeting where various members of City staff met with you and your client to discuss the conditions of approval pertaining to the conditional use permit application currently under consideration by the City. The following is an itemized list of violations that Staff will recommend be included as conditions of approval in the event the Planning Commission approves the conditional use permit request for the two (2) churches and the Orange County Recovery Center: Fire Department Comments: Suites 1 -5 • Needs approval of occupancy change from the Building Division. • Plans must be submitted to the Building Division for Occupant Load. • Provide two 2A10BC fire extinguishers, serviced by a California State Licensed Company. Title 19 • A flame - retardant certificate must be provided for all drapes, or remove. CFC Section 1103.3.3.1 • Maintain proper amounts of Exit doors provided with panic hardware and they must swing outward. CFC Section 1207.1 and 1207.2 • Remove all secondary locks, latches, or bolts from Exit doors. CFC Section 1207.3 • Circuit breakers may not be taped or secured in the "On" position. CFC Section 8504. • Remove all extension cords. CFC Section 8508.1 • Provide address numbers 2230 on front of building. CFC Section 901.4.4 • Gates outside must have panic hardware and swing outward. CFC Section 1208.2 and 1208.4 • Illuminated Exit signs are required. 200 South Anaheim Boulevard P.G. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 www.anaheim.net I TEL (714) 765 -5139 -2- November 3, 2004 Suites 6 -8 May need approval of occupancy change from Building Division. Remove extension cord to back -up coffee pot. CFC Section 8506.1 Replace missing electrical cover plate by the back -up coffee pot. CFC Section 8504 Suites 13 -16 • Needs approval of occupancy change from the Building Division. • Plans must be submitted to the Building Division for Occupant Load. • A flame - retardant certificate must be provided for all drapes or remove. CFC Section 1103.3.3.1 • Service fire extinguisher In classroom area. Title 19 597.1 • Maintain proper amounts of Exit doors with panic hardware and doors must swing outward. CFC Section 1207.1 and 1207.2 • Remove all extension cords. CFC Section 8506.1 • Replace missing blanks in the electrical panels. CFC Section 8504 • Remove all secondary locks, latches, or bolts from Exit doors. CFC Section 1207.3 • Gates must have panic hardware and swing outward. CFC Section 1208.2 and 1208.4 • illuminated Exit signs are required. Building Division Comments: General Comments: The owner is required to hire a licensed architect to 1) Conduct a comprehensive facility investigation; 2) Prepare accurate "as- built" plans to reflect the existing tenant improvements; 3) Modify the plans in order to fully comply with the applicable codes; and 4) Submit new "Tenant Improvement" plans for permits and inspections. A licensed architect must prepare the plans because they involve "Assembly" occupancies (potential of increased risk for fire related injuries). Suite No. 1 -5 (Alcance VictoriaNictory Church): Approximately 3.100 s.f. • Interior walls were built without permits. • Masonry wall on south side was cut for a door opening. • Restrooms are not handicapped accessible. ® Exit doors are not handicapped accessible (i.e., top of door threshold to outside pavement is -4 ", no lever type hardware, no kickplates). • New counter top is not handicapped accessible. • Exit door on west side is blocked from the public sidewalk (gate within the 4' -6" block wall was locked). • Mechanical, electrical, plumbing works (electrical fixtures, outlets, a/c distributions, gas, water line, sewer cleanout at the middle of pavement, etc.) require permits. • Change of Occupancy from B to A3 requires permit. -3- November 3, 2004 • Interior walls were built without permit. • Bearing walls dividing each suite were cut for opening. Ceiling joist and beam size must be calculated & verified for proper structural supports between Suite No. 6 and 7. • Restrooms are not handicapped accessible. • Exit doors are not handicapped accessible (i.e., top of door threshold to outside pavement is -4 ", no kickplates). • New counter tops at the thrift store are not handicapped accessible. • Exit door on west side is blocked from the public sidewalk (gate within the 4' -6°' block wall was locked). • Mechanical, electrical, plumbing works (electrical fixtures, outlets, a/c distributions, gas, water line, etc.) require permits. • Change of Occupancy from B to A3 is required if occupancy exceeds 50. Suites No. 13 -16 (Minsterio Impactor Nuevo) • Interior walls were built without permit. (Kitchen, kid's room, main entry area, offices, etc.) • Bearing walls dividing each suite were cut for opening. • Church Assembly area is not handicapped accessible. (Counter area, doors, hardware, etc.) • The row seating blocks exits on east side. • Restrooms are not handicapped accessible. • Exit doors are not handicapped accessible 0.e., top of door threshold to outside pavement is -4 ", no kickplates). • Mechanical, electrical, plumbing works (electrical fixtures, outlets, a/c distributions, gas, water line, etc.) require permits. • Change of Occupancy from B to A3 requires permit. Site Items: • Storage at the west side yard was built without permit. • Handicapped parking, landing area striping, and pole sign are required. Code Enforcement Comments: The number of chairs in Victory Outreach (Units #1 -5) number 158. The occupants of Units #6 -8 are the OC Recovery Center and Thrift Store. There is one jukebox in Unit #6 & 7, and Unit #8 has 7 amusement devices, 2 pool tables, and 1 jukebox. A check of City records (Tidemark) does not show that any fees are being assessed for the amusement devices. The fence at the rear, fronting on Colony Street, is not permitted due to the installation of chain link atop a 48" high block wall fence. The chain link is in disrepair at the NWC and in several places along the linear length. The chain link fence was installed sometime between April 1997 and October 1997, indicated by photographs taken during inspections conducted by Code Enforcement during 1997, When the chain link fence was installed, the caps of the block wall were removed and remnants of mortar remain, as do the exposed cells of the top blocks. -4— November 3, 2004 • The asphalt at the rear is in disrepair, containing deep crevices and holes. This presents a potential hazard of tripping or falling to persons walking in the area. This condition is most apparent between units # 2 & 3 and Units #13.16. • An unpermitted wooden enclosure has been erected behind the EI Encante Bar. It is used to store recyclable beer bottles and cans. • Two exterior lights at the rear exits (Units #7 & 8) are considered electrical hazards. One of the lights is hanging from its wires. The other light is missing and the electrical connection is open and exposed to the elements. • Refuse and waste and outdoor storage is evident behind many of the units. • The premise numbers (2230) for the buildings are missing, and each unit needs to be properly identified by number. • There are possible NPDES violations at the site. It appears when cleaning the interior units; wastewater is being dumped out onto the rear pavement as evidenced by residue and etching of the asphalt. Such waste could possibly enter the public, sidewalk and street. • The two business licenses for Unit #9, BUS 2002 -04302 (Nail Salon) expired November 15, 2003 and BUS 2002-04471 (Independent Hair Stylist) expired December 1, 2003. Please be advised that items involving safety and occupancy must be addressed immediately (items in bold font). The remainder of the items will be included as conditions of approval for your conditional use permit application. The Fire Department has already directly notified the tenants of the two churches to reduce the number of occupants due to concerns about safety in the event of an emergency. Please review the above information and contact me with any questions at (714) 765- 5139, extension 5804, or e-mail me at ioramirezOanaheim.net The public hearing for this project was continued by the Planning Commission to November 15, 2004. If you feel that more time is needed to review the above - referenced items and would like to meet with staff to discuss these items, then you may request another continuance in writing, to the December 13, 2004, Commission meeting. I hope this information is helpful to you. As noted above, if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, John P. Ramirez Planner City of Anaheim CC: Chris Lee, Plan Check Supervisor Cathy Mobley, Fire inspector II Larry Newberry, Senior Assistant City Attorney Greg Hastings, Planning Services Manager Selma Mann, Assistant City Attorney Linda Eaves, Senior Code Enforcement Officer