Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
PC 2014/09/08
City of Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Monday, September 8, 2014 Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California • Chairman: John Seymour • Chairman Pro-Tempore: Michelle Lieberman • Commissioners: Peter Agarwal, Paul Bostwick, Mitchell Caldwell, Bill Dalati, Victoria Ramirez • Call To Order - 5:00 p.m. • Pledge Of Allegiance • Public Comments • Public Hearing Items • Commission Updates • Discussion • Adjournment 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. A copy of the staff report may be obtained at the City of Anaheim Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805. A copy of the staff report is also available on the City of Anaheim website www.anaheim.net/planning on Thursday, September 4, 2014, after 5:00 p.m. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda (other than writings legally exempt from public disclosure) will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Department located at City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, during regular business hours. You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e-mail address: planningcommission@anaheim.net 09/08/14 Page 2 of 7 APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Public Convenience or Necessity Determinations, Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 calendar 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. 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. Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 5:00 P.M. Public Comments: This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim City Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items. 09/08/14 Page 3 of 7 Public Hearing Items ITEM NO. 2 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2014-00270 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2014-120 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05704 (DEV2013-00106) Location: 320 North Anaheim Boulevard, 408 – 424 North Anaheim Boulevard, 321 North Claudina Street, and 401 – 417 North Claudina Street, Request: To permit a mixed use commercial development including the following zoning entitlements: (i) a conditional use permit to permit the conversion of an existing auto body facility to a neighborhood marketplace to include indoor and outdoor retail stores, restaurants, outdoor dining, on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages, and outdoor entertainment and special events; the conversion of two single family homes to offices; the conversion of an existing public street (Adele Street) to a community plaza; and to permit an existing legally nonconforming banquet hall (Landmark) to include the on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages; (ii) a reclassification to rezone the properties from the RS-3 (Single Family Residential) and C-G (General Commercial) zones to the MU (Mixed Use) Overlay zone; and (iii) a tentative parcel map to merge seven parcels into one parcel. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Continued from the August 25, 2014 Planning Commission meeting. Motion Request for Continuance to October 6, 2014 Project Planner: David See dsee@anaheim.net 09/08/14 Page 4 of 7 ITEM NO. 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05747 VARIANCE NO. 2014-04979 (DEV2014-00072) Location: 1341 Simpson Circle Request: To permit a physical fitness facility within an existing industrial building with fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Amy Vazquez avazquez@anaheim.net ITEM NO. 4 VARIANCE NO. 2014-04964 (DEV2014-00031) Location: 3085 East La Palma Avenue Request: To allow two business identification signs at an existing service station where one business identification sign is permitted. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Amy Vazquez avazquez@anaheim.net 09/08/14 Page 5 of 7 ITEM NO. 5 DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00106 (DEV2014-00052) Location: 400 West Disney Way Request: For a determination of public convenience or necessity to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption in conjunction with a proposed nightclub and entertainment venue (Rumba Room) within Anaheim GardenWalk. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi ethien@anaheim.net ITEM NO. 6 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17796 (DEV2014-00061) Location: 1311 – 1347 North Blue Gum Street Request: To subdivide three existing parcels into seven lots with three of the buildings being subdivided for condominium purposes. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 15 (Minor Land Divisions) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. _____ Project Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi ethien@anaheim.net 09/08/14 Page 6 of 7 ITEM NO. 7 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00495 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00117 MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2014-00593 SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002 (DAG2007-00002D) (DEV2012-00060B) Location: 1005 - 1105 East Katella Avenue Request: The following zoning entitlements are requested in order to modify a previously-approved residential project in the Platinum Triangle to increase the number of units from 350 to 389 units. This request would also eliminate 60,000 square feet of commercial area designated for this property within Sub-Area A of the Katella District in the Platinum Triangle (“the Proposed Project”): amend the General Plan to modify Figures and Tables in various Elements of the General Plan, including Table LU-4: “General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City” to reflect the Proposed Project; amend Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to reflect the Proposed Project; amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to reflect the Proposed Project; and, amend and restate Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 between the City of Anaheim and Platinum Vista Apartments, LP to reflect the Proposed Project. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether Previously Certified Environmental Impact Report No. 339, Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 316 and Addendum No. 3 to Previously Certified Environmental Impact Report No. 339 is the appropriate environmental documentation for the Proposed Project. Resolution No. _____ Resolution No. _____ Resolution No. _____ Resolution No. _____ Project Planner: Vanessa Norwood vnorwood@anaheim.net Adjourn to Monday, September 22, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. 09/08/14 Page 7 of 7 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: 4:45 p.m. September 3, 2014 (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION The City of Anaheim wishes to make all of its public meetings and hearings accessible to all members of the public. The City prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. If requested, the agenda and backup materials will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Any person who requires a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the public meeting may request such modification, accommodation, aid or service by contacting the Planning Department either in person at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, or by telephone at (714) 765-5139, no later than 10:00 a.m. one business day preceding the scheduled meeting. La ciudad de Anaheim desea hacer todas sus reuniones y audiencias públicas accesibles a todos los miembros del público. La Ciudad prohíbe la discriminación por motivos de raza , color u origen nacional en cualquier programa o actividad que reciba asistencia financiera federal. Si se solicita, la agenda y los materiales de copia estarán disponible en formatos alternativos apropiados a las personas con una discapacidad, según lo requiere la Sección 202 del Acta de Americanos con Discapacidades de 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), las normas federales y reglamentos adoptados en aplicación del mismo. Cualquier persona que requiera una modificación relativa a la discapacidad, incluyendo medios auxiliares o servicios, con el fin de participar en la reunión pública podrá solicitar dicha modificación, ayuda o servicio poniéndose en contacto con la Oficina de Secretaria de la Ciudad ya sea en persona en el 200 S Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, o por teléfono al (714) 765-5139, antes de las 10:00 de la mañana un día habil antes de la reunión programada. ITEM NO. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 SUBJECT: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2014-00270 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2014-120 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05704 LOCATION: 320 North Anaheim Boulevard, 408 – 424 North Anaheim Boulevard, 321 North Claudina Street, and 401 – 417 North Claudina Street APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The agent is Greg McCafferty, representing the applicant and property owner, William Taormina. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of the following applications: 1) A Zoning Reclassification of the properties from the Single Family Residential (RS-3) and General Commercial (C-G) zones to the Mixed Use (MU) Overlay zone; 2) A Tentative Parcel Map to merge seven parcels into one parcel; and 3) A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to permit the conversion of an existing auto body facility to a neighborhood marketplace to include indoor and outdoor retail stores, restaurants, outdoor dining, on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages, and outdoor entertainment and special events; the conversion of two single family homes to offices; the conversion of an existing public street (Adele Street) to a community plaza; and to permit on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages at an existing legally nonconforming banquet hall (Landmark). DISCUSSION: This hearing was continued from the August 25, 2014 Planning Commission meeting. The applicant would like additional time to address comments received from the community and is requesting that this hearing be continued to October 6, 2014. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this hearing be continued to the October 6, 2014, Planning Commission meeting as requested by the applicant. Prepared by, Submitted by, David See Jonathan E. Borrego Senior Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity and Aerial Maps 2. Applicant’s Request for Continuance 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net C -G P A R K IN G L O T RS-3DUPLEX R S -3S.F .R .R S -3S.F .R .R S -3 T R IP L E X RS-3APTS6 DU C -G A U T O R E P A IR /S E R V IC E RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RE SID EN CE RS-3FOURPLE X R S -3S.F .R .R S -3 T R IP L E X R S -3S.F .R .R S -3S.F .R .R S -3S.F .R .R S -3S.F .R .R S -3S.F .R .R S -2S.F .R .R S -2 T R IP L E X R S -2S.F .R .C -G O F F IC E S RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RE SID EN CE R S -3 D U P L E X R S -3 D U P L E X R M -4PAR K P R O M E N A D E A P T S 2 4 D U R S -2S.F .R .R M -4 A P T S 1 2 D U R S -2S.F .R .T R E L IG IO U S U S E C -GRETA IL C -GNIGH TCLUB R S -3 F O U R P L E X C -G O F F IC E S R S -3 R E L IG IO U S U S E R S -3 D U P L E X R S -3S.F .R .RS-3SINGLE FAMILY RE SID EN CE R S -3S.F .R .TVAC A N T R S -2S.F .R .R S -2S.F .R .R S -2S.F .R .R S -3 R E L IG IO U S U S E R S -3 V A C A N T R S -3S.F .R .RS-3SINGLE FAMILY RE SID EN CE RS-3FOURPLE X R S -2S.F .R .T A P T S 2 0 D U TPARK IN G L O T C -G O F F IC E S C -G R E S T A U R A N T R S -3 T R IP L E X R S -3S.F .R .R S -3S.F .R .R S -3 D U P L E X R M -4APT S8 D U R M -4 A P T S 1 0 D U C -GAPT S5 D U R S -3S.F .R .R M -3 R E T A IL R S -3 D U P L E X C -GS.F .R .R S -3 D U P L E X R S -3 D U P L E X C-GCOLON YPARK R S -3S.F .R .R S -3S.F .R .C -G R E L IG IO U S U S E C -GRETA IL C -GRETA IL C -GRETA IL R S -36 D U R S -3 T R IP L E X R S -3S.F .R .R S -3S.F .R .C -G V A C A N T R S -3S.F .R .R S -3S.F .R .R S -2S.F .R .R S -2S.F .R .C -GAUT OSALE S R S -3S.F .R .C -GS.F .R .R S -2S.F .R .C -GAUT O B O D Y S H O P R M -4 P A R K IN G L O T R M -4SFR N ANAHEI M BL VDS ANAHEI M BL VDN EMI LY STE A D E L E S TN CLAUDI NA STE S Y C A M O R E S T E C Y P R E S S S T N LEMON STN ZEYN STW C Y P R E S S S T W A D E L E S T E A L B E R T A S T W S Y C A M O R E S T W A L B E R T A S T N PHI LADELPHI A STN CL AUDI NA STE. LA PALMA AVE E . L I N C O L N A V E W .LIN C O L N A V E N. EAST STS. EAST STN. HARBOR BLVDW. LA PALMA AV E W . B R O A D W A Y E . B R O A D W A Y S. ANAHEI M BLVDW . B R O A D W A Y E . B R O A D W A Y320 N orth Ana he im Bou lev ard408-42 4 N ort h An ah eim Bo ule va r d321 N orth C la udi na Stree t,401 -41 7 N ort h C la ud ina Stre et D E V 20 13 -0 01 0 6 Su bje ct Property APN: 035-111-01035-111-02035-111-03035-111-04035-111-05035-111-06035-115-01 ATTACHM ENT NO. 1 0 50 10 0 Feet Ae ria l Pho to :Ma y 20 12 N ANAHEI M BLVDS ANAHEI M BL VDN EMI LY STE A D E L E S TN CLAUDI NA STE S Y C A M O R E S T E C Y P R E S S S T N LEMON STN ZEYN STW C Y P R E S S S T W A D E L E S T E A L B E R T A S T W S Y C A M O R E S T W A L B E R T A S T N PHI LADELPHI A STN CLAUDI NA STN PHI LADELPHI A STE. LA PALMA AVE E . L I N C O L N A V E W .LIN C O L N A V E N. EAST STS. EAST STN. HARBOR BLVDW. LA PALMA AVE W . B R O A D W A Y E . B R O A D W A Y S. ANAHEI M BLVDW . B R O A D W A Y E . B R O A D W A Y320 North Anaheim Boulev ard408-424 North Anah eim Boulevard321 North Claudina Street ,4 0 1-417 North Clau dina St re et D E V2013-00106 Subject Property APN: 035-111-01035-111-02035-111-03035-111-04035-111-05035-111-06035-115-01 ATTACHMEN T NO. 1 0 50 100 Feet Aeria l Ph oto :Ma y 2 01 2 From:Greg McCafferty To:David See Cc:Josh Haskins; Ted White Subject:Mercado La Mision Date:Wednesday, September 03, 2014 1:43:29 PM Please continue the project to the October 6 Planning Commission meeting. We are holding another community meeting tonight and are planning to go to the Historic Preservation Committee on September 17. Thanks for your help Dave. Greg McCafferty, Principal Development Advisors, LLC 2400 E. Katella Ave., Suite 800 Anaheim, CA 92806 Phone: (714) 606-7208 Email: greg@development-advisors.com ATTACHMENT NO. 2 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. ITEM NO. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05747 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04979 LOCATION: 1341 Simpson Circle (Anaheim Crossfit West) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The agent is Derek Burnham representing the applicant, Stephanie Amato. The property owner is James Ness. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to establish a physical fitness facility in an existing industrial building. The applicant is also requesting approval of a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the State CEQA Guidelines, and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05747 and Variance No. 2014-04979. BACKGROUND: This 0.6-acre property is developed with an industrial building. The property is located in the Industrial (I) zone and the General Plan designates this property for Industrial land uses. The property is surrounded by industrial businesses in all directions. Anaheim Crossfit West has been operating with a conditional use permit at 1015 East Katella Avenue since 2010. However, the business needs to relocate due to the demolition of its building to accommodate development of a mixed-use project in the Platinum Triangle. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to open a strength and fitness training business within a 5,800 square foot space located in a two unit, 11,300 square foot industrial building. No changes to the interior or exterior of the building are proposed. Hourly classes would be held between 6 a.m. and 8:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday, with the facility being closed from 11 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Friday classes would be the same, but would end at 7:30 p.m. Weekend hours would be 9:00 a.m. to 11 a.m. Class sessions would be approximately 50 minutes with a 10 minute transition time between classes. Class sizes would be limited to 12 students with a single instructor. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05747 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04979 September 8, 2014 Page 2 of 3 ANALYSIS: The following is staff’s analysis of the requested entitlements. Conditional Use Permit: A conditional use permit is required to permit physical fitness facilities in the Industrial zone in order to determine compatibility with the surrounding area. All classes would take place within the building, with the exception of limited outdoor exercise activities in the parking lot. The property is suitable to accommodate the proposed fitness facility without any impacts to surrounding properties. This business has been operating at an industrial complex since 2010 and the City has received no complaints. Staff believes that the proposed use will be compatible with other businesses in the surrounding area. Parking Variance: The Zoning Code requires that parking requirements be calculated by combining the needs of the physical fitness facility and the industrial use on the property. The fitness facility and the industrial business requires a total of 41 parking spaces; 32 for the fitness facility and 9 for the industrial use. The property contains a total of 25 parking spaces. The applicant has submitted a parking justification letter indicating that the maximum class size would be 12 members and one coach. The parking lot has recently been improved and there are currently 14 parking spaces available in close proximity to the business. The parking will not be shared with the industrial business in the building since the parking areas are separated by a fence and are located on opposite ends of the property. Based upon the proposed operations of the business and the limited class sizes, staff recommends approval of the parking variance as the parking spaces available on-site are adequate to accommodate the parking demands of the proposed use. Conditions of approval pertaining to hours of operation and maximum number of class participants have been included in the attached resolution. Letters of Support and Opposition: Two letters of support were received for this request (Attachment 5). The first letter was from the property manager at 1015 East Katella Avenue, indicating that the physical fitness facility operated in a responsible and respectful manner at the prior business location. The owner of the business directly across the street from the proposed fitness facility also submitted a letter stating that he has met with the applicant, discussed the operational characteristics of Anaheim Crossfit West, and supports the project. Two letters of opposition were received from adjacent property owners expressing concerns regarding the lack of parking in the area, a potential increase in traffic, gym members running in the streets, and the operation of a medical marijuana dispensary within the same building as the proposed fitness facility (Attachment 5). Staff believes that the proposed condition of approval limiting the size of classes to a maximum of 12 participants and one instructor would ensure that on-site parking is adequate to accommodate the parking demands of this business. The applicant also proposes to have all patrons agree to park in designated on-site parking spaces as part of their membership agreement. In response to concerns about patrons running in the public streets, a condition of approval has been added to the resolution prohibiting the use of public streets for any exercise activities. The medical marijuana dispensary that was located in the adjacent tenant space was not associated with the proposed business. Code Enforcement staff have confirmed that the dispensary is no longer in operation and a home theater construction business now occupies the space. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05747 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04979 September 8, 2014 Page 3 of 3 CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the proposed physical fitness business, with the proposed conditions of approval limiting the number of patrons and prohibiting exercise activities within the public street, is compatible with the adjacent industrial uses in the surrounding area. Staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Amy Vazquez Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner, Lilley Planning Group Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity and Aerial Maps 2. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution 3. Applicant’s Letter of Request 4. Parking Justification Letter 5. Letters of Support and Opposition The following attachments were provided to the Planning Commission and are available for public review at the Planning Department at City Hall or on the City of Anaheim’s web site at www.anaheim.net/planning. 6. Photographs 7. Site Plan IINDUSTRI AL IINDUSTRIAL RM-4KING OF SPAI NAPARTMENTS104 DU RM-4FOURPLE X RM-4FOURPLE X RM-4FOURPLE X IJOLANTA TIL ESTORAGE YAR D RM -4WATERRIDGEAPARTMENTS220 D U IU-STOR EPUBLIC STOR AGE RM-4FOURPLE X IKELLYPAPER RM-4FOURPLE X IINDUSTRI AL IINDUSTRI AL IINDUSTRIALIINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRI AL IINDUSTRIAL IINDUSTRI AL RM-4FOURPLE X IINDUSTRI AL IINDUSTRIAL T (MH P)SUN KI ST GARD EN SMOBILEHOME PAR KS SUNKIST STE WINSTON RD E OMEG A AV E S TALT AVES ATHENA WAY S SIMPSON CIRS BELHAVEN STE. B ALL RD E. K ATE LLA AVE S. SUNKIST STS. LEWIS STE.CERRITOS AVES. STATE COLLEGE BLVDS. EAST STS. ANAHEIM BLVD134 1 So uth Sim ps on Circ le D E V N o . 20 1 4-0 0 07 2 Su bje ct Property APN: 253-163-17 ATTACHM ENT NO. 1 0 50 10 0 Feet Ae ria l Pho to :Ma y 20 13 S SUNKIST STE WINSTON RD E OMEGA AVE S TALT AVES ATHENA WAY S SIMPSON CIRS BELHAVEN STE. BALL RD E. KATELLA AVE S. SUNKIST STS. LEWIS STE.CERRITOS AVES. STATE COLLEGE BLVDS. EAST STS. ANAHEIM BLVD1 3 4 1 S o u t h S im p so n C ir c le D E V N o . 2 0 1 4 -0 0 0 7 2 Subject Property APN: 253-163-17 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 °0 50 100 Feet Aeria l Ph oto :Ma y 2 01 3 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. PC2014-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05747 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04979 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00072) (1341 SIMPSON CIRCLE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05747 to permit a physical fitness facility within an existing industrial building and Variance No. 2014- 04979 to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") (collectively referred to herein as the "Proposed Project") for that certain real property located at 1341 Simpson Circle in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 0.6 acres in size and is currently developed with a two-unit industrial building. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Industrial land uses. The Property is located in the “I” (Industrial) Zone. As such, the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards described in Chapter 18.10 (Industrial Zones) of the Code; and WHEREAS, as the "lead agency" under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, on September 8, 2014, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, notice of said public hearing having been duly given in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05747 and Variance No. 2014-04979, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Planning 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 with respect to a physical fitness facility in an existing industrial building with fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code, does find and determine the following facts: - 1 - PC2014-*** 1. The proposed conditional use permit request to permit a physical fitness facility within an existing industrial building is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized under the classes of allowable uses set forth in Table 10-A as Dance and Fitness Studios-Small, as referenced in paragraph .0402 of what, but for a clerical error, should be subsection .030 of Section No. 18.10.030 of the Code. 2. The proposed conditional use permit to permit a physical fitness facility, 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 because the building is surrounded by compatible buildings and uses; and, the physical fitness facility would be located within an existing building with no adverse effects to adjoining land uses. 3. The size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the physical fitness facility in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety because the facility would be located within an existing industrial building that is surrounded by other industrial uses. 4. The traffic generated by the physical fitness facility will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the traffic generated by this use will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking will be provided to accommodate the use. 5. 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 as the proposed land use will continue to be integrated with the surrounding industrial area and would not pose a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for a variance to allow less parking than required by the Code in conjunction with the proposed physical fitness facility should be approved for the following reasons: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces. (41 spaces required for the entire industrial property; 25 spaces proposed) 1. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed 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. A parking justification letter was prepared by the applicant, determining that the current number of parking spaces within the industrial property is sufficient to accommodate the uses on the site including the new physical fitness facility. The parking demand/operational letter indicates that only 12 parking spaces will be required by the proposed use during peak demand operating hours based on the number of students and coaches proposed and since a 10 minute gap is provided between classes; 2. 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 because the on-site parking will adequately accommodate the peak parking demands of the proposed physical fitness facility and the industrial use on the site; - 2 - PC2014-*** 3. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use because the on-site parking for the physical fitness facility will adequately accommodate peak parking demands of all uses on the site. This physical fitness facility generates a maximum peak parking demand of 12 parking spaces and 14 are provided; 4. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use because the project site provides adequate ingress and egress points to the property and are designed to allow for adequate on-site circulation; and 5. 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 because the project site has existing ingress or egress access points that are designed to allow adequate on-site circulation and therefore will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the physical fitness facility. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-05747 and Variance No. 2014-04979, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition (s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal 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. - 3 - PC2014-*** THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 8, 2014. Said Resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 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, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on September 8, 2014, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of September, 2014. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2014-*** - 5 - PC2014-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2014-05747 AND VARIANCE NO. 2014-04979 (DEV2014-00072) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1 There shall be a maximum of 12 class participants and one employee on site at any time. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 2 A ten minute gap between fitness classes shall be provided. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 3 The roll-up door located on the north side of the building shall remain closed and locked to accommodate the two adjacent parking spaces. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 4 Members of the fitness facility shall not participate in any physical fitness activities within the public streets. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 5 There shall be no outdoor storage of fitness equipment. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 6 The business shall be operated in accordance with the Letter of Request and Parking Justification Letter submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the business operation as described in that document shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial conformance with the Letter of Request and Parking Justification Letter and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning Department, Planning Services Division GENERAL CONDITIONS 7 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 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 may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 6 - PC2014-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 8 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 9 The 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 and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 7 - PC2014-*** ATTACHMENT NO. 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 Anaheim CrossFit West 1341 Simpson Circle Parking Justification August 21, 2014 The intent of this Operational Plan is to summarize our business plan for the current site. This document describes our current location and characteristics as it relates to operational hours and associated parking demands. Anaheim CrossFit West is a strength and fitness gym that has been in business at this location since July 2010. This is a small business owned by Stephanie Amato. Stephanie coaches and operates the business along with an on-site coach. The proposed fitness facility would occupy a tenant space of 5,500 square feet at 1341 Simpson Circle, which includes one small office and restrooms. The location is developed with an industrial building, with 14 parking spaces dedicated to the space at 1341 Simpson Circle. The fitness center classes operate in small groups. Keeping our classes small, with a low student to coach ratio is imperative in the training method. In order to control class sizes, 10 classes are offered each day. Currently, classes have a ”Maximum Capacity” of 12 members. However, based on the attendance records since 2010, actual class sizes range from one attendee to a maximum of 10 attendees, with the largest class sizes occurring during the 6 a.m. and 7 a.m. classes in the morning, and the 5:30 and 6:30 p.m. classes in the evening. Each class, coaches electronically confirm students attendance to keep accurate records and follow up with clients. Assuming a maximum class size of 12, along with an on-site coach, the maximum parking demand for the proposed fitness center would be 12 spaces. Since the site has 14 spaces allotted to the building at 1341 Simpson Circle, parking on the site would be adequate to serve the proposed use. Further, since actual class sizes are predominantly less than the maximum size of 12, and the largest class sizes occur in the early morning hours and in the mid-evening hours, which are generally off-peak for the adjacent businesses, the existing parking would be more than adequate to accommodate the proposed fitness center use. ATTACHMENT NO. 5 From:Shawn Townsend To:Amy K. Vazquez Cc:stephanie@anaheimcrossfitwest.com Subject:Stephanie Amato & Anaheim Crossfit West Date:Wednesday, September 03, 2014 8:35:02 AM City of Anaheim, My name is Shawn Townsend and I run Compressed Air Specialties on SimpsonCircle in the City. The reason for this email is to support the proposed crossfit gymthat would occupy the building directly across the street from our facility. We havebeen located there for almost 20 years and have never had any major issues withthe neighbors or the city. We are a family run business that prides ourselves on ourhistory of 60+ years in our industry. Our street is fairly small and when word got out that a gym would be going in, there was an initial scare that our tiny street would turn into a parking catastrophe. We heard that 30+ people would be in the gym at the same time and there was animmediate resistance to the possible move. We did not know at the time that thesenumbers were grossly inflated, nor do we even know where the rumor was started.As neighbors we all took this number of 30+ as the truth and immediately put ourguards up and started writing the City to voice our displeasure. We were not goingto sit back and take this. But unfortunately for the gym, we got ourselves worked up for nothing. Their actual numbers are no where close to what our fears led us to believe. I had the opportunity to speak with Stephanie Amato about this and I was given the facts. Ivoiced my only concern to her which was the parking situation and she detailed herplans which were well thought out. So basically in a very short meeting withStephanie I came to the realization that I would not anticipate any problems withthem conducting business directly across the street from us. As I sat back and thought more about the situation, we have gotten used to that building being used as a storage building for 10+ years with no one utilizing the parking. We had elbow room to park and we got comfortable with it. If ANY business were to occupy that building you would be bringing more cars onto our street. Why should we hold the gym to a higher standard than any other business inthe area? We ALL bring cars into the area and onto the street. Bottom line is that Stephanie wants to be a good neighbor and smallbusinesswoman. She knows that the parking is a major concern for our small groupof business owners and she has promised to keep a handle on it. Problem solved. Please keep in mind that I am not speaking on behalf of all of the businesses in our area. I am speaking on behalf of my family business that would likely be affected the greatest by this proposed move due to our location directly across the smallstreet. In short, I would like to show our support for Stephanie Amato and her gym andhope that this letter can in some way shed some light on the complaints filed againsther proposed move. If anyone needs to contact me directly, I can always be reached on my cell at 909- 578-8565 ________________Shawn TownsendCompressed Air Specialties, Inc.1340 S. Simpson CircleAnaheim, CA 92806-5531P: 714.991.8800 F: 714.991.1120 E: shawn@compairspec.com Photographs ATTACHMENT NO. 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. ITEM NO. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 SUBJECT: VARIANCE NO. 2014-04964 LOCATION: 3085 East La Palma Avenue (Chevron Service Station) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Joseph Karaki of Western States Engineering, Inc. and the property owner is Michael Kurkgian. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a variance to allow two freestanding signs at an existing service station where one freestanding sign is permitted by the Zoning Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution denying Variance No. 2014-04964. BACKGROUND: This half- acre property is located in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 5 - Neighborhood Commercial zone (SP94-1, DA5). The site is designated for General Commercial land uses by the General Plan. Surrounding uses include retail businesses to the north, an office building to the west, and service stations to the south across La Palma Avenue and to the east across Kraemer Boulevard. This application was filed in response to a complaint received by Code Enforcement regarding the use of a portable aluminum price sign at the service station. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to replace an unpermitted portable price sign with a permanent, aluminum-type price sign. The sign would be externally illuminated with a ground-mounted spotlight. The service station currently has a freestanding identification sign, advertising the business name and the price of fuel. The proposed sign would be located approximately 12 feet west of the existing identification sign within the landscape planter at the corner of La Palma Avenue and Kraemer Boulevard. The size and content of the signs are described in the table below: Sign Content Height Width Area No. 1 (Existing) Business Name, Fuel Price, Address 8’-10” 10’-8” 94 square feet No. 2 (Proposed) Fuel Price 5’-6” 3’ 17 square feet 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net VARIANCE NO. 2014-04964 September 8, 2014 Page 2 of 3 ANALYSIS: A variance is required because two freestanding signs are proposed at an existing service station where one sign is allowed. The Code allows one freestanding or monument sign, including the name of the fuel business, and name of a convenience store or fast-food restaurant attached to the fuel business, price of fuel, credit cards accepted, and existence of a car wash. The applicant has submitted a letter of justification indicating that the variance is requested because there is a lack of visibility to the existing freestanding sign for customers driving east or west on La Palma Avenue as a result of the sign being relocated two years ago. The sign was moved due to street widening at the intersection of Kraemer Boulevard and La Palma Avenue. Staff has carefully reviewed the applicant’s letter of justification and does not believe there are findings to support a variance for the proposed sign. Although the intersection was widened, the sign remains visible from La Palma Avenue and Kraemer Boulevard. There are no unique street improvements that impact the visibility of the sign. There are no physical site characteristics such as topography, size, shape or location relating to this site to justify approval of a variance. The property is rectangular-shaped and is similar in size and location to other service stations within the area. Strict application of the Code would not deprive the business of privileges enjoyed by other properties under the identical zoning classification in the vicinity since the other service stations located at this intersection only have one business identification sign. In addition, the location of the second sign creates a potential safety hazard because it is located within the line of sight distance triangle of the driveway located to the west of the sign on La Palma Avenue. Placing any structure or sign over 24 inches in height within the line-of-sight triangle could obstruct a driver’s view while entering or exiting the service station. The applicant cites the ARCO service station located at 1700 West La Palma as an example of a variance granted to allow two monument signs. A variance was approved by the Commission in 2007 to allow two monument signs for this property. The justification for the variance was based on the location of existing underground fuel tanks which made it difficult to put a freestanding sign in the typical corner location adjacent to the street intersection. The property was allowed to have one sign facing each street. Similar site constraints do not exist at the subject property. Aluminum-type price signs have not been allowed at other service stations within the city. Staff is concerned that the sign would have the appearance of a temporary sign and that the aluminum material would be difficult to maintain with a professional appearance. The applicant has been informed that a triangular-shaped freestanding sign providing greater visibility to La Palma Avenue and Kraemer Boulevard would be permitted by code as a replacement to the existing freestanding sign. This type of sign would be visible from all directions, adequately advertise the price of fuel and would be out of the line of site triangle. VARIANCE NO. 2014-04964 September 8, 2014 Page 3 of 3 CONCLUSION: Staff does not believe there is justification to grant the requested variance. There are no unique physical site characteristics such as topography, size, shape or location that justify a second sign. Staff recommends denial of the variance. Prepared by, Submitted by, Amy Vazquez Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner, Lilley Planning Group Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity and Aerial Maps 2. Draft Resolution Denying Variance 3. Variance Justification Letter The following attachments were provided to the Planning Commission and are available for public review at the Planning Department at City Hall or on the City of Anaheim’s web site at www.anaheim.net/planning. 4. Site and Sign Plan 5. Photographs S P 9 4 -1 D A 5 S E R V IC E S T A T IO N S P 9 4 -1 D A 5 S E R V IC E S T A T IO N S P 9 4 -1 D A 5 V A C A N T S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 O F F IC E S S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 B U S IN E S S P A R K SP 9 4-1DA3SUBSTATION S P 9 4 -1 D A 3 R E T A IL S P 9 4 -1 D A 3 B U S IN E S S P A R K S P 9 4 -1 D A 2 K R A E M E R B U S IN E S S C E N T E R S P 9 4 -1 D A 5 S T E R L IN G B U S IN E S S C O M P L E X S P 9 4 -1 D A 5 C A R L S J R D A 5 O .C .F .C .D .S P 9 4 -1 D A 5 B U S IN E S S P A R K S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 B U S IN E S S P A R K S P 9 4 -1 D A 5 S E R V IC E S T A T IO N S P 9 4 -1 D A 2 K R A E M E R B U S IN E S S C E N T E R S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 L A P A L M A - K R A E M E R B U S IN E S P A R K S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 IN D U S T R IA L SP 94-1DA1INDUSTRIAL S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 B U S IN E S S P A R K E L A P A LM A A V EN KRAEMER BL VDN KRAEMER PL N ARMANDO STE . M IR A L O M A A V E E . L A P A L M A A V E N. T U STIN A VEN.BLUEGU M S TN. MI LLER STN. RIO VISTA ST308 5 Ea st La Palm a Ave nu e D E V N o . 20 1 4-0 0 03 1 Su bje ct Property APN: 344-361-04 ATTACHM ENT NO. 1 0 50 10 0 Feet Ae ria l Pho to :Ma y 20 13 E LA P A LM A A V EN KRAEMER BL VDN KRAEMER PL N ARMANDO STE . M IR A L O M A A V E E . L A P A L M A A V E N. T U STIN A VEN.BLUEGU M S TN. MI LLER STN. RIO VISTA ST3 0 8 5 E a s t L a Pa lm a A v e n u e D E V N o . 2 0 1 4 -0 0 0 3 1 Subject Property APN: 344-361-04 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 °0 50 100 Feet Aeria l Ph oto :Ma y 2 01 3 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. PC2014-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DENYING VARIANCE NO. 2014-04964 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00031) (3085 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (“Planning Commission”) did receive a verified petition for Variance No. 2014-04964 to allow two freestanding signs where one freestanding sign is permitted (herein referred to as the “Proposed Project”) on that certain real property located at 3085 East La Palma Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, The Property is approximately 0.5 acres in size and is currently developed with a service station. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for General Commercial land uses. The Property is located in the Commercial Area (Development Area 5) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan Area. The underlying base zone for the Property is the "C- NC" Neighborhood Center Commercial Zone. Unless otherwise indicated in Section 18.120.100 [Land Use and Development Standards – Commercial Area (Development Area 5)] of Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP94-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"), the zoning and development standards of the "C- NC" Neighborhood Center Commercial Zone shall apply; and WHEREAS, this Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on September 8, 2014 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Variance No. 2014-04964 and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Planning 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 with respect to Variance No. 2014-04964 to allow two freestanding signs where one freestanding sign is permitted by the Code, should be denied for the following reasons: SECTION NO. 18.44.090.0101 Permitted Number of Freestanding Signs (1 freestanding sign permitted); (2 freestanding signs proposed) - 1 - PC2014-*** 1. There are no special circumstances applicable to the Property relating to size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, which are found to exist on other property under the identical zoning classification in the vicinity of the Property. The Property is rectangular in shape and has a large street frontage facing La Palma Avenue and Kraemer Boulevard; and 2. The strict application of the Zoning Code would not deprive the Property of privileges enjoyed by other property under the identical zoning classification in the vicinity of the Property. There are no unique physical site characteristics such as topography, size, shape or location relating to this Property that justifies an additional freestanding sign. Further, the existing freestanding sign could be reconstructed to become more visible. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission that proposed Variance No. 2014-04964 is hereby denied. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 8, 2014. Said Resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Section 18.60.130 (Appeals – Planning Commission Decisions) of 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, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 2 - PC2014-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on September 8, 2014, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of September, 2014. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 3 - PC2014-*** - 4 - PC2014-*** ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT JUSTIFICATION LETTER “Minor Variance” Chevron Service Station, 3805 E. La Palma Ave Site Address: 3085 E La Palma Ave Anaheim, CA 92806 Request: “Minor Variance” to allow a second Price Sign The site was built in 2003, with one monument Price Sign built at the corner of Kramer and La Palma Ave, facing Kramer Blvd. The area surrounding the Property is generally built out. To the South of The Gas Station, there is a Shell Gas Station. To the East, there is an Arco Gas Station, and a Carl’s JR. “Two Years ago, the City of Anaheim widened the streets at the intersection of Kramer Blvd and La Palma Ave. By doing so, my Client was forced to relocate the existing monument/ price to within the new setbacks. This relocation, caused a poor visibility for the monument/ price sign. ( Pls. See Pictures). As you will see in the pictures, the signal light pole hides the part the monument sign, if you drive North on Kramer Blvd. As you drive west on La Palma, the visibility is almost null, you can barely see the sign. ( where the Arco and Shell have more and wide visibility than the Chevron Station) Planning dept. Is suggesting the installation of a Triangular sign, to enhance visibility. This solution pauses two problems. 1. At the corner of the intersection, along La Palma Ave, there are.; 1. Signal light pole along Kramer Blvd.; 2. two boxes 4-5 high for telephone and others. This will also prevent customers driving west on La Palma from having a good and clear visibility of the price sign. 2. It is a cost prohibitive to build a new triangular sign ( over $30,000). My client feels that he has been deprived from having a fair price sign visibility, like the other two stations across from his, if the CITY of ANAHEIM did not widen the intersection. For the past 12 years, my client did not have any problems with the existing monument/price sign, until the City of Anaheim started the street widening, (described above) that had resulted of the relocation of the monument/ price sign, thus causing poor visibility for my clients customers. What we are proposing, is one more freestanding Price sign, (not an identification sign), than permitted by code. Code allows for one freestanding sign, that includes Oil Company identification logo ( Chevron logo), and a price sign associated with it. We are proposing one double-sided monument Price sign along La Palma Ave , so it can be visible along the street, (East/ West). ” We have had a lot of complaints from our customers, not being able to see to fueling prices, which in return, that had coasted my client some financial losses”. The current price sign , is only and PARTIALLY visible if you travel North on Kramer Blvd. Service stations are required by the State to post gasoline prices in conspicuous areas, and we feel that this would not be achieved by a single sign on one street frontage ( after the street widening). The reason for proposing two freestanding signs is to have adequate visibility from both adjacent streets. we feel that we have been deprived of privileges enjoyed by neighboring properties, or by other Service Stations ( Arco, located on Euclid and La Palma Ave, and 76 Service Station located on Kramer Blvd and Orangethorpe), since Code allows one sign per street frontage for properties developed with uses other than service stations. Therefore, we are respectfully requesting the approval of the” Minor Variance” to allow, the installation of an additional Price Sign along Kramer Blvd. The granting of the Variance will not constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and land use district in which such property is located. Also, the granting of the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and land use district and denied to the property for which the Variance is sought. Exhibits attached are : A, B, C, D, E, F Sincerely, Joseph Karaki EXISTING C-STORE 6) (E) SERVICE STATION 6) 5+6'2.#0 #5Ä SCALE:1 SITE PLAN 1" = 10'-0" WS WSR WS 04-22-14 1/4"-1'-0" North True J I H G F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NOTE TO CONTRACTOR 3 4 2 1 DESCRIPTIONNO.BY DATE REVISIONS SUBMITTAL OWNER NAME & ADDRESS PROJECT NAME & ADDRESS CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE 1 A B C D E F G H 2 3 4 5 6 J 7 8 109 11 12 13 14 DRAWN BY: DATE DRAWN: CHECKED BY: DATEBYNO. DESCRIPTION DESIGNED BY: SCALE: I JOB No CUP No CONSULTANT/ SEALS Plotted: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 4:29 PM E:\3085 e. la palma-CHEVRON\AS-1 SITE PLAN.dwgWESTERN STATES 4887 E. LA PALMA AVE. STE. 707 ANAHEIM, CA 92807 CHEVRON SERVICE STATION JOB NO. CUP NO. 3085 E. LA PALMA AVE. ANAHEIM, CA 92807 PRICE SIGN LEGEND SITE KEY NOTES 1 VICINITY MAP ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 344-361-04 PROJECT SITE NORTH ATTACHMENT NO. 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. ITEM NO. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 SUBJECT: DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00106 LOCATION: 400 West Disney Way, Unit 201 (Anaheim GardenWalk) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Delia Hauser, representing Rumba Room Anaheim LLC, and the property owner is Anaheim Retail Partners, LLC. REQUEST: The applicant requests a determination of public convenience or necessity to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption in conjunction with a proposed nightclub (Rumba Room). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities), and approving Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00106. BACKGROUND: The proposed nightclub would be within Anaheim GardenWalk, on the north end of the shopping center, adjacent to Disney Way. The site is within the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1, Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay. In 2006, Conditional Use Permit No. 4078 was approved, permitting the development of the Anaheim GardenWalk project, including bars and nightclubs. In 2011, the CUP was amended to reduce the amount of retail uses and the size of the bus terminal and increase the permitted amount of dining and entertainment uses. The General Plan designates this property and all surrounding properties for Commercial Recreation uses. Surrounding uses include Disney cast member parking lots to the north and south and hotels and motels to the east and west. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to establish a 13,366 square foot Latin-themed nightclub and small concert venue on the second level of the retail concourse. The business would include a lobby and box office, lounge seating areas, two bars and a raised stage in front of the dance floor. The hours of operation would be 6:00 p.m. until 2:00 a.m., Tuesday through Sunday. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00106 September 8, 2014 Page 2 of 3 ANALYSIS: Although bars and nightclubs within the Anaheim GardenWalk project are permitted by Conditional Use Permit No. 4078, State law requires a determination of public convenience or necessity when a property for which an alcoholic beverage license is requested is located in a police reporting district with a crime rate above the City average or when there is an over concentration in the number of licenses within a Census Tract. The Business and Professions Code provides that the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) shall deny an application for a license if issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement problem or if issuance would result in, or add to, an undue concentration of licenses, except when an applicant has demonstrated that public convenience or necessity would be served by the issuance of a license. A request for Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity is required from the City because this property is located within a reporting district with a high crime rate and an over concentration of licenses. This property is located within Reporting District 2025, which has a crime rate of 224 percent above the citywide average. The crime rate within ¼ mile of this property is 133% above the citywide average based upon calls for service. These calls consisted of 44 petty thefts, 18 simple assaults, 13 frauds and 10 grand theft automobiles. Staff does not consider the higher than average crime rate to be unusual based on the volume of visitors to the Resort area each year. Due to the unique nature of the Resort area, there is an over concentration in the number of licenses. There are zero ABC licenses allowed in the census tract because there are very few people living in the area. There are presently 40 licenses in the tract. Due to the fact that the census tract is located within The Anaheim Resort, which is a world class tourist destination, the number of on-sale licenses is disproportionably higher than in other census tracts in the City. The Anaheim Resort area was created to maintain and encourage Anaheim’s position as a nationally recognized tourist, convention and recreation center. The 40 on-sale licenses are for restaurants within The Anaheim Resort, including Downtown Disney and GardenWalk. The City received one letter in opposition to the request from the manager of the Super 8 Motel, immediately adjacent to GardenWalk on Katella Avenue. The concerns pertain to issues experienced due to the Heat Ultra Lounge nightclub, which has been in operation in GardenWalk since 2008. The Super 8 Motel is located adjacent to the GardenWalk parking structure and complaints include loud music and noise from cars, fighting, disorderly conduct due to intoxication, and patrons parking in the Super 8 Motel parking lot. The applicant and GardenWalk management recognize the importance of a coordinated security program to ensure the safe and orderly operation of the entertainment uses permitted at this location. Each entertainment business is required to have a security plan approved by the Police Department prior to the business opening. The General Manager for GardenWalk is actively working with the Police Department to update the security plan for the property, including existing and planned entertainment venues. A primary focus of on-going security enhancements relates to the orderly dispersal of patrons at closing time for this business and the other entertainment venues, such as Heat Ultra Lounge and Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar and Grill, which is currently under construction. The congregation of patrons leaving the venue’s multiple entertainment uses at closing time has the potential to create the types of issues cited by the PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00106 September 8, 2014 Page 3 of 3 adjacent property owner. Ensuring the timely exit of patrons and vehicles from the property is an important component of the security plan. The General Manager indicates that additional staff to direct traffic within the structure and operate ticket booths will be provided in conjunction with the new businesses. The enhanced security provisions and additional parking operations staff will facilitate the efficient exiting of patrons from GardenWalk and provide more supervision of parking structure activity. In addition to the security and operations measures planned for the parking structure, a separate security plan for the proposed business will be submitted by the applicant for Police Department review and approval. This plan will identify the number of security guards required for the premises, outline methods to deal with disorderly patrons, and establish coordination procedures between security staff and the Anaheim Police Department. Staff believes these steps will help to ensure that adjacent businesses are not unduly impacted by the proposed entertainment venues. CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the security measures proposed by GardenWalk management, in conjunction with implementation of the conditions of approval relating to security and operation of the proposed nightclub, the use would be an asset to GardenWalk and complementary to the other visitor-serving, entertainment uses in the Anaheim Resort area. Staff recommends approval of the application. Prepared by, Submitted by, Elaine Thienprasiddhi Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity and Aerial Maps 2. Public Convenience or Necessity Draft Resolution 3. Applicant’s Letter of Request 4. Applicant’s Statement of Justification 5. Police Department Memorandum 6. Letter of Opposition The following attachments were provided to the Planning Commission and are available for public review at the Planning Department at City Hall or on the City of Anaheim’s website at www.anaheim.net/planning. 7. Site and Floor Plans and Interior Renderings 8. Site Photographs SP 92 -1GARDENWA LK SP 92 -1DA5ANAHEIM P LA ZAHOTEL SP 92 -2DA1INDUSTRIAL SP 9 2-1DA3ASOUTHERN C ALIFOR NIA ED IS ON C O . EASEMENT SP 9 2-2DA1ANAHEIMRESIDENCEINN SP 9 3-1 HO TE L CIRC LEWORLDMARK SP 92-2DA1CASTLE IN N& SU ITE S SP 92 -1DA3ASOUTHERN CALIFOR NIA EDISON C O. E ASE MENT SP 92-2DA1VACANT SP 9 2-2DA1SUPER 8MOTEL SP 9 2-1GARDENWA LKPARKINGSTRUCTURE SP 9 2-1DA3AFIRE STATION SP 9 3-1 HO TE L CIRC LELA QU IN TAINN & SU ITES SP 93 -1 HOTE L CI RC L EEXTENDED STAYAMERICA SP 92 -2DA1HOLIDAYINNEXPRESSANAHEIM SP 9 2-2DA1AMERICA'SBEST VALUEINN & SU ITES SP 9 2-2DA1RENT-A -C AR SP 9 2-1GARDENWA LKVACANT SP 9 2-1GARDENWA LKVACANT W KATELLA AVE W DISNEY WAY S CLEMENTINE STW DISNEY WAY W. BALL RD S. HARBOR BLVDE. BALL RD W. KAT ELLA AVE S. LEWIS STS. WALNUT STW.ORANGEWOOD AVE S. WEST STS. NINTH STE. K ATE LLA AVE S. STATE COLLEGE BLVDS. ANAHEIM BLVDS. HASTER STE. ORANGEWOOD AVE E .GENE AUTRY WAY 400 We st Di sn ey Wa y D E V 20 14 -0 00 5 2 Su bje ct Property APN: 082-551-11082-551-04082-551-05082-551-06082-551-07 ATTACHM ENT NO. 1 0 50 10 0 Feet Ae ria l Pho to :Ma y 20 13 W KATELLA AVE S CLEMENTINE STW DISNEY WAY W DISNEY WAY W. BALL RD S. HARBOR BLVDE. B ALL RD W. KATELLA AVE S. LEWIS STS. WALNUT STW.ORANGEWOOD AVE S. WEST STE. K ATE LLA AVE S. NINTH STS. STATE COLLEGE BLVDS. ANAHEIM BLVDS. HASTER STE. ORA NGE WOOD AVE E .GENE AUTRY WAY 400 We st Di sn ey Wa y D E V 20 14 -0 00 5 2 Su bje ct Property APN: 082-551-11082-551-04082-551-05082-551-06082-551-07 ATTACHM ENT NO. 1 0 50 10 0 Feet Ae ria l Pho to :Ma y 20 13 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. PC2014-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DETERMINING PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00106 FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL LICENSE AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00052) (400 WEST DISNEY WAY) WHEREAS, on July 11, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 95R-134, establishing procedures and delegating certain responsibilities to the Planning Commission relating to the determination of "public convenience or necessity" on those certain applications requiring that such determinations be made by the local governing body pursuant to applicable provisions of the California Business and Professions Code, and prior to the issuance of a license by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control ("ABC"); and WHEREAS, Section 23958 of the Business and Professions Code provides that the ABC shall deny an application for a license if issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement problem, or if issuance would result in or add to an undue concentration of licenses, except when an applicant has demonstrated that public convenience or necessity would be served by the issuance of a license; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (hereinafter referred to as the “Planning Commission”) did receive a verified Petition for Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00106 for a Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption within a bar/nightclub within the Anaheim Gardenwalk (herein referred to as the "Proposed Project") for certain real property located at 400 West Disney Way in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Property, consisting of approximately 29.1 acres, is developed with the GardenWalk outdoor shopping center. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Commercial Recreation land uses. The Property is located within the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area and, more specifically, within the Anaheim Gardenwalk Overlay, and is subject to the zoning and development standards described in Chapter 18.114 (Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1(SP-92-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"), including the regulations set forth in Section 18.114.105 (Anaheim Gardenwalk Overlay) of the Code. Conditional Use Permit No. 4078 permitted the development of the Anaheim GardenWalk project, including bars and nightclubs; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on September 8, 2014 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00106, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and - 1 - PC2014-*** WHEREAS, as the "lead agency" under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Planning 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 with respect to the request for Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00106, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 and, specifically, the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay permits the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption within a nightclub integrated within the GardenWalk project, and the intent of the Code is to provide such sales as a convenience for visitors; further the nightclub is integrated within the GardenWalk project providing additional security for the facility. 2. That California state law requires a determination of "Public Convenience or Necessity" when property is located in a police reporting district with a crime rate above the City average and has an over-concentration of licenses; and that Section 23958 of the Business and Professions Code provides that the ABC shall deny an application for a license if issuance of that license would tend to create a law enforcement problem or if issuance would result in, or add to, an undue concentration of licenses, except when an applicant has demonstrated that public convenience or necessity would be served by issuance of a license. 3. That Resolution No. 95R-134 authorizes the City of Anaheim Police Department to make recommendations related to the public convenience or necessity determinations; and when the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption is permitted by the Municipal Code under Conditional Use Permit No. 4078, said recommendations shall take the form of conditions of approval to be imposed on the determination in order to ensure that the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages does not adversely affect any adjoining land use or the growth and development of the surrounding area. 4. That the Property is located in Reporting District 1925, which has a crime rate of 224 percent above the City average. The Property is also located in Census Tract 875.01, which permits no on-sale licenses. Currently, there are 40 licenses existing within Census Tract 875.01. 5. That there are no schools or residential uses adjacent to the subject Property. 6. That there are licenses for restaurants, bars and nightclubs immediately adjacent to the site of the Proposed Project and the addition of this business would support the vision of GardenWalk as a premiere entertainment destination in the Disneyland Resort area. The addition of this business will benefit the surrounding community by providing an option for patrons seeking Latin entertainment, which is currently not offered in the immediate area. The conditions of approval will ensure that approval of the proposal will not adversely affect any adjoining land use or the growth and development of the surrounding area. - 2 - PC2014-*** 7. That the determination of "Public Convenience or Necessity" can be made based on the finding that the license requested is consistent with the Planning Commission guideline for such determinations and further that the granting of the determination of Public Convenience or Necessity under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2014-00106, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the 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. - 3 - PC2014-*** THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 8, 2014. 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, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on September 8, 2014, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of September, 2014. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2014-*** - 5 - PC2014-*** EXHIBIT “B” PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2014-00106 (DEV2014-00052) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS 1 A security plan must be submitted to the Chief of Police or his designee for review and approval. The plan should include the number of security personnel that will be provided, job duties and descriptions, procedures on communication, I.D. check, occupancy load and a detailed description of how problems at the location and problem guests will be handled. Police Department 2 Managers, owners, bar tenders, and waitresses shall obtain Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control LEAD (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs Program) Training. The contact number is 714-558-4101. Police Department OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 3 Security measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct of employees and patrons, promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, and to prevent disturbances by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises. Police Department 4 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. Police Department 5 At close of business the petitioner(s) shall provide security personnel to observe and secure the path of travel in closest proximity to the parking structure. They shall maintain order at time of closing and prevent any activity which would interfere with the other businesses and patrons visiting Garden Walk. Police Department 6 Door staff will be responsible for monitoring and keeping exact attendance numbers. Police Department 7 All patrons are to have their I.D. checked at the door and staff shall not allow obviously intoxicated guests in. Police Department 8 The Police Department retains the ability to review operations that pertain to “Bottle Service” and security procedures and make necessary changes or modifications to those operations to promote the safety of patrons, employees and the public. Police Department - 6 - PC2014-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 9 Partitions separating the V.I.P. areas shall not exceed 52” in height. There shall be complete visibility into all V.I.P. areas. There shall be no obstructed view. Police Department 10 The licensee(s) shall not maintain or construct any type of enclosed room intended for use by patrons or customers for any purpose. Police Department 11 The floor space provided for dancing shall be free of any furniture or partitions and maintained in a smooth and safe condition. Police Department 12 The business shall not be operated in such a way as to be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. Police Department 13 The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises is strictly prohibited. Police Department 14 No one under the age of 21 shall be allowed on the premises at any time. Signs shall be posted at the front door stating “No one under the age of 21 allowed.” Police Department 15 The business shall not 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. (Section 24200.5 Alcoholic Beverage Control Act) Police Department 16 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. Police Department 17 There shall be no requirement to purchase a minimum number of drinks. Police Department 18 Signs shall be posted at all exits stating “No alcohol beyond this point.” Police Department 19 The permitted event or activity shall not create sound levels that violate any ordinance of the City of Anaheim. Police Department 20 Entertainment provided shall not be audible beyond the area under the control of the licensee. Police Department 21 No entertainment including music is allowed in the patio area. Police Department - 7 - PC2014-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 22 All entertainers, employees and patrons shall be clothed in such a way as to not expose "specified anatomical areas" as explained in Anaheim Municipal Code 7.16.060. Police Department 23 The rear doors of the premises shall be equipped on the inside with an automatic locking device and shall be closed at all times, and shall not be used as a means of access by patrons to and from the licensed premises. Temporary use of these doors for delivery of supplies does not constitute a violation. Police Department 24 Any Graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the licensee shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied. Planning Department, Code Enforcement Division 25 There shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. Interior displays of alcoholic beverages or signs which are clearly visible to the exterior shall constitute a violation of this condition. Police Department GENERAL 26 The 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, and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 27 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning Department, Planning Services Division 28 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 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 may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning Department, Planning Services Division - 8 - PC2014-*** Rumba Room Live Anaheim LLC 400 W. Disney Way Suite 201 Anaheim, California 92802 www.RumbaRoomLive.com June 1, 2014 City of Anaheim Planning Commission Office of the City Clerk City Hall 2nd Floor 200 South Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, California 92805 Dear Planning Commission Members: We are respectfully submitting this letter in the sincerest hope that our application for our purchase of Alcoholic Beverage Control Type 48 license # 544935 (Transfer and conversion from Shakeys Pizza Parlor 10742 Westminister Blvd, Garden Grove) be reviewed and ultimately approved for our proposed business “Rumba Room Live” @ Anaheim GardenWalk. We firmly believe by doing so, we will be able to contribute to the City of Anaheim’s appeal as a world class metropolitan city, and more specifically help contribute to Anaheim GardenWalk’s commercial success, as well as enhance GardenWalk’s image as a world class entertainment destination. Executive Summary: For over 10 years, the Rumba Room was one of Southern California’s most exciting entertainment venues, having been located at Universal Studios Hollywood from the years 2000-2011 and having hosted notable Latin Entertainers such as Cristian Castro, Juan Gabriel, Banda El Recodo, and the late Jenni Rivera to name a few. Now with its planned re-launch at Anaheim GardenWalk, “Rumba Room Live’ is excited to bring its blend of positive energy and flare to a new generation of local residents, tourists and multicultural crowds alike with an updated vision. In doing so, it is our hope and firm belief, that Rumba Room Live @ Anaheim GardenWalk will be the perfect compliment to the world-class attractions Anaheim has to offer. Ownership History: Rumba Room Live’s ownership has a long, rich history in Latin Entertainment and can be traced back to the early 80’s when my husband, the late Ralph Hauser III, began Hauser Entertainment at the Pico Rivera Sports Arena. Our company went on to become the largest Hispanic concert promotion and artist management agency in the country, having represented some of Latin Entertainments biggest stars including Juan Gabriel, Vicente Fernandez, Alejandro Fernandez and Pepe Aguilar to name a few. This led to the opening of the original Rumba Room in 2000 at Universal Studios Hollywood. After the unfortunate passing of my Husband in 2003, I continued Hauser Entertainment presence in the concerts promotions Industry as well as managing Rumba Room nightclub. I plan on using my experience and network to help bring first class entertainment to GardenWalk. Business Summary: Rumba Room Live @ Anaheim Garden Walk will be a Latin themed, upscale, intimate concert venue & nightclub, open year round, with various entertainment options throughout the week with a strong emphasis on providing a unique lifestyle and musical entertainment experience for guests looking to have an enjoyable and memorable night out. At over 13,000 square feet, the new Rumba Room Live will feature an expansive stage as well as state of the art lighting and sound. Our primary revenue will be based on admission ticket sales, as well as hosting a variety of musical and media events in an intimate concert venue, supported by the sale of alcoholic beverages in a stylish and luxurious setting. We will provide bottle service on a limited basis therefore we do consider the sale of alcohol an essential part of our business model. We anticipate our alcohol sales to be 35-40% of our total gross revenue. ATTACHMENT NO. 3 2 It is our sincere belief, that the sale of alcohol on our premises will not jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare of the city because we will implement strict security procedures, our employees will be trained to prevent sales to intoxicated individuals, as well as abide by all A.B.C. rules and regulations. Admissions will be strictly 21 and over to prevent any minors from consuming alcohol. In addition, Gardenwalk and our floor plan have been designed in a way that ensures public safety, including the use of closed circuit monitoring for any behavior that could be considered inappropriate or offensive. GardenWalk is well lit and provides for entertainment in a safe and secure environment. It is for this very reason, why we strongly believe that any potential negative consequences from the sale of alcohol will be greatly diminished. In addition, there are no homes, churches, or schools in the immediate vicinity that would be affected by the sale of alcoholic beverages on our premises. Currently GardenWalk has several bars and a lounge/ nightclub on its premises, including Fire & Ice bar and Heat Ultra Lounge. The addition of “Rumba Room Live” will provide an option for patrons looking for authentic Latin Entertainment, which is currently not offered in the immediate area. As an example of planned programming we plan on hosting live Salsa nights, Latin Jazz weekday nights as well as host intimate concerts with well-established Latin artists such as Cristian Castro and Alicia Villareal. Rumba Room Live also plans on supporting local talent by having local musical showcases. “Rumba Room Live” will fill a need for authentic entertainment, in a safe and stylish setting, which is currently not available for local residents and tourists that visit GardenWalk. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter and I look forward to the opportunity to help contribute to Anaheim’s continued success. Sincerely, Delia Hauser President JUSTIFICATION FOR PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY 1. What is the primary purpose of your business? Is the sale of alcohol an essential part of the primary purpose of the business? Rumba Room Live @ Anaheim Garden Walk will be a Latin themed, upscale, intimate concert venue & nightclub, open year round, with various entertainment options throughout the week such as Live Salsa bands and DJ’s. Our primary revenue will be based on admission ticket sales, supported by the sale of alcoholic beverages in a stylish and luxurious setting. We will provide bottle service on a limited basis therefore we do consider the sale of alcohol an essential part of our business model. 2. Are there similar businesses or a concentration of alcohol outlets in the immediate area that already provide alcohol service? If so, how would the public convenience or necessity be served by permitting an additional license within the census tract? Currently GardenWalk has several bars that are open or slated to open soon and a lounge/ nightclub on its premises, including “Fire & Ice bar”, “Toby Kieth’s I love this Bar & Grill” and “Heat Ultra Lounge.” The addition of “Rumba Room Live” will benefit the surrounding community by providing an option for patrons looking for authentic Latin Entertainment, which is currently not offered in the immediate area. As an example of planned programming we plan on hosting live Salsa nights, Latin Jazz weekday nights as well as host intimate concerts with well-‐established Latin artists such as Cristian Castro and Alicia Villareal. Rumba Room Live also plans on supporting local talent by having local musical showcases. “Rumba Room Live” will fill a need for authentic Latin entertainment, in a safe and stylish setting, which is currently not available for local residents and tourists that visit the Anaheim Resort District. 3. Is there a residential neighborhood or school adjacent to the property for which you are requesting a public convenience or necessity determination? If so, please explain how permitting an additional license would not disproportionately impact an adjacent residential neighborhood or school. Currently there are no homes, churches, or schools adjacent, nor are there any in the immediate vicinity that would be affected by the sale of alcoholic beverages on our premises. ATTACHMENT NO. 4 4. What percentage of your business do you anticipate will be alcohol sales? We anticipate our alcohol sales to be 35-‐40% of our total gross revenue, which will supplement ticket/ admission sales and private event rentals such as corporate holiday luncheons. 5. Does your business cater to a specific need or specialty which is not currently available in the area? Yes, “Rumba Room Live” will fill a need for authentic Latin entertainment in a safe and stylish setting for local residents and tourists that visit the Anaheim Resort District. In addition, it will provide an alternative entertainment option for Convention Center attendees that may desire to experience authentic “Salsa” or “Merengue” style of music and dancing which is currently not available at GardenWalk. 6. Are you proposing any specific operational measures to eliminate or limit any potential negative consequences from the sale of alcoholic beverages? It is our sincere belief, that the sale of alcohol on our premises will not jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare of the surrounding community because we will implement strict security procedures and we will work in conjunction with GardenWalk security & management to address, identify and prevent any possible security concerns. Our employees will be well trained to prevent sales to intoxicated individuals, as well as trained to abide by all A.B.C. rules and regulations. Admissions will be strictly 21 and over to prevent any minors from consuming alcohol. In addition, Gardenwalk and our floor plan have been designed in a way that ensures public safety, including the use of closed circuit monitoring for any behavior that could be considered inappropriate or offensive. GardenWalk is well lit and provides for entertainment in a safe and secure environment. It is for this reason, we strongly believe that any potential negative consequences from the sale of alcohol will be greatly diminished. 7. What type of license are you requesting from ABC? Is it an existing license? Where is the license being purchased from? We are respectfully requesting the approval of our application for our purchase/ conversion of Alcoholic Beverage Control Type 48 license # 544935 which is an existing Type 47 license being purchased from Shakeys Pizza Parlor 10742 Westminister Blvd, Garden Grove. We firmly believe by doing so, we will be able to contribute to the City of Anaheim’s appeal as a world class metropolitan city, and more specifically help contribute to Anaheim GardenWalk’s commercial success, as well as enhance GardenWalk’s image as a world class entertainment destination. ATTACHMENT NO. 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 Rumba Room Live @ Anaheim GardenWalk ! Proposed Renderings! ! Exterior (top) Box Office and Entry (below)! Entry Lounge (top) Entry VIP lounge (Below)! Stage (top) Main Bar (Below)! Secondary Bar* (top) VIP lounge (Below)! *secondary bar to be rectangle as in floor plan ATTACHMENT NO. 8 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. ITEM NO. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17796 LOCATION: 1311 – 1349 North Blue Gum APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant and owner is Turner Real Estate Investments, represented by Jason Korengold. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a tentative tract map to establish a seven-lot subdivision with three of the buildings being subdivided for condominium purposes. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 15 (Minor Land Divisions) of the State CEQA Guidelines, and approving Tentative Tract Map No. 17796. BACKGROUND: The 10-acre property is located in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 1 – Industrial Area zone (SP94-1, DA1). The site is designated for Industrial land uses by the General Plan. The property is surrounded by industrial land uses and is bounded by State Route 57 on the west. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property to create a seven-lot industrial subdivision to allow the individual sale of seven existing industrial buildings. Three of the largest buildings are proposed as industrial condominiums with two units per building. No new buildings are proposed; however, a new fenced yard is proposed on the west side of Lot 5. The sizes of the proposed parcels are as follows: Lot No. Area in acres 1 0.69 2 1.72 3 1.03 4 2.10 5 2.19 6 1.16 7 1.02 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17796 September 8, 2014 Page 2 of 2 ANALYSIS: The purpose of the Commission’s consideration of a tentative tract map is to review the proposed subdivision of land for consistency with the General Plan and compliance with the zoning code. The proposed subdivision complies with all of the development standards of the Specific Plan, including the maximum floor area ratio, minimum number of parking spaces, and required access. A recommended condition of approval requires the recordation of a reciprocal easement agreement for ingress/egress, parking, maintenance and trash pick-up for the entire property. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends approval of the requested industrial subdivision as the request complies with the goals of the General Plan and the property’s zoning. Prepared by, Submitted by, Elaine Thienprasiddhi Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity and Aerial Maps 2. Draft Tentative Tract Map Resolution 3. Letter of Request The following attachments were provided to the Planning Commission and are available for public review at the Planning Department at City Hall or on the City of Anaheim’s website at www.anaheim.net/planning. 4. Site Photographs 5. Tentative Tract Map and Site Plan 6. Elevations S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 B L U E G U M IN D U S T R IA L P A R K RM -4APTS9 DU RM-4FOURPLE X RM-4APTS7 DU RM -4APTS7 DU S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 A R E G A L P A R K B U S IN E S S C E N T E R RM -4PARK LA NE APA RTMEN TS33 D U D A 1 M A R T E N S B U S IN E S S P A R K RM -4VEGA AP TS5 DU S P 9 4 -1 D A 5 A R T IS T IC P L A T IN G A N D M E T A L F IN IS H IN G RM-4APTS5 DU S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 A IN D U S T R IA L S P 9 4 -1 D A 1 M A R T E N S B U S IN E S S P A R KINDUSTRIAL P A R K 57 FREEWAY57 FREEWAYN BL UE GUM STE M IR A LO M A A V E W LA JO LLA ST E V IA M A R T E N S E R E G A L P A R K D R E . L A P A L M A A V E E . M IR A L O M A A V E N. ACACIA STN. STATE COLLEGE BLVDE .ORANGET HO RPE AV E E. FRONTERA ST 131 1-1 347 Nor th Blu e Gu m St reet D E V N o . 20 1 4-0 0 06 1 Su bje ct Property APN: 344-261-03344-293-01344-293-02 ATTACHM ENT NO. 1 0 50 10 0 Feet Ae ria l Pho to :Ma y 20 13 P L A C E N T IA C IT Y B O U N D A R Y A N A H E IM C IT Y B O U N D A R Y 57 FREEWAY57 FREEWAYN BL UE GUM STE M IR A LO M A A V E W LA JO LLA ST E V IA M A R T E N S E R E G A L P A R K D R E . L A P A L M A A V E E . M IR A L O M A A V E N. ACACIA STN. STATE COLLEGE BLVDE .ORANGET HO RPE AV E E. FRONTERA ST 131 1-1 347 Nor th Blu e Gu m St reet D E V N o . 20 1 4-0 0 06 1 Su bje ct Property APN: 344-261-03344-293-01344-293-02 ATTACHM ENT NO. 1 0 50 10 0 Feet Ae ria l Pho to :Ma y 20 13 P L A C E N T IA C IT Y B O U N D A R Y A N A H E IM C IT Y B O U N D A R Y [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. PC2014-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17796 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2014-00061) (1311-1349 North Blue Gum) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (herein referred to as the “Planning Commission”) did receive a verified petition for Tentative Tract Map No. 17796 to establish a seven lot industrial subdivision (herein referred to as the "Proposed Project") for that certain real property located at 1311-1349 North Blue Gum in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Property, consisting of approximately 9.9 acres, is developed with seven industrial buildings. The Property is located in and subject to the regulations and development standards of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, Development Area 1 – Industrial Area (SP94-1, DA 1) Zone. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Industrial land uses; and WHEREAS, this Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on September 8, 2014 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (herein referred to as the “Code”), to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 17796 to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, prior to its proposed subdivision, the Property consists of three (3) parcels and is fully improved with seven (7) industrial buildings. The purpose of the proposed subdivision of the Property is to establish separate legal parcels for each of the existing seven industrial buildings, turning three parcels into seven. Once approved, the subdivision of the Property will not create the opportunity for the development of any one of the resulting legal parcels. As the “lead agency” under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the Planning Commission finds and determines that the proposed subdivision of the Property represented by Tentative Tract Map No. 17796 is not a "project" under CEQA, as that term is defined in Section 15378 of the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3; herein referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission also finds and determines that, notwithstanding its determination set forth in the preceding recital, if the proposed subdivision were to be considered a "project" under CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, it would constitute the functional equivalent of the type of project which has been determined under CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines not to have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA. Specifically, but for the fact that the number - 1 - PC2014-*** of resulting parcels from the subdivision represented by Tentative Tract Map No. 17796 will be seven, the proposed subdivision would, taken as a whole, only create four new parcels. Accordingly, the Planning Commission finds and determines, under these facts, that the proposed subdivision would be within that class of projects which consists of the division of property meeting the following conditions described in Section 15315 of the State CEQA Guidelines: (a) consists of the division of property in an urbanized area zoned for industrial use into four or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with the General Plan and Zoning Code, (b) no variances or exceptions are required, (c) all services and access to the proposed parcels to local standards are available, (d) the parcel prior to its division was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous two years, and (e) the parcel does not have an average slope of greater than 20 percent. WHEREAS, the Planning 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 with respect to the request to establish a two lot industrial subdivision, has determined that Tentative Tract Map No. 17796 should be approved for the following reasons, does find and determine the following facts: 1. The request to permit the Proposed Project, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the Industrial land use designation in the Anaheim General Plan and, more specifically, the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP94-1) and with the zoning and development standards contained in Chapter 18.120 of the Code for the Industrial Area (Development Area 1) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP94-1); and 2. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the Proposed Project; and 3. The the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, as no sensitive environmental habitat has been identified in the vicinity; and 4. The the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems, as no changes are proposed to the existing industrial buildings; and 5. The the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Tentative Tract Map No. 17796, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. - 2 - PC2014-*** BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the 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. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 8, 2014. 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, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 3 - PC2014-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, 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 September 8, 2014, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of September, 2014. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2014-*** - 5 - PC2014-*** EXHIBIT “B” TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17796 (DEV2014-00061) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE MAP 1 A Reciprocal Easement Agreement (REA) for ingress/egress, parking, maintenance and trash pick-up will be required as a condition of approval of the Subdivision application. The REA (i) must run with the land in perpetuity, (ii) shall inure to the benefit of, and be enforceable by, the City by any legal or equitable means against any person or persons in actual possession of the properties who directly or through any agent violate the terms hereof; and (iii) shall not be modified, supplemented or amended without the City's prior written consent. The REA shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to its execution and recordation in the Official Records of the County of Orange. A copy of the recorded covenant shall then be submitted to the Planning Department. The covenant shall be referenced in all deeds transferring all or any part of the interest in the property. Planning Department 2 There shall be a recorded use agreement satisfactory to the City Attorney’s Office for all parcels sharing fire protection equipment and associated appurtenances. Fire Department 3 The final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim Department of Public Worksand the Orange County Surveyor for technical review and that all applicable conditions of approval have been complied with and then shall be filed in the Office of the Orange County recorder concurrently with the Subdivision Agreement and the Maintenance Covenant. Public Works- Development Services 4 A maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section of the Public Works Department for review and approval 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. Maintenance responsibilities shall include parkway landscaping and irrigation on Blue Gum Street and Miraloma Avenue. The covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final parcel map. Public Works- Development Services 5 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 Subdivision Section of the Public Works Department and approved by the City Attorney and City Engineer. The developer shall post a security to guarantee the Public Works- Development Services - 6 - PC2014-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT construction of public works improvements in an amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney. 6 Street improvement plans shall be submitted for the construction of imrovements, including sidewalk, accessible ramp, and landscaping and irrigation modifications, along the frontage of Blue Gum Street. The landscape and irrigation improvement plans shall be prepared in accordance with the Public Works Landscape and Irrigation Manual for Public Streets and Highways. Public Works- Development Services GENERAL CONDITIONS 7 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnities to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning Department 8 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 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 may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning Department 9 The premises shall be developed substantially in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to and reviewed and approved by the City of Anaheim, which plan is on file with the Planning Department. Planning Department - 7 - PC2014-*** ATTACHMENT NO. 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 NOTESSECTION A-A1. NO OBSERVED EVIDENCE OF CURRENT EARTHMOVING WORK.2. NO PROPOSED CHANGES IN STREET RIGHTOF WAY LINES.3. NO OBSERVED EVIDENCE OF SITE USE AS A SOLIDWASTE DUMP, SUMP OR SANITARY LANDFILL.4. NO WETLAND AREAS AS DELINEATED BY THEAPPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES.5. NO OBSERVED EVIDENCE OF ANYCEMETERIES.6. PROPERTY BOUNDARY CAN BE RETRACED FROMFOUND STREET CENTERLINE MONUMENTS.SECTION B-BSECTION B-BADA PATH DETAILATTACHMENT NO. 5 1" = 30'697-1011107-22-14EARLIER REVISION DATESDISREGARD PRINTS BEARINGOFCHECKED BY:DRAWN BY:SCALE:JOB NO:PREPARED FOR:SHEET:BUILDING HEIGHT : AS SHOWN PER BUILDINGACCESS : BLUE GUM STREETSP-1SECTION A-ASECTION B-B08-08-14TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1779607-30-14BACK UP PATHADA PATH DETAIL08-08-14 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. ITEM NO. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00495 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00117 MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2014-00593 SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D LOCATION: 1005 - 1105 East Katella Avenue (Platinum Vista Project) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Jared Black representing the Platinum Vista Project and the property owner is Platinum Vista Apartments, LP. REQUEST: The applicant proposes to develop a 389-unit residential project on a site that is currently entitled for a 350-unit residential project under an existing development agreement. The applicant requests approval of the following applications: 1) An addendum (Addendum No. 3) to Environmental Impact Report No. 339 (EIR No. 339) to verify that the proposed project does not create any new significant environmental impacts beyond those previously analyzed for the subject site. 2) An amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan to amend Table LU-4: “General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City” to increase the number of dwelling units and reduce the amount of commercial development allowed within the Mixed Use land use designation of the Platinum Triangle to reflect the proposed project. 3) An amendment to Chapter 18.20.040 of the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code to revise Table 20-D Development Intensities: Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone to increase the number of dwelling units and reduce the amount of commercial development allowed within the Katella District to reflect the proposed project. 4) An amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) to amend all sections of the document that reference the amount of development allowed on the subject site to reflect the proposed project. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00495, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00117 MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2014-00593, SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 Page 2 of 5 5) Amend and restate Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D) between the City of Anaheim and Platinum Vista Apartments, LP to increase the number of dwelling units and revise language to reflect the proposed project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission determine that Addendum No. 3 to EIR No. 339 along with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 316 is the appropriate environmental documentation for these requests and adopt the attached resolutions recommending City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117, Miscellaneous Case No. 2014-00593, and Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D. BACKGROUND: This 4.13-acre parcel is developed with a vacant restaurant building formerly occupied by Mr. Stox and two industrial buildings. This property is located within Sub-Area A of the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone. The General Plan designates this property for Mixed Use land use. Surrounding properties include industrial buildings to the north, apartments to the east, vacant land south across Katella Avenue and apartments currently under construction to the west. In 2007, a Development Agreement was executed between the City of Anaheim and the property owners to govern the development of a mixed use residential project consisting of a 327-unit condominium complex and 10,000 square feet of commercial space. In 2010, the Council certified EIR No. 339 and approved the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. This project amended the General Plan, Zoning Code and the PTMLUP to increase the overall permitted amount of development within the PTMU Overlay Zone. EIR No. 339 specifically analyzed the development of up to 350 dwelling units and 60,000 square feet of commercial development on the subject site. Since the certification of EIR No. 339, two addendums to this EIR have been prepared. One was associated with nearby street improvements on Katella Avenue and the other was associated with the Platinum Gateway project, currently under construction to the west of the subject site. Similar to the proposed project, the Platinum Gateway project required amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Code and PTMLUP to correctly reflect that project. In January 2013, the Council approved a revised project to increase the number of units on this site from 327 condominium units to 350 apartment units and eliminate 10,000 square feet of commercial space. This project did not require an addendum or any changes to the maximum densities permitted by the General Plan, Zoning Code or PTMLUP because it was within the development envelope analyzed by EIR No. 339. Subsequently, the property was sold to Platinum Vista Apartments, LP. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00495, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00117 MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2014-00593, SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to modify previously approved plans to construct a five- story, wrap-style, 389-unit apartment building with a separate six-story parking structure. The parking structure would include one subterranean level and a clubhouse located on top of the parking structure. This project maintains the same building footprint as the previously-approved project. The applicant has revised floor plans in order to gain an additional 39 units within the existing building configurations. Vehicular access is provided from a new Connector Street via Katella Avenue. Pedestrian connectivity to the site is provided via walkways from surrounding streets. Interior courtyards and private recreational areas meting Code requirements are provided for the residents. ANALYSIS: Following is staff’s analysis of the requested actions: General Plan Amendment: This General Plan Amendment request includes a revision to Table LU-4 (General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City) of the Land Use Element. A General Plan Amendment is necessary to revise this Figure as depicted in the attached General Plan Amendment Resolution (Attachment 2). Further, elimination of commercial square footage accurately reflects the proposed project and offsets potential impacts analyzed in Addendum No. 3, such as traffic and sewer when analyzing the request for an additional 39 residential units. Staff recommends approval of the requested General Plan Amendment as it would update the General Plan to accurately reflect the entitled project densities. Zoning Code Amendment: The amendment to Chapter 18.20.040.020 of the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code would revise the development intensities reflected in Table 20-D of this chapter, including total number of permitted dwelling units, and the reduction in commercial footage for the Katella District. Staff recommends approval of the proposed Zoning Code Amendment because the amendment is consistent with the goals established in the General Plan for the Platinum Triangle to provide a variety of housing types and promote higher density residential projects. The proposed amendment would update the Zoning Code to accurately reflect the entitled project densities. In addition, this amendment would further the objectives of the PTMU of development of a high density urban neighborhood, with pedestrian connectivity, and access to regional transit. Amendment to Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan: The PTMLUP contains exhibits and text that must be revised to reflect the maximum number of permitted dwelling units and commercial square footage within the Platinum Triangle. Similar to the General Plan Amendment described above, the PTMLUP also contains exhibits which must be amended to reflect the increase in dwelling units and reduction of commercial square footage within the Platinum Triangle. This amendment would update the PTMLUP to accurately reflect the entitled project densities within the Platinum Triangle. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00495, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00117 MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2014-00593, SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 Page 4 of 5 Development Agreement: Mixed-use projects within the Platinum Triangle are subject to the approval of a development agreement between the property owner and the City of Anaheim. A Standardized Agreement was created in order to maintain consistency between Agreements adopted within the Platinum Triangle. The applicant proposes to amend the existing development agreement to develop a total of 389 dwelling units and to revise language within the document to reflect the current project proposal. The Commission’s role in reviewing a development agreement is to consider the land use implications of the proposed development. The Commission is required to make a recommendation to Council that it has determined that the project meets the following standards: • The project is compatible with the General Plan, including the goals, policies, and objectives for The Platinum Triangle. • The project is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area. • The project will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of Anaheim. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the proposed Development Agreement and found it to be consistent with the form of the Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement. Staff has also determined that the Agreement complies with the General Plan goals, policies and objectives for The Platinum Triangle and the Platinum Triangle PTMU Overlay, Katella District requirements. Final Site Plan: The Final Site Plan must be found by the Planning Director to be consistent with the standards set forth for residential development within the Platinum Triangle. On August 20, 2014, the Planning Director approved the Final Site Plan subject to the approval of the associated project entitlements. The design of this project complies with the PTMU Overlay zone and reinforces the urban land use and development patterns of the Platinum Triangle, consistent with the intent of the PTMLUP. The approved Final Site Plans are attached as Exhibit “B” to the Development Agreement. Addendum No. 3 to the Environmental Impact Report No. 339: Addendum No. 3 to the Environmental Impact Report No. 339 was prepared in conjunction with the request to increase the total number of units from 350 to 389 units and eliminate 60,000 square feet of commercial area in order to assess potential environmental impacts associated with the project. In addition, Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 316 was developed for this project. This Plan incorporates mitigation measures from the Platinum Triangle’s Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106C adopted in association with Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. 339, and are contained in the Development Agreement Resolution (Attachment 5). Through this analysis, staff has determined that no additional environmental impacts would result from the proposed project. The Planning Commission’s findings pertaining to the environmental determination for the project include the consideration of the analysis contained in the Addendum, included as Attachment 11. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00495, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00117 MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2014-00593, SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 Page 5 of 5 CONCLUSION: The proposed amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, the vision and planning principles of the PTMLUP, and the objectives of the PTMU Overlay Zone. Staff believes that this project would contribute towards a beneficial mix of residential uses in the Platinum Triangle while providing a quality living environment for future residents. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the proposed amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Code, PTMLUP and the amended Development Agreement. Prepared by, Submitted by, Vanessa Norwood Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity and Aerial Maps 2. Draft General Plan Resolution 3. Draft Zoning Code Resolution 4. Draft PTMLUP Resolution 5. Draft Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement Resolution – DAG2007-00002D 6. Letter from Applicant Representative The following attachments were provided to the Planning Commission and are available for public review at the Planning Department at City Hall or on the City of Anaheim’s web site at www.anaheim.net/planning 7. Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D 8. Final Site Plan 9. Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 316 10. Site Photographs 11. Addendum No. 3 to FSEIR No. 339 I (PTMU )IND U STRI AL I (PTMU )IND U STRIAL I (PTMU )Kate llaPARK VIRID IANAPTS I (PTMU )Ka tellaMAGNOL IAPARK I (PTM U )VAC AN T I (PTMU )RETAIL I (PTM U )IND . FIR MS I (PTMU )Ka tellaVACANT I (PTMU )Kate llaVIVERE CON DO S I (PTMU )Ka tellaVACANT I (PTMU )Ka tellaVACANT I (PTM U )IND . FIR MSI (PTMU )IND. FIRMS I (PTMU )IND U STRI AL I (PTMU )Ka tellaVACANT I (PTM U )VAC AN TI (PTM U )IND U STRIAL I (PTMU )IND U STRIAL E KATELLA AVE MARKET STS AUBURN WAYS WESTSIDE DRS GRANVILLE DRE W RIG H T C IR E.KA T E L L A A VES. HARBOR BLVDE. C ERRITOS AVE S. LEWIS STE. ORANGEWOOD AVE S. M ANCH ESTE R A VE S. HASTER STS. ANAHEIM BLVDS. SUNKIST STS.DOUGLASSRDW.KA TELLA AVE 100 5 - 1 10 5 Ea st Kate lla Ave nu e D E V 20 12 -0 00 6 0B Su bje ct Property APN: 082-261-28082-261-27 ATTACHM ENT NO. 1 0 50 10 0 Feet Ae ria l Pho to :Ma y 20 13 E KATELLA AVE MARKET STS AUBURN WAYS WESTSIDE DRS GRANVILLE DRE W RIG H T C IR E.KA T E L L A A VES. HARBOR BLVDS. LEWIS STE. C ERRITOS AV E E. ORANGEWOOD AVE S. M ANCHESTE R A VE S. HASTER STS. ANAHEIM BLVDS. SUNKIST STS.DOUGLASSRDW. KAT ELLA AVE 100 5 - 1 10 5 Ea st Kate lla Ave nu e D E V 20 12 -0 00 6 0B Su bje ct Property APN: 082-261-28082-261-27 ATTACHM ENT NO. 1 0 50 10 0 Feet Ae ria l Pho to :Ma y 20 13 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. PC2014-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO THE PREVIOUSLY-CERTIFIED REVISED PLATINUM TRIANGLE EXPANSION PROJECT SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 339 FOR THE REVISED PLATINUM TRIANGLE EXPANSION PROJECT, ALONG WITH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 316, AND DETERMINING THAT SAID ADDENDUM, TOGETHER WITH OTHER PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION, SERVES AS THE APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE PLATINUM VISTA PROJECT; AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00495. (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00495) (DEV2012-00060B) (1005 – 1105 EAST KATELLA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition from Platinum Vista Apartments, LP, a California limited partnership (herein referred to as the "Owner") to approve General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495 to modify "Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City" to increase the number of dwelling units from 350 to 389 residential apartment units for certain real property consisting of approximately 4.13 acres commonly known as 1005-1105 East Katella Avenue) in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property consists of 2 parcels currently designated for use as “Mixed Use" on the land use map of the General Plan. These parcels are zoned Industrial (I) and are located within the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle and, as such, are subject to and must comply with the land use intensities and the development standards and regulations of Chapter 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495 is proposed in conjunction with the "Proposed New Entitlements", as defined herein below, all of which have been presented for consideration by the Planning Commission at the meeting at which this Resolution was adopted; and WHEREAS, the Platinum Triangle comprises approximately 820 acres located at the confluence of the Interstate 5 and State Route 57 ("SR-57 Freeway") freeways in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, generally east of the Interstate 5 Freeway, west of the Santa Ana River channel and the SR-57 Freeway, south of the Southern California Edison easement, and north of the Anaheim City limit. The Platinum Triangle encompasses the Angel Stadium, the Honda Center, the City National Grove of Anaheim, the Anaheim -1- Amtrak/Metrolink Station, and surrounding residential and mixed use development, light industrial buildings, industrial parks, distribution facilities, offices, hotels, restaurants, and retail development; and WHEREAS, since 1996, the City Council of the City of Anaheim ("City Council") has approved several actions relating to the area encompassed by the Platinum Triangle; and WHEREAS, on May 30, 1996, the City Council of the City of Anaheim certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 320 and adopted Area Development Plan No. 120 for that portion of the Angel Stadium property associated with the Sportstown Development. Area Development Plan No. 120 entitled a total of 119,543 seats for new and/or renovated stadiums, 750,000 square feet of urban entertainment/retail uses, a 500-room hotel (550,000 square feet), a 150,000-square-foot exhibition center, 250,000 square feet of office development and 15,570 on- site parking spaces. The Grove of Anaheim, the renovated Angel Stadium and the Stadium Gateway Office Building were developed/renovated under Area Development Plan No. 120; and WHEREAS, on March 2, 1999, the City Council adopted the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan ("MLUP"). The boundaries of the MLUP were generally the same as those for the Platinum Triangle, with the exception that the MLUP included 15 acres adjacent to the Interstate 5 freeway that are not a part of the current Platinum Triangle boundaries. As part of the approval process for the MLUP, the City Council also certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 321 and adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106. Development within the boundaries of the MLUP was implemented through the Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone ("SE Overlay Zone"), which permitted current uses to continue or expand within the provisions of the existing zoning, while providing those who may want to develop sports, entertainment, retail, and office uses with standards appropriate to those uses, including increased land use intensity. Implementation of the SE Overlay Zone was projected to result in a net loss of 491,303 square feet of industrial space and increases of 1,871,285 square feet of new office space, 452,026 square feet of new retail space, and 991,603 square feet of new hotel space. Projects that were developed under the SE Overlay Zone included the Ayers Hotel, the Arena Corporate Center, and the Westwood School of Technology; and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the City Council approved a comprehensive citywide General Plan and Zoning Code Update, which included a new vision for the Platinum Triangle. The General Plan Update changed the General Plan designations within the Platinum Triangle from Commercial Recreation and Business Office/Mixed Use/Industrial to Mixed-Use, Office- High, Office-Low, Industrial, Open Space and Institutional to provide opportunities for existing uses to transition to mixed-use, residential, office, and commercial uses. The General Plan Update also established the overall maximum development intensities for the Platinum Triangle, which permitted up to 9,175 dwelling units, 5,000,000 square feet of office space, 2,044,300 square feet of commercial uses, industrial development at a maximum floor area ratio ("FAR") of 0.50, and institutional development at a maximum FAR of 3.0. In addition, the square footage/seats allocated to the existing Honda Center and all of the development intensity entitled by Area Development Plan No. 120 was incorporated into the Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use land use designation. Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330 ("FEIR No. 330"), which was prepared for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update and associated actions, analyzed the above development intensities on a City-wide impact level and adopted mitigation monitoring programs, including that certain Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106 for the Platinum Triangle; and -2- WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004 and in order to provide the implementation tools necessary to realize the City’s new vision for the Platinum Triangle, the City Council replaced the MLUP with the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (the "PTMLUP"), replaced the SE Overlay Zone with the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone ("PTMU Overlay Zone"), approved the form of a Standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement, and approved associated zoning reclassifications. Under these updated zoning regulations, property owners desiring to develop under the PTMU Overlay Zone provisions were thereafter required to enter into a standardized Development Agreement with the City of Anaheim; and WHEREAS, on October 25, 2005, the City Council certified Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 ("FSEIR No. 332") adopting a Statement of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A to provide for the implementation of the PTMLUP , in conjunction with its consideration and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00420, Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00089, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00036 and a series of related actions, which collectively allowed for an increase in the allowable development intensities within the Platinum Triangle to 9,500 residential units, 5,000,000 square feet of office uses, and 2,254,400 square feet of commercial uses; and WHEREAS, following the certification of FSEIR No. 332, the City Council approved two addendums to FSEIR No. 332 in conjunction with requests to increase the Platinum Triangle intensity by 67 residential units, 55,550 square feet of office development, and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses. A project Environmental Impact Report was also approved to increase the allowable development intensities by an additional 699 residential units to bring the total allowable development intensity within the Platinum Triangle to up to 10,266 residential units, 5,055,550 square feet of office uses, and 2,264,400 square feet of commercial uses; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 2007, the City embarked upon a process to amend the General Plan, the PTMLUP, the PTMU Overlay Zone, the Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement, and related zoning reclassifications to increase the allowable development intensities within the Platinum Triangle to up to 18,363 residential units, 5,657,847 square feet of commercial uses,16,819,015 square feet of office uses, and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses (the "Platinum Triangle Expansion Project"); and WHEREAS, on December 11, 2007, the City Council certified Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 334 ("FSEIR No. 334") adopting a Statement of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A in conjunction with its consideration and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00420, Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00089, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00036, and a series of other related actions in order to provide for the implementation of the PTMLUP and approval of the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project; and WHEREAS, in response to the application of the Ronald W. Marshall and Deborah L. Marshall Trust, Dated January 7, 1989, the Marshall Family Trust, Dated February 14, 2000, and See Development Limited Partnership (collectively referred to herein as "Marshall/See"), for entitlements allowing the development of a 327-unit mixed use residential condominium project with a 9,500 square foot full-service restaurant with an outdoor dining area on the Property (the "Original Project"), the City Council determined that FSEIR No. 334, including Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106B for the PTMLUP and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 153, served as the appropriate environmental documentation for the Original Project. -3- In addition to Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, which was recorded in the Official Records of the County of Orange, California ("Official Records") on March 20, 2008, as Instrument No. 2008000129034 (the “Development Agreement”), the City Council approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05248 to permit the sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages within a full-service restaurant and Tentative Tract Map No. 17186 to establish a 2-lot (1 lettered and 1 numbered) residential subdivision on the Property; and WHEREAS, on January 8, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6090 approving the Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, subsequent to the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05248 and the Development Agreement, a lawsuit was filed challenging the adequacy of FSEIR No. 334. The City Council thereafter repealed the approval of the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, including FSEIR No. 334 and various related actions, and directed staff to prepare a new Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project; and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2010, the City Council approved amendments to the General Plan ("General Plan Amendment No. 2008-00471"), the PTMLUP ("Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00188"), the PTMU Overlay Zone, and related zoning reclassifications to increase the allowable development intensities within the PTMU Overlay Zone to up to 18,909 residential units, 14,340,522 square feet of office uses, 4,909,682 square feet of commercial uses, and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses. Before approving said amendments and zoning reclassifications, the City Council approved and certified the "Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339" for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, including Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106C (collectively referred to herein as "FSEIR No. 339") ; and WHEREAS, certain additional development approvals and permits were subsequently approved by the City for the Property, including (1) Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002A), extending the Term of the Development Agreement from a period of five years to a period of ten years; (2) First Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002B) (the “First Amended DA”), to increase the number of units in the Original Project to 350 and eliminated the 9,500 square foot full-service restaurant; and (3) Tentative Tract Map No. 17494 to modify the product type, overall site layout, and to include the addition of a public park. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 was recorded in the Official Records on June 14, 2012, as Instrument No. 2012000337873. The First Amended DA was recorded in the Official Records on April 11, 2013, as Instrument No. 2013000217457; and WHEREAS, Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, and the First Amended DA shall be referred to herein collectively as the "Existing Development Agreement"; and WHEREAS, the Existing Development Agreement and Tentative Tract Map No. 17494 shall be referred to herein collectively as the “Existing Entitlements”; and WHEREAS, the Original Project, as represented by the Existing Development Agreement and Existing Entitlements, shall be referred to herein as the "Platinum Vista Project"; and -4- WHEREAS, Addendum No. 1 to FSEIR No. 339, dated April 17, 2012 ("Addendum No. 1"), was prepared and considered by the City Council in connection with the Katella Avenue/I-5 Undercrossing Improvements project because none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent environmental impact report had occurred; and WHEREAS, on December 18, 2012, the City Council approved amendments to the General Plan ("General Plan Amendment No. 2012-00486"), the PTMLUP ("Miscellaneous Case No. 2012-00559"), and the PTMU Overlay Zone ("Zoning Code Amendment No. 2012-00107") to increase the number of dwelling units and reduce the amount of office and commercial development allowed within the Mixed-Use land use designation of the Platinum Triangle and to amend various Elements of the General Plan to include the addition of a public park ("General Plan Amendment No. 2012-00486"); and WHEREAS, Addendum No. 2 to FSEIR No. 339, dated December 3, 2012 ("Addendum No. 2"), was prepared and considered by the City Council in connection with proposed revisions to a master planned mixed-use project on a 7.01-acre (approximate) parcel commonly known as 905-917 East Katella Avenue to allow the development of a four-story "wrap style" residential building consisting of 399 dwelling units with a five-story parking structure and a public park (the "Platinum Gateway Project"). The Platinum Gateway Project is located adjacent to the Property; and WHEREAS, on January 22, 2014, the Property was acquired by the Owner and the First Amended DA was assigned from TSG Platinum LP, a Delaware limited partnership (successor to Shopoff Advisors, L.P.), to the Owner pursuant to that certain Assignment and Assumption of Development Agreement, dated as of January 22, 2014, the original of which was recorded in the Official Records on January 22, 2014 as Instrument No. 2014000025889; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority conferred upon and in accordance with Section 21 of the Development Agreement and Chapter 18.60 of the Code, the Owner has requested an amendment to the Existing Entitlements to modify the site design and product type of the Platinum Vista Project, consisting of an increase in the number of dwelling units from 350 to 389 residential apartment units involving the construction of a five-story “wrap-style” building (five levels of apartments) and a six-story parking structure, including subterranean parking. To that end, the Owner has requested the following entitlements (herein referred to collectively as the "Proposed New Entitlements"): (a) An amendment to the Existing Development Agreement in the form of the proposed Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007- 00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D) (the "Second Amended DAG") presented at the meeting at which this Resolution was adopted; (b) An amendment to the General Plan to modify "Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City" to increase the number of dwelling units from 350 to 389 residential apartment units ("General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495"), as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; (c) An amendment to the Zoning Code to make the Zoning Code consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, as adopted ("Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117"); and -5- (d) An amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to be consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, including amendments to (i) Chapter 1, Table 1 - General Plan Development Intensities, (ii) Chapter 3, Section 3.1, (iii) Chapter 3, Section 3.4, (iv) Chapter 3, Table 3, and (v) Appendix G, to reflect revised development intensities ("Miscellaneous Case No. 2014-00593"); and WHEREAS, in connection with the Proposed New Entitlements, Addendum No. 3 to FSEIR N o. 339, dated August 2014 ("Addendum No. 3"), a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department and incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth, has been prepared in order to determine whether any significant environmental impacts which were not identified in the previously-approved FSEIR No. 339 would result or whether previously identified significant impacts would be substantially more severe. FSEIR No. 339, Addendum, No. 1, Addendum No. 2, and the Addendum No. 3, together with the related Mitigation Monitoring Programs and Plans, shall be referred to herein collectively as the "CEQA Documents"; and WHEREAS, in connection with the Proposed New Entitlements and the Planning Commission’s review of Addendum No. 3, the Planning Commission has independently reviewed all of the CEQA Documents and has exercised its independent judgment in making the findings and determinations set forth herein; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has heretofore approved Final Site Plan No. 2014- 00007 ("Final Site Plan") to provide for the development of the Platinum Vista Project, as revised by the Owner, contingent upon the approval of the Proposed New Entitlements. The Platinum Vista Project, as revised by the Owner and subject to the Proposed New Entitlements, shall be referred to herein as the "Revised Platinum Vista Project"; and WHEREAS, on September 8, 2014, this Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for the proposed Revised Platinum Vista Project and the Proposed New Entitlements at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code, and considered information presented by City staff and evidence for and against the proposed Revised Platinum Vista Project and the Proposed New Entitlements; and WHEREAS, this Planning 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 testimony, evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine as follows: 1. That proposed General Plan Amendment 2014-00495 maintains internal consistency with the General Plan as the increase in the number of residential dwelling units is consistent with the goals and policies set forth in the General Plan for the Mixed Use land use designation and the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, as proposed to be amended by, and contingent upon and subject to the approval by the City Council of, Miscellaneous Case No. 2014-00593, now pending. -6- 2. That proposed General Plan Amendment 2014-00495 would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City because the increase in the number of dwelling units is negligible as it is off-set by the previous deletion of commercial and office square footage. Further, public recreational amenities were enhanced by an additional public park for the surrounding community; 3. That proposed General Plan Amendment 2014-00495 continues to be consistent with the intent of the General Plan and would maintain the balance of land uses within the City; and 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2014-00495 is physically suitable to accommodate the proposed modifications, including but not limited to, access, physical constraints, topography, provision of utilities, and compatibility with surrounding land uses and will maintain an accurate reflection of the allotted densities permitted under, and will further the goals of, the General Plan. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentation, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission, pursuant to the above findings and based upon a thorough review of proposed General Plan Amendment 2014- 00495, Addendum No. 3, the CEQA Documents, and the evidence received to date, does determine and recommends that the City Council so find and determine as follows: 1. That Addendum No. 3 was prepared in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual. 2. That, based upon the evidence submitted and as demonstrated by the analysis included in Addendum No. 3, none of the conditions described in Sections 15162 or 15163 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR or negative declaration have occurred; specifically: (a) There have not been any substantial changes in the Platinum Vista Project that require major revisions of the CEQA Documents because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (b) There have not been any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Revised Platinum Vista Project is undertaken that require major revisions of the CEQA Documents due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and -7- (c) There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time FSEIR No. 339 was certified as complete or the other CEQA Documents were adopted, that shows any of the following: (a) the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in FSEIR No. 339 or the other CEQA Documents; (b) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in FSEIR No. 339 or the other CEQA Documents; (c) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would, in fact, be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Revised Platinum Vista Project, but the Owner declines to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (d) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in FSEIR No. 339 would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Owner decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, pursuant to the above findings, the Planning Commission determines that the previously-approved CEQA Documents, together with Addendum No. 3, satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA and are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed New Entitlements and the Revised Platinum Vista Project and hereby recommends that the City Council so find and determine. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, based upon the aforesaid findings and determinations, this Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve and adopt proposed General Plan Amendment 2014-00495 in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that proposed General Plan Amendment 2014-00495 be approved contingent upon and subject to the approval of the other Proposed New Entitlements, specifically, the Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D), Miscellaneous Case No. 2014-00593 and Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117, now pending. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon compliance with each and all of the conditions set forth in the resolution of this Planning Commission adopted substantially concurrently with this Resolution relating to proposed Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D). 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. -8- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of September 8, 2014. 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. CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary for the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on September 8, 2014, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of September, 2014. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 104410-v2/TReynolds -9- -10- EXHIBIT "B" TABLE LU-4: GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY Location General Plan Land Use Designations Permitted Density The Mountain Park Area Low Medium Hillside Density Residential (Up to 6 du/ac) Low Medium Density Residential (Up to 16 du/ac) 485 2,015 (Up to 2,500 dwelling units) Area “A” (Parcel Map 94-205) Low-Medium Density Residential Up to 140 dwelling units The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-1) Area Commercial Recreation See Note No. 1 on next page. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-2) Area Commercial Recreation See Note No. 2 on next page. Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP 93-1) Area Commercial Recreation The Hotel Circle Specific Plan allows for a master planned hotel project including up to 969 hotel rooms and integrated guest oriented amenities including full-service restaurants, conference room/banquet facilities, pool and spa areas, tour bus/shuttle facilities, and pedestrian promenades and plaza areas with comprehensive landscaping. The Platinum Triangle Area Mixed-Use Residential Commercial Office Institutional Office High and Office Low Institutional Industrial Open Space 19,027 dwelling units 4,735,111 square feet 9,652,747 square feet 1,500,000 square feet 4,478,356 square feet* 3.0 FAR 0.5 FAR 0.1 FAR * The maximum FAR for properties designated Office-Low is 0.5; the maximum FAR for properties designated Office-High is 2.0. TABLE LU-4: GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY (CONTINUED) Low Density Residential Up to 35 dwelling units Exhibit "B" Page 1 of 2 Note No. 1: The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan provides for the development of an approximate 489.7 acre international multi-day vacation designation resort including ongoing modifications to the Disneyland theme park, the development of a new theme park, additional hotels and entertainment areas, administrative office facilities, new public and private parking facilities, and an internal transportation system. This development is within five planning Districts (Theme Park, Hotel, Parking, Future Expansion and District A) and a C-R Overlay, which allows development within the Overlay to either be consistent with the underlying Resort District or subject to the same land uses as in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 Zone. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan also identifies maximum development density designations for hotel/motel development in the Hotel District (up to 5,600 hotel rooms for the entire District with up to 1,000 hotel rooms transferable to the Theme Park District), in District A (the maximum number of units permitted would be 75 hotel/motel rooms per gross acre or 75 hotel/motel rooms per parcel existing on June 29, 1993, whichever is greater) and the C-R Overlay (the maximum number of units permitted on a parcel would be the following: 1) for parcels designated Low Density – up to 50 hotel rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater; and 2) for parcels designated Medium Density – up to 75 hotel rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater; provided that for those parcels that are developed with hotel/motel rooms which exceeded the maximum density designation, the number of rooms existing on the date of adoption of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Ordinance may be rebuilt or modified at their existing density.) It should be noted that accessory uses may be developed as well as other visitor-serving commercial/retail and restaurant uses along with these hotel/motel uses. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan also provides for the development of the Anaheim GardenWalk project pursuant to the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay at the following density and subject to the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 4078, as amended, to permit the following: up to 590,265 square feet of specialty retail, restaurants, and entertainment uses, including movie theaters; 1,628 hotel rooms/suites (including up to 500 vacation ownership units) and 278,817 square feet of hotel accessory uses; a transportation center, and 4,800 parking spaces. The Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay encompasses District A and the portion of the Parking District (East Parking Area)/CR Overlay south of Disney Way. Note No. 2: The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan provides for the development of approximately 582 acres within the C-R (Commercial Recreation) District which allows for hotels, motels, convention and conference facilities, as well as restaurants, retail shops and entertainment facilities; the PR (Public Recreation) District which encompasses the Anaheim Convention Center and associated parking facilities and provides for the orderly use of City-owned property as well as the existing Anaheim Hilton Hotel; the Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay which encompasses existing mobilehome parks within the C-R District and provides development standards for mobilehome parks and regulations and procedures to mitigate relocation concerns and adverse effects of displacement upon mobilehome owners when a park is converted to another land use; and, the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay, which applies to focused areas of the Specific Plan and provides for the incorporation of residential uses into hotel developments when such uses are fully integrated into a minimum 300-room full-service hotel. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan also identifies maximum development density designations in the C-R District. These designations are based upon hotel/motel development and allow up to 20% of each hotel/motel project gross square footage, excluding parking facilities, to be developed with integrated (i.e., included within the main hotel/motel complex) accessory uses. These accessory uses will reduce the otherwise maximum permitted hotel/motel density at the rate of one hotel/motel room per six hundred (600) gross square feet of accessory use. For properties proposed to be developed with permitted and conditionally permitted uses other than hotels/motels with accessory uses, the traffic generation characteristics of said uses shall not exceed those associated with the otherwise permitted hotel/motel (including accessory uses) density as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to Final Site Plan review and approval. The density designations are as follows: “Low Density,” which has a maximum density of up to 50 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater; “Low-Medium Density,” up to 75 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater; “Low-Medium Density (Modified),” up to 252 rooms and 75,593 square feet of accessory uses; “Medium Density,” up to 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater; and, “Convention Center (CC) Medium Density,” up to 125 rooms per gross acre with trip generation characteristics mitigated to the equivalent of 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater. For those parcels that are developed with hotel/motel rooms which exceed the maximum density designation, the number of rooms existing on the date of adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Ordinance may be rebuilt or modified at their existing density. For projects that are developed in accordance with the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay, the maximum number of dwelling units allowed shall be less than the number of hotel rooms proposed and such projects shall not create infrastructure impacts greater than the subject property’s permitted hotel/motel density, as permitted by the property’s underlying C-R District density designation unless otherwise mitigated through subsequent environmental analysis. Exhibit "B" Page 2 of 2 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. PC2014-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND TABLE 20-D (DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES: PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE) OF SECTION 18.20.040 (DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS) OF CHAPTER 18.20 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AND MAKING FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00117). (ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00117) (DEV2014-00060B) (1005 – 1105 EAST KATELLA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition from Platinum Vista Apartments, LP, a California limited partnership (herein referred to as the "Owner") to approve a proposed amendment to the Zoning Code to modify "Table D - Development Intensities: Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone" of Section 18.20.040 (Development Districts) of Chapter 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone) of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (“Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117”) to increase the number of dwelling units from 350 to 389 residential apartment units for certain real property consisting of approximately 4.13 acres commonly known as 1005-1105 East Katella Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property consists of 2 parcels currently designated for use as “Mixed Use" on the land use map of the General Plan. These parcels are zoned Industrial (I) and are located within the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle and, as such, are subject to and must comply with the land use intensities and the development standards and regulations of Chapter 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117 is proposed in conjunction with the "Proposed New Entitlements", as defined herein below, all of which have been presented for consideration by the Planning Commission at the meeting at which this Resolution was adopted; and WHEREAS, the Platinum Triangle comprises approximately 820 acres located at the confluence of the Interstate 5 and State Route 57 ("SR-57 Freeway") freeways in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, generally east of the Interstate 5 Freeway, west of the Santa Ana River channel and the SR-57 Freeway, south of the Southern California Edison easement, and north of the Anaheim City limit. The Platinum Triangle encompasses the Angel Stadium, the Honda Center, the City National Grove of Anaheim, the Anaheim Amtrak/Metrolink Station, and surrounding residential and mixed use development, light industrial buildings, industrial parks, distribution facilities, offices, hotels, restaurants, and retail development; and -1- PC2014-*** WHEREAS, since 1996, the City Council of the City of Anaheim ("City Council") has approved several actions relating to the area encompassed by the Platinum Triangle; and WHEREAS, on May 30, 1996, the City Council of the City of Anaheim certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 320 and adopted Area Development Plan No. 120 for that portion of the Angel Stadium property associated with the Sportstown Development. Area Development Plan No. 120 entitled a total of 119,543 seats for new and/or renovated stadiums, 750,000 square feet of urban entertainment/retail uses, a 500-room hotel (550,000 square feet), a 150,000-square-foot exhibition center, 250,000 square feet of office development and 15,570 on-site parking spaces. The Grove of Anaheim, the renovated Angel Stadium and the Stadium Gateway Office Building were developed/renovated under Area Development Plan No. 120; and WHEREAS, on March 2, 1999, the City Council adopted the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan ("MLUP"). The boundaries of the MLUP were generally the same as those for the Platinum Triangle, with the exception that the MLUP included 15 acres adjacent to the Interstate 5 freeway that are not a part of the current Platinum Triangle boundaries. As part of the approval process for the MLUP, the City Council also certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 321 and adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106. Development within the boundaries of the MLUP was implemented through the Sports Entertainment Overlay Zone ("SE Overlay Zone"), which permitted current uses to continue or expand within the provisions of the existing zoning, while providing those who may want to develop sports, entertainment, retail, and office uses with standards appropriate to those uses, including increased land use intensity. Implementation of the SE Overlay Zone was projected to result in a net loss of 491,303 square feet of industrial space and increases of 1,871,285 square feet of new office space, 452,026 square feet of new retail space, and 991,603 square feet of new hotel space. Projects that were developed under the SE Overlay Zone included the Ayers Hotel, the Arena Corporate Center, and the Westwood School of Technology; and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the City Council approved a comprehensive citywide General Plan and Zoning Code Update, which included a new vision for the Platinum Triangle. The General Plan Update changed the General Plan designations within the Platinum Triangle from Commercial Recreation and Business Office/Mixed Use/Industrial to Mixed-Use, Office-High, Office-Low, Industrial, Open Space and Institutional to provide opportunities for existing uses to transition to mixed- use, residential, office, and commercial uses. The General Plan Update also established the overall maximum development intensities for the Platinum Triangle, which permitted up to 9,175 dwelling units, 5,000,000 square feet of office space, 2,044,300 square feet of commercial uses, industrial development at a maximum floor area ratio ("FAR") of 0.50, and institutional development at a maximum FAR of 3.0. In addition, the square footage/seats allocated to the existing Honda Center and all of the development intensity entitled by Area Development Plan No. 120 was incorporated into the Platinum Triangle Mixed- Use land use designation. Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330 ("FEIR No. 330"), which was prepared for the General Plan and Zoning Code Update and associated actions, analyzed the above development intensities on a City-wide impact level and adopted mitigation monitoring programs, including that certain Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106 for the Platinum Triangle; and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004 and in order to provide the implementation tools necessary to realize the City’s new vision for the Platinum Triangle, the City Council replaced the MLUP with the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (the "PTMLUP"), replaced the SE Overlay Zone with the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone ("PTMU Overlay Zone"), approved the form of a -2- PC2014-*** Standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement, and approved associated zoning reclassifications. Under these updated zoning regulations, property owners desiring to develop under the PTMU Overlay Zone provisions were thereafter required to enter into a standardized Development Agreement with the City of Anaheim; and WHEREAS, on October 25, 2005, the City Council certified Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332 ("FSEIR No. 332") adopting a Statement of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A to provide for the implementation of the PTMLUP, in conjunction with its consideration and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00420, Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00089, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00036 and a series of related actions, which collectively allowed for an increase in the allowable development intensities within the Platinum Triangle to 9,500 residential units, 5,000,000 square feet of office uses, and 2,254,400 square feet of commercial uses; and WHEREAS, following the certification of FSEIR No. 332, the City Council approved two addendums to FSEIR No. 332 in conjunction with requests to increase the Platinum Triangle intensity by 67 residential units, 55,550 square feet of office development, and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses. A project Environmental Impact Report was also approved to increase the allowable development intensities by an additional 699 residential units to bring the total allowable development intensity within the Platinum Triangle to up to 10,266 residential units, 5,055,550 square feet of office uses, and 2,264,400 square feet of commercial uses; and WHEREAS, on February 13, 2007, the City embarked upon a process to amend the General Plan, the PTMLUP, the PTMU Overlay Zone, the Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement, and related zoning reclassifications to increase the allowable development intensities within the Platinum Triangle to up to 18,363 residential units, 5,657,847 square feet of commercial uses,16,819,015 square feet of office uses, and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses (the "Platinum Triangle Expansion Project"); and WHEREAS, on December 11, 2007, the City Council certified Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 334 ("FSEIR No. 334") adopting a Statement of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A in conjunction with its consideration and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00420, Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00089, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00036, and a series of other related actions in order to provide for the implementation of the PTMLUP and approval of the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project; and WHEREAS, in response to the application of the Ronald W. Marshall and Deborah L. Marshall Trust, Dated January 7, 1989, the Marshall Family Trust, Dated February 14, 2000, and See Development Limited Partnership (collectively referred to herein as "Marshall/See"), for entitlements allowing the development of a 327-unit mixed use residential condominium project with a 9,500 square foot full-service restaurant with an outdoor dining area on the Property (the "Original Project"), the City Council determined that FSEIR No. 334, including Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106B for the PTMLUP and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 153, served as the appropriate environmental documentation for the Original Project. In addition to Development Agreement No. 2007- 00002, which was recorded in the Official Records of the County of Orange, California ("Official Records") on March 20, 2008, as Instrument No. 2008000129034 (the “Development Agreement”), the City Council approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05248 to permit the sales and consumption of -3- PC2014-*** alcoholic beverages within a full-service restaurant and Tentative Tract Map No. 17186 to establish a 2- lot (1 lettered and 1 numbered) residential subdivision on the Property; and WHEREAS, on January 8, 2008, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6090 approving the Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, subsequent to the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05248 and the Development Agreement, a lawsuit was filed challenging the adequacy of FSEIR No. 334. The City Council thereafter repealed the approval of the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, including FSEIR No. 334 and various related actions, and directed staff to prepare a new Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project; and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2010, the City Council approved amendments to the General Plan ("General Plan Amendment No. 2008-00471"), the PTMLUP ("Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00188"), the PTMU Overlay Zone, and related zoning reclassifications to increase the allowable development intensities within the PTMU Overlay Zone to up to 18,909 residential units, 14,340,522 square feet of office uses, 4,909,682 square feet of commercial uses, and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses. Before approving said amendments and zoning reclassifications, the City Council approved and certified the "Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339" for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, including Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106C (collectively referred to herein as "FSEIR No. 339") ; and WHEREAS, certain additional development approvals and permits were subsequently approved by the City for the Property, including (1) Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007- 00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002A), extending the Term of the Development Agreement from a period of five years to a period of ten years; (2) First Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002B) (the “First Amended DA”), to increase the number of units in the Original Project to 350 and eliminated the 9,500 square foot full- service restaurant; and (3) Tentative Tract Map No. 17494 to modify the product type, overall site layout, and to include the addition of a public park. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007- 00002 was recorded in the Official Records on June 14, 2012, as Instrument No. 2012000337873. The First Amended DA was recorded in the Official Records on April 11, 2013, as Instrument No. 2013000217457; and WHEREAS, Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, and the First Amended DA shall be referred to herein collectively as the "Existing Development Agreement"; and WHEREAS, the Existing Development Agreement and Tentative Tract Map No. 17494 shall be referred to herein collectively as the “Existing Entitlements”; and WHEREAS, the Original Project, as represented by the Existing Development Agreement and Existing Entitlements, shall be referred to herein as the "Platinum Vista Project"; and WHEREAS, Addendum No. 1 to FSEIR No. 339, dated April 17, 2012 ("Addendum No. 1"), was prepared and considered by the City Council in connection with the Katella Avenue/I-5 Undercrossing Improvements project because none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent environmental impact report had occurred; and -4- PC2014-*** WHEREAS, on December 18, 2012, the City Council approved amendments to the General Plan ("General Plan Amendment No. 2012-00486"), the PTMLUP ("Miscellaneous Case No. 2012-00559"), and the PTMU Overlay Zone ("Zoning Code Amendment No. 2012-00107") to increase the number of dwelling units and reduce the amount of office and commercial development allowed within the Mixed- Use land use designation of the Platinum Triangle and to amend various Elements of the General Plan to include the addition of a public park ("General Plan Amendment No. 2012-00486"); and WHEREAS, Addendum No. 2 to FSEIR No. 339, dated December 3, 2012 ("Addendum No. 2"), was prepared and considered by the City Council in connection with proposed revisions to a master planned mixed-use project on a 7.01-acre (approximate) parcel commonly known as 905-917 East Katella Avenue to allow the development of a four-story "wrap style" residential building consisting of 399 dwelling units with a five-story parking structure and a public park (the "Platinum Gateway Project"). The Platinum Gateway Project is located adjacent to the Property; and WHEREAS, on January 22, 2014, the Property was acquired by the Owner and the First Amended DA was assigned from TSG Platinum LP, a Delaware limited partnership (successor to Shopoff Advisors, L.P.), to the Owner pursuant to that certain Assignment and Assumption of Development Agreement, dated as of January 22, 2014, the original of which was recorded in the Official Records on January 22, 2014 as Instrument No. 2014000025889; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority conferred upon and in accordance with Section 21 of the Development Agreement and Chapter 18.60 of the Code, the Owner has requested an amendment to the Existing Entitlements to modify the site design and product type of the Platinum Vista Project, consisting of an increase in the number of dwelling units from 350 to 389 residential apartment units involving the construction of a five-story “wrap-style” building (five levels of apartments) and a six-story parking structure, including subterranean parking. To that end, the Owner has requested the following entitlements (herein referred to collectively as the "Proposed New Entitlements"): (a) An amendment to the Existing Development Agreement in the form of the proposed Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D) (the "Second Amended DAG") presented at the meeting at which this Resolution was adopted; (b) An amendment to the General Plan to modify "Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City" to increase the number of dwelling units from 350 to 389 residential apartment units ("General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495"), as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; (c) An amendment to the Zoning Code to make the Zoning Code consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, as adopted ("Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014- 00117"); and (d) An amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to be consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, including amendments to (i) Chapter 1, Table 1 - General Plan Development Intensities, (ii) Chapter 3, Section 3.1, (iii) Chapter 3, Section 3.4, (iv) Chapter 3, Table 3, and (v) Appendix G, to reflect revised development intensities ("Miscellaneous Case No. 2014-00593"); and -5- PC2014-*** WHEREAS, by the adoption of a resolution concurrently with, but prior in time to, the adoption of this Resolution and pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as "CEQA"), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, this Planning Commission has found and determined and has recommended that the City Council so find and determine that, among other findings, (i) Addendum No. 3 to FSEIR No. 339, dated August 2014 ("Addendum No. 3"), a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department and incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth, together with the "Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339" for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, including Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106C ("FSEIR No. 339"), Addendum No. 1 to FSEIR No. 339, dated April 17, 2012, Addendum No. 2 to FSEIR No. 339, dated December 3, 2012, and related Mitigation Monitoring Programs and Plans (collectively, the "CEQA Documents") satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA and are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed New Entitlements and the Revised Platinum Vista Project; (ii) none of the conditions described in Sections 15162 or 15163 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred in connection with the Proposed New Entitlements and the Revised Platinum Vista Project; and (iii) no further environmental documentation needs to be prepared under CEQA for the Proposed New Entitlements and the Revised Platinum Vista Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has heretofore approved Final Site Plan No. 2014-00007 ("Final Site Plan") to provide for the development of the Platinum Vista Project, contingent upon the approval of the Proposed New Entitlements. The Platinum Vista Project, as revised by the Owner and subject to the Proposed New Entitlements shall be referred to herein as the "Revised Platinum Vista Project"; and WHEREAS, on September 8, 2014, this Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for the proposed Revised Platinum Vista Project and the Proposed New Entitlements at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code, and considered information presented by City staff and evidence for and against the proposed Revised Platinum Vista Project and the Proposed New Entitlements; and WHEREAS, proposed Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117 would make the Zoning Code consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, as adopted, by amending and restating Table 20-D (Development Intensities: Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone) of Section 18.20.040 (Development Districts) of Chapter 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone) of Title 18 of the Code; and WHEREAS, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of and based upon all of the testimony, evidence and reports offered at said hearing, this Planning Commission has heretofore adopted its Resolution recommending that the City Council amend the General Plan by approving and adopting General Plan Amendment No.2014-00495; and -6- PC2014-*** WHEREAS, in order to make the Zoning Code consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, as adopted, this Planning Commission desires to recommend that the City Council approve and adopt proposed Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117 in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentation, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, pursuant to the above findings and based upon a thorough review of proposed Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117, Addendum No. 3, the CEQA Documents, and the evidence received to date, does hereby approve and recommends that the City Council approve Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117 in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A contingent upon and subject to the approval of the other Proposed New Entitlements, specifically General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007- 00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D), and Miscellaneous Case No. 2014-00593, now pending.. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon compliance with each and all of the conditions set forth in a separate resolution of this Planning Commission adopted substantially concurrently with this Resolution relating to the proposed Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D). 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 September 8, 2014. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures. CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM -7- PC2014-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary for the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on September 8, 2014, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of September, 2014. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM -8- PC2014-*** EXHIBIT "A" PROPOSED ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING TABLE 20-D (DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES: PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE) OF SECTION 18.20.040 (DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS) OF CHAPTER 18.20 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That Table 20-D (DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES: PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE) of Section 18.20.040 (DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS) of Chapter 18.20 (PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE) of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended and restated to read as follows: Table 20-D DEVELOPMENT INTENSITIES: PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE (PTMU) OVERLAY ZONE District Acres Maximum Housing Units Maximum Office Square Feet Maximum Commercial Square Feet Maximum Institutional Square Feet Arena 41 425 100,000 100,000 0 ARTIC 17 520 2,202,803 358,000 1,500,000 Gateway 50 2,949 562,250 64,000 0 Gene Autry 33 2,362 338,200 304,700 0 Katella 141 5,825 1,921,639 658,043 0 Orangewood 35 1,771 1,402,855 130,000 0 Stadium 153 5,175 3,125,000 3,120,368 0 Total Mixed Use 470 19,027 9,652,747 4,735,111 1,500,000 Office 121 0 4,478,356 0 0 Total PTMU Overlay 591 19,027 14,131,103 4,735,111 1,500,000 SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY. The City Council of the City of Anaheim hereby declares that should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or word of this ordinance hereby adopted be declared for any reason invalid by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, it is the intent of the City Council that it would have adopted all other portions of this ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom of any such portion as may be declared invalid. SECTION 3. SAVINGS CLAUSE. Neither the adoption of this ordinance nor the repeal of any other ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver of any license or penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation thereof. The provisions of this ordinance, insofar as they are substantially the same as ordinance provisions previously adopted by the City relating to the same subject matter, shall be construed as restatements and continuations, and not as new enactments. THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Anaheim held on the ____ day of ______________, 2014, and thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the ____ day of ______________, 2014, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CITY OF ANAHEIM By: __________________________________ MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: ______________________________________ CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 5 RESOLUTION NO. PC2014-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS, LP, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D) (DEV2012-00060B) (1015 – 1105 EAST KATELLA AVENUE) WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim (the "City") and the Ronald W. Marshall and Deborah L. Marshall Trust, Dated January 7, 1989, the Marshall Family Trust, Dated February 14, 2000, and See Development Limited Partnership (collectively, the “Original Owner”) entered into that certain Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 to build a 327-unit condominium project, including a 9,500 square foot full-service restaurant, the original of which was recorded in the Official Records of the County of Orange, State of California ("Official Records") on March 20, 2008 as Instrument No. 2008000129034 (the “Development Agreement”) with respect to that certain real property described in the “Legal Description” which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Original Owner and the City entered into that certain Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 extending the Term of the Development Agreement from a period of five years to a period of ten years, the original of which was recorded in the Official Records on June 14, 2012, as Instrument No. 2012000337873 (“Amendment No. 1”); and WHEREAS, by that certain Assignment and Assumption of Development Agreement, dated as of December 20, 2012, the Original Owner assigned the Development Agreement, as amended by Amendment No. 1, to TSG Platinum LP, a Delaware limited partnership ("TSG"), the original of which was recorded in the Official Records on December 21, 2012 as Instrument No. 2012000796335; and WHEREAS, the City and Shopoff Advisors, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, entered into that certain First Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002B) (“First Amended DA”), to increase the number of units in the project to 350 and eliminate the 9,500 square foot full-service restaurant in the project, the original of which was recorded in the Official Records on April 11, 2013, as Instrument No. 2013000217457; and WHEREAS, on or about January 22, 2014, the Property was acquired by Platinum Vista Apartments, L.P., a California limited partnership ("Owner") and the First Amended DA was assigned from TSG Platinum LP, a Delaware limited partnership (successor to Shopoff Advisors, L.P.), to Owner pursuant to that certain Assignment and Assumption of Development 1 Agreement, dated as of January 22, 2014, the original of which was recorded in the Official Records on January 22, 2014 as Instrument No. 2014000025889; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement, Amendment No. 1, and the First Amended DA shall be referred to herein collectively as the "Existing Development Agreement"; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority conferred upon and in accordance with Section 21 of the Development Agreement and Chapter 18.60 of the Code, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition from the Owner to amend the Existing Development Agreement and existing entitlements to increase the number of dwelling units that can be built on the Property from 350 to 389 residential apartment units consisting of a six-story "wrap style" building with subterranean parking (the "Revised Platinum Vista Project"). To that end, the Owner has requested the following entitlements (herein referred to collectively as the "Proposed New Entitlements"): (a) An amendment to the Existing Development Agreement in the form of the proposed Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007- 00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D) (the "Second Amended DAG") presented at the meeting at which this Resolution was adopted; (b) An amendment to the General Plan to modify "Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City" to increase the number of dwelling units from 350 to 389 residential apartment units ("General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495"); (c) An amendment to the Zoning Code to make the Zoning Code consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, as adopted ("Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00117"); and (d) An amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to be consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00495, including amendments to (i) Chapter 1, Table 1 - General Plan Development Intensities, (ii) Chapter 3, Section 3.1, (iii) Chapter 3, Section 3.4, (iv) Chapter 3, Table 3, and (v) Appendix G, to reflect revised development intensities ("Miscellaneous Case No. 2014-00593"); and WHEREAS, by the adoption of a resolution concurrently with, but prior in time to, the adoption of this Resolution and pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as "CEQA"), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, this Planning Commission has found and determined and has recommended that the City Council so find and determine that, among other findings, (i) Addendum No. 3 to FSEIR No. 339, dated August 2014 ("Addendum No. 3"), a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department and incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth, together with the "Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339" for the Revised Platinum 2 Triangle Expansion Project, including Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106C ("FSEIR No. 339"), Addendum No. 1 to FSEIR No. 339, dated April 17, 2012, Addendum No. 2 to FSEIR No. 339, dated December 3, 2012, and related Mitigation Monitoring Programs and Plans (collectively, the "CEQA Documents") satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA and are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed New Entitlements and the Revised Platinum Vista Project; (ii) none of the conditions described in Sections 15162 or 15163 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred in connection with the Proposed New Entitlements and the Revised Platinum Vista Project; and (iii) no further environmental documentation needs to be prepared under CEQA for the Proposed New Entitlements and the Revised Platinum Vista Project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director has heretofore approved Final Site Plan No. 2014- 00007 ("Final Site Plan") to provide for the development of the Revised Platinum Vista Project, contingent upon the approval of the Proposed New Entitlements; and WHEREAS, on September 8, 2014, this Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for the proposed Revised Platinum Vista Project and the Proposed New Entitlements at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code, and considered information presented by City staff and evidence for and against the proposed Revised Platinum Vista Project and the Proposed New Entitlements; and WHEREAS, this Planning 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 testimony, evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine that the proposed Second Amended DAG, in the form presented at this meeting, meets all of the standards and requirements set forth in Resolution No. 82R-565 (the “Procedures Resolution”), which was adopted by the City Council on November 23, 1982, that is: (a) The proposed Second Amended DAG is consistent with the City’s General Plan in that it is in conformance with the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation for the Property and with the goals, policies, programs and objectives specified in the General Plan. (b) The proposed Second Amended DAG is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the applicable zoning district in which the Revised Platinum Vista Project is and will be located, and is consistent with the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overly requirements. (c) The proposed Second Amended DAG is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area in that it is in conformance with and implements the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone requirements. (d) The proposed Second Amended DAG is not otherwise detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 3 (e) The proposed Second Amended DAG constitutes a lawful, present exercise of the City’s police power and authority under, is entered into pursuant to, and is in compliance with the City’s charter powers, the requirements of Section 65867 of California Government Code and the Procedures Resolution. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentation, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission, pursuant to the above findings and based upon a thorough review of the proposed Second Amended DAG, Addendum No. 3, the CEQA Documents, and the evidence received to date, does determine and recommends that the City Council approve the proposed Second Amended DAG in the form presented at the meeting at which this Resolution was adopted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon the Owner's compliance with each and all of the conditions set forth in the Second Amended DAG and those conditions of approval set forth on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 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 September 8, 2014. 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. CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary for the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on September 8, 2014, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 8th day of September, 2014. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 104483-v2/TReynolds 5 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A: PARCELS 1 AND 2, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 111, PAGES 40, 41 AND 42 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL B: NON-EXCLUSIVE RECIPROCAL EASEMENT(S) FOR VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, AS SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN INSTRUMENT ENTITLED “GRANT OF RECIPROCAL EASEMENTS”, RECORDED FEBRUARY 28, 2013 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2013-000127002, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. [Assessor's Parcels Nos. 082-261-27 and 082-261-28] 6 EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002 PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D) (DEV2012-00060B) NOTE: Mitigation Measures (“MM”), from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 316 are incorporated into these conditions of approval and are identified by the mitigation measure number below applicable condition numbers. NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT OR DEMOLITION PERMITS 1 (MM2-3) Prior to approval of each grading plan (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for Demolition Plans), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export Plans detailing construction and demolition (C&D) recycling and waste reduction measures to be implemented to recover C&D materials. These plans shall include identification of off-site locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials on-site or to an adjacent site, sale to a soil 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 firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects if not all can be reused at the project site. Planning Department, Planning Services Division Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 2 Prior to issuance of the grading permit and right-of- way construction permit for the storm drain and sewer, whichever occurs first, a Save Harmless agreement in-lieu of an Encroachment Agreement is required to be executed, approved by the City and recorded by the applicant on the property for any storm drains connecting to a City storm drain. Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "B" Page 1 of 33 3 (MM 3-2) At least 90 days prior to the initiation of grading activities, for projects greater than one acre, coverage for the project must be obtained by electronically submitting permit registration documents to the State or obtaining coverage via current general construction permit prescribed method by the property owner/developer pursuant to State and Federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. As part of the NOI, a Surface Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared. The property owner/developer shall also prepare and submit to the Development Services Division of the Public Works Department, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) in accordance with the City’s municipal NPDES requirements and Chapter 7 of the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. The WQMP must be approved prior to issuance of grading permit. The SWPPP, in conjunction with the WQMP, will describe the structural and nonstructural BMPs that will be implemented during construction (short-term) within the Project Area as well as BMPs for long- term operation of the Project Area that address potential impacts to surface waters. Planning Department, Building Division 4 (MM10-1) The City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient sewer facilities, as identified in the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. If the project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the project currently discharges to an existing deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the sewer plans shall be submitted for review. Prior to issuance of a building permit for each development project, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the latest updated sewer Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "B" Page 2 of 33 study for the Platinum Triangle. 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. 5 (MM10-3) Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall contact Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) regarding sewer capacity. Additionally, if requested by the OCSD, the property owner/developer shall place up to three flow monitoring devices for up to a month to verify capacity and ensure consistency with the OCSD’s modeling results. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 6 Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit, the 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 owner 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. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 7 (MM10-8) Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide engineering studies, including network analysis, to size the water mains for ultimate development within the project. This includes detailed water usage analysis and building plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering reviews and approval in determining project water requirements and appropriate water assessment fees. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 8 (MM10-9) Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation meter when the Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources Exhibit "B" Page 3 of 33 total landscaped area exceeds 2,500 square feet. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) 9 The property owner shall comply with Rule 15D of the Water Utilities Rates, Rules, and Regulations and pay all applicable water assessment fees. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 10 (MM10-13) Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans water efficient design features including, but not limited to (as applicable to the type of development at issue) waterless water heaters, waterless urinals, automatic on and off water faucets, and water efficient appliances. Public Utilities, Resource Efficiency 11 (MM10-14) Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation lines and use recycled water when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. The property owner/developer shall contact the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, for recycled water system requirements and specific water conservation measures to be incorporated into the building and landscape construction plans. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 12 (MM10-17) Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient drainage facilities, as identified in the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area. If the project will increase stormwater flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan 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 impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "B" Page 4 of 33 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 of the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area, 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 fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. 13 Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the property owner shall submit a final drainage report and project improvement plans that incorporate the required drainage improvements and the mechanisms proposed in the Drainage Report. No offsite run-off shall be blocked during and after grading operations or perimeter wall construction. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 14 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans documenting that the design of all aboveground structures (with the exception of parking structures) shall be at least one foot higher that the 100-year flood zone, where applicable, unless otherwise required by the City Engineer. All structures below this level shall be floodproofed to prevent damage to property or harm to people. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 15 (MM 10-20) Prior to the approval of each grading plan (for import/export plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for demolition plans), the property owner/developer shall submit a Demolition and Import/ Export Plans, if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division and/or Street and Sanitation Division. The plans shall include identification of off-site locations for material export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Planning Department, Planning Division Exhibit "B" Page 5 of 33 include recycling of materials on-site, 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 firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if all cannot be reused on the project site. 16 (MM10-23) Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall install their portion of the underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System as determined by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications of Underground Systems. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. The underground electrical service will consist of the following improvements to the current electric facilities: Relocate Southern California Edison transmission line underground on Katella Avenue from west of the Union Pacific Railroad to Lewis Street (850 feet). Relocate Southern California Edison communication line underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to east of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). Relocate distribution circuits underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Orangewood Avenue from Anaheim Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division Exhibit "B" Page 6 of 33 Way to State College Boulevard (1,500 feet). Relocation a distribution circuit underground on Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to west of the Santa Ana River (1,600 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Gene Autry Way (950 feet). Relocate a distribution circuit underground on Douglas Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue (1,000 feet). 17 (MM10-25) Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall install their portion of the underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System as determined by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications of Underground Systems. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. The underground electrical service will consist of the following improvements to the current electric facilities: Two new distribution duct banks on Katella Avenue from Anaheim Way to Lewis Street (800 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Douglas Road to Howell Avenue (2,000 feet). A new distribution duct bank on State College Boulevard from Cerritos Avenue to Katella Avenue (2,600 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division Exhibit "B" Page 7 of 33 Orangewood Avenue from I-5 to the Santa Ana River (4,800 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from Haster Street to the east side of I-5 (2,500 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet). A new transmission duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet). A new transmission duct bank on Lewis Street and Santa Cruz Street from Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,000 feet). A new distribution duct bank on the east side of the Angel Stadium parking lot from Orangewood Avenue to the SR-57 (2,000 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Douglas Road from SR-57 to Cerritos Avenue (4,000 feet). PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT 18 (MM2-4) The property owner/developer shall submit evidence that high-solids or water-based low emissions paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District’s regulations. This information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. Additionally, the property owner/developer’s shall specify the use of high- volume/low-pressure spray equipment or hand application. Air-atomized spray techniques shall not be permitted. Plans shall also show that property owner/developers shall construct/build with materials that do not require painting, or use prepainted construction materials, to the extent feasible. South Coast Air Quality Management District 19 (MM2-6) The property owner/architect shall submit energy calculations used to demonstrate compliance with the performance approach to the California Energy Efficiency Standards to the Building Division that Planning Department, Building Division Exhibit "B" Page 8 of 33 shows each new structure exceeds the applicable Building and Energy Efficiency Standards by a minimum of 10 percent at the time of the building permit. Prior to issuance of a building permit, plans shall show the following: a) Energy-efficient roofing systems, such as vegetated or “cool” roofs, that reduce roof temperatures significantly during the summer and; therefore, reduce the energy requirement for air conditioning. Examples of energy efficient building materials and suppliers can be found at the following website: http://eetd.lbl.gov/CoolRoofs/ or other similar websites. b) Cool pavement materials such as lighter- colored pavement materials, porous materials, or permeable or porous pavement, for all roadways and walkways not within the public right-of-way, to minimize the absorption of solar heat and subsequent transfer of heat to its surrounding environment. Examples of cool pavement materials are available at: http://www.epa.gov/heatisld/ images/extra/level3_pavingproducts.html or other similar websites. c) Energy saving devices that achieve the existing 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards, such as use of energy efficient appliances (e.g., EnergyStar® appliances) and use of sunlight-filtering window coatings or double-paned windows. d) Electrical vehicle charging stations for all commercial structures encompassing over 50,000 square-feet. e) Shady trees strategically located within close proximity to the building structure to reduce heat load and resulting energy usage at residential, commercial, and office. 20 (MM5-1) Prior to approval of street improvement plans for any project-related roadway widening, the City shall retain a qualified acoustic engineer to design Public Works, Development Services Division Exhibit "B" Page 9 of 33 project acoustical features that will limit traffic noise at noise sensitive uses to levels that are below the City’s noise ordinance. These treatments shall be noted on the street improvement plans to the satisfaction of the Planning Department and may include, but are not limited to, the replacement of windows and doors at existing residences with acoustically rated windows and doors. Planning Department, Building Division 21 (MM5-2) The project property owner/developers shall submit a final acoustical report prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The report shall show that the development will be sound- attenuated against present and projected noise levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter, stationary sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, stadium, etc.), and railroad, to meet City interior noise standards as follows: a) The report shall demonstrate that the proposed residential design will result in compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise levels, as required by the California Building Code and California Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24 and 25 of the California Code of Regulations). b) The report shall demonstrate that the Proposed Project residential design shall minimize nighttime awakening from stadium event noise and train horns such that interior single-event noise levels are below 81 dBA L max . The property owner/developer shall submit the noise mitigation report to the Planning Director for review and approval. Upon approval by the City, the project acoustical design features shall be incorporated into construction of the Proposed Project. Planning Department, Building Division 22 (MM5-5) To reduce noise and vibration impacts from the impact pile driver, the construction contractor shall evaluate the feasibility of using auger cast piles or a similar system to drill holes to construct cast-in-place piles for a pile-supported transfer slab foundation system. This alternative construction method would reduce the duration Planning Department, Building Division Exhibit "B" Page 10 of 33 necessary for use of the impact pile driver and/or eliminate the need to use pile drivers altogether. Proof of compliance with this measure shall be submitted to the Planning Department in the form of a letter from the construction contractor. 23 (MM7-1) Plans shall indicate that all buildings shall have fire sprinklers in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed by the property owner/developer prior to each final Building and Zoning inspection. Fire Department 24 (MM7-2) The property owner/developer shall pay the Public Safety Impact Fee, as amended from time to time, for fire facilities and equipment impact fees identified in Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 17.36. Fire Department 25 (MM7-3) The property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including implementation of Ordinance 6016 and the concept of crime prevention through environmental design (i.e., building design, circulation, site planning and lighting 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 four feet in height and two feet in width. The lines for the numbers shall be six 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. Police Department 26 (MM7-4) For a parking structure, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval indicating the provision of closed circuit monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Anaheim Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented prior to final Building and Zoning inspections. Police Department 27 (MM7-5) The property owner/developer shall submit design plans that shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit Police Department Exhibit "B" Page 11 of 33 ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Anaheim Police Department, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Anaheim Police Department. 28 (MM7-9) The property owner/developer shall pay the school impact fees as adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Anaheim Union High School District and Anaheim City School District in compliance with Senate Bill 50 (Government Code [GC] Section 65995 [b][3] as amended). Planning Department, Building Division 29 (MM9-4) The property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees, Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees, and Platinum Triangle Impact Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 30 (MM9-5) Prior to approval of the first building permit the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan and consistent with the adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 31 (MM 9-6) Any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, property owner/developers shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Draft Traffic Study Report, Parson Brinckerhoff, August 2010 (Appendix F of this SEIR) shall be designed and constructed. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to implement traffic improvements as identified in the project traffic Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Exhibit "B" Page 12 of 33 study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339, Orange County Congestion Management Program and established in City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. 32 (MM9-7) In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, property owners /developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 9-6 of Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106C. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. At minimum, fair-share calculations shall include intersection improvements, rights-of- way, and construction costs, unless alternative funding sources have been identified to help pay for the improvement. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Exhibit "B" Page 13 of 33 33 (MM9-8) In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, the following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. c) The Proposed Project shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. d) The City shall work with the City of Orange to amend the JCFA to ensure the fair share fees collected to mitigate arterial and intersection impacts in the City of Orange are mitigated to the extent feasible. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 34 (MM9-9) In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, and assuming that a regional transportation agency has not already programmed and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a) The traffic study will identify the Project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair share percentage Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Exhibit "B" Page 14 of 33 responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339 and established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b) The City shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. 35 (MM9-10) Prior to the approval of a building permit the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair-share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in Mitigation Measure 9-9. The City shall allocate the property owners/developers fair- share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 36 (MM9-14) Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees, Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees, and Platinum Triangle Impact Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 37 (MM9-15) The property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) 38 Prior to approval of sanitary sewer connections for Public Works Department, Exhibit "B" Page 15 of 33 (MM10-4) each development project, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to prevent the sewer spill for below-grade structures of the proposed development based upon the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. Where requested by the City Engineer, sewer improvements shall be constructed with larger than recommended diameter to maintain the surcharge levels within the pipe and the invert elevation of sewer laterals shall be located above the hydraulic grade line elevation of the surcharge levels when they are above the pipe crown. Development Services Division 39 (MM10-6) Prior to issuance of a building permit, additional analysis shall be performed using flow, wet- weather data, and other information specific for that project in order to obtain more accurate results of the surcharge levels for final design. Public Work Department, Development Services 40 (MM10-7) Landscape plans shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Anaheim adopted Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines. This ordinance is in compliance with the State of California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (AB 1881). 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; Infrared sensors on drinking fountains; Use of irrigation systems primarily at night, when evaporation rates are lowest; Water-efficient dishwashers, clothes washers, and other water using appliances; Resource Efficiency Public Works, Development Services Division Exhibit "B" Page 16 of 33 Cooling tower recirculating system; Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation system; Use of waterway recirculation 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. 41 (MM 10-12) Submitted landscape plans for all residential, office and commercial landscaping shall demonstrate the use of drought tolerant plant materials pursuant to the publication entitled “Water Use Efficiency of Landscape Species” by the U.C. Cooperative Extension, August 2000. Public Utilities, Resource Efficiency 42 (MM10-18) The property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB939, and the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans as administered by the City of Anaheim. Implementation of said plan shall commence upon occupancy and shall remain in full effect as required by the Street and Sanitation Division and may include, at its discretion, the following plan components: Detailing the locations and design of on-site recycling facilities. Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City or governing agency. Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and bailing. Providing trash compactors for non-recyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the Public Works, Streets and Sanitation Division Exhibit "B" Page 17 of 33 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. 43 (MM 10-21) The property owner/developer shall submit plans showing that each structure will exceed the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Code of Regulations) by a minimum of 10 percent and will consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department Business and Community Programs Division. This consultation shall take place during project design in order to review Title 24 measures that are incorporated into the project design energy efficient practices and allow potential system alternatives such as thermal energy storage air-conditioning, lighting, and building envelope options. Plans submitted for building permits shall show the proposed energy efficiencies and systems alternatives. Public Utilities, Business and Community Programs 44 (MM 10-22) The property owner/developer shall indicate on plans energy-saving practices that will be implemented with the project in compliance with Tit le 24, which may include the following: High-efficiency air-conditioning with EMS (computer) control. Variable Air Volume (VAV) air distribution. Outside air (100 percent) economizer cycle. Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads. 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. Public Utilities, Business and Community Programs Exhibit "B" Page 18 of 33 Use of compact fluorescent lamps. Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps. Use of EnergyStar ® exit lighting or exit signage. Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified. Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high- pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots. Consideration of thermal energy storage air conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day-peak periods. Consideration for participation in Advantage Services Programs such as: o New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering for up to $15,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems. o New Construction – Cash incentives $400 per kW or $0.15 per kWh saved for each measure and up to $200,000 per facility for efficiency that exceed Title 24 requirements. o Green Building Program – Offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. Use of high efficiency toilets (1.28 gallons per flush [gpf] or less). Use of zero to low water use urinals (0.0 gpf to 0.25 gpf). Use of weather-based irrigation controllers for outdoor irrigation. Use of draught-tolerant and native plants in outdoor landscaping. 45 (MM 10-24) The property owner/developer shall submit plans for review and approval which shall ensure that buildings exceed the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential buildings (Title 24, Public Utilities, Business and Community Programs Exhibit "B" Page 19 of 33 Part 6, Article 2, California Administrative Code) by a minimum of 10 percent. 46 (MM10-26) Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, the property owner/developer shall provide an electrical load analysis to the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD). The analysis shall include a load schedule and maximum electrical coincident demand. Should the property owner/developer’s load analysis result in a contributed load forecasted to exceed 20 MVA above the existing 40 MVA capacity of the electrical system currently serving the Platinum Triangle area, the APUD will initiate construction of a new electrical substation within the Platinum Triangle project area. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees for the electrical substation will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City design features. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 47 The property owner/developer shall submit a plan to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department showing the individual water service installations required to serve each building, including locations of proposed large meters with easements, small meters, and fire lines with backflow devices. The plan shall demonstrate that all backflow devices will be located aboveground outside the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and in locations approved by the Public Utilities Department and the Planning Department. The plans shall also demonstrate that any existing water services, fire lines, and backflow devices conform to current Water Utility Standards and/or existing water services and/or fire lines that are not approved for continued use by Water Engineering shall be upgraded to current standards, or abandoned, if no longer needed, by the property owner/developer. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 48 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the property owner/developer shall pay his project’s proportionate share of the cost to prepare the Water Supply Assessment for the Platinum Triangle SEIR No. 339. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources Exhibit "B" Page 20 of 33 49 The Owner shall submit a water system master plan, including hydraulic distribution network analysis and estimates of the maximum required fire flow rate and the maximum day and peak hour water demands for the development 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 without reducing existing service levels or impacting any existing water supply or conveyance facilities. 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. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 50 A water improvement plan shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division for approval and a performance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and form approved by City Attorney shall be posted with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 51 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. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 52 Prior to issuance of a building permit it the following shall be determined: 1) No public water mains or public water facilities shall be installed in any alleys or paseos. 2) No water mains or laterals allowed under parking stalls. 3) Separate services shall be installed for domestic and fire water. 4) All fire services 2-inch and smaller shall be metered with a UL listed meter, Hershey Residential Fire Meter with Translator Register, no equals. 5) Large water meters shall be located on private property in an easement, outside of the setback area. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources Exhibit "B" Page 21 of 33 6) Lead-free backflow prevention assemblies meeting the City of Anaheim’s current standards shall be installed at all domestic water service meters. Backflow prevention assemblies meeting the City of Anaheim’s current standards shall be installed at all fire and irrigation services. Additionally, the location and type of all meters and backflow prevention assemblies shall be subject to the review and approval of Anaheim Water Engineering during the final design stage. 7) Although the conceptual water system layout is acceptable to Anaheim Water Engineering, the final alignment and layout shall be subject to the review and approval of Anaheim Water Engineering during the final design phase. 53 Owner/developer shall acquire and provide an easement to the City of Anaheim for all locations where public water main crosses Orange County Flood Control District Right-of-Way and facilities (both existing AND proposed flood facilities). The City will cooperate and assist in the acquisition of the easement. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 54 The City’s grant easement deed language requirements (i.e., City is ONLY responsible for replacing asphalt paving when it makes repairs or replacements to public water facilities in private streets, it is NOT responsible for slurry sealing, replacing concrete, pavers, or any other decorative hardscape, walls, or landscaping) shall be included in easement deeds for all public water facilities located on private property. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 55 The applicant shall demonstrate to the City that adequate water supply exists to serve the Proposed Project. If it cannot be demonstrated that adequate water exists to serve the specific project, the project shall not be approved. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 56 “No Trespassing 602(k) P.C.” posted at the entrances of parking lots/structures and located in other appropriate places. Signs must be at least 2’ x 1’ in overall size, with white background and Police Department Exhibit "B" Page 22 of 33 black 2” lettering. 57 All entrances to parking areas should be posted with appropriate signs per 22658(a) C.V.C. to assist in removal of vehicles at the property owner’s/manager’s request. Police Department 58 The proposed project shall comply with all State Energy Insulation Standards and City of Anaheim codes in effect at the time of application for building permits. (Commonly referred to as Title 24, these standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods.) Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 59 Prior to approval of permits for improvement plans, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with Electrical Engineering to establish electrical service requirements and submit electric system plans, electrical panel drawings, site plans, elevation plans, and related technical drawings and specifications. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 60 That curbs adjacent to the drive aisles shall be painted red to prohibit parallel parking in the drive aisles. Red curb locations shall be clearly labeled on building plans. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 61 That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall specifically indicate that all vehicular ramps and grades conform to all applicable Engineering Standards. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 62 That prior to issuance of the a building permit for the parking structure, plans shall demonstrate that at-grade ducts and overhead pipes shall not encroach in the parking space areas or required vehicle clearance areas. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 63 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim Department of Public Works and the Orange County Surveyor for technical review and that all applicable conditions of approval have been complied with and then shall be filed in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "B" Page 23 of 33 64 That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the property owner/developer of the Platinum Vista project, subject to the approval of the City Engineer, to provide for cost sharing of the construction of the public Connector Street between Lewis Street and Katella Avenue. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 65 That prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in Mitigation Measures 9-7 and 9-8 of MMP 106C. The City shall allocate the property owners/developers fair share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. These improvements consist of any potential mitigation measures identified in the updated traffic study. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 66 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall submit to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division street improvement plans for the work on Katella Avenue, collector road street “A” and “B” including but not limited to curb and gutter, sidewalk and landscape, storm drain, and sewer facilities, and traffic signals as applicable. The landscape and irrigation improvement plans shall be prepared in accordance with the Public Works Landscape and Irrigation Manual for Public Street and Highway. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 67 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall post a security to guarantee the construction of public improvements, including storm drain, water, electrical and sewer, in an amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney. The improvements shall be constructed and operational prior to final building and zoning inspections. Public Works Department, Development Services Division ON-GOING DURING GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION 68 (MM 2-1) The property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to reduce construction-related South Coast Air Quality Management District Exhibit "B" Page 24 of 33 emissions; however, the resultant value is expected to remain significant. a) The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations to reduce operational emissions. b) The contractor shall use Tier 3 or higher, as identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, off-road construction equipment with higher air pollutant emissions standards for equipment greater than 50 horsepower, based on manufacturer’s availability. c) The contractor shall utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary diesel- power generators, where feasible. Public Works Department, Development Services Division Planning Department, Building Division 69 (MM 2-2) The property owner/developer shall implement the following measures in addition to the existing requirements for fugitive dust control under South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 to further reduce PM 10 and PM 2.5 emissions. To assure compliance, the City shall verify compliance that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections. The measures to be implemented are listed below: a) During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall re-establish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering as quickly as possible to achieve minimum control efficiency for PM 10 of 5 percent. b) During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply chemical soil stabilizers Pave to on-site haul roads to achieve control efficiency for PM 10 of 85 percent compared to travel on unpaved, untreated roads. c) The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas South Coast Air Quality Management District Public Works Department, Development Services Division Planning Department, Building Division Exhibit "B" Page 25 of 33 to erosion over extended periods of time. d) The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall schedule activities to minimize the amount of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. e) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall sweep streets with Rule 1186 compliant PM 10 efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. f) During active demolition and debris removal and grading, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall suspend demolition and grading operations when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour to achieve an emissions control efficiency for PM 10 under worst- case wind conditions of 98 percent. g) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall maintain a minimum 12- inch freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials and tarp materials with a fabric cover or other suitable means to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 91 percent. an h) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of every three hours on the construction site to achieve an emissions reduction control efficiency for PM 10 of 61 percent. i) During active demolition and debris removal, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply water to disturbed soils at the end of each day to achieve an emission control efficiency for PM 10 of 10 percent. j) During scraper unloading and loading, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall ensure that actively disturbed areas maintain a minimum soil Exhibit "B" Page 26 of 33 moisture content of 12 percent by use of a moveable sprinkler system or water truck to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 69 percent. k) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall limit on-site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 57 percent. 70 (MM5-7) Ongoing during grading, demolition, and construction, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to limit construction-related noise: a) Noise generated by construction, shall be limited by the property owner/developer to 60 dBA along the property boundaries, before 7:00 AM and after 7:00 PM, 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 AM to 4:00 PM. All internal combustion engines on all of the construction equipment shall be properly outfitted with well maintained muffler systems. Planning Department, Building Division Public Works Department, Development Services 71 Through specific study of this project site, by a certified archaeologist, it has been determined that no known cultural resources are located in this area. However, should artifacts be uncovered during grading or excavation, the developer shall have a certified archaeologist ensure that the following actions are implemented: a) that the project shall be temporarily halted or work redirected to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and determined to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with Planning Department, Building Division Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "B" Page 27 of 33 the City for exploration and/or salvage; b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process shall be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution; c) Any archaeological work at the project site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological observer is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the observer can survey the area; and 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 ON-GOING DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 72 (MM5-8) The property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring project contractors to properly maintain and tune all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. Planning Department, Building Division 73 (MM5-9) The property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring project contractors to locate all stationary noise sources (e.g., generators, compressors, staging areas) as far from occupied noise-sensitive receptors as is feasible. Planning Department, Building Division 74 (MM5-10) Material delivery, soil haul trucks, and equipment servicing shall also be restricted to the hours set forth in the City of Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 6.70. Planning Department, Building Division PRIOR TO APPROVAL AND ON-GOING DURING CONSTRUCTION 75 (MM10-2) Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) will be upsizing trunk lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner/developer shall coordinate with the OCSD to ensure that all improvements and construction schedules are coordinated. Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "B" Page 28 of 33 76 (MM10-5) Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where OCSD will be upsizing trunk lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner shall coordinate with OCSD to ensure that backflow prevention devices are installed by OCSD at the lateral connections to prevent surcharge flow from entering private properties. Public Works, Streets and Sanitation Division Orange County Sanitation District PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTIONS 77 (MM 2-5) In accordance with the timing required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager, but no later than prior to the first final Building and Zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall implement the following measures to reduce long- term operational CO, NO X , ROG, and PM 10 emissions: Traffic lane improvements and signalization as outlined in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Draft Traffic Study Report, Parsons Brinckerhoff, August 2010 and Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH ) shall be implemented as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager. 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. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 78 (MM 5-3) The property owner/developer shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that occupancy disclosure notices regarding potential for exterior noise levels to be elevated during a stadium event will be provided to all future tenants in the Stadium District. Planning Department, Building Division 79 (MM 5-4) The property owner/developer shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that occupancy disclosure notices regarding potential for exterior noise levels to be elevated during Stadium nearby venue events. Planning Department, Building Division 80 A parking management plan shall be submitted for Planning Department, Exhibit "B" Page 29 of 33 review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the project receiving a certificate of occupancy. Planning Division Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 81 That prior to final building and zoning inspection, fire lanes shall be posted with “No Parking Any Time.” Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 82 That prior to City acceptance of the public right- of-way improvements for Katella Avenue and for the public Connector Street identified in the Final Site Plan, said streets shall be posted with “No Stopping Any Time” signs and associated red curbs, except, in the locations where the Connector Street is improved with designated parking stalls and designated turn-out areas for loading and unloading. Such signs shall be shown on street improvement plans submitted by the property owner/developer for the review and approval by the Public Works Department. The location of such signs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineering Manager. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with the installation of such signs. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 83 That prior to final building and zoning inspections, the developer shall install accessible curb access ramps with truncated domes at the intersection of collector street “A” at the parking garage access, in conformance with Public Works Standard Detail 111-3. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 84 Prior to release of posted securities, the public improvements shall be constructed by the developer and accepted by Construction Services prior to final zoning and building inspections. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 85 If required, prior to connection of electrical service, the legal owner shall provide to the City of Anaheim a Public Utilities easement with dimensions as shown on the approved utility service plan. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division Exhibit "B" Page 30 of 33 86 That prior to final building and zoning inspections, the developer shall improve the streets as follows: 1) improve Katella Avenue per the Platinum Triangle Implementation Master Plan or as approved by the City Engineer, 2) improve the interior collector streets “A” per the Connector and Collector Streets requirements of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the Platinum Triangle Implementation Plan. Install a temporary turn-around at the north terminus of Street “A” as required by the City Engineer and the Fire Department. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 87 Prior to connection of electrical service, the legal owner shall submit payment to the City of Anaheim for service connection fees. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division PRIOR TO FINAL MAP APPROVAL 88 The vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 89 The vehicular access rights to connector public road STREET “A” and STREET “B”, except at the private street openings, shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 90 The property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, 1) the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property (Katella Avenue) as shown in the Platinum Triangle Implementation Plan or as approved by the City Engineer, and 2) the ultimate right-of-way for the interior collector streets “A” and “B” per the Connector and Collector Streets requirements of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, regardless of the level of impacts generated by the project. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 91 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 such as private sewer, concrete paver covered street sections, private storm drain improvements, temporary turn-around areas, if any, and backflow Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "B" Page 31 of 33 prevention devices such as flap gates; compliance with approved Water Quality Management Plan; and a maintenance exhibit. Maintenance responsibilities shall include all drainage devices, concrete pavers within the Connector public road, sewer system, gates, parkway landscaping and irrigation on Katella Avenue, collector public road STREET “A” and STREET “B”, all lettered lots, and any private street name signs. The covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. 92 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 approved by the City Attorney and City Engineer. In lieu of a Subdivision Agreement, an amended Development Agreement can be utilized to satisfy this condition of approval if the required terms are included therein. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 93 The property owner/developer shall record an easement for cul-de-sac driveway purposes on the adjacent property to the immediate west if needed, as approved by the City Engineer. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division GENERAL 94 (MM7-6) Ongoing during project operation, if the Anaheim Police Department of Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services for the project, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services Police Department Traffic Management Public Works, Development Services Division 95 (MM10-19) Ongoing during project operations, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: Usage of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead, and packaging. Recovery of materials, such as aluminum and cardboard. Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division Exhibit "B" Page 32 of 33 Collection of office paper for recycling. Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. 96 Ongoing during business operations and in accordance with the Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations, OWNER shall be responsible for restoring any special surface improvements other than asphalt paving within the right-of-way, City water easements, Public Utility easements, private roads, alleys and driveways, including but not limited to colored concrete, stamped concrete, bricks, pavers, concrete, walls, or landscaping that becomes damaged during any excavation, repair or replacement of any City water facility. Provisions for maintenance of all said special surface improvements shall be included in the recorded Master C, C & R’s for the project. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 97 The Planning Director has the authority to grant the modification of the timing of any of the conditions of approval, provided said modification does not result in any increase in environmental impacts for which sufficient mitigation cannot be provided. Any request for such modification shall be in writing and shall clearly identify the reason for the modification. Appeal of such decision shall be provided pursuant to Section 18.60.135 (Appeals – Planning Director Decisions) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Planning Department, Planning Division 98 The 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 and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Division Exhibit "B" Page 33 of 33 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 2 September 2014 REQUEST FOR ENTITLEMENTS Platinum Vista Apartments / Anaheim, CA Proposed Entitlements: The proposed entitlements for the Platinum Vista sill include plans for 389-apartment units at 1005 & 1105 E. Katella Avenue to be constructed as a five-story wrap product (Type II construction). Current site entitled through Development Agreement of up to 350-residential units and 60,000 sq/ft of Commercial Development. Entitlements being sought: 1) An addendum (Addendum No. 3) to EIR No. 339 to verify that the proposed project does not create any new significant impacts than those impacts identified for 350 dwelling units and 60,000 square feet of commercial development on the subject site; 2) An amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan to amend Table LU-4: “General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City” to increase the number of dwelling units and reduce the amount of commercial development allowed within the Mixed Use land use designation of the Platinum Triangle to reflect the proposed project; 3) An amendment to Chapter 18.20.040 of the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code to revise Table 20- D Development Intensities: Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone to increase the number of dwelling units and reduce the amount of commercial development allowed within the Katella District to reflect the proposed project; 4) An amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) to amend all sections of the document that reference the amount of development allowed on the subject site to reflect the proposed project; 5) Amend and restate Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D) between the City of Anaheim and Platinum Vista Apartments, LP to increase the number of dwelling units and revise language to reflect the proposed project. 6710 E. Camelback rd., ste 100 Scottsdale, az 85251 P: 480-315-9595 f: 480-315-1739 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Council City of Anaheim c/o City Clerk 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., 2nd Floor Anaheim, California 92805 ______________________________________________________________________________ (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use) SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D) BETWEEN CITY OF ANAHEIM AND PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS, L.P. ATTACHMENT NO. 7 i SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D) BETWEEN CITY OF ANAHEIM AND PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS, L.P. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE RECITALS .......................................................................................................................................1 Section 1. DEFINITIONS .........................................................................................................5 1.1 Assessment District ..................................................................................................5 1.2 Authorizing Ordinance .............................................................................................5 1.3 City ...........................................................................................................................5 1.4 Development ............................................................................................................6 1.5 Development Agreement .........................................................................................6 1.6 Development Agreement Date .................................................................................6 1.7 Development Agreement Statute .............................................................................6 1.8 Development Approvals ..........................................................................................6 1.9 Enabling Ordinance..................................................................................................6 1.10 Existing Land Use Regulations ................................................................................6 1.11 Final Site Plan ..........................................................................................................7 1.12 Gross Floor Area/GFA .............................................................................................7 1.13 Interim Development Fees .......................................................................................7 1.14 Mortgage ..................................................................................................................7 1.15 Mortgagee ................................................................................................................7 1.16 Owner .......................................................................................................................7 1.17 Parking Areas ...........................................................................................................7 1.18 Permitted Development ...........................................................................................7 1.19 Platinum Triangle .....................................................................................................7 1.20 Procedures Resolution .............................................................................................7 1.21 Project ......................................................................................................................8 1.22 Property ....................................................................................................................8 1.23 Support Commercial Uses .......................................................................................8 1.24 Term .........................................................................................................................8 1.25 Zoning Code .............................................................................................................8 Section 2. TERM ......................................................................................................................8 Section 3. BINDING COVENANTS ........................................................................................9 ii Section 4. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT ...................................................................................9 Section 5. PROJECT LAND USES ..........................................................................................9 Section 6. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................9 6.1 Description of Permitted Buildings .........................................................................9 6.2 Parking Areas ...........................................................................................................9 Section 7. DENSITY OF PERMITTED BUILDINGS ...........................................................10 Section 8. ENFORCEMENT ..................................................................................................10 Section 9. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES....................................................10 9.1 Public Park .............................................................................................................11 9.2 Utilities (Water, Electrical, Gas, Sewer, & Drainage) ...........................................11 9.2.1 Water Service .........................................................................................................11 9.2.2 Sanitary Sewer and Storm Drains ..........................................................................11 9.3 Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public Improvements and Facilities ................12 9.4 Traffic Circulation Improvements .........................................................................12 Section 10. REIMBURSEMENT PROVISION .......................................................................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 .......................................................13 12.2.1 Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee ................................................................13 12.2.2 General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee ..................................................13 12.2.3 Library Facilities Fee .............................................................................................13 12.3 Excluded Development Fees ..................................................................................13 12.3.1 Water Utilities Fees ................................................................................................13 12.3.2 Electrical Utilities Fees ..........................................................................................13 12.3.3 City Processing Fees ..............................................................................................13 12.4 Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and/or Maintenance Assessment District ..........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 iii Section 16. EXISTING USES ..................................................................................................15 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 18.1 Initiation of Amendment ........................................................................................16 18.2 Procedure ...............................................................................................................16 18.3 Consent ..................................................................................................................16 18.4 Amendments ..........................................................................................................16 18.5 Effect of Amendment to Development Agreement ...............................................16 Section 19. NON-CANCELLATION OF RIGHTS..................................................................16 Section 20. BENEFITS TO CITY ............................................................................................16 Section 21. BENEFITS TO OWNER .......................................................................................17 Section 22. UNDERTAKINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTEMPLATED AND PROMOTED BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATUTE ........................17 Section 23. RESERVED AUTHORITY ...................................................................................17 23.1 State and Federal Laws and Regulations ...............................................................17 23.2 Model 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 OWNER and CITY .............................................................................18 Section 25. PERIODIC REVIEW .............................................................................................18 25.1 Time for Review ....................................................................................................18 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 26.1 Defaults by OWNER .............................................................................................19 26.2 Specific Performance Remedy ...............................................................................20 26.3 Liquidated Damages Remedy ................................................................................20 iv Section 27. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION ...............................................................21 27.1 Notice to OWNER .................................................................................................21 27.2 Public Hearing .......................................................................................................21 27.3 Decision .................................................................................................................21 27.4 Standard of Review ................................................................................................21 27.5 Implementation ......................................................................................................21 27.6 Schedule for Compliance .......................................................................................21 Section 28. ASSIGNMENT ......................................................................................................22 28.1 Right to Assign ......................................................................................................22 28.2 Release upon Transfer ............................................................................................22 Section 29. NO CONFLICTING ENACTMENTS...................................................................23 Section 30. GENERAL .............................................................................................................23 30.1 Force Majeure ........................................................................................................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 30.12.1 To Owner .........................................................................................................26 30.12.2 To City .............................................................................................................26 30.13 Captions .................................................................................................................27 30.14 Consent ..................................................................................................................27 30.15 Further Actions and Instruments ............................................................................27 30.16 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute ....................................................27 30.17 Governing Law ......................................................................................................27 30.18 Effect on Title ........................................................................................................27 30.19 Mortgagee Protection .............................................................................................27 30.20 Notice of Default to Mortgagee, Right of Mortgagee to 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 30.27 Recording ...............................................................................................................29 v 30.28 Title Report ............................................................................................................29 30.29 Entire Agreement ...................................................................................................30 30.30 Successors and Assigns ..........................................................................................30 30.31 OWNER’s Title of 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" General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee Exhibit “D-3" Library Facilities Fee Exhibit "E" Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations Exhibit "F" Preliminary Title Report 1 SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002 (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D) BETWEEN CITY OF ANAHEIM AND PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS, L.P. This Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement (“Development Agreement”) is entered into this day of , 20__, 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 PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership (referred to herein as "OWNER"), pursuant to the authority set forth in Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division l 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 City Council of the City of 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 2 Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plan (“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 “Platinum Triangle") 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 May 25, 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 eighty-three 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. On October 25, 2005, the City Council adopted and certified Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 332, adopting a Statement of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and an Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A (collectively referred to as “FSEIR No. 332”) to provide for the implementation of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, and in conjunction with its consideration and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00420, Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00089, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00036 and a series of related actions. H. On December 11, 2007, the City Council certified Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 334, adopting a Statement of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A (collectively referred to as “FSEIR No. 334”) in conjunction with its consideration and approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00420, Miscellaneous Case No. 2005-00089, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2004-00036, and a series of other related actions in order to provide for the implementation of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and approval of an increase in the allowable development intensities within the Platinum Triangle to up to 18,363 residential units, 5,657,847 square feet of commercial uses, 16,819,015 square feet of office uses, and 1,500,000 square feet of institutional uses (the "Platinum Triangle Expansion Project"). 3 I. A lawsuit was subsequently filed challenging the adequacy of FSEIR No. 334. The City Council repealed the approval of the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, including FSEIR No. 334 and various related actions, and directed staff to prepare a new Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. J. On October 26, 2010, the City Council adopted General Plan Amendment No. 2008- 00471 and approved an amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2007-00188) to increase the maximum number of dwelling units permitted in the PTMU Overlay Zone to 18,909 dwelling units, increase the maximum number of commercial square footage to 4,909,682, increase the maximum number of office square footage to 14,340,522, and add 1,500,000 square feet of institutional land uses. Before approving said amendments and zoning reclassifications, the City Council approved and certified the "Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339" for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, including Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106C (collectively referred to herein as "FSEIR No. 339"). K. Addendum No. 1 to FSEIR No. 339, dated April 17, 2012 ("Addendum No. 1"), was prepared and considered by the City Council in connection with the Katella Avenue/I-5 Undercrossing Improvements project because none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent environmental impact report had occurred. L. Addendum No. 2 to FSEIR NO. 339, dated December 3, 2012 ("Addendum No. 2"), was prepared and considered by the City Council in connection with proposed revisions to a master planned mixed-use project on a 7.01-acre (approximate) parcel commonly known as 905- 917 East Katella Avenue to allow the development of a four-story "wrap style" residential building consisting of 399 dwelling units with a five-story parking structure and a public park (the "Platinum Gateway Project"). The Platinum Gateway Project is located adjacent to the Property. M. Section 65865 of the California Government Code allows cities to enter into development agreements with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property. N. OWNER represents that, at the time of entering into this Development Agreement, OWNER is the owner in fee of approximately 4.13 acres of real property located in the Katella District of The Platinum Triangle at 1005 through 1105 East Katella Avenue, in the City of Anaheim, 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. O. Prior to entering into this Development Agreement, certain development approvals and permits were approved by the City for the Property, including (1) Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-05248, to permit the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages within a full-service restaurant; (2) Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, to build a 327-unit condominium 4 project, including a 9,500 square foot full-service restaurant; (3) Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, extending the Term of Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 from a period of five years to a period of ten years; (4) First Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002B) (“First Amended DA”), to increase the number of units in the project to 350 and eliminated the 9,500 square foot full-service restaurant in the project; and (5) Tentative Tract Map No. 17494 to modify the product type, overall site layout, and to include the addition of a public park (collectively, the “Existing Entitlements”). Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 was recorded in the Official Records of the County of Orange ("Official Records") on March 20, 2008, as Instrument No. 2008000129034. Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 was recorded in the Official Records on June 14, 2012, as Instrument No. 2012000337873. The First Amended DA was recorded in the Official Records on April 11, 2013, as Instrument No. 2013000217457. Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, Amendment No. 1 to Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, and the First Amended DA shall be referred to herein collectively as the "Existing Development Agreement." At the time of entering into this Development Agreement, the Existing Entitlements remain valid and in effect. P. On or about January 22, 2014, the Property was acquired by OWNER and the First Amended DA was assigned from TSG Platinum LP, a Delaware limited partnership (successor to Shopoff Advisors, L.P.), to OWNER pursuant to that certain Assignment and Assumption of Development Agreement, dated as of January 22, 2014, the original of which was recorded in the Official Records on January 22, 2014 as Instrument No. 2014000025889. OWNER now desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Development Agreement by developing a three hundred eighty-nine (389) unit residential apartment project consisting of a six-story "wrap style" building with subterranean parking, all as more particularly described in that certain Addendum No. 3 to Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 339, dated August 2014 (herein referred to as "Addendum No. 3 to FSEIR No. 339"), and as set forth in the Final Site Plan (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). Q. OWNER has requested a series of actions to replace the Existing Entitlements and permit development of the Project consistent with the CITY’s vision for The Platinum Triangle (collectively, the “Project Actions”), including: 1. This Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007- 00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D) to amend and restate the Existing Development Agreement in its entirety in order to provide for the development of the Project and certain vested development rights in connection therewith; 2. An Amendment to the General Plan; 3. An Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use Overlay Zone; 4. An Amendment to the Platinum Triangle Land Use Plan; and 5 5. Addendum No. 3 to FSEIR No. 339. R. 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. S. 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. T. 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 Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 C and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 316 for the Project, CITY is requiring that OWNER construct and install certain public improvements, including off-site traffic circulation improvements, and provide other public benefits. U. 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. V. CITY, as a charter city, has enacted Ordinance No. 4377 on November 23, 1982, which makes the 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. W. On ___________, 2014, 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 this Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002. X. On ____________, 2014, 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 6 City Council regarding adoption of this Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002. Y. On _____________, 2014, 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. Z. On that date, the City Planning Commission, after considering the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines, found and determined and recommended that the City Council find that previously-certified FSEIR No. 339, together with Addenda Nos. 1, 2 and 3 thereto, the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106C for the Platinum Triangle, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 316, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement, and related Project Actions, and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002. AA. 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 findings, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Application and this Development Agreement pursuant to Resolution No. PC2012- 099. BB. On ____________, 2014, 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 this Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002. CC. On ___________, 2014, 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. DD. On that date, the City Council, after considering the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, did find and determined that previously-certified FSEIR No. 339, together with Addenda Nos. 1 and 2 thereto, the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106C for the Platinum Triangle, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 316, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002, and related Project Actions, and satisfies all of the 7 requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002. EE. On ____________, 2014, the City Council found and determined that this Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002: (i) is consistent with the CITY's existing General Plan, as amended; (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. FF. 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. GG. On _______________, 2014, the City Council adopted the Authorizing Ordinance authorizing the execution of this Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002. 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. DEFINITIONS. 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. l.2 Authorizing Ordinance. The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance No. ______ approving this Development Agreement. 8 l.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. l.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. “Development Agreement” means this Development Agreement and any subsequent amendments to this Development Agreement which have been made in compliance with the provisions of this Development Agreement, the Development Agreement Statute, the Enabling Ordinance, and the Procedures Resolution. l.6 Development Agreement Date. The "Development Agreement Date" means January 15, 2013. l.7 Development Agreement Statute. The "Development Agreement Statute" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance. 1.8 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, those items listed in section 5.1 below, and the following: 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. 1.9 Enabling Ordinance. The "Enabling Ordinance" means Ordinance No. 4377 enacted by the CITY on November 23, 1982. 1.10 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 of the Authorizing Ordinance, 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 9 Land Use Plan, Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106C, 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. 1.11 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. 1.12 Gross Floor Area/GFA. "Gross Floor Area" or "GFA" means the gross floor area of any buildings which are part of the Permitted Development. 1.13 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 Development Agreement. 1.14 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. 1.15 Mortgagee. "Mortgagee" means the holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage, or the owner of the Property, or interest therein, under a Mortgage. 1.16 OWNER. "OWNER" is Platinum Vista Apartments, L.P., a California limited partnership, and any person or entity with which or into which Platinum Vista Apartments, L.P., may merge, and any person or entity who may acquire substantially all of the assets of Platinum Vista Apartments, L.P., 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. 1.17 Parking Areas. The "Parking Areas" means all parking structure(s), and/or all surface parking servicing the Project. 1.18 Permitted Development. "Permitted Development" includes all buildings 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 all Permitted Development as set forth in the Final Site Plan. 1.19 Platinum Triangle. “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. 10 1.20 Procedures Resolution. The "Procedures Resolution" is Resolution No. 82R-565 adopted by CITY pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement Statute. 1.21 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 and the Development Approvals. 1.22 Property. The "Property" means that certain real property shown and described on Exhibit A to this Development Agreement. 1.24 Term. "Term" is defined in Section 2 of this Development Agreement. 1.25 Zoning Code. “Zoning Code” refers to Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Section 2. TERM. 2.1 This Development Agreement is intended to replace the Existing Development Agreement and to reflect the agreement of the parties to the amendment and restatement of the Existing Development Agreement. 2.2 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 commenced on the Development Agreement Date and shall extend for a period of five (5) years thereafter, expiring at the end of the day on the fifth anniversary of the Development Agreement Date unless extended for an additional five (5) years upon OWNER’S timely request, as discussed in Section 2.3 below, and 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. 2.3 So long as OWNER is not otherwise in default of one or more provisions of this Development Agreement, OWNER may request, and City shall grant upon receipt of a timely written request from OWNER, one extension that will extend the Term for an additional five (5) years from the date that this Development Agreement is set to expire. OWNER shall submit its written request to extend this Development Agreement to City no sooner than one (1) year, and no later than thirty (30) days, before this Development Agreement is set to expire. Upon the submission by OWNER of a valid timely written request to extend, and the City’s receipt thereof, this Development Agreement shall be deemed to be automatically extended for the additional 5- year period. 2.4 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 11 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. 2.5 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 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. 5.1 The Property shall be used for such uses as may be permitted by the Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use Regulations. The Term, 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. 12 Section 6. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT. 6.1 Description of Permitted Development. The Permitted Development 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 to serve the Project, as depicted and substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the OWNER shall record a covenant against the property in a form approved by the City Attorney’s Office that requires OWNER and its heirs, assignees and successor-in-interests to reimburse the City for the full cost associated with the use of any Police Department and/or Traffic Management Center staff that may be needed for traffic control purposes related to the use of Parking Areas for public parking in connection with events in the Platinum Triangle, including events at Angel Stadium, the Honda Center, or the Grove of Anaheim. 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 13 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. Section 18.20.110.0101 of the Zoning Code requires that, if the Property is eight (8) or more acres with residential development totaling more than 325 dwelling units, OWNER shall be required to dedicate, improve and maintain a minimum size of 44 square feet for each residential unit for public park purposes. However, while the number of dwelling units to be constructed on the Property will exceed 325 units, the Property is less than eight (8) acres in size and, in accordance with Section 18.20.110.0102 of the Zoning Code, is, therefore, not subject to the park land dedication requirements in Section 18.20.110.0101 of the Zoning Code, and, instead, is subject to the requirement to pay park in-lieu fees under Sections 18.20.110.0102 and 17.08.260 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. The amount of the park in-lieu fees shall be based on the current adopted park in-lieu fee in effect at the time of payment of the fees. 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 Development on the Property or that are displaced by the construction of the Permitted Development. As OWNER submits detailed construction plans in order to obtain building permits for the Permitted Development 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 14 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. Alternatively, at OWNER’S election, 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 l5D for the advancement of additional funds to construct the upgraded water facilities. 9.2.2 Sanitary Sewer and Storm Drains. Prior to final building and zoning inspections for the first building within the Permitted Development, OWNER will construct all sanitary sewers and storm drains and appurtenant structures (including treatment control BMP’s as required by the WQMP) 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 building within the Permitted Development and updated prior to the issuance of any building permits for each subsequent building within the Permitted Development. 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 subject to the approval of the City Engineer, 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 including all applicable measures from the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program 106C approved in conjunction with Subsequent EIR No. 339, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 316, as shown on the Final Site Plan. Section 10. [INTENTIONALLY OMITTED]. Section 11. DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS. In exchange for the payment by CITY of the sum of $247,572, the Parties acknowledge that OWNER has heretofore arranged for the dedication to CITY of the ultimate rights-of-way needed by CITY for the widening of Katella Avenue adjacent to the Property, which amount has been paid through and in accordance with the terms and provisions of (a) that certain Acquisition and Funding Agreement, dated May 28, 2013 by and between Owner's 15 predecessor in interest, TSG Platinum, L.P., and CITY, and (b) the existing Platinum Triangle Community Facilities District and said sum has not exceeded the maximum amount allowable for right-of-way acquisition set forth in the Platinum Triangle Community Facilities District Implementation Plan (herein the "Implementation Plan"). OWNER has heretofore entered into a right-of-entry agreement with CITY, pursuant to which CITY is, as of the date of this Agreement, undertaking the construction of the ultimate right-of-way roadway improvements along Katella Avenue adjacent to the Property. In addition, prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, and at no cost or expense to CITY or the Platinum Triangle Community Facilities District, OWNER shall irrevocably offer for dedication the rights-of-way, including the public connector streets and collector streets, if applicable, and other areas as more fully set forth in Tentative Tract Map No. 17494 and the Final Site Plan for the uses set forth in Tentative Tract Map No. 17494 and 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, including transitions to private driveways, walkways, landscaping, and relocation of signage from the dedicated area and other temporary needs as determined by the City Engineer, CITY may accept OWNER's offer of dedication. OWNER shall work cooperatively with the City in planning, design, and construction of the roadway improvements. OWNER acknowledges and agrees that it will not be entitled to reimbursement for any such additional rights-of-way dedications. All rights-of-way dedications shall be made at no cost or expense to CITY or the Platinum Triangle Community Facilities District. 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 City 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 certificate of occupancy for the Project, the OWNER shall pay the fee. If an identified fee has not been adopted prior to the issuance of said certificate of occupancy, 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 16 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 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-2. 12.2.3 Library Facilities Fee. OWNER will pay a Library Facilities Fee as set forth in Exhibit D-3. 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. 17 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, except as otherwise provided in this Development Agreement. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prohibit CITY from imposing fees, taxes or assessments on the Property which are unrelated to the approval or 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 Development Agreement, OWNER agrees, if deemed by the Planning Director with the advice of the City Attorney to be applicable and required for the Property, to record unsubordinated covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) applicable to the Property in a form and content satisfactory to the Planning Director, City Engineer and the City Attorney incorporating the requirements and obligations set forth in Exhibit E to this Development 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 Development 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 18 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 Development 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. 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 l8. 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 19 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 elsewhere within 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. l8.5 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 l9. 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: a. 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 20 b. 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 effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance 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 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 21 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. Model 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. 24.3 Consent of OWNER and CITY. 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 effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance, 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. 22 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 effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance, 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. 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 23 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. 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. 24 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 Standard of Review. Any determination by CITY to terminate this Development Agreement because OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms of this Development Agreement must be based upon a finding by the City Council, based on the preponderance of evidence, that OWNER is in default and has not cured that default in the timeframe permitted by Sections 25 and 26 above, as applicable. 27.5 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 than 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. 27.6 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. 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. 25 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 the rights, duties and obligations hereunder, to an OWNER-controlled and/or OWNER-affiliated entity, in OWNER’s discretion and without the need to obtain further CITY consent, at any time after this Development Agreement becomes effective. Further, 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 effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance. 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 9 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 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 26 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 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. 27 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 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 28 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. 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. 29 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: Platinum Vista Apartments, L.P. c/o WREP II California General Partner, LLC, its General Partner c/o The Wolff Company II, LLC 6710 E. Camelback Road, Suite 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85255 Attn: Jared Black, General Counsel With a copy to: Jackson DeMarco Tidus Peckenpaugh 2030 Main Street, 12th Floor Irvine, CA 92614 Attn: Gregory P. Powers, Esq. 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 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., 2nd Floor Anaheim, California 92805 With copies to: City Manager City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., 2nd Floor Anaheim, California 92805 30 City Attorney City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., 2nd Floor Anaheim, California 92805 or such changed address as CITY shall designate in writing to OWNER. Alternatively, notices to CITY may also be personally delivered to the City Clerk, at the Anaheim Civic Center, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., 2nd Floor, 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 parties 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 effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance. 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 31 Development Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance. 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 OWNER's 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. 32 30.22.1 CITY agrees that in the event of termination of this Development 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, joint 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 33 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. 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 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 August 8, 2014, attached hereto as Exhibit F (collectively referred to herein as 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 effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance 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 Development 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 OWNER's Title of Property. Neither party hereto shall be bound by any provision of this Development 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 Development Agreement and the obligations contained herein to attach to and encumber OWNER’s fee title to the Property. 30.32 Exhibits. All exhibits, including attachments thereto, are incorporated in this Development Agreement in their entirety by this reference. 34 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 By: ___________________ Mayor ATTEST: ________________________ Linda N. Andal City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: MICHAEL R.W. HOUSTON, CITY ATTORNEY By: ________________________ Theodore J. Reynolds Assistant City Attorney [Signatures continued on next page.] 35 “OWNER” PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership WREP II California General Partner, LLC, a California limited liability company By: WREP II Non-REIT Investments, L.P., its Sole Member and Sole Manager By: Wolff Real Estate Partners II, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, its General Partner By: Wolff Capital Master II LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its General Partner By: Wolff Capital Holdings II-A, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, its Manager By: Wolff Holdings II-A, LLC, a Washington limited liability Company, its Manager By: Fritz H. Wolff, its Manager By: Wolff Real Estate Partners II A, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, its General Partner By: Wolff Capital Master II-A LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its General Partner By: Wolff Capital Master II, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its sole Member and sole Manager By: Wolff Capital Holdings II-A, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, its Manager By: Wolff Holdings II-A, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, its Manager By: Fritz H. Wolff, its Manager 104226-v3/TReynolds EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A: LOT 2 OF TRACT NO. 17494, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 927, PAGES 10 THROUGH 14, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL B: NON-EXCLUSIVE RECIPROCAL EASEMENT(S) FOR VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, AS SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN INSTRUMENT ENTITLED “GRANT OF RECIPROCAL EASEMENTS”, RECORDED FEBRUARY 28, 2013 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2013-000127002, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. [Assessor's Parcels Nos. 082-261-27 and 082-261-28 and a portion of Assessor's Parcels No. 082-261-24] EXHIBIT “B” Final Site Plan The Platinum Vista Project Exhibit No. Tract Map No. 17494 A-0 Title Sheet A-1.0 Overall Site Plan A-1.1 Conceptual Site Plan A-1.2 Open Space Plan A-1.3 Fire Access Plan A-1.4 Trash Collection Plan A-3.1 Conceptual Building Plans - Sub Level/First Level A-3.2 Conceptual Building Plans - Second Level/Third Level A-3.3 Conceptual Building Plans - Fourth Level/Fifth Level A-3.4 Conceptual Building Plans – Sixth & Roof Level/Roof Top Deck Plan, Parking Structure A-4.1 Conceptual Elevations North Side/East Side A-4.2 Conceptual Elevations South Side/West Side A-5.1 Building Sections A-6.1 Unit Plans L.1 Landscape Plan - Overall L.2 Recreation Area Plan/Landscape Plan Courtyard Enlargement L.3 Rooftop Deck Plan L.4 Leasing Area Plan L.5 Schematic Lighting Plan Color and Material Finishes TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. CITY OF ANAHEIM PLATINUM GATEWAY AND PLATINUM VISTA 17494 PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTSTHE WOLFF COMPANY1005 - 1125 Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 1Additional Sheets08-18-14 CLUBHOUSEFITNESSLEASINGE1A4A466'-2"76'-1"115 STALLSELECTRICALROOMTRASHROOMTRASHROOMRAMP - 5% MAX. SLOPE UPLINE OF RAMP ABOVEBULK ITEMCOLLECTIONAREA 13'X15'A390'-0"68'-2"B3B2C1B5B5B5A1C1A1B5B5C1A5A5A4A3A3B2B3A3A5A5C1A1B5B5A5A5B4B4A1A4A5A5A1B3A3B2A3A3A1A1A1B5B5A4A4B5B5C1B3A3B2A3A2A3S1S1A1A1B3B3A3B3B5B5C1B4A1A4A4A5A3A3B3B5B5B5B5B2B5B5B5B1B3A4A1A1A1A2A1A1ACCESSMPOEACCESSELEC. 3ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS ACCESSACCESS A3ELEC. 254'-6" 77'-6"A4A1POOL EQ.ELEC. 4A1ELEC. 1 OPEN TO SKY E2E4E3OPEN TO SKY OPEN TO SKY POOL/SPAPARKCOURTYARD#2COURTYARD#3COURTYARD#1COURTYARD#5COURTYARD#4MAIN ENTRY COURTCOURTYARD#6A1ACCESS ACCESS ACCESSA1 A1A391'-0"C1A1B4399 UNITS X 44 SQ. FT. =17,556 SQ. FT. MIN. REQ'D.17,614 SQ. FT. PROVIDEDK A T E L L A A V E.L E W I S S T R E E T C O N N E C T O R S T R E E T C O N N E C T O R S T R E E TRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILE2E1E3B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3A2A2A2A1A1ALEASINGPOOL CLUB4,500 S.F.E1AGEWAYA2A3E X I S T I N G F I R E L A N E MOVE-IN LOADINGMOVE-IN LOADING N O T A P A R TcNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 1Additional Sheets08-18-14 RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPLEASINGPOOL CLUBRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP4,500 S.F.B3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILA3E2E1E3UNIT A4: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 795 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3A2A2A2A1A1AcNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 136'-0"98'-8" 65'-4" 88'-4"93'-0"26'-0"26'-0" 27'-0"K A T E L L A A V E N U EC O N N E C T O R S T R E E T E X I S T I N G F I R E L A N E MOVE-IN LOADINGMOVE-IN LOADING TO TOP FLOOR OFFIRE ACCESS STAIRPARKING STRUCTURETO TOP FLOOR OFFIRE ACCESS STAIRPARKING STRUCTUREHATCHING INDICATESENHANCED FIREPROTECTION AREASHATCHING INDICATESENHANCED FIREPROTECTION AREAS26'-0"26'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILE2E1E3B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3A2A2A2A1A1ALEASINGPOOL CLUB4,500 S.F.E1EXIT PASSAGEWAYA3cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 1Additional Sheets08-18-14 136'-0"98'-8" 65'-4" 88'-4"93'-0"26'-0"26'-0" 27'-0"K A T E L L A A V E N U EC O N N E C T O R S T R E E T E X I S T I N G F I R E L A N E MOVE-IN LOADINGMOVE-IN LOADING RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILE2E1E3B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3A2A2A2A1A1ALEASINGPOOL CLUB4,500 S.F.E1EXIT PASSAGEWAYA3cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 1Additional Sheets08-18-14 RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP L.RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPLEASINGPOOL CLUBRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP4,500 S.F.B3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILA3E2E1E3B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3L.A2A2A2A1A1ARECREATIONAREAMAINMOTORCOURTSECONDARYMOTORCOURTcNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal L.127'-6"25'-0"25'-0"25'-0"9'-0"8'-6"9'-0"18'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1B3A1A1A2A2A1A1B2 B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1B2A1A1A1B3A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4 B2A3A3S2B3B3B4A3A2 B2A3E2E1E3B2A2RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP V.V.V.V.TR.TR.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2S2A1AA1A2B3B3L.A2A2A2A1A1AB2L.127'-6"25'-0"25'-0" 25'-0" 9'-0"8'-6"9'-0"18'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPA1A1B3A1A1A2A2A1A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1B2A1A1A1B3A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A2 B2A3A3S2B3B3B4A3A2 B2A3E2E1E3B2RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP V.V.V.V.TR.TR.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2S2A1AA1A2B3B3B3B3L.A2A2A2A1A1AB2cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal L.127'-6"25'-0"25'-0"25'-0"9'-0"8'-6"9'-0"18'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPA1A1B3A1A1A2A2A1B2 B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1A1B3A4A3A1AA3A4 B2A3A3S2B4A3A2 B2A3E2E1E3B2RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP V.V.V.V.TR.TR.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2S2A1B3B3B3B3B3B3B3A2B3B2A1AA1A2B3B3L.A2A2A2A1A1AB2L.127'-6"25'-0"25'-0" 25'-0" 9'-0"8'-6"9'-0"18'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPA1A1B3A1A1A2A2A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1A1A1A1AA3A4A2 B2A3A3S2B4A3A2 B2A3E2E1E3RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP V.V.V.V.TR.TR.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2S2L.A2A2A2A1A1AB2A4A3B3B3B3B3B3B3B3B3B2A1AA1B3B3cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1B2 A3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1B2A1A1A1B3A2A2A2A1A1AB2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A2 B2A3A3S2B3B3B4A3A2 B2A3E2E3B2RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPV.V.V.V.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2A1A1AA1E3V.E2V.V.TR.V.DOGPARKSPORTSCOURTEXERCISEPAVILION2,950 S.F.MECH/STOR.850 S.F.B3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1B2A3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1B2A1A1A1B3A2A2A2A1A1AB2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A2 B2A3A3S2B3B3B4A3A2 B2A3E3B2A4A4A3A1A1B2A2A1A1AA1cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal PROVIDE ROOF-TOPSTAIR ACCESSPROVIDE ROOF-TOPSTAIR ACCESS5 STORY ON-GRADERESIDENTIAL (TYP.)4 STORY MASSINGBREAK PER CODE4 STORY MASSINGBREAK PER CODE4 STORY MASSINGBREAK PER CODEROOFTOP MECHANICALEQUIPMENT CONCEALEDFROM EXTERIOR VIEWBY PERIMETER PARAPETWALLS (TYP.) - SEE DETAILPROVIDE ROOF-TOPSTAIR ACCESS5 STORY ON-GRADERESIDENTIAL (TYP.)PROVIDE ROOF-TOPSTAIR ACCESS 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"9'-2"8'-2"10'-1" 61'-2" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"9'-2"8'-2" 3'-6" 73'-8" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6"10'-1" 53'-11" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6"11'-7"55'-5" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6"10'-1" 53'-11"RESIDENTIALPARKING STRUCTURERESIDENTIALCOURTYARDRESIDENTIAL2'VIEWANGLE11'-7"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6" 55'-5" 73'-8" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6" 53'-11"RESIDENTIALcNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal UNIT A4: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 795 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.38'-3"29'-8"8'-7"32'-3"5'-3"100 CU. FT.STORAGEPATIO/BALC.7'-2" X 9'-9"LIVING13'-4" X 11'-0"KITCHENDINING W.I.C.COATSW/DBATHPAN.REF.DWBEDROOM12'-4" X 11'-8"L.100 CU. FT.STORAGEFLEX ROOM12'-0" X 17'-6"SLEEPING9'-6" X 10'-2"PATIO/BALC.10'-8" X 5'-0"BATHW/DW.I.C.LIN.ENTRYDWREF.15'-2"UNIT S1: STUDIO / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 550 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 53 SQ. FT.*STORAGE: 100 C.F.* DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR PRIVATE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTSKITCHENUNIT S2: STUDIO / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 595 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 71 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.100 CU. FT.STORAGESLEEPING ENTRYW/DW.I.C.KITCHENL.PATIO/BALC.7'-6" X 9'-6"20'-0"33'-0" FLEX ROOM 19'-2" X 19'-4"P.REF.DWMOVABLECOUNTERUNIT A1: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 695 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 81 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 108 C.F.24'-0"12'-4"11'-8"33'-0"PATIO/BALCONY7-0" X 11'-0"LIVING11'-8" X 13'-0"MBR11'-6" X 11'-2"DININGKITCHENW/DBATHL.PAN.108 CU. FT.STORAGEUNIT A1-ALT: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 714 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 81 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 108 C.F.24'-0"12'-4"11'-8"33'-0"PATIO/BALCONY7-0" X 11'-0"LIVING11'-8" X 13'-0"MBR11'-6" X 11'-2"DININGKITCHENW/DBATHL.PAN.108 CU. FT.STORAGEKITCHENREF.DWP.L.25'-0"BEDROOM11'-8" X 11'-4"LIVING/DINING12'-4" X 17'-8"DINING BATHCOATSPATIO/BALC.9'-4" X 7'-6"100 CU. FT.STORAGEUNIT A2: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 730 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.33'-0"W/DMOVABLECOUNTERUNIT B2: 2BR / 2BANET LEASABLE AREA: 1063 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 71 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.KITCHENREF.DWP.L.BEDROOM11'-8" X 11'-4"LIVING/DINING12'-4" X 17'-8"DINING BATHCOATSPATIO/BALC.9'-4" X 7'-6"100 CU. FT.STORAGEW/D37'-0"33'-0"BEDROOM11'-8" X 12-4"W.I.C.PATIO/BALC.11'-6" X 5'-0"MOVABLECOUNTER63x43ACCESS.SHWR.L.W/DLIVING12'-4" X 12'-2"BATHBATHDININGKITCHENBR.11'-0" X 11'-6"MBR.12'-0" X 12'-10"UNIT B3: 2BR / 2BANET LEASABLE AREA: 1,077 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALCONY: 108 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.38'-6"24'-10"13'-8"34'-6" 26'-4"8'-2" 25'-6"7'-6"1'-6" 34'-6"BALCONY12'-0" X 9'-0"COATSL.P.W.I.C.100 CU. FT.STORAGEL.63x43ACCESS.SHWR.38'-3"29'-8"8'-7"32'-3"UNIT A3: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 795 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.5'-3"100 CU. FT.STORAGEPATIO/BALC.7'-2" X 9'-9"LIVING13'-2" X 15'-3"KITCHENDINING W.I.C.COATSW/DBATHPAN.REF.DWBEDROOM12'-4" X 11'-8"L.49'-11"29'-8"20'-3"32'-3"UNIT B4: 2BR / 2BANET LEASABLE AREA: 1,119 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.5'-3"BEDROOM11'-4" X 12-0"W.I.C.100 CU. FT.STORAGEPATIO/BALC.7'-2" X 9'-9"LIVING13'-2" X 15'-3"KITCHENDINING W.I.C.COATSW/DBATHPAN.REF.DWBEDROOM0'-0" X 0'-0"L.L.L.BATH63x43ACCESS.SHWR.100 CU. FT.STORAGELIVING/DINING13'-0" X 19'-8"BEDROOM11'-4" X 11'-0"BEDROOM11'-0" X 12'-0"PATIO/BALC.10'-10" X 7'-0"KITCHENBATHBATHW/DENTRYW.I.C.W.I.C.COATSPAN.LIN.REF.DW52'-0"36'-8""33'-0"UNIT B1: 2BR / 2BANET LEASABLE AREA: 1,012 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 76 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.DINING63x43ACCESS.SHWR.LIN.cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional Sheets12312434 No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional Sheets12344321 No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional Sheets1234567812345678 No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional Sheets12344321 No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional SheetsTHE OUTDOOR LIGHTING CONCEPT IS TO PROVIDE LEVELS OF LIGHTING SUFFICIENT TO MEETSAFETY AND ORIENTATION NEEDS.WITHIN PUBLIC AREAS LIGHTING WILL BE WARM COLORED AND UNOBTRUSIVE. LIGHT SOURCESWILL BE TUNGSTEN OR METAL HALIDE.LIGHTING SOURCES FOR THE LANDSCAPE AND PAVED AREAS WILL BE CONCEALED AND THELIGHTING INDIRECT NOT VISIBLE FROM A PUBLIC VIEWPOINT. LIGHT SOURCES SHOULD BEDIRECTED SO THAT IT DOES NOT FALL OUTSIDE THE AREA TO BE LIGHTED.ALL EXTERIOR SURFACE AND ABOVE-GROUND MOUNTED FIXTURES WILL BE SYMPATHETIC ANDCOMPLIMENTARY TO THE ARCHITECTURAL THEME.LIGHTING CONCEPT:KATELLA AVENUETHEMATIC 'COBRA'PER CITY GUIDELINESCONNECTOR STREETPOLE LIGHT PER CITY GUIDELINESMATCHING ARCHITECTURAL STYLENOTE:POLE LIGHTS AND WALL MOUNTED LIGHTS TO BE A FULL CUTOFF FIXTURE TO MEET DARK SKYREQUIREMENTS AND PREVENT LIGHT SPILLAGE.14' TALL, 125' SPACING31' TALL, 130'-150' SPACINGFIXTURESYMBOLLOCATIONSIZE Exhibit "C" Page 1 of 34 EXHIBIT “C” CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002 PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2007-00002D) (DEV2012-00060B) NOTE: Mitigation Measures (“MM”), from Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 316 are incorporated into these conditions of approval and are identified by the mitigation measure number below applicable condition numbers. NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT OR DEMOLITION PERMITS 1 (MM2-3) Prior to approval of each grading plan (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for Demolition Plans), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export Plans detailing construction and demolition (C&D) recycling and waste reduction measures to be implemented to recover C&D materials. These plans shall include identification of off-site locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials on-site or to an adjacent site, sale to a soil 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 firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects if not all can be reused at the project site. Planning Department, Planning Services Division Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 2 Prior to issuance of the grading permit and right-of- way construction permit for the storm drain and sewer, whichever occurs first, a Save Harmless agreement in-lieu of an Encroachment Agreement is required to be executed, approved by the City and recorded by the applicant on the property for any storm drains connecting to a City storm drain. Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "C" Page 2 of 34 3 (MM 3-2) At least 90 days prior to the initiation of grading activities, for projects greater than one acre, coverage for the project must be obtained by electronically submitting permit registration documents to the State or obtaining coverage via current general construction permit prescribed method by the property owner/developer pursuant to State and Federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. As part of the NOI, a Surface Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared. The property owner/developer shall also prepare and submit to the Development Services Division of the Public Works Department, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) in accordance with the City’s municipal NPDES requirements and Chapter 7 of the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. The WQMP must be approved prior to issuance of grading permit. The SWPPP, in conjunction with the WQMP, will describe the structural and nonstructural BMPs that will be implemented during construction (short-term) within the Project Area as well as BMPs for long- term operation of the Project Area that address potential impacts to surface waters. Planning Department, Building Division 4 (MM10-1) The City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient sewer facilities, as identified in the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. If the project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the project currently discharges to an existing deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office. Prior to issuance of a grading permit the sewer plans shall be submitted for review. Prior to issuance of a building permit for each development project, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the latest updated sewer Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "C" Page 3 of 34 study for the Platinum Triangle. 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. 5 (MM10-3) Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall contact Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) regarding sewer capacity. Additionally, if requested by the OCSD, the property owner/developer shall place up to three flow monitoring devices for up to a month to verify capacity and ensure consistency with the OCSD’s modeling results. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 6 Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit, the 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 owner 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. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 7 (MM10-8) Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide engineering studies, including network analysis, to size the water mains for ultimate development within the project. This includes detailed water usage analysis and building plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering reviews and approval in determining project water requirements and appropriate water assessment fees. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 8 (MM10-9) Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources Exhibit "C" Page 4 of 34 installation of a separate irrigation meter when the total landscaped area exceeds 2,500 square feet. (City of Anaheim Water Conservation Measures) 9 The property owner shall comply with Rule 15D of the Water Utilities Rates, Rules, and Regulations and pay all applicable water assessment fees. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 10 (MM10-13) Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans water efficient design features including, but not limited to (as applicable to the type of development at issue) waterless water heaters, waterless urinals, automatic on and off water faucets, and water efficient appliances. Public Utilities, Resource Efficiency 11 (MM10-14) Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation lines and use recycled water when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. The property owner/developer shall contact the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, for recycled water system requirements and specific water conservation measures to be incorporated into the building and landscape construction plans. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 12 (MM10-17) Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient drainage facilities, as identified in the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area. If the project will increase stormwater flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan 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 Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "C" Page 5 of 34 impact to 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 of the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area, 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 fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. 13 Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the property owner shall submit a final drainage report and project improvement plans that incorporate the required drainage improvements and the mechanisms proposed in the Drainage Report. No offsite run-off shall be blocked during and after grading operations or perimeter wall construction. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 14 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans documenting that the design of all aboveground structures (with the exception of parking structures) shall be at least one foot higher that the 100-year flood zone, where applicable, unless otherwise required by the City Engineer. All structures below this level shall be floodproofed to prevent damage to property or harm to people. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 15 (MM 10-20) Prior to the approval of each grading plan (for import/export plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for demolition plans), the property owner/developer shall submit a Demolition and Import/ Export Plans, if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division and/or Street and Sanitation Division. The plans shall include identification of off-site locations for Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Planning Department, Planning Division Exhibit "C" Page 6 of 34 material export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials on-site, 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 firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if all cannot be reused on the project site. 16 (MM10-23) Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall install their portion of the underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System as determined by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications of Underground Systems. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. The underground electrical service will consist of the following improvements to the current electric facilities: Relocate Southern California Edison transmission line underground on Katella Avenue from west of the Union Pacific Railroad to Lewis Street (850 feet). Relocate Southern California Edison communication line underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to east of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). Relocate distribution circuits underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division Exhibit "C" Page 7 of 34 Boulevard (2,400 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Orangewood Avenue from Anaheim Way to State College Boulevard (1,500 feet). Relocation a distribution circuit underground on Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to west of the Santa Ana River (1,600 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Gene Autry Way (950 feet). Relocate a distribution circuit underground on Douglas Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue (1,000 feet). 17 (MM10-25) Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall install their portion of the underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System as determined by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications of Underground Systems. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. The underground electrical service will consist of the following improvements to the current electric facilities: Two new distribution duct banks on Katella Avenue from Anaheim Way to Lewis Street (800 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Douglas Road to Howell Avenue (2,000 feet). Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division Exhibit "C" Page 8 of 34 A new distribution duct bank on State College Boulevard from Cerritos Avenue to Katella Avenue (2,600 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Orangewood Avenue from I-5 to the Santa Ana River (4,800 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from Haster Street to the east side of I-5 (2,500 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet). A new transmission duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Aven ue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet). A new transmission duct bank on Lewis Street and Santa Cruz Street from Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,000 feet). A new distribution duct bank on the east side of the Angel Stadium parking lot from Orangewood Avenue to the SR-57 (2,000 feet). A new distribution duct bank on Douglas Road from SR-57 to Cerritos Avenue (4,000 feet). PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT 18 (MM2-4) The property owner/developer shall submit evidence that high-solids or water-based low emissions paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District’s regulations. This information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. Additionally, the property owner/developer’s shall specify the use of high- volume/low-pressure spray equipment or hand application. Air-atomized spray techniques shall not be permitted. Plans shall also show that property owner/developers shall construct/build with materials that do not require painting, or use prepainted construction materials, to the extent feasible. South Coast Air Quality Management District Exhibit "C" Page 9 of 34 19 (MM2-6) The property owner/architect shall submit energy calculations used to demonstrate compliance with the performance approach to the California Energy Efficiency Standards to the Building Division that shows each new structure exceeds the applicable Building and Energy Efficiency Standards by a minimum of 10 percent at the time of the building permit. Prior to issuance of a building permit, plans shall show the following: a) Energy-efficient roofing systems, such as vegetated or “cool” roofs, that reduce roof temperatures significantly during the summer and; therefore, reduce the energy requirement for air conditioning. Examples of energy efficient building materials and suppliers can be found at the following website: http://eetd.lbl.gov/CoolRoofs/ or other similar websites. b) Cool pavement materials such as lighter- colored pavement materials, porous materials, or permeable or porous pavement, for all roadways and walkways not within the public right-of-way, to minimize the absorption of solar heat and subsequent transfer of heat to its surrounding environment. Examples of cool pavement materials are available at: http://www.epa.gov/heatisld/ images/extra/l evel3_pavingproducts.html or other similar websites. c) Energy saving devices that achieve the existing 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards, such as use of energy efficient appliances (e.g., EnergyStar® appliances) and use of sunlight-filtering window coatings or double-paned windows. d) Electrical vehicle charging stations for all commercial structures encompassing over 50,000 square-feet. e) Shady trees strategically located within close proximity to the building structure to reduce heat load and resulting energy usage at residential, commercial, and Planning Department, Building Division Exhibit "C" Page 10 of 34 office. 20 (MM5-1) Prior to approval of street improvement plans for any project-related roadway widening, the City shall retain a qualified acoustic engineer to design project acoustical features that will limit traffic noise at noise sensitive uses to levels that are below the City’s noise ordinance. These treatments shall be noted on the street improvement plans to the satisfaction of the Planning Department and may include, but are not limited to, the replacement of windows and doors at existing residences with acoustically rated windows and doors. Public Works, Development Services Division Planning Department, Building Division 21 (MM5-2) The project property owner/developers shall submit a final acoustical report prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The report shall show that the development will be sound- attenuated against present and projected noise levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter, stationary sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, stadium, etc.), and railroad, to meet City interior noise standards as follows: a) The report shall demonstrate that the proposed residential design will result in compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise levels, as required by the California Building Code and California Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24 and 25 of the California Code of Regulations). b) The report shall demonstrate that the Proposed Project residential design shall minimize nighttime awakening from stadium event noise and train horns such that interior single-event noise levels are below 81 dBA L max . The property owner/developer shall submit the noise mitigation report to the Planning Director for review and approval. Upon approval by the City, the project acoustical design features shall be incorporated into construction of the Proposed Project. Planning Department, Building Division 22 (MM5-5) To reduce noise and vibration impacts from the impact pile driver, the construction contractor Planning Department, Exhibit "C" Page 11 of 34 shall evaluate the feasibility of using auger cast piles or a similar system to drill holes to construct cast-in-place piles for a pile-supported transfer slab foundation system. This alternative construction method would reduce the duration necessary for use of the impact pile driver and/or eliminate the need to use pile drivers altogether. Proof of compliance with this measure shall be submitted to the Planning Department in the form of a letter from the construction contractor. Building Division 23 (MM7-1) Plans shall indicate that all buildings shall have fire sprinklers in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed by the property owner/developer prior to each final Building and Zoning inspection. Fire Department 24 (MM7-2) The property owner/developer shall pay the Public Safety Impact Fee, as amended from time to time, for fire facilities and equipment impact fees identified in Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 17.36. Fire Department 25 (MM7-3) The property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including implementation of Ordinance 6016 and the concept of crime prevention through environmental design (i.e., building design, circulation, site planning and lighting 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 four feet in height and two feet in width. The lines for the numbers shall be six 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. Police Department 26 (MM7-4) For a parking structure, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval indicating the provision of closed circuit monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Anaheim Police Department. Said measures shall Police Department Exhibit "C" Page 12 of 34 be implemented prior to final Building and Zoning inspections. 27 (MM7-5) The property owner/developer shall submit design plans that shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Anaheim Police Department, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Anaheim Police Department. Police Department 28 (MM7-9) The property owner/developer shall pay the school impact fees as adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Anaheim Union High School District and Anaheim City School District in compliance with Senate Bill 50 (Government Code [GC] Section 65995 [b][3] as amended). Planning Department, Building Division 29 (MM9-4) The property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees, Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees, and Platinum Triangle Impact Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 30 (MM9-5) Prior to approval of the first building permit the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan and consistent with the adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 31 (MM 9-6) Any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, property owner/developers shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in the Revised Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Exhibit "C" Page 13 of 34 Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Draft Traffic Study Report, Parson Brinckerhoff, August 2010 (Appendix F of this SEIR) shall be designed and constructed. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to implement traffic improvements as identified in the project traffic study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339, Orange County Congestion Management Program and established in City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. 32 (MM9-7) In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, property owners /developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 9-6 of Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 106C. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. At minimum, fair-share calculations shall include intersection improvements, rights-of- way, and construction costs, unless alternative funding sources have been identified to help pay for the improvement. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Exhibit "C" Page 14 of 34 The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. 33 (MM9-8) In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, the following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. c) The Proposed Project shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. d) The City shall work with the City of Orange to amend the JCFA to ensure the fair share fees collected to mitigate arterial and intersection impacts in the City of Orange are mitigated to the extent feasible. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 34 (MM9-9) In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, and assuming that a regional transportation agency has not already programmed and funded the warranted Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Exhibit "C" Page 15 of 34 improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a) The traffic study will identify the Project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339 and established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b) The City shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. 35 (MM9-10) Prior to the approval of a building permit the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair-share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in Mitigation Measure 9-9. The City shall allocate the property owners/developers fair- share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 36 (MM9-14) Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees, Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees, and Platinum Triangle Impact Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 37 (MM9-15) The property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Exhibit "C" Page 16 of 34 adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) 38 (MM10-4) Prior to approval of sanitary sewer connections for each development project, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to prevent the sewer spill for below-grade structures of the proposed development based upon the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. Where requested by the City Engineer, sewer improvements shall be constructed with larger than recommended diameter to maintain the surcharge levels within the pipe and the invert elevation of sewer laterals shall be located above the hydraulic grade line elevation of the surcharge levels when they are above the pipe crown. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 39 (MM10-6) Prior to issuance of a building permit, additional analysis shall be performed using flow, wet- weather data, and other information specific for that project in order to obtain more accurate results of the surcharge levels for final design. Public Work Department, Development Services 40 (MM10-7) Landscape plans shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Anaheim adopted Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines. This ordinance is in compliance with the State of California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (AB 1881). 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; Resource Efficiency Public Works, Development Services Division Exhibit "C" Page 17 of 34 Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors; Infrared sensors on sinks, toilets and urinals; Infrared sensors on drinking fountains; Use of irrigation systems primarily at night, when evaporation rates are lowest; Water-efficient dishwashers, clothes washers, and other water using appliances; Cooling tower recirculating system; Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation system; Use of waterway recirculation 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. 41 (MM 10-12) Submitted landscape plans for all residential, office and commercial landscaping shall demonstrate the use of drought tolerant plant materials pursuant to the publication entitled “Water Use Efficiency of Landscape Species” by the U.C. Cooperative Extension, August 2000. Public Utilities, Resource Efficiency 42 (MM10-18) The property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB939, and the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans as administered by the City of Anaheim. Implementation of said plan shall commence upon occupancy and shall remain in full effect as required by the Street and Sanitation Division and may include, at its discretion, the following plan components: Detailing the locations and design of on-site recycling facilities. Public Works, Streets and Sanitation Division Exhibit "C" Page 18 of 34 Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City or governing agency. Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and bailing. 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. 43 (MM 10-21) The property owner/developer shall submit plans showing that each structure will exceed the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Code of Regulations) by a minimum of 10 percent and will consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department Business and Community Programs Division. This consultation shall take place during project design in order to review Title 24 measures that are incorporated into the project design energy efficient practices and allow potential system alternatives such as thermal energy storage air-conditioning, lighting, and building envelope options. Plans submitted for building permits shall show the proposed energy efficiencies and systems alternatives. Public Utilities, Business and Community Programs 44 (MM 10-22) The property owner/developer shall indicate on plans energy-saving practices that will be implemented with the project in compliance with Title 24, which may include the following: High-efficiency air-conditioning with EMS (computer) control. Variable Air Volume (VAV) air distribution. Public Utilities, Business and Community Programs Exhibit "C" Page 19 of 34 Outside air (100 percent) economizer cycle. Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads. 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. Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps. Use of EnergyStar ® exit lighting or exit signage. Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified. Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high- pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots. Consideration of thermal energy storage air conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day-peak periods. Consideration for participation in Advantage Services Programs such as: o New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering for up to $15,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems. o New Construction – Cash incentives $400 per kW or $0.15 per kWh saved for each measure and up to $200,000 per facility for efficiency that exceed Title 24 requirements. o Green Building Program – Offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. Use of high efficiency toilets (1.28 gallons per flush [gpf] or less). Exhibit "C" Page 20 of 34 Use of zero to low water use urinals (0.0 gpf to 0.25 gpf). Use of weather-based irrigation controllers for outdoor irrigation. Use of draught-tolerant and native plants in outdoor landscaping. 45 (MM 10-24) The property owner/developer shall submit plans for review and approval which shall ensure that buildings exceed the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Administrative Code) by a minimum of 10 percent. Public Utilities, Business and Community Programs 46 (MM10-26) Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, the property owner/developer shall provide an electrical load analysis to the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD). The analysis shall include a load schedule and maximum electrical coincident demand. Should the property owner/developer’s load analysis result in a contributed load forecasted to exceed 20 MVA above the existing 40 MVA capacity of the electrical system currently serving the Platinum Triangle area, the APUD will initiate construction of a new electrical substation within the Platinum Triangle project area. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees for the electrical substation will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City design features. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 47 The property owner/developer shall submit a plan to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department showing the individual water service installations required to serve each building, including locations of proposed large meters with easements, small meters, and fire lines with backflow devices. The plan shall demonstrate that all backflow devices will be located aboveground outside the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and in locations approved by the Public Utilities Department and the Planning Department. The plans shall also demonstrate that any existing water services, fire lines, and backflow devices Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources Exhibit "C" Page 21 of 34 conform to current Water Utility Standards and/or existing water services and/or fire lines that are not approved for continued use by Water Engineering shall be upgraded to current standards, or abandoned, if no longer needed, by the property owner/developer. 48 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the property owner/developer shall pay his project’s proportionate share of the cost to prepare the Water Supply Assessment for the Platinum Triangle SEIR No. 339. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 49 The Owner shall submit a water system master plan, including hydraulic distribution network analysis and estimates of the maximum required fire flow rate and the maximum day and peak hour water demands for the development 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 without reducing existing service levels or impacting any existing water supply or conveyance facilities. 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. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 50 A water improvement plan shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division for approval and a performance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and form approved by City Attorney shall be posted with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 51 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. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 52 Prior to issuance of a building permit it the following shall be determined: 1) No public water mains or public water facilities shall be installed in any alleys or Public Utilities, Exhibit "C" Page 22 of 34 paseos. 2) No water mains or laterals allowed under parking stalls. 3) Separate services shall be installed for domestic and fire water. 4) All fire services 2-inch and smaller shall be metered with a UL listed meter, Hershey Residential Fire Meter with Translator Register, no equals. 5) Large water meters shall be located on private property in an easement, outside of the setback area. 6) Lead-free backflow prevention assemblies meeting the City of Anaheim’s current standards shall be installed at all domestic water service meters. Backflow prevention assemblies meeting the City of Anaheim’s current standards shall be installed at all fire and irrigation services. Additionally, the location and type of all meters and backflow prevention assemblies shall be subject to the review and approval of Anaheim Water Engineering during the final design stage. 7) Although the conceptual water system layout is acceptable to Anaheim Water Engineering, the final alignment and layout shall be subject to the review and approval of Anaheim Water Engineering during the final design phase. Water Planning & Resources 53 Owner/developer shall acquire and provide an easement to the City of Anaheim for all locations where public water main crosses Orange County Flood Control District Right-of-Way and facilities (both existing AND proposed flood facilities). The City will cooperate and assist in the acquisition of the easement. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 54 The City’s grant easement deed language requirements (i.e., City is ONLY responsible for replacing asphalt paving when it makes repairs or replacements to public water facilities in private streets, it is NOT responsible for slurry sealing, replacing concrete, pavers, or any other decorative Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources Exhibit "C" Page 23 of 34 hardscape, walls, or landscaping) shall be included in easement deeds for all public water facilities located on private property. 55 The applicant shall demonstrate to the City that adequate water supply exists to serve the Proposed Project. If it cannot be demonstrated that adequate water exists to serve the specific project, the project shall not be approved. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 56 “No Trespassing 602(k) P.C.” posted at the entrances of parking lots/structures and located in other appropriate places. Signs must be at least 2’ x 1’ in overall size, with white background and black 2” lettering. Police Department 57 All entrances to parking areas should be posted with appropriate signs per 22658(a) C.V.C. to assist in removal of vehicles at the property owner’s/manager’s request. Police Department 58 The proposed project shall comply with all State Energy Insulation Standards and City of Anaheim codes in effect at the time of application for building permits. (Commonly referred to as Title 24, these standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods.) Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 59 Prior to approval of permits for improvement plans, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with Electrical Engineering to establish electrical service requirements and submit electric system plans, electrical panel drawings, site plans, elevation plans, and related technical drawings and specifications. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 60 That curbs adjacent to the drive aisles shall be painted red to prohibit parallel parking in the drive aisles. Red curb locations shall be clearly labeled on building plans. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 61 That prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall specifically indicate that all vehicular ramps and grades conform to all applicable Engineering Standards. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Exhibit "C" Page 24 of 34 62 That prior to issuance of the a building permit for the parking structure, plans shall demonstrate that at-grade ducts and overhead pipes shall not encroach in the parking space areas or required vehicle clearance areas. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 63 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the final map shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim Department of Public Works and the Orange County Surveyor for technical review and that all applicable conditions of approval have been complied with and then shall be filed in the Office of the Orange County Recorder. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 64 That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the property owner/developer of the Platinum Vista project, subject to the approval of the City Engineer, to provide for cost sharing of the construction of the public Connector Street between Lewis Street and Katella Avenue. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 65 That prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in Mitigation Measures 9-7 and 9-8 of MMP 106C. The City shall allocate the property owners/developers fair share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. These improvements consist of any potential mitigation measures identified in the updated traffic study. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 66 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall submit to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division street improvement plans for the work on Katella Avenue, collector road street “A” and “B” including but not limited to curb and gutter, sidewalk and landscape, storm drain, and sewer facilities, and traffic signals as applicable. The landscape and irrigation improvement plans shall be prepared in accordance with the Public Works Landscape and Irrigation Public Works Department, Development Services Division Exhibit "C" Page 25 of 34 Manual for Public Street and Highway. 67 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall post a security to guarantee the construction of public improvements, including storm drain, water, electrical and sewer, in an amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney. The improvements shall be constructed and operational prior to final building and zoning inspections. Public Works Department, Development Services Division ON-GOING DURING GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION 68 (MM 2-1) The property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to reduce construction-related emissions; however, the resultant value is expected to remain significant. a) The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations to reduce operational emissions. b) The contractor shall use Tier 3 or higher, as identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, off-road construction equipment with higher air pollutant emissions standards for equipment greater than 50 horsepower, based on manufacturer’s availability. c) The contractor shall utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary diesel- power generators, where feasible. South Coast Air Quality Management District Public Works Department, Development Services Division Planning Department, Building Division 69 (MM 2-2) The property owner/developer shall implement the following measures in addition to the existing requirements for fugitive dust control under South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 to further reduce PM 10 and PM 2.5 emissions. To assure compliance, the City shall verify compliance that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections. The measures to be implemented are listed below: a) During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor South Coast Air Quality Management District Public Works Department, Development Services Division Planning Department, Building Division Exhibit "C" Page 26 of 34 shall re-establish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering as quickly as possible to achieve minimum control efficiency for PM 10 of 5 percent. b) During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply chemical soil stabilizers Pave to on-site haul roads to achieve control efficiency for PM 10 of 85 percent compared to travel on unpaved, untreated roads. c) The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. d) The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall schedule activities to minimize the amount of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. e) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall sweep streets with Rule 1186 compliant PM 10 efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. f) During active demolition and debris removal and grading, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall suspend demolition and grading operations when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour to achieve an emissions control efficiency for PM 10 under worst- case wind conditions of 98 percent. g) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall maintain a minimum 12- inch freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials and tarp materials with a fabric cover or other suitable means to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 91 percent. an h) During all construction activities, the Exhibit "C" Page 27 of 34 property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of every three hours on the construction site to achieve an emissions reduction control efficiency for PM 10 of 61 percent. i) During active demolition and debris removal, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply water to disturbed soils at the end of each day to achieve an emission control efficiency for PM 10 of 10 percent. j) During scraper unloading and loading, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall ensure that actively disturbed areas maintain a minimum soil moisture content of 12 percent by use of a moveable sprinkler system or water truck to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 69 percent. k) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall limit on-site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 57 percent. 70 (MM5-7) Ongoing during grading, demolition, and construction, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to limit construction-related noise: a) Noise generated by construction, shall be limited by the property owner/developer to 60 dBA along the property boundaries, before 7:00 AM and after 7:00 PM, 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 AM to 4:00 PM. All internal combustion engines on all of the construction equipment shall be properly outfitted with well maintained muffler systems. Planning Department, Building Division Public Works Department, Development Services Exhibit "C" Page 28 of 34 71 Through specific study of this project site, by a certified archaeologist, it has been determined that no known cultural resources are located in this area. However, should artifacts be uncovered during grading or excavation, the developer shall have a certified archaeologist ensure that the following actions are implemented: a) that the project shall be temporarily halted or work redirected to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. If artifacts are uncovered and determined to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the City for exploration and/or salvage; b) Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process shall be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution; c) Any archaeological work at the project site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological observer is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the observer can survey the area; and 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 Planning Department, Building Division Public Works Department, Development Services Division ON-GOING DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 72 (MM5-8) The property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring project contractors to properly maintain and tune all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. Planning Department, Building Division 73 (MM5-9) The property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring project contractors to locate all stationary noise sources (e.g., generators, compressors, staging areas) as far from occupied noise-sensitive receptors as is feasible. Planning Department, Building Division Exhibit "C" Page 29 of 34 74 (MM5-10) Material delivery, soil haul trucks, and equipment servicing shall also be restricted to the hours set forth in the City of Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 6.70. Planning Department, Building Division PRIOR TO APPROVAL AND ON-GOING DURING CONSTRUCTION 75 (MM10-2) Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) will be upsizing trunk lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner/developer shall coordinate with the OCSD to ensure that all improvements and construction schedules are coordinated. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 76 (MM10-5) Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where OCSD will be upsizing trunk lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner shall coordinate with OCSD to ensure that backflow prevention devices are installed by OCSD at the lateral connections to prevent surcharge flow from entering private properties. Public Works, Streets and Sanitation Division Orange County Sanitation District PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTIONS 77 (MM 2-5) In accordance with the timing required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager, but no later than prior to the first final Building and Zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall implement the following measures to reduce long- term operational CO, NO X , ROG, and PM 10 emissions: Traffic lane improvements and signalization as outlined in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Draft Traffic Study Report, Parsons Brinckerhoff, August 2010 and Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH ) shall be implemented as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager. The property owner/contractor shall place bus benches and/or shelters as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager at Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Exhibit "C" Page 30 of 34 locations along any site frontage routes as needed. 78 (MM 5-3) The property owner/developer shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that occupancy disclosure notices regarding potential for exterior noise levels to be elevated during a stadium event will be provided to all future tenants in the Stadium District. Planning Department, Building Division 79 (MM 5-4) The property owner/developer shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that occupancy disclosure notices regarding potential for exterior noise levels to be elevated during Stadium nearby venue events. Planning Department, Building Division 80 A parking management plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the project receiving a certificate of occupancy. Planning Department, Planning Division Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 81 That prior to final building and zoning inspection, fire lanes shall be posted with “No Parking Any Time.” Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 82 That prior to City acceptance of the public right- of-way improvements for Katella Avenue and for the public Connector Street identified in the Final Site Plan, said streets shall be posted with “No Stopping Any Time” signs and associated red curbs, except, in the locations where the Connector Street is improved with designated parking stalls and designated turn-out areas for loading and unloading. Such signs shall be shown on street improvement plans submitted by the property owner/developer for the review and approval by the Public Works Department. The location of such signs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineering Manager. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with the installation of such signs. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 83 That prior to final building and zoning inspections, the developer shall install accessible curb access Public Works Department, Exhibit "C" Page 31 of 34 ramps with truncated domes at the intersection of collector street “A” at the parking garage access, in conformance with Public Works Standard Detail 111-3. Development Services Division 84 Prior to release of posted securities, the public improvements shall be constructed by the developer and accepted by Construction Services prior to final zoning and building inspections. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 85 If required, prior to connection of electrical service, the legal owner shall provide to the City of Anaheim a Public Utilities easement with dimensions as shown on the approved utility service plan. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division 86 That prior to final building and zoning inspections, the developer shall improve the streets as follows: 1) improve Katella Avenue per the Platinum Triangle Implementation Master Plan or as approved by the City Engineer, 2) improve the interior collector streets “A” per the Connector and Collector Streets requirements of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the Platinum Triangle Implementation Plan. Install a temporary turn-around at the north terminus of Street “A” as required by the City Engineer and the Fire Department. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 87 Prior to connection of electrical service, the legal owner shall submit payment to the City of Anaheim for service connection fees. Public Utilities, Electrical Engineering Division PRIOR TO FINAL MAP APPROVAL 88 The vehicular access rights to Katella Avenue shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 89 The vehicular access rights to connector public road STREET “A” and STREET “B”, except at the private street openings, shall be released and relinquished to the City of Anaheim. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 90 The property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction Public Works Department, Exhibit "C" Page 32 of 34 easements, 1) the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property (Katella Avenue) as shown in the Platinum Triangle Implementation Plan or as approved by the City Engineer, and 2) the ultimate right-of-way for the interior collector streets “A” and “B” per the Connector and Collector Streets requirements of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, regardless of the level of impacts generated by the project. Development Services Division 9\1 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 such as private sewer, concrete paver covered street sections, private storm drain improvements, temporary turn-around areas, if any, and backflow prevention devices such as flap gates; compliance with approved Water Quality Management Plan; and a maintenance exhibit. Maintenance responsibilities shall include all drainage devices, concrete pavers within the Connector public road, sewer system, gates, parkway landscaping and irrigation on Katella Avenue, collector public road STREET “A” and STREET “B”, all lettered lots, and any private street name signs. The covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 92 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 approved by the City Attorney and City Engineer. In lieu of a Subdivision Agreement, an amended Development Agreement can be utilized to satisfy this condition of approval if the required terms are included therein. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 93 The property owner/developer shall record an easement for cul-de-sac driveway purposes on the adjacent property to the immediate west if needed, as approved by the City Engineer. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division GENERAL Exhibit "C" Page 33 of 34 94 (MM7-6) Ongoing during project operation, if the Anaheim Police Department of Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services for the project, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services Police Department Traffic Management Public Works, Development Services Division 95 (MM10-19) Ongoing during project operations, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: Usage of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead, and packaging. Recovery of materials, such as aluminum and cardboard. Collection of office paper for recycling. Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division 96 Ongoing during business operations and in accordance with the Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations, OWNER shall be responsible for restoring any special surface improvements other than asphalt paving within the right-of-way, City water easements, Public Utility easements, private roads, alleys and driveways, including but not limited to colored concrete, stamped concrete, bricks, pavers, concrete, walls, or landscaping that becomes damaged during any excavation, repair or replacement of any City water facility. Provisions for maintenance of all said special surface improvements shall be included in the recorded Master C, C & R’s for the project. Public Utilities, Water Planning & Resources 97 The Planning Director has the authority to grant the modification of the timing of any of the conditions of approval, provided said modification does not result in any increase in environmental impacts for which sufficient mitigation cannot be provided. Any request for such modification shall be in writing and shall clearly identify the reason for the modification. Appeal of such decision shall be provided pursuant to Section 18.60.135 Planning Department, Planning Division Exhibit "C" Page 34 of 34 (Appeals – Planning Director Decisions) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 98 The 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 and as conditioned herein. Planning Department, Planning Division EXHIBIT “D” PLATINUM TRIANGLE INTERIM DEVELOPMENT FEES [See next page.] EXHIBIT “D-1" ELECTRIC UTILITIES UNDERGROUNDING FEE Residential Uses $9.92 per unit The Platinum Triangle 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 $187,505. These funds will be collected by imposing an interim fee on the 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 residential units The Per-Unit fee is calculated at: $187,505 = $9.92 per Unit 18,909 Units EXHIBIT “D-2" GENERAL PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSING FEE Residential Uses: $24.00 per unit Non-residential Uses: $0.03 per sq. ft. These fees are intended to recover the costs associated with the Platinum Triangle including the designation of portions of the Platinum Triangle for mixed use and office development by the General Plan, the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay, the Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement Form, Zone Reclassifications, all other associated documents and amendments thereto, and all associated environmental documentation. The fees are based upon the following calculations: Costs Consultant Contract Costs: $670,623 (includes costs related to DSEIR No. 339) Planning Department Costs: $456,765 (to be updated with costs related to DSEIR No. 339) Public Works Costs: $41,325 (to be updated with costs related to DSEIR No. 339) $1,168,713 (to be updated with costs related to DSEIR No. 339) New Development Allowed in the Platinum Triangle Non-Residential Uses 14,340,522 square feet office development 4,909,682 square feet commercial development + 1,500,000 square feet institutional 20,750,204 total square feet non-residential development Residential Uses 18,909 residential units x 800 square feet (estimated average unit size) 15,127,200 total square feet of residential development Total Square Feet 20,750,204 total square feet non-residential development + 15,127,200 total square feet of residential development 35,877,404 total square feet of residential and non-residential uses Fees (to be updated with DSEIR Planning and Public Works Costs) $1,168,713 costs = $0.03 per square foot 35,877,404 total square feet Non Residential Uses: $0.03 per square foot Residential Uses: $24.00 per unit ($0.03 x 800 square feet) EXHIBIT “D-3" LIBRARY FACILITIES FEE Residential Uses $486.77 per unit The increase of density in the Platinum Triangle to an expected population over 27,000 residents requires the inclusion of a library facility in the Platinum Triangle. The library facilities fee includes the cost of the purchase of a 10,000 square foot commercial condominium shell space with 50 assigned parking spaces as well as FF&E and an opening day collection. The projected project cost for a 10,000 square foot library facility in the Platinum Triangle is $8,004,000. The individual unit library impact fee for the Platinum Triangle is now $486.77 per unit. EXHIBIT ”E” DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS As a condition of approval of the Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002D), the CITY requires OWNER to undertake and implement the maintenance of certain areas, facilities and improvements to be constructed in conjunction with the development of the Property. The initial intended use for the Project is as a multifamily property with apartments for rent. As such, OWNER shall be responsible for compliance with the Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations described below ("Maintenance Obligations"). If the Project is ever converted to a for-sale condominium project, prior to such conversion the owner of the property at that time ("Current Owner") shall execute and record in the Official Records of the County of Orange, State of California, a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions ("CC&Rs") in a form satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney, creating development requirements and maintenance obligations for an incorporated association ("Association") and establishing a financial mechanism or financial mechanisms to maintain those areas and facilities (collectively referred to hereinafter as the "Maintenance Obligations"). Following the formation of the Association, such Association, or an Assessment District acceptable to the City, shall take over the responsibility for compliance with the Maintenance Obligations for the overall Project and the Current Owner shall be relieved therefrom. The Maintenance Obligations include: a. Common fences, walls and utility screening devices. b. Private sewer lines and storm drain lines and facilities, area drains, inlets, manholes and catch basins, and any appurtenances within the boundaries of the Property that serve the Project. c. Private drives and parking, including sidewalks, landscaping, street lighting, mounted lighting, signage, and striping. d. Provision for the replacement of any landscaping planted on-site in accordance with project landscaping plans in a timely manner in the event that landscaping is removed, damaged, diseased, and/or dead. e. Parkway and street median landscaping and irrigation along the project frontage including East Katella Avenue. f. All landscape improvement and amenities for the Project on the Final Site Plan including all trees and tree wells, shrubbery and any and all landscaping. g. All street furniture not maintained by the public utility companies or by the CITY. h. Maintenance of on-site signs and all special monumentation within the Project, including community identification signs and their respective sign easements, if any, and on-site fountains and art elements. i. Common or open space areas within the boundaries of the Project. j. All walkways, pedestrian paths within the boundaries of the Project. k. Covered on-site storage areas for bicycles, scooters and athletic equipment screened from public view. l. Centralized recreational amenities within the boundaries of the Project appropriate to the population mix in the Project, including pools and spas, barbecue areas, clubhouse meeting room(s) and workout room(s). m. Maintenance of internal hardscapes, and other common open spaces or areas, if applicable. n. Removal of graffiti within 24 hours’ notice of occurrence. o. Any special surface improvements other than typical concrete or asphalt paving within the public right-of-way, including but not limited to colored concrete, bricks, pavers or landscaping that becomes damaged during any excavation, repair or replacement of public utilities including water, electrical, and sewer facilities within easements. p. Enclosed parking structures with mail facilities, trash collection areas, and bicycle storage, including the squeal-free surface in the parking structure. q. Trash bins and enclosures within the boundaries of the Project. r. Trash collection and facilities including the Solid Waste Management Plan for the project as approved by the CITY, including a sign to be posted in each trash collection area indicating "No Parking Between the Hours of 7 A.M. and 5 P.M." to allow sufficient access for the trash bin retrieval vehicle. s. Maintenance of all security equipment required by the Police Department including antennas providing radio communication. t. Provision for the continued maintenance of all automatic fire sprinklers systems and fire alarm system. u. Maintenance of private water meters and all associated water line improvements. v. Prohibit the enclosure of any balconies or patios that are shown as unenclosed on any approved Final Site Plan. w. Provision that all parking spaces shall remain open and available for their intended purpose. No storage, staging or other use of parking stalls shall be permitted. x. Provision for the property to be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance and removal of trash or debris. y. Demonstrate that the Current Owner and/or Association is prepared to implement Treatment Controls Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management Plan; all non-structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP; and, that an adequate number of copies for all responsible parties) of the approved Project WQMP are available on-site. z. So long as the Property is maintained and operated for rent, all leases and/or rental agreements shall contain a provision in a form acceptable to the City Attorney providing for the waiver and release by tenants of any claims, demands or causes of action against the OWNER or the City of Anaheim, a municipal corporation (which shall be deemed to be a third party beneficiary) relating to the proximity of the Project and each tenant's apartment unit to entertainment venues, especially the Angel Stadium, and the potential for audible noise associated with said entertainment uses. If the Property is converted to a for-sale condominium project, all agreements for the purchase and sale of the condominium units shall contain a similar waiver and release in form acceptable to the City Attorney. aa. Provision that requires the subscription to a service that provides "automated emergency notification" to individual residents of the Project (subject to meeting minimum standards set by the CITY) following expiration of the initial subscription required to be purchased by the property owner/developer. Provision to require the maintenance, in a timely manner, of the database of resident phone numbers in conjunction with the service, and provide appropriate agencies (police, fire, other emergency responders, as identified by the CITY) with information on how to activate the notification via the service provider. bb. Provision that the Current Owner and/or Association shall not charge for "event parking" for the Honda Center, The Grove of Anaheim or the Angel Stadium unless approved by the CITY. cc. Provisions to restrict loitering and any unauthorized sales of t-shirts, tickets and other merchandise related to events at the adjacent sports and entertainment venues. dd. Provision that the Current Owner and/or Association shall handle and dispose of all hazardous materials and wastes during the operation and maintenance of facilities in accordance with the State codes identified in Mitigation Measure No. 5.4 1 and under Anaheim Fire Department supervision. ee. Provision that, in the event that Anaheim Police Department or Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services in connection with construction or operation of the project, the Current Owner shall reimburse the CITY, on a fair-share basis, if determined appropriate by CITY, for reasonable costs associated with such services. Until such time as an Association is formed, CC&Rs recorded, and an Association has assumed responsibility to perform the Maintenance Obligations, the OWNER or its successors or assigns shall be responsible for the performance of such Maintenance Obligations. If CC&RS are recorded, the covenants and restrictions set forth in the CC&Rs shall constitute a general scheme for the development, protection and maintenance of the Property for the benefit of the Current Owner and all residents. Said covenants and restrictions shall be for the benefit of the Property and shall bind the Current Owner and its successors and assigns. Such covenants and restrictions shall be a burden upon, and a benefit to, not only the Current 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&Rs shall provide that termination of the CC&Rs or amendment of any provision which may negatively impact performance of the Maintenance Obligations shall require the prior written consent of the CITY. Termination of the CC&Rs shall not release the Current Owner with regard to the Current Owner's independent obligations in connection with development and approval of the Project or with regard to obligations and liabilities incurred prior to such termination or amendment. EXHIBIT "F” PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT Fidelity National Title Company CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 1 AMENDED PRELIMINARY REPORT In response to the application for a policy of title insurance referenced herein, Fidelity National Title Company hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a policy or policies of title insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an exception herein or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations or Conditions of said policy forms. The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage and Limitations on Covered Risks of said policy or policies are set forth in Attachment One. The policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When the Amount of Insurance is less than that set forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. Limitations on Covered Risks applicable to the CLTA and ALTA Homeowner’s Policies of Title Insurance which establish a Deductible Amount and a Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability for certain coverages are also set forth in Attachment One. Copies of the policy forms should be read. They are available from the office which issued this report. This report (and any supplements or amendments hereto) is issued solely for the purpose of facilitating the issuance of a policy of title insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability be assumed prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance, a Binder or Commitment should be requested. The policy(s) of title insurance to be issued hereunder will be policy(s) of Fidelity National Title Insurance Company, a California Corporation. Please read the exceptions shown or referred to herein and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in Attachment One of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered. It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects and encumbrances affecting title to the land. Countersigned by: Authorized Signature Authorized Signature Fidelity National Title Company 1300 Dove Street, Suite 310, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Phone: (949) 622-5000 Fax: (949) 477-6813 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 2 PRELIMINARY REPORT Amended Title Officer: Trent Cornell (MA) TO: Fidelity National Title 600 University Street, Suite 1518 Seattle, WA 98101 ATTN: .Kerry Wise YOUR REFERENCE: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 PROPERTY ADDRESS:1015 and 1105 East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA EFFECTIVE DATE:August 8, 2014 at 7:30 a.m. The form of policy or policies of title insurance contemplated by this report is: ALTA Loan, ALTA Loan, ALTA Loan 1.THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO COVERED BY THIS REPORT IS: A FEE 2.TITLE TO SAID ESTATE OR INTEREST AT THE DATE HEREOF IS VESTED IN: PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership 3.THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS REPORT IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: See Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. /aag 03/27/14 PRELIMINARY REPORT Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT “A” THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A: LOT 2 OF TRACT NO. 17494, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 927, PAGES 10 THROUGH 14, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. PARCEL B: NON-EXCLUSIVE RECIPROCAL EASEMENT(S) FOR VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, AS SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN INSTRUMENT ENTITLED “GRANT OF RECIPROCAL EASEMENTS”, RECORDED FEBRUARY 28, 2013 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2013-000127002, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. APN: 082-261-27 AND 28 AND A PORTION OF APN 082-261-24 PRELIMINARY REPORT Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 4 AT THE DATE HEREOF, ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED AND EXCEPTIONS TO COVERAGE IN ADDITION TO THE PRINTED EXCEPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS IN SAID POLICY FORM WOULD BE AS FOLLOWS: A.Property taxes, which are a lien not yet due and payable, including any assessments collected with taxes to be levied for the fiscal year 2014-2015. B. INTENTIONALLY DELETED C. INTENTIONALLY DELETED D.Any liens or other assessments, bonds, or special district liens including without limitation, Community Facility Districts, that arise by reason of any local, City, Municipal or County Project or Special District. E.The herein described property lies within the boundaries of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) as follows: CFD No:08-1 Disclosed by:Notice of Special Tax Lien Recording Date:August 12, 2008 Recording No.:2008000383751 Official Records This property, along with all other parcels in the CFD, is liable for an annual special tax. This special tax is included with and payable with the general property taxes of the City of Anaheim, County of Orange. The tax may not be prepaid. F.The lien of supplemental or escaped assessments of property taxes, if any, made pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3.5 or Part 2, Chapter 3, Articles 3 and 4 respectively (commencing with Section 75) of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California as a result of the transfer of title to the vestee named in Schedule A; or as a result of changes in ownership or new construction occurring prior to date of policy. 1.Water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not disclosed by the public records. 2.Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: Purpose:roads and incidental purposes Recording No:Book 1232, Page 338 Official Records Affects:a portion of said land as more particularly described in said document 3.Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: In favor of:City of Anaheim Purpose:public utility and incidental purposes Recording Date:September 29, 1978 Recording No:Book 12930, Page 514 Official Records Affects:as described therein 4.Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: In favor of:City of Anaheim Purpose:installation and maintenance of a water fireline assembly and incidental purposes Recording Date:November 28, 1978 Recording No:Book 12939, Page 1457 Official Records Affects:as described therein 5.The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Development Agreement No. 2007-00002" recorded March 20, 2008 as Instrument No. 2008000129034 Official Records. ITEMS (Continued)Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 5 Document(s) declaring modifications thereof recorded June 14, 2012 as Instrument No. 2012000337873 Official Records. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Assignment and Assumption of Development Agreement" recorded December 21, 2012 as Instrument No. 2012000796335 Official Records. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "First Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2007-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2007-00002B)" recorded April 11, 2013 as Instrument No. 2013000217457 Official Records. Said Amended and Restated Development Agreement does not purport to supersede and replace in its entirety the previously existing development agreement of record. 6.Matters contained in that certain document Entitled:Grant of Reciprocal Easements Dated:February 28, 2013 Executed by:Brumleu Investments, L.P., a California limited partnership and Platinum Gateway Development Company, LP, a California limited partnership Recording Date:February 28, 2013 Recording No:2013000127002 Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 7.Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: In favor of:City of Anaheim, a municipal corporation Purpose:public road, utilities and highway purposes and incidental purposes Recording Date:May 20, 2013 Recording No:2013000303259 Official Records Affects:as described therein Affects:Parcel 2 8.Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: In favor of:City of Anaheim, a municipal corporation Purpose:public road, utilities and highway purposes and incidental purposes Recording Date:May 20, 2013 Recording No:2013000303260 Official Records Affects:as described therein Affects:Parcel 1 9.Matters contained in that certain document Entitled:Assignment and Assumption of Development Agreement Dated:January 22, 2014 Executed by:TSG Platinum LP, a Delaware limited partnership and Platinum Vista Apartments, L.P., a California limited partnership Recording Date:January 22, 2014 Recording No:2014000025889 Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. ITEMS (Continued)Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 6 10.Matters contained in that certain document Entitled:Save Harmless In-Lieu of Encroachment Agreement and Covenant Not to Sue Dated:January 15, 2014 Executed by:Platinum Gateway Development Company, LP Recording Date:March 07, 2014 Recording No:2014000087444 Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. Affects: The herein described Land and other land. 11.Please be advised that our search did not disclose any open Deeds of Trust of record. If you should have knowledge of any outstanding obligation, please contact the Title Department immediately for further review prior to closing. 12.Any easements not disclosed by the public records as to matters affecting title to real property, whether or not said easements are visible and apparent. 13.Matters which may be disclosed by an inspection and/or by a correct ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey of said Land that is satisfactory to the Company, and/or by inquiry of the parties in possession thereof. THE FOLLOWING MATTERS AFFECT PARCEL B: 14.Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: In favor of:Southern Pacific Transportation Company Purpose:transportation and railroad Recording No:in Book 10377, Page 229 Official Records Affects:the Southerly and Easterly 15 feet of said land and that portion thereof lying Northerly of the Easterly prolongation of the course described in the hereinafter mentioned deed as having a bearing and distance of “North 89 57’ 30” East 988.12 feet 15.Covenants, conditions and restrictions but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, source of income, gender, gender identity, gender expression, medical condition or genetic information, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law, as set forth in the document Recording Date:October 17, 1972 Recording No:in Book 10377, Page 229 Official Records Said covenants, conditions and restrictions provide that a violation thereof shall not defeat the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust made in good faith and for value. 16.An irrevocable offer to dedicate an easement over a portion of said Land for Purpose(s):road and public utilities Recording Date:August 11, 1997 Recording No:19970383268 Official Records Affects:the Westerly 8 feet of said land 17.The use and control of cienegas and natural streams of water, if any, naturally upon, flowing across, into or by the herein described land, and the right of way for and to construct irrigation or drainage ditches through said land to irrigate or drain adjacent lands, as reserved in the deed from Stearns Ranchos Company to G.W. Bissett, recorded July 27, 1895 in Book 87, Page 269 of Deeds. ITEMS (Continued)Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 7 18.An instrument entitled “Covenant and Agreement” Executed by:Sequoia Pacific Realco, a general partnership; David E. Sanford; Julius Fligelman; Harvey Cooper and Mark Ross In favor of:City of Anaheim Recording Date:April 4, 1978 Recording No:Book 12621, Page 1581 Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. This covenant and agreement provides that it shall be binding upon any future owners, encumbrancers, their successors or assigns, and shall continue in effect until the advisory agency approves termination. 19.Matters contained in that certain document Entitled:Covenant Not To Contest Dated:June 13, 2008 Executed by:K/L Anaheim Properties I LLC, a California limited liability company and K/L Anaheim Properties II LLC, a California limited liability company Recording Date:June 17, 2008 Recording No:2008-289659 Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 20.Matters contained in that certain document Entitled:Development Agreement No. 2008-00002 Dated:June 24, 2008 Executed by:City of Anaheim, K/L Anaheim Properties I LLC, a California limited liability company and K/L Anaheim Properties II LLC, a California limited liability company Recording Date:July 23, 2008 Recording No:2008-351778 Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. As amended by unrecorded First Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2008-00002 by and between the City of Anaheim and Shoppoff Advisors, L.P. as disclosed by Ordinance No. 6263 passed and adopted on January 15, 2013. The interest of Shopoff Advisors, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership under said Development Agreement was assigned to Platinum Gateway Development Company, LP, a California limited partnership by Assignment and Assumption of Development Agreement recorded February 28, 2013 as Instrument No. 2013000127001 Official Records. and Re-Recording Date:April 30, 2013 and Re-Recording No:2013000257538 Official Records ITEMS (Continued)Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 8 Matters contained in that certain document Entitled:First Amended and Restated Development Agreement No. 2008-00002 (Development Agreement No. 2008-00002D) Between City of Anaheim and Shopoff Advisors, L.P. Recording Date:April 11, 2013 Recording No:2013000217458 Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. An “Assignment and Assumption of Development Agreement” recorded May 29, 2013 as Instrument No. 2013000324609 Official Records. 21.Matters contained in that certain document Entitled:Grant of Reciprocal Easements Dated:February 28, 2013 Executed by:Brumleu Investments, L.P., a California limited partnership and Platinum Gateway Development Company, LP, a California limited partnership Recording Date:February 28, 2013 Recording No:2013000127002 Official Records Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 22.Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to:City of Anaheim, a municipal corporation Purpose:public road, utilities and highway purposes Recording Date:May 20, 2013 Recording No:2013000303263 Official Records Affects:a portion of said land as more particularly described in said document 23.Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to:City of Anaheim, a municipal corporation and charter city Purpose:public road, utilities and highway purposes Recording Date:July 11, 2013 Recording No:2013000417926 Official Records Affects:a portion of said land as more particularly described in said document 24.Any easements not disclosed by the public records as to matters affecting title to real property, whether or not said easements are visible and apparent. 25.Matters which may be disclosed by an inspection and/or by a correct ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey of said Land that is satisfactory to the Company, and/or by inquiry of the parties in possession thereof. THE FOLLOWING MATTERS AFFECT ALL PARCELS 26.Any rights of the parties in possession of a portion of, or all of, said Land, which rights are not disclosed by the public records. The Company will require, for review, a full and complete copy of any unrecorded agreement, contract, license and/or lease, together with all supplements, assignments and amendments thereto, before issuing any policy of title insurance without excepting this item from coverage. The Company reserves the right to except additional items and/or make additional requirements after reviewing said documents. ITEMS (Continued)Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 9 27.Unrecorded matters which may be disclosed by an Owner’s Affidavit or Declaration. A form of the Owner’s Affidavit/Declaration is attached to this Preliminary Report/Commitment. This Affidavit/Declaration is to be completed by the record owner of the land and submitted for review prior to the closing of this transaction. Your prompt attention to this requirement will help avoid delays in the closing of this transaction. Thank you. The Company reserves the right to add additional items or make further requirements after review of the requested Affidavit/Declaration. 28.Matters contained in that certain document Entitled:Declaration of Covenants Dated:06/10/2014 Executed by:Platinum Gateway Development Company, LP Recording Date:06/25/2014 Recording No:2014000249618 Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 29.A deed of trust to secure an indebtedness in the amount shown below, Amount:$9,000,000.00 Dated:August 8, 2014 Trustor/Grantor Platinum Vista Apartments, LP, a California limited partnership Trustee:First American Title Insurance Company, a Nebraska corporation Beneficiary:Western Alliance Bank, an Arizona corporation Loan No.:None Shown Recording Date:August 8, 2014 Recording No:2014000320140 30.Matters contained in that certain document Entitled:Subdivision Agreement Dated:April 30, 2014 Executed by:The City of Anaheim, a municipal corporation and Platinum Gateway Development Company, LP, a California limited partnership and Platinum Vista Apartments, LP, a California limited partnership Recording Date:August 13, 2014 Recording No:2014000327562 Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. END OF ITEMS PRELIMINARY REPORT Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 10 NOTES Note:Supplemental assessment for 2012-2013: 1st Installment $12,676.79, PAID 2nd Installment $12,676.78, PAID Bill No.:0100 Note:Supplemental assessment for 2012-2013: 1st Installment $9,556.82, PAID 2nd Installment $9,556.81, PAID Bill No.:0100 Note: Property taxes for the fiscal year shown below are PAID. For proration purposes the amounts were: Tax Identification No.:082-261-22 Fiscal Year:2013-2014 1st Installment:$36,815.11 2nd Installment:$36,815.11 Exemption:$0.00 Land:$3,174,920.00 Improvements:$2,969,357.00 Personal Property:$0.00 Code Area:01007 Affects:Parcel B Note: Property taxes for the fiscal year shown below are PAID. For proration purposes the amounts were: Tax Identification No.:082-261-23 Fiscal Year:2013-2014 1st Installment:$57,015.93 2nd Installment:$57,015.93 Exemption:$0.00 Land:$1,140,512.00 Improvements:$3,066,660.00 Personal Property:$0.00 Code Area:01007 Affects:Parcel B Note: Property taxes for the fiscal year shown below are PAID. For proration purposes the amounts were: Tax Identification No.:082-261-24 Fiscal Year:2013-2014 1st Installment:$33,576.50 2nd Installment:$33,576.50 Exemption:$0.00 Land:$1,125,687.00 Improvements:$1,524,908.00 Personal Property:$0.00 Code Area:01007 Affects:Parcel B NOTES (Continued)Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 CLTA Preliminary Report Form – Modified (11/17/06)Page 11 Note:The Company is not aware of any matters which would cause it to decline to attach CLTA Endorsement Form 116 indicating that there is located on said Land a commercial property, known as 1015 and 1105 East Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA, to an Extended Coverage Loan Policy. Note:The only conveyance(s) affecting said Land, which recorded within 24 months of the date of this report, are as follows: Grantor:TSG Platinum LP, a Delaware limited partnership Grantee:Platinum Vista Apartments, L.P., a California limited partnership Recording Date:January 22, 2014 Recording No:2014000025888 Official Records Note: Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes, are paid. For proration purposes the amounts were: Code Area:01007 Tax Identification No.:082-261-27 Fiscal Year:2013-2014 1st Installment:$46,180.96, PAID 2nd Installment:$46,180.96, PAID Exemption:$0.00 Land:$5,445,000.00 Improvements:$675,000.00 Personal Property:$0.00 Note:Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes, are paid. For proration purposes the amounts were: Code Area:01007 Tax Identification No.:082-261-28 Fiscal Year:2013-2014 1st Installment:$47,848.40, PAID 2nd Installment:$47,848.40, OPEN Exemption:$0.00 Land:$4,455,000.00 Improvements:$675,000.00 Personal Property:$0.00 END OF NOTES PRELIMINARY REPORT Fidelity National Title Company Your Reference: Order No.: 997-23044150-B-TC1 OWNER'S DECLARATION The undersigned hereby declares as follows: 1.(Fill in the applicable paragraph and strike the other) a.Declarant ("Owner") is the owner or lessee, as the case may be, of certain premises located at ____________________________________________________________________________________, further described as follows: See Preliminary Report/Commitment No. 997-23044150-B-TC1 for full legal description (the "Land"). b.Declarant is the ____________________________ of ______________________________________ ("Owner"), which is the owner or lessee, as the case may be, of certain premises located at __________________________________________________________________________________, further described as follows: See Preliminary Report/Commitment No. 997-23044150-B-TC1 for full legal description (the "Land"). 2.(Fill in the applicable paragraph and strike the other) a.During the period of six months immediately preceding the date of this declaration no work has been done, no surveys or architectural or engineering plans have been prepared, and no materials have been furnished in connection with the erection, equipment, repair, protection or removal of any building or other structure on the Land or in connection with the improvement of the Land in any manner whatsoever. b.During the period of six months immediately preceding the date of this declaration certain work has been done and materials furnished in connection with upon the Land in the approximate total sum of $ , but no work whatever remains to be done and no materials remain to be furnished to complete the construction in full compliance with the plans and specifications, nor are there any unpaid bills incurred for labor and materials used in making such improvements or repairs upon the Land, or for the services of architects, surveyors or engineers, except as follows: . Owner, by the undersigned Declarant, agrees to and does hereby indemnify and hold harmless Fidelity National Title Insurance Company against any and all claims arising therefrom. 3.Owner has not previously conveyed the Land; is not a debtor in bankruptcy (and if a partnership, the general partner thereof is not a debtor in bankruptcy); and has not received notice of any pending court action affecting the title to the Land. 4.Except as shown in the above-referenced Preliminary Report/Commitment, there are no unpaid or unsatisfied mortgages, deeds of trust, Uniform Commercial Code financing statements, claims of lien, special assessments, or taxes that constitute a lien against the Land or that affect the Land but have not been recorded in the public records. 5.The Land is currently in use as ; occupy/occupies the Land; and the following are all of the leases or other occupancy rights affecting the Land: 6.There are no other persons or entities that assert an ownership interest in the Land, nor are there unrecorded easements, claims of easement, or boundary disputes that affect the Land. 7.There are no outstanding options to purchase or rights of first refusal affecting the Land. This declaration is made with the intention that Fidelity National Title Insurance Company (the "Company") and its policy issuing agents will rely upon it in issuing their title insurance policies and endorsements. Owner, by the undersigned Declarant, agrees to indemnify the Company against loss or damage (including attorneys fees, expenses, and costs) incurred by the Company as a result of any untrue statement made herein. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on at . Signature: Privacy Notice Effective: January 24, 2014 FIDELITY NATIONAL FINANCIAL PRIVACY NOTICE Fidelity National Financial, Inc. and its majority-owned subsidiary companies providing real estate- and loan-related services (collectively, “FNF”, “our” or “we”) respect and are committed to protecting your privacy. This Privacy Notice lets you know how and for what purposes your Personal Information (as defined herein) is being collected, processed and used by FNF. We pledge that we will take reasonable steps to ensure that your Personal Information will only be used in ways that are in compliance with this Privacy Notice. This Privacy Notice is only in effect for any generic information and Personal Information collected and/or owned by FNF, including collection through any FNF website and any online features, services and/or programs offered by FNF (collectively, the “Website”). This Privacy Notice is not applicable to any other web pages, mobile applications, social media sites, email lists, generic information or Personal Information collected and/or owned by any entity other than FNF. Collection and Use of Information The types of personal information FNF collects may include, among other things (collectively, “Personal Information”): (1) contact information (e.g., name, address, phone number, email address); (2) demographic information (e.g., date of birth, gender marital status); (3) Internet protocol (or IP) address or device ID/UDID; (4) social security number (SSN), student ID (SIN), driver’s license, passport, and other government ID numbers; (5) financial account information; and (6) information related to offenses or criminal convictions. In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: •Applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative; •Information we receive from you through the Website; •Information about your transactions with or services performed by us, our affiliates, or others; and •From consumer or other reporting agencies and public records maintained by governmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities, or from our affiliates or others. Information collected by FNF is used for three main purposes: •To provide products and services to you or one or more third party service providers (collectively, “Third Parties”) who are obtaining services on your behalf or in connection with a transaction involving you. •To improve our products and services that we perform for you or for Third Parties. •To communicate with you and to inform you about FNF’s, FNF’s affiliates and third parties’ products and services. Additional Ways Information is Collected Through the Website Browser Log Files. Our servers automatically log each visitor to the Website and collect and record certain information about each visitor. This information may include IP address, browser language, browser type, operating system, domain names, browsing history (including time spent at a domain, time and date of your visit), referring/exit web pages and URLs, and number of clicks. The domain name and IP address reveal nothing personal about the user other than the IP address from which the user has accessed the Website. Cookies. From time to time, FNF or other third parties may send a “cookie” to your computer. A cookie is a small piece of data that is sent to your Internet browser from a web server and stored on your computer’s hard drive and that can be re-sent to the serving website on subsequent visits. A cookie, by itself, cannot read other data from your hard disk or read other cookie files already on your computer. A cookie, by itself, does not damage your system. We, our advertisers and other third parties may use cookies to identify and keep track of, among other things, those areas of the Website and third party websites that you have visited in the past in order to enhance your next visit to the Website. You can choose whether or not to accept cookies by changing the settings of your Internet browser, but some functionality of the Website may be impaired or not function as intended. See the Third Party Opt Out section below. Web Beacons. Some of our web pages and electronic communications may contain images, which may or may not be visible to you, known as Web Beacons (sometimes referred to as “clear gifs”). Web Beacons collect only limited information that includes a cookie number; time and date of a page view; and a description of the page on which the Web Beacon resides. We may also carry Web Beacons placed by third party advertisers. These Web Beacons do not carry any Personal Information and are only used to track usage of the Website and activities associated with the Website. See the Third Party Opt Out section below. Unique Identifier. We may assign you a unique internal identifier to help keep track of your future visits. We may use this information to gather aggregate demographic information about our visitors, and we may use it to personalize the information you see on the Website and some of the electronic communications you receive from us. We keep this information for our internal use, and this information is not shared with others. Third Party Opt Out. Although we do not presently, in the future we may allow third-party companies to serve advertisements and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit the Website. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to the Website in order to provide advertisements about products and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party Web Beacon to collect this information, as further described above. Through these technologies, the third party may have access to and use non-personalized information about your online usage activity. You can opt-out of online behavioral services through any one of the ways described below. After you opt-out, you may continue to receive advertisements, but those advertisements will no longer be as relevant to you. •You can opt-out via the Network Advertising Initiative industry opt-out at http://www.networkadvertising.org/. •You can opt-out via the Consumer Choice Page at www.aboutads.info. •For those in the U.K., you can opt-out via the IAB UK's industry opt-out at www.youronlinechoices.com. •You can configure your web browser (Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari, etc.) to delete and/or control the use of cookies. More information can be found in the Help system of your browser. Note: If you opt-out as described above, you should not delete your cookies. If you delete your cookies, you will need to opt-out again. When Information Is Disclosed By FNF We may provide your Personal Information (excluding information we receive from consumer or other credit reporting agencies) to various individuals and companies, as permitted by law, without obtaining your Privacy Notice Effective: January 24, 2014 prior authorization. Such laws do not allow consumers to restrict these disclosures. Disclosures may include, without limitation, the following: •To agents, brokers, representatives, or others to provide you with services you have requested, and to enable us to detect or prevent criminal activity, fraud, material misrepresentation, or nondisclosure in connection with an insurance transaction; •To third-party contractors or service providers who provide services or perform marketing services or other functions on our behalf; •To law enforcement or other governmental authority in connection with an investigation, or civil or criminal subpoenas or court orders; and/or •To lenders, lien holders, judgment creditors, or other parties claiming an encumbrance or an interest in title whose claim or interest must be determined, settled, paid or released prior to a title or escrow closing. In addition to the other times when we might disclose information about you, we might also disclose information when required by law or in the good-faith belief that such disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with a legal process or applicable laws; (2) enforce this Privacy Notice; (3) respond to claims that any materials, documents, images, graphics, logos, designs, audio, video and any other information provided by you violates the rights of third parties; or (4) protect the rights, property or personal safety of FNF, its users or the public. We maintain reasonable safeguards to keep the Personal Information that is disclosed to us secure. We provide Personal Information and non- Personal Information to our subsidiaries, affiliated companies, and other businesses or persons for the purposes of processing such information on our behalf and promoting the services of our trusted business partners, some or all of which may store your information on servers outside of the United States. We require that these parties agree to process such information in compliance with our Privacy Notice or in a similar, industry-standard manner, and we use reasonable efforts to limit their use of such information and to use other appropriate confidentiality and security measures. The use of your information by one of our trusted business partners may be subject to that party’s own Privacy Notice. We do not, however, disclose information we collect from consumer or credit reporting agencies with our affiliates or others without your consent, in conformity with applicable law, unless such disclosure is otherwise permitted by law. We also reserve the right to disclose Personal Information and/or non- Personal Information to take precautions against liability, investigate and defend against any third-party claims or allegations, assist government enforcement agencies, protect the security or integrity of the Website, and protect the rights, property, or personal safety of FNF, our users or others. We reserve the right to transfer your Personal Information, as well as any other information, in connection with the sale or other disposition of all or part of the FNF business and/or assets. We also cannot make any representations regarding the use or transfer of your Personal Information or other information that we may have in the event of our bankruptcy, reorganization, insolvency, receivership or an assignment for the benefit of creditors, and you expressly agree and consent to the use and/or transfer of your Personal Information or other information in connection with a sale or transfer of some or all of our assets in any of the above described proceedings. Furthermore, we cannot and will not be responsible for any breach of security by any third parties or for any actions of any third parties that receive any of the information that is disclosed to us. Information from Children We do not collect Personal Information from any person that we know to be under the age of thirteen (13). Specifically, the Website is not intended or designed to attract children under the age of thirteen (13). You affirm that you are either more than 18 years of age, or an emancipated minor, or possess legal parental or guardian consent, and are fully able and competent to enter into the terms, conditions, obligations, affirmations, representations, and warranties set forth in this Privacy Notice, and to abide by and comply with this Privacy Notice. In any case, you affirm that you are over the age of 13, as THE WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED FOR CHILDREN UNDER 13 THAT ARE UNACCOMPANIED BY HIS OR HER PARENT OR LEGAL GUARDIAN. Parents should be aware that FNF’s Privacy Notice will govern our use of Personal Information, but also that information that is voluntarily given by children – or others – in email exchanges, bulletin boards or the like may be used by other parties to generate unsolicited communications. FNF encourages all parents to instruct their children in the safe and responsible use of their Personal Information while using the Internet. Privacy Outside the Website The Website may contain various links to other websites, including links to various third party service providers. FNF is not and cannot be responsible for the privacy practices or the content of any of those other websites. Other than under agreements with certain reputable organizations and companies, and except for third party service providers whose services either we use or you voluntarily elect to utilize, we do not share any of the Personal Information that you provide to us with any of the websites to which the Website links, although we may share aggregate, non-Personal Information with those other third parties. Please check with those websites in order to determine their privacy policies and your rights under them. European Union Users If you are a citizen of the European Union, please note that we may transfer your Personal Information outside the European Union for use for any of the purposes described in this Privacy Notice. By providing FNF with your Personal Information, you consent to both our collection and such transfer of your Personal Information in accordance with this Privacy Notice. Choices with Your Personal Information Whether you submit Personal Information to FNF is entirely up to you. You may decide not to submit Personal Information, in which case FNF may not be able to provide certain services or products to you. You may choose to prevent FNF from disclosing or using your Personal Information under certain circumstances (“opt out”). You may opt out of any disclosure or use of your Personal Information for purposes that are incompatible with the purpose(s) for which it was originally collected or for which you subsequently gave authorization by notifying us by one of the methods at the end of this Privacy Notice. Furthermore, even where your Personal Information is to be disclosed and used in accordance with the stated purposes in this Privacy Notice, you may elect to opt out of such disclosure to and use by a third party that is not acting as an agent of FNF. As described above, there are some uses from which you cannot opt-out. Please note that opting out of the disclosure and use of your Personal Information as a prospective employee may prevent you from being hired as an employee by FNF to the extent that provision of your Personal Information is required to apply for an open position. Privacy Notice Effective: January 24, 2014 If FNF collects Personal Information from you, such information will not be disclosed or used by FNF for purposes that are incompatible with the purpose(s) for which it was originally collected or for which you subsequently gave authorization unless you affirmatively consent to such disclosure and use. You may opt out of online behavioral advertising by following the instructions set forth above under the above section “Additional Ways That Information Is Collected Through the Website,” subsection “Third Party Opt Out.” Access and Correction To access your Personal Information in the possession of FNF and correct inaccuracies of that information in our records, please contact us in the manner specified at the end of this Privacy Notice. We ask individuals to identify themselves and the information requested to be accessed and amended before processing such requests, and we may decline to process requests in limited circumstances as permitted by applicable privacy legislation. Your California Privacy Rights Under California’s “Shine the Light” law, California residents who provide certain personally identifiable information in connection with obtaining products or services for personal, family or household use are entitled to request and obtain from us once a calendar year information about the customer information we shared, if any, with other businesses for their own direct marketing uses. If applicable, this information would include the categories of customer information and the names and addresses of those businesses with which we shared customer information for the immediately prior calendar year (e.g., requests made in 2013 will receive information regarding 2012 sharing activities). To obtain this information on behalf of FNF, please send an email message to privacy@fnf.com with “Request for California Privacy Information” in the subject line and in the body of your message. We will provide the requested information to you at your email address in response. Please be aware that not all information sharing is covered by the “Shine the Light” requirements and only information on covered sharing will be included in our response. Additionally, because we may collect your Personal Information from time to time, California’s Online Privacy Protection Act requires us to disclose how we respond to “do not track” requests and other similar mechanisms. Currently, our policy is that we do not recognize “do not track” requests from Internet browsers and similar devices. Your Consent to This Privacy Notice By submitting Personal Information to FNF, you consent to the collection and use of information by us as specified above or as we otherwise see fit, in compliance with this Privacy Notice, unless you inform us otherwise by means of the procedure identified below. If we decide to change this Privacy Notice, we will make an effort to post those changes on the Website. Each time we collect information from you following any amendment of this Privacy Notice will signify your assent to and acceptance of its revised terms for all previously collected information and information collected from you in the future. We may use comments, information or feedback that you may submit in any manner that we may choose without notice or compensation to you. If you have additional questions or comments, please let us know by sending your comments or requests to: Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 601 Riverside Avenue Jacksonville, Florida 32204 Attn: Chief Privacy Officer (888) 934-3354 privacy@fnf.com Copyright © 2014. Fidelity National Financial, Inc. All Rights Reserved. EFFECTIVE AS OF: JANUARY 24, 2014 LAST UPDATED: JANUARY 24, 2014 CA Discount Notice Effective Date: 1-10-2010 Notice of Available Discounts Pursuant to Section 2355.3 in Title 10 of the California Code of Regulations Fidelity National Financial, Inc. and its subsidiaries (“FNF”) must deliver a notice of each discount available under our current rate filing along with the delivery of escrow instructions, a preliminary report or commitment. Please be aware that the provision of this notice does not constitute a waiver of the consumer’s right to be charged the field rate. As such, your transaction may not qualify for the below discounts. You are encouraged to discuss the applicability of one or more of the below discounts with a Company representative. These discounts are generally described below; consult the rate manual for a full description of the terms, conditions and requirements for each discount. These discounts only apply to transaction involving services rendered by the FNF Family of Companies. This notice only applies to transactions involving property improved with a one-to-four family residential dwelling. FNF Underwritten Title Company FNF Underwriter FNTC - Fidelity National Title Company FNTCCA –Fidelity National Title Company of California FNTIC - Fidelity National Title Insurance Company Available Discounts CREDIT FOR PRELIMINARY REPORTS AND/OR COMMITMENTS ON SUBSEQUENT POLICIES (FNTIC) Where no major change in the title has occurred since the issuance of the original report or commitment, the order may be reopened within 12 or 36 months and all or a portion of the charge previously paid for the report or commitment may be credited on a subsequent policy charge. FEE REDUCTION SETTLEMENT PROGRAM (FNTC, FNTCCA and FNTIC) Eligible customers shall receive $20.00 reduction in their title and/or escrow fees charged by the Company for each eligible transaction in accordance with the terms of the Final Judgments entered in The People of the State of California et al. v. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company et al., Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 99AS02793, and related cases. DISASTER LOANS (FNTIC) The charge for a lender’s Policy (Standard or Extended coverage) covering the financing or refinancing by an owner of record, within 24 months of the date of a declaration of a disaster area by the government of the United States or the State of California on any land located in said area, which was partially or totally destroyed in the disaster, will be 50% of the appropriate title insurance rate. CHURCHES OR CHARITABLE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS (FNTIC) On properties used as a church or for charitable purposes within the scope of the normal activities of such entities, provided said charge is normally the church’s obligation the charge for an owner’s policy shall be 50% to 70% of the appropriate title insurance rate, depending on the type of coverage selected. The charge for a lender’s policy shall be 40% to 50% of the appropriate title insurance rate, depending on the type of coverage selected. Notice You may be entitled to receive a $20.00 discount on escrow services if you purchased, sold or refinanced residential property in California between May 19,1995 and November 1, 2002. If you had more than one qualifying transaction, you may be entitled to multiple discounts. If your previous transaction involved the same property that is the subject of your current transaction, you do not have to do anything; the Company will provide the discount, provided you are paying for escrow or title services in this transaction. If your previous transaction involved property different from the property that is the subject of your current transaction, you must inform the Company of the earlier transaction, provide the address of the property involved in the previous transaction, and the date or approximate date that the escrow closed to be eligible for the discount. Unless you inform the Company of the prior transaction on property that is not the subject of this transaction, the Company has no obligation to conduct an investigation to determine if you qualify for a discount. If you provided the Company information concerning a prior transaction, the Company is required to determine if you qualify for a discount. Effective through November 1, 2014 Attachment One (06/03/11) ATTACHMENT ONE (Revised 06-03-11) CALIFORNIA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY – 1990 EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1.(a)Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building or zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien, or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b)Any governmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. 2.Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters: (a)whether or not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b)not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c)resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d)attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or (e)resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the insured mortgage or for the estate or interest insured by this policy. 4.Unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the insured at Date of Policy, or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness, to comply with the applicable doing business laws of the state in which the land is situated. 5.Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. 6.Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the insured the estate of interest insured by this policy or the transaction creating the interest of the insured lender, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency or similar creditors' rights laws. EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE - SCHEDULE B, PART I This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) which arise by reason of: 1.Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession thereof. 3.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the public records. 4.Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. 5.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b) or (c) are shown by the public records. 6.Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the public records. CLTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (02-03-10) ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, You are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from: 1.Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of those portions of any law or government regulation concerning: a.building; b.zoning; c.land use; d.improvements on the Land; e.land division; and f.environmental protection. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 8.a., 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23 or 27. 2.The failure of Your existing structures, or any part of them, to be constructed in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 14 or 15. 3.The right to take the Land by condemning it. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 17. 4.Risks: a.that are created, allowed, or agreed to by You, whether or not they are recorded in the Public Records; b.that are Known to You at the Policy Date, but not to Us, unless they are recorded in the Public Records at the Policy Date; Attachment One (06/03/11) c.that result in no loss to You; or d.that first occur after the Policy Date - this does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 7, 8.e., 25, 26, 27 or 28. 5.Failure to pay value for Your Title. 6.Lack of a right: a.to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in paragraph 3 of Schedule A; and b.in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch the Land. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 11 or 21. 7.The transfer of the Title to You is invalid as a preferential transfer or as a fraudulent transfer or conveyance under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors’ rights laws. LIMITATIONS ON COVERED RISKS Your insurance for the following Covered Risks is limited on the Owner’s Coverage Statement as follows: For Covered Risk 16, 18, 19, and 21 Your Deductible Amount and Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability shown in Schedule A. The deductible amounts and maximum dollar limits shown on Schedule A are as follows: Your Deductible Amount Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability Covered Risk 16: 1.00% of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A or $2,500.00 (whichever is less) $10,000.00 Covered Risk 18: 1.00% of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A or $5,000.00 (whichever is less) $25,000.00 Covered Risk 19: 1.00% of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A or $5,000.00 (whichever is less) $25,000.00 Covered Risk 21: 1.00% of Policy Amount Shown in Schedule A or $2,500.00 (whichever is less) $5000.00 AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION RESIDENTIAL TITLE INSURANCE POLICY (6-1-87) EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, you are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from: 1.Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of any law or government regulation. This includes building and zoning ordinances and also laws and regulations concerning: * land use * improvements on the land * land division * environmental protection This exclusion does not apply to violations or the enforcement of these matters which appear in the public records at Policy Date. This exclusion does not limit the zoning coverage described in Items 12 and 13 of Covered Title Risks. 2.The right to take the land by condemning it, unless: * a notice of exercising the right appears in the public records * on the Policy Date * the taking happened prior to the Policy Date and is binding on you if you bought the land without knowing of the taking 3.Title Risks: * that are created, allowed, or agreed to by you * that are known to you, but not to us, on the Policy Date – unless they appeared in the public records * that result in no loss to you * that first affect your title after the Policy Date – this does not limit the labor and material lien coverage in Item 8 of Covered Title Risks 4.Failure to pay value for your title. 5.Lack of a right: * to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in Item 3 of Schedule A OR * in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch your land This exclusion does not limit the access coverage in Item 5 of Covered Title Risks. 2006 ALTA LOAN POLICY (06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: Attachment One (06/03/11) 1.(a)Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (i)the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii)the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii)the subdivision of land; or (iv)environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b)Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2.Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a)created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b)not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c)resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d)attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 13 or 14); or (e)resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4.Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing business laws of the state where the Land is situated. 5.Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law. 6.Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors’ rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is (a)a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or (b)a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 13(b) of this policy. 7.Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11(b). The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys’ fees or expenses) that arise by reason of: 1.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 2.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 3.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 4.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 5.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records. 6.Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the Public Records. 2006 ALTA OWNER’S POLICY (06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1.(a)Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (i)the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii)the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii)the subdivision of land; or (iv)environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b)Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2.Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a)created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b)not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c)resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d)attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 9 and 10); or (e)resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Title. Attachment One (06/03/11) 4.Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors’ rights laws, that the transaction vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A, is (a)a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or (b)a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 9 of this policy. 5.Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys’ fees or expenses) that arise by reason of: 1.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 2.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown in the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 3.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 4.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and that are not shown by the Public Records. 5.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records. 6.Any lien or right to a lien for services, labor or material not shown by the Public Records. ALTA EXPANDED COVERAGE RESIDENTIAL LOAN POLICY (07-26-10) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys’ fees or expenses which arise by reason of: 1.(a)Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (i)the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii)the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii)the subdivision of land; or (iv)environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5, 6, 13(c), 13(d), 14 or 16. (b)Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5, 6, 13(c),13(d), 14 or 16. 2.Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a)created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b)not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c)resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d)attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27 or 28); or (e)resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4.Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing business laws of the state where the Land is situated. 5.Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury, or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 26. 6.Any claim of invalidity, unenforceability or lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage as to Advances or modifications made after the Insured has Knowledge that the vestee shown in Schedule A is no longer the owner of the estate or interest covered by this policy. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 11. 7.Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching subsequent to Date of Policy. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 11(b) or 25. 8.The failure of the residential structure, or any portion of it, to have been constructed before, on or after Date of Policy in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 5 or 6. 9.Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors’ rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is (a)a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or (b)a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 27(b) of this policy. Final Site Plan List of Exhibits for The Platinum Vista Project Exhibit No. Tract Map No. 17494 A-0 Title Sheet A-1.0 Overall Site Plan A-1.1 Conceptual Site Plan A-1.2 Open Space Plan A-1.3 Fire Access Plan A-1.4 Trash Collection Plan A-3.1 Conceptual Building Plans - Sub Level/First Level A-3.2 Conceptual Building Plans - Second Level/Third Level A-3.3 Conceptual Building Plans - Fourth Level/Fifth Level A-3.4 Conceptual Building Plans – Sixth & Roof Level/Roof Top Deck Plan, Parking Structure A-4.1 Conceptual Elevations North Side/East Side A-4.2 Conceptual Elevations South Side/West Side A-5.1 Building Sections A-6.1 Unit Plans L.1 Landscape Plan - Overall L.2 Recreation Area Plan/Landscape Plan Courtyard Enlargement L.3 Rooftop Deck Plan L.4 Leasing Area Plan L.5 Schematic Lighting Plan Color and Material Finishes ATTACHMENT NO. 8 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. CITY OF ANAHEIM PLATINUM GATEWAY AND PLATINUM VISTA 17494 PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTSTHE WOLFF COMPANY1005 - 1125 Katella Avenue, Anaheim, CA cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 1Additional Sheets08-18-14 CLUBHOUSEFITNESSLEASINGE1A4A466'-2"76'-1"115 STALLSELECTRICALROOMTRASHROOMTRASHROOMRAMP - 5% MAX. SLOPE UPLINE OF RAMP ABOVEBULK ITEMCOLLECTIONAREA 13'X15'A390'-0"68'-2"B3B2C1B5B5B5A1C1A1B5B5C1A5A5A4A3A3B2B3A3A5A5C1A1B5B5A5A5B4B4A1A4A5A5A1B3A3B2A3A3A1A1A1B5B5A4A4B5B5C1B3A3B2A3A2A3S1S1A1A1B3B3A3B3B5B5C1B4A1A4A4A5A3A3B3B5B5B5B5B2B5B5B5B1B3A4A1A1A1A2A1A1ACCESSMPOEACCESSELEC. 3ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS ACCESS ACCESSACCESS A3ELEC. 254'-6" 77'-6"A4A1POOL EQ.ELEC. 4A1ELEC. 1 OPEN TO SKY E2E4E3OPEN TO SKY OPEN TO SKY POOL/SPAPARKCOURTYARD#2COURTYARD#3COURTYARD#1COURTYARD#5COURTYARD#4MAIN ENTRY COURTCOURTYARD#6A1ACCESS ACCESS ACCESSA1 A1A391'-0"C1A1B4399 UNITS X 44 SQ. FT. =17,556 SQ. FT. MIN. REQ'D.17,614 SQ. FT. PROVIDEDK A T E L L A A V E.L E W I S S T R E E T C O N N E C T O R S T R E E T C O N N E C T O R S T R E E TRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILE2E1E3B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3A2A2A2A1A1ALEASINGPOOL CLUB4,500 S.F.E1AGEWAYA2A3E X I S T I N G F I R E L A N E MOVE-IN LOADINGMOVE-IN LOADING N O T A P A R TcNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 1Additional Sheets08-18-14 RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPLEASINGPOOL CLUBRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP4,500 S.F.B3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILA3E2E1E3UNIT A4: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 795 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3A2A2A2A1A1AcNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 136'-0"98'-8" 65'-4" 88'-4"93'-0"26'-0"26'-0" 27'-0"K A T E L L A A V E N U EC O N N E C T O R S T R E E T E X I S T I N G F I R E L A N E MOVE-IN LOADINGMOVE-IN LOADING TO TOP FLOOR OFFIRE ACCESS STAIRPARKING STRUCTURETO TOP FLOOR OFFIRE ACCESS STAIRPARKING STRUCTUREHATCHING INDICATESENHANCED FIREPROTECTION AREASHATCHING INDICATESENHANCED FIREPROTECTION AREAS26'-0"26'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILE2E1E3B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3A2A2A2A1A1ALEASINGPOOL CLUB4,500 S.F.E1EXIT PASSAGEWAYA3cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 1Additional Sheets08-18-14 136'-0"98'-8" 65'-4" 88'-4"93'-0"26'-0"26'-0" 27'-0"K A T E L L A A V E N U EC O N N E C T O R S T R E E T E X I S T I N G F I R E L A N E MOVE-IN LOADINGMOVE-IN LOADING RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILE2E1E3B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3A2A2A2A1A1ALEASINGPOOL CLUB4,500 S.F.E1EXIT PASSAGEWAYA3cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal 1Additional Sheets08-18-14 RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP L.RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP TRASH RM. 1 V.V.V.V.RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPTRASH RM. 2RAMP - 8.33% MAX. SLOPE UPLEASINGPOOL CLUBRAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP4,500 S.F.B3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1A1B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1S1B1B1S1B2A2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1AA2B2A2A1A1A1ELEC.A1ELEC.B3B2A2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A3A3S2A3MAILA3E2E1E3B2A2A3EXIT PASSAGEWAYEXIT PASSAGEWAYB2A2(B2)(B2)B3B3L.A2A2A2A1A1ARECREATIONAREAMAINMOTORCOURTSECONDARYMOTORCOURTcNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal L.127'-6"25'-0"25'-0"25'-0"9'-0"8'-6"9'-0"18'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1B3A1A1A2A2A1A1B2 B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1B2A1A1A1B3A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4 B2A3A3S2B3B3B4A3A2 B2A3E2E1E3B2A2RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP V.V.V.V.TR.TR.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2S2A1AA1A2B3B3L.A2A2A2A1A1AB2L.127'-6"25'-0"25'-0" 25'-0" 9'-0"8'-6"9'-0"18'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPA1A1B3A1A1A2A2A1A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1B2A1A1A1B3A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A2 B2A3A3S2B3B3B4A3A2 B2A3E2E1E3B2RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP V.V.V.V.TR.TR.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2S2A1AA1A2B3B3B3B3L.A2A2A2A1A1AB2cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal L.127'-6"25'-0"25'-0"25'-0"9'-0"8'-6"9'-0"18'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPA1A1B3A1A1A2A2A1B2 B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1A1B3A4A3A1AA3A4 B2A3A3S2B4A3A2 B2A3E2E1E3B2RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP V.V.V.V.TR.TR.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2S2A1B3B3B3B3B3B3B3A2B3B2A1AA1A2B3B3L.A2A2A2A1A1AB2L.127'-6"25'-0"25'-0" 25'-0" 9'-0"8'-6"9'-0"18'-0"RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPA1A1B3A1A1A2A2A1 B2B3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1A1A1A1A1AA3A4A2 B2A3A3S2B4A3A2 B2A3E2E1E3RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UP V.V.V.V.TR.TR.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2S2L.A2A2A2A1A1AB2A4A3B3B3B3B3B3B3B3B3B2A1AA1B3B3cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPB3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1B2 A3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1B2A1A1A1B3A2A2A2A1A1AB2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A2 B2A3A3S2B3B3B4A3A2 B2A3E2E3B2RAMP - 6.67% SLOPE UPV.V.V.V.A4A4A3A1A1B2A2A1A1AA1E3V.E2V.V.TR.V.DOGPARKSPORTSCOURTEXERCISEPAVILION2,950 S.F.MECH/STOR.850 S.F.B3A1A1A2S2B3A1A1A2A2A1B2A3A4A1B2A1AA1A4A3A3S2S1B1 S2S1B1B1S1B2B2A1AA4A1A3A1B1S1A1B2A1A1A1B3A2A2A2A1A1AB2A4A3B3B3A1AA3A4A2 B2A3A3S2B3B3B4A3A2 B2A3E3B2A4A4A3A1A1B2A2A1A1AA1cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal PROVIDE ROOF-TOPSTAIR ACCESSPROVIDE ROOF-TOPSTAIR ACCESS5 STORY ON-GRADERESIDENTIAL (TYP.)4 STORY MASSINGBREAK PER CODE4 STORY MASSINGBREAK PER CODE4 STORY MASSINGBREAK PER CODEROOFTOP MECHANICALEQUIPMENT CONCEALEDFROM EXTERIOR VIEWBY PERIMETER PARAPETWALLS (TYP.) - SEE DETAILPROVIDE ROOF-TOPSTAIR ACCESS5 STORY ON-GRADERESIDENTIAL (TYP.)PROVIDE ROOF-TOPSTAIR ACCESS 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"9'-2"8'-2"10'-1" 61'-2" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"9'-2"8'-2" 3'-6" 73'-8" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6"10'-1" 53'-11" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6"11'-7"55'-5" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6"10'-1" 53'-11"RESIDENTIALPARKING STRUCTURERESIDENTIALCOURTYARDRESIDENTIAL2'VIEWANGLE11'-7"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6" 55'-5" 73'-8" 10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"10'-1"3'-6" 53'-11"RESIDENTIALcNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal UNIT A4: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 795 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.38'-3"29'-8"8'-7"32'-3"5'-3"100 CU. FT.STORAGEPATIO/BALC.7'-2" X 9'-9"LIVING13'-4" X 11'-0"KITCHENDINING W.I.C.COATSW/DBATHPAN.REF.DWBEDROOM12'-4" X 11'-8"L.100 CU. FT.STORAGEFLEX ROOM12'-0" X 17'-6"SLEEPING9'-6" X 10'-2"PATIO/BALC.10'-8" X 5'-0"BATHW/DW.I.C.LIN.ENTRYDWREF.15'-2"UNIT S1: STUDIO / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 550 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 53 SQ. FT.*STORAGE: 100 C.F.* DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR PRIVATE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTSKITCHENUNIT S2: STUDIO / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 595 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 71 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.100 CU. FT.STORAGESLEEPING ENTRYW/DW.I.C.KITCHENL.PATIO/BALC.7'-6" X 9'-6"20'-0"33'-0" FLEX ROOM 19'-2" X 19'-4"P.REF.DWMOVABLECOUNTERUNIT A1: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 695 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 81 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 108 C.F.24'-0"12'-4"11'-8"33'-0"PATIO/BALCONY7-0" X 11'-0"LIVING11'-8" X 13'-0"MBR11'-6" X 11'-2"DININGKITCHENW/DBATHL.PAN.108 CU. FT.STORAGEUNIT A1-ALT: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 714 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 81 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 108 C.F.24'-0"12'-4"11'-8"33'-0"PATIO/BALCONY7-0" X 11'-0"LIVING11'-8" X 13'-0"MBR11'-6" X 11'-2"DININGKITCHENW/DBATHL.PAN.108 CU. FT.STORAGEKITCHENREF.DWP.L.25'-0"BEDROOM11'-8" X 11'-4"LIVING/DINING12'-4" X 17'-8"DINING BATHCOATSPATIO/BALC.9'-4" X 7'-6"100 CU. FT.STORAGEUNIT A2: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 730 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.33'-0"W/DMOVABLECOUNTERUNIT B2: 2BR / 2BANET LEASABLE AREA: 1063 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 71 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.KITCHENREF.DWP.L.BEDROOM11'-8" X 11'-4"LIVING/DINING12'-4" X 17'-8"DINING BATHCOATSPATIO/BALC.9'-4" X 7'-6"100 CU. FT.STORAGEW/D37'-0"33'-0"BEDROOM11'-8" X 12-4"W.I.C.PATIO/BALC.11'-6" X 5'-0"MOVABLECOUNTER63x43ACCESS.SHWR.L.W/DLIVING12'-4" X 12'-2"BATHBATHDININGKITCHENBR.11'-0" X 11'-6"MBR.12'-0" X 12'-10"UNIT B3: 2BR / 2BANET LEASABLE AREA: 1,077 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALCONY: 108 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.38'-6"24'-10"13'-8"34'-6" 26'-4"8'-2" 25'-6"7'-6"1'-6" 34'-6"BALCONY12'-0" X 9'-0"COATSL.P.W.I.C.100 CU. FT.STORAGEL.63x43ACCESS.SHWR.38'-3"29'-8"8'-7"32'-3"UNIT A3: 1BR / 1BANET LEASABLE AREA: 795 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.5'-3"100 CU. FT.STORAGEPATIO/BALC.7'-2" X 9'-9"LIVING13'-2" X 15'-3"KITCHENDINING W.I.C.COATSW/DBATHPAN.REF.DWBEDROOM12'-4" X 11'-8"L.49'-11"29'-8"20'-3"32'-3"UNIT B4: 2BR / 2BANET LEASABLE AREA: 1,119 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 70 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.5'-3"BEDROOM11'-4" X 12-0"W.I.C.100 CU. FT.STORAGEPATIO/BALC.7'-2" X 9'-9"LIVING13'-2" X 15'-3"KITCHENDINING W.I.C.COATSW/DBATHPAN.REF.DWBEDROOM0'-0" X 0'-0"L.L.L.BATH63x43ACCESS.SHWR.100 CU. FT.STORAGELIVING/DINING13'-0" X 19'-8"BEDROOM11'-4" X 11'-0"BEDROOM11'-0" X 12'-0"PATIO/BALC.10'-10" X 7'-0"KITCHENBATHBATHW/DENTRYW.I.C.W.I.C.COATSPAN.LIN.REF.DW52'-0"36'-8""33'-0"UNIT B1: 2BR / 2BANET LEASABLE AREA: 1,012 SQ. FT.PATIO / BALC: 76 SQ. FT.STORAGE: 100 C.F.DINING63x43ACCESS.SHWR.LIN.cNo.ITEMDATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Conformance Submittal No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional Sheets12312434 No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional Sheets12344321 No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional Sheets1234567812345678 No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional Sheets12344321 No. ITEM DATECASE FILE NUMBERS:Planning Commission Submittal08.15.14Conceptual Development 07.01.14Review Application1234567Cannery Lofts507 30th St.Newport Beach, CA 92663(949) 675-9964Landscape Architecture08.15.14Additional SheetsTHE OUTDOOR LIGHTING CONCEPT IS TO PROVIDE LEVELS OF LIGHTING SUFFICIENT TO MEETSAFETY AND ORIENTATION NEEDS.WITHIN PUBLIC AREAS LIGHTING WILL BE WARM COLORED AND UNOBTRUSIVE. LIGHT SOURCESWILL BE TUNGSTEN OR METAL HALIDE.LIGHTING SOURCES FOR THE LANDSCAPE AND PAVED AREAS WILL BE CONCEALED AND THELIGHTING INDIRECT NOT VISIBLE FROM A PUBLIC VIEWPOINT. LIGHT SOURCES SHOULD BEDIRECTED SO THAT IT DOES NOT FALL OUTSIDE THE AREA TO BE LIGHTED.ALL EXTERIOR SURFACE AND ABOVE-GROUND MOUNTED FIXTURES WILL BE SYMPATHETIC ANDCOMPLIMENTARY TO THE ARCHITECTURAL THEME.LIGHTING CONCEPT:KATELLA AVENUETHEMATIC 'COBRA'PER CITY GUIDELINESCONNECTOR STREETPOLE LIGHT PER CITY GUIDELINESMATCHING ARCHITECTURAL STYLENOTE:POLE LIGHTS AND WALL MOUNTED LIGHTS TO BE A FULL CUTOFF FIXTURE TO MEET DARK SKYREQUIREMENTS AND PREVENT LIGHT SPILLAGE.14' TALL, 125' SPACING31' TALL, 130'-150' SPACINGFIXTURESYMBOLLOCATIONSIZE MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 316 CEQA ACTION: Previously Certified Environmental Impact Report No. 339 and Addendum No. 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This residential project is located on a 4.13-acre parcel consisting of 389 apartment units. PROJECT LOCATION: 1015-1105 East Katella Avenue STAFF CONTACT PERSON, EMAIL & PHONE NUMBER: Vanessa Norwood, vnorwood@anaheim.net, (714) 765-4934 1. Property Owner/Developer – Platinum Vista Apartments, LP 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 determined 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 borne 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 – After project construction begins, the mitigation measures are designated to occur on an ongoing basis as part of this mitigation monitoring program and 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. 6. Building Permit – for purposes of this mitigation monitoring program, a building perm 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. ATTACHMENT NO. 9 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Air Quality 2-1 Ongoing during grading and construction Ongoing during grading and construction, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to reduce construction-related emissions; however, the resultant value is expected to remain significant. a) The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations to reduce operational emissions. b) The contractor shall use Tier 3 or higher, as identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, off-road construction equipment with higher air pollutant emissions standards for equipment greater than 50 horsepower, based on manufacturer’s availability. c) The contractor shall utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary diesel-power generators, where feasible. South Coast Air Quality Management District; Public Works Department, Construction Services Division; Planning Department, Planning Services Division 2-2 Ongoing during grading and construction Ongoing during grading and construction, the property owner/developer shall implement the following measures in addition to the existing requirements for fugitive dust control under South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 to further reduce PM 10 and PM 2.5 emissions. To assure compliance, the City shall verify compliance that these measures have been implemented during normal construction site inspections. The measures to be implemented are listed below: a) During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall re-establish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering as quickly as possible to achieve a minimum control efficiency for PM 10 of 5 percent. b) During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply chemical soil stabilizers Pave to on-site haul roads to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 85 percent compared to travel on unpaved, untreated roads. c) The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. d) The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall schedule activities to minimize the amount of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. e) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall sweep streets with Rule 1186 compliant PM 10 efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public South Coast Air Quality Management District; Public Works Department, Construction Services Division; Planning Department, Planning Services Division Page 1 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. f) During active demolition and debris removal and grading, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall suspend demolition and grading operations when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour to achieve an emissions control efficiency for PM 10 under worst-case wind conditions of 98 percent. g) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall maintain a minimum 12-inch freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials and tarp materials with a fabric cover or other suitable means to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 91 percent. h) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of every three hours on the construction site to achieve an emissions reduction control efficiency for PM 10 of 61 percent. i) During active demolition and debris removal, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply water to disturbed soils at the end of each day to achieve an emission control efficiency for PM 10 of 10 percent. j) During scraper unloading and loading, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall ensure that actively disturbed areas maintain a minimum soil moisture content of 12 percent by use of a moveable sprinkler system or water truck to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 69 percent. k) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall limit on-site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour to achieve a control efficiency for PM 10 of 57 percent. 2-3 Prior to approval of each grading plan (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for Demolition Plans), Prior to approval of each grading plan (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for Demolition Plans), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export Plans detailing construction and demolition (C&D) recycling and waste reduction measures to be implemented to recover C&D materials. These plans shall include identification of off-site locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials on-site or to an adjacent site, sale to a soil 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 firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects if not all can be reused at the project site. Planning Department, Planning Services Division; Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 2-4 Prior to issuance of each Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit South Coast Air Quality Page 2 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion building permit evidence that high-solids or water-based low emissions paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District’s regulations. This information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. Additionally, the property owner/developer’s shall specify the use of high-volume/low-pressure spray equipment or hand application. Air-atomized spray techniques shall not be permitted. Plans shall also show that property owner/developers shall construct/build with materials that do not require painting, or use prepainted construction materials, to the extent feasible. Management District 2-5 In accordance with the timing required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager, but no later than prior to the first final Building and Zoning inspection, In accordance with the timing required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager, but no later than prior to the first final Building and Zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall implement the following measures to reduce long-term operational CO, NO X , ROG, and PM 10 emissions: • Traffic lane improvements and signalization as outlined in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Draft Traffic Study Report, Parsons Brinckerhoff, August 2010 and Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH ) shall be implemented as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager. • 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. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 2-6 Prior to issuance of building permits Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/architect shall submit energy calculations used to demonstrate compliance with the performance approach to the California Energy Efficiency Standards to the Building Division that shows each new structure exceeds the applicable Building and Energy Efficiency Standards by a minimum of 10 percent at the time of the building permit. Prior to issuance of a building permit, plans shall show the following: a) Energy-efficient roofing systems, such as vegetated or “cool” roofs, that reduce roof temperatures significantly during the summer and; therefore, reduce the energy requirement for air conditioning. Examples of energy efficient building materials and suppliers can be found at the following website: http://eetd.lbl.gov/CoolRoofs/ or other similar websites. b) Cool pavement materials such as lighter-colored pavement materials, porous materials, or permeable or porous pavement, for all roadways and walkways not within the public right-of-way, to minimize the absorption of solar heat and subsequent transfer of heat to its surrounding environment. Examples of cool pavement materials are available at: http://www.epa.gov/heatisld/ images/extra/level3_pavingproducts.html or other similar websites. c) Energy saving devices that achieve the existing 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards, such as use of energy efficient appliances (e.g., Planning Department, Building Division Page 3 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion EnergyStar® appliances) and use of sunlight-filtering window coatings or double-paned windows. d) Electrical vehicle charging stations for all commercial structures encompassing over 50,000 square-feet. e) Shady trees strategically located within close proximity to the structure to reduce heat load and resulting energy usage at residential, commercial, and office buildings Hydrology and Water Quality 3-2 At least 90 days prior to the initiation of grading activities Prior to the initiation of grading activities, for projects greater than one acre, coverage for the project must be obtained by electronically submitting permit registration documents to the State or obtaining coverage via current general construction permit prescribed method by the property owner/developer pursuant to State and Federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. As part of the NOI, a Surface Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared. The property owner/developer shall also prepare and submit to the Development Services Division of the Public Works Department, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) in accordance with the City’s municipal NPDES requirements and Chapter 7 of the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan. The WQMP must be approved prior to issuance of grading permit. The SWPPP, in conjunction with the WQMP, will describe the structural and nonstructural BMPs that will be implemented during construction (short-term) within the Project Area as well as BMPs for long-term operation of the Project Area that address potential impacts to surface waters. Public Works Department, Development Services Division Noise 5-1 Prior to approval of street improvement plans for any project-related roadway widening Prior to approval of street improvement plans for any project-related roadway widening, the City shall retain a qualified acoustic engineer to design project acoustical features that will limit traffic noise at noise sensitive uses to levels that are below the City’s noise ordinance. These treatments shall be noted on the street improvement plans to the satisfaction of the Planning Department and may include, but are not limited to, the replacement of windows and doors at existing residences with acoustically rated windows and doors. Planning Department, Building Division; Public Works Department, Development Services Division 5-2 Prior to issuance of a building permit, Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project property owner/developers shall submit a final acoustical report prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The report shall show that the development will be sound-attenuated against present and projected noise levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter, stationary sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, stadium, etc.), and railroad, to meet City interior noise standards as follows: a) The report shall demonstrate that the proposed residential design will result in compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise levels, as required by the California Building Code and California Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24 Planning Department, Building Division Page 4 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion and 25 of the California Code of Regulations). b) The report shall demonstrate that the Proposed Project residential design shall minimize nighttime awakening from stadium event noise and train horns such that interior single-event noise levels are below 81 dBA L max . The property owner/developer shall submit the noise mitigation report to the Planning Director for review and approval. Upon approval by the City, the project acoustical design features shall be incorporated into construction of the Proposed Project. 5-3 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that occupancy disclosure notices regarding potential for exterior noise levels to be elevated during a stadium event will be provided to all future tenants in the Stadium District. Planning Department, Building Division 5-4 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that occupancy disclosure notices regarding potential for exterior noise levels to be elevated during sounding of train horns will be provided to all future tenants facing an at-grade crossing of the Orange County Line. Planning Department, Building Division 5-5 Prior to issuance of the first building permit Prior to issuance of the first building permit, to reduce noise and vibration impacts from the impact pile driver, the construction contractor shall evaluate the feasibility of using auger cast piles or a similar system to drill holes to construct cast-in-place piles for a pile-supported transfer slab foundation system. This alternative construction method would reduce the duration necessary for use of the impact pile driver and/or eliminate the need to use pile drivers altogether. Proof of compliance with this measure shall be submitted to the Planning Department in the form of a letter from the construction contractor. Planning Department, Building Division 5-7 Ongoing during grading, demolition, and construction Ongoing during grading, demolition, and construction, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to limit construction-related noise: a) Noise generated by construction, shall be limited by the property owner/developer to 60 dBA along the property boundaries, before 7:00 AM and after 7:00 PM, 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 AM to 4:00 PM. c) All internal combustion engines on all of the construction equipment shall be properly outfitted with well maintained muffler systems Planning Department, Building Division; Public Works Department, Development Services Division Page 5 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion 5-8 Ongoing during construction activities Ongoing during construction activities, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring project contractors to properly maintain and tune all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. Planning Department, Building Division 5-9 Ongoing during construction activities Ongoing during construction activities, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring project contractors to locate all stationary noise sources (e.g., generators, compressors, staging areas) as far from occupied noise-sensitive receptors as is feasible. Planning Department, Building Division 5-10 Ongoing during construction activities Ongoing during construction activities, material delivery, soil haul trucks, and equipment servicing shall also be restricted to the hours set forth in the City of Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 6.70. Planning Department, Building Division Public Services 7-1 Prior to issuance of a Building Permit Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, plans shall indicate that all buildings shall have fire sprinklers in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed by the property owner/developer prior to each final Building and Zoning inspection. Fire Department 7-2 Prior to issuance of a Building Permit Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the property owner/developer shall pay the Public Safety Impact Fee, as amended from time to time, for fire facilities and equipment impact fees identified in Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 17.36. Fire Department 7-3 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including implementation of Ordinance 6016 and the concept of crime prevention through environmental design (i.e., building design, circulation, site planning and lighting 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 four feet in height and two feet in width. The lines for the numbers shall be six 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. Police Department 7-4 Prior to the issuance of each Building Permit for a parking structure Prior to the issuance of each Building Permit for a parking structure , the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval indicating the provision of closed circuit monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Anaheim Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented prior to final Building and Zoning inspections. Police Department 7-5 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall submit design plans that shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Anaheim Police Police Department Page 6 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Department, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Anaheim Police Department. 7-6 Ongoing during project operation Ongoing during project operation, if the Anaheim Police Department of Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fairshare basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. Police Department; Public Works Department, Traffic Management Center 7-9 Prior to the issuance of each building permit Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall pay the school impact fees as adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Anaheim Union High School District and Anaheim City School District in compliance with Senate Bill 50 (Government Code [GC] Section 65995 [b][3] as amended). Community Development Department, Redevelopment Services; Planning Department, Planning Services Division Transportation and Traffic 9-4 Prior to issuance of the first building permit Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees, Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees, and Platinum Triangle Impact Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City-authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division; 9-5 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan and consistent with the adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. Public Works Department, Development Services; 9-6 Prior to approval of a Development Agreement for Prior to approval of a Development Agreement for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, property owner/developers shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Draft Traffic Study Report, Parson Brinckerhoff, August 2010 (Appendix F of this SEIR) shall be designed and constructed. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to implement traffic improvements as identified in the project traffic study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339, Orange County Congestion Management Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Page 7 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Program and established in City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. 9-7 Prior to approval of a Development Agreement (in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analysis as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6.) In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, property owners/developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 9-6. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair-share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. At minimum, fair-share calculations shall include intersection improvements, rights-of-way, and construction costs, unless alternative funding sources have been identified to help pay for the improvement. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 9-8 Prior to approval of a Development Agreement (in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analysis as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6.) In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, the following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair-share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. c) The Proposed Project shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair-share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Page 8 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. d) The City shall work with the City of Orange to amend the JCFA to ensure tha fair share fees collected to mitigate arterial and intersection impacts in the City of Orange are mitigated to the extent feasible. 9-9 Prior to approval of a Development Agreement (in conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analysis as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6.) In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, and assuming that a regional transportation agency has not already programmed and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a) The traffic study will identify the Project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339 and established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b) The City shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair-share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 9-10 Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair-share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in Mitigation Measure 9-9. The City shall allocate the property owners/developers fair-share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division Page 9 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion 9-11 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan and consistent with the adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, regardless of the level of impacts generated by the project. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 9-14 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9-6, property owners/developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements identified under Impact 5.9-4 shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 9-6. Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division 9-15 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Public Works Department, Traffic and Transportation Division; Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Utilities and Service Systems 10-1 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first The City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient sewer facilities, as identified in the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. If the project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the project currently discharges to an existing deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office. Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to mitigate the impacts of the proposed Public Works Department, Development Services Division Page 10 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion development based upon the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. 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. 10-2 Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) will be upsizing trunk lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner/developer shall coordinate with the OCSD to ensure that all improvements and construction schedules are coordinated. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 10-3 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall contact Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) regarding sewer capacity. Additionally, if requested by the OCSD, the property owner/developer shall place up to three flow monitoring devices for up to a month to verify capacity and ensure consistency with the OCSD’s modeling results. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 10-4 Prior to approval of sanitary sewer connections for each development project Prior to approval of sanitary sewer connections for each development project, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to prevent the sewer spill for below-grade structures of the proposed development based upon the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. Where requested by the City Engineer, sewer improvements shall be constructed with larger than recommended diameter to maintain the surcharge levels within the pipe and the invert elevation of sewer laterals shall be located above the hydraulic grade line elevation of the surcharge levels when they are above the pipe crown. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 10-5 Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where OCSD will be upsizing trunk lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner shall coordinate with OCSD to ensure that backflow prevention devices are installed by OCSD at the lateral connections to prevent surcharge flow from entering private properties. Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division; Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) 10-6 Prior to final design approval Prior to final design approval, additional analysis shall be performed and provided for each individual project using flow, wet-weather data, and other information specific for that project in order to obtain more accurate results of the surcharge levels for final design. Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division 10-7 Prior to issuance of a building permit and in conjunction with submittal of landscape and building Prior to issuance of a building permit, submitted landscape plans shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Anaheim adopted Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines. This ordinance is in compliance with the State of California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (AB 1881). Public Utilities Department, Resource Efficiency Division; Public Works Department Page 11 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion plans 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; • 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 recirculation 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. Development Services Division 10-8 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide engineering studies, including network analysis, to size the water mains for ultimate development within the project. This includes detailed water usage analysis and building plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering reviews and approval in determining project water requirements and appropriate water assessment fees. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division 10-9 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation meter when the total landscaped area exceeds 2,500 square feet. (City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division; Page 12 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion grading permit Water Conservation Measures) 10-12 Prior to issuance of a building permit Prior to issuance of a building permit, submitted landscape plans for all residential, office and commercial landscaping shall demonstrate the use of drought tolerant plant materials pursuant to the publication entitled “Water Use Efficiency of Landscape Species” by the U.C. Cooperative Extension, August 2000. Public Utilities Department, Resource Efficiency Division 10-13 Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans water efficient design features including, but not limited to (as applicable to the type of development at issue) waterless water heaters, waterless urinals, automatic on and off water faucets, and water efficient appliances. Public Utilities Department, Resource Efficiency Division 10-14 Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation lines and use recycled water when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division 10-17 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient drainage facilities, as identified in the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area. If the project will increase stormwater flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan 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 impact to 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 of the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area, 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 fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. Public Works Department, Development Services Division 10-18 Prior to the final building and zoning inspections of each development Prior to the final building and zoning inspections of each development, the property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB939, and the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans as administered by the City of Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division Page 13 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion Anaheim. Implementation of said plan shall commence upon occupancy and shall remain in full effect as required by the Street and Sanitation Division and may include, at its discretion, the following plan components: • Detailing the locations and design of on-site recycling facilities. • Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City or governing agency. • Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and bailing. • Providing trash compactors for nonrecyclable 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. 10-19 Ongoing during project operations Ongoing during project operations, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: • Usage of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead, and packaging. • Recovery of materials, such as aluminum and cardboard. • Collection of office paper for recycling. • Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division 10-20 Prior to the approval of each grading plan (for import/export plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for demolition plans) Prior to the approval of each grading plan (for import/export plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for demolition plans), the property owner/developer shall submit a Demolition and Import/ Export Plans, if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division and/or Street and Sanitation Division. The plans shall include identification of off-site locations for material export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials on-site, 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 firms or public agencies for Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division Page 14 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion use in construction of other projects, if all cannot be reused on the project site. 10-21 Prior to the issuance of each building permit Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans showing that each structure will exceed the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Code of Regulations) by a minimum of 10 percent and will consult with the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department Business and Community Programs Division. This consultation shall take place during project design in order to review Title 24 measures that are incorporated into the project design energy efficient practices and allow potential system alternatives such as thermal energy storage air-conditioning, lighting, and building envelope options. Plans submitted for building permits shall show the proposed energy efficiencies and systems alternatives. Public Utilities Department, Business and Community Programs Division 10-22 Prior to the issuance of each building permit Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans energy-saving practices that will be implemented with the project in compliance with Title 24, which may include the following: • High-efficiency air-conditioning with EMS (computer) control. • Variable Air Volume (VAV) air distribution. • Outside air (100 percent) economizer cycle. • Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads. • 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. • Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps. • Use of EnergyStar ® exit lighting or exit signage. • Use of T-8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified. • Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal-halide or high- pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots. • Consideration of thermal energy storage air conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air-conditioning during summer, day-peak periods. Public Utilities Department, Business and Community Programs Division Page 15 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion • Consideration for participation in Advantage Services Programs such as: o New construction design review, in which the City cost-shares engineering for up to $15,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems. o New Construction – Cash incentives $400 per kW or $0.15 per kWh saved for each measure and up to $200,000 per facility for efficiency that exceed Title 24 requirements.. o Green Building Program – Offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. • Use of high efficiency toilets (1.28 gallons per flush [gpf] or less). • Use of zero to low water use urinals (0.0 gpf to 0.25 gpf). • Use of weather-based irrigation controllers for outdoor irrigation. • Use of draught-tolerant and native plants in outdoor landscaping. 10-23 Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall install their portion of the underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System as determined by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications of Underground Systems. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. The underground electrical service will consist of the following improvements to the current electric facilities: • Relocate Southern California Edison transmission line underground on Katella Avenue from west of the Union Pacific Railroad to Lewis Street (850 feet). • Relocate Southern California Edison communication line underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to east of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). • Relocate distribution circuits underground on Katella Avenue from Lewis Street to 700 feet west of State College Boulevard (2,400 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Orangewood Avenue from Anaheim Way to State College Boulevard (1,500 feet). Public Utilities Department, Electrical Engineering Division; Page 16 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion • Relocation a distribution circuit underground on Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to west of the Santa Ana River (1,600 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Gene Autry Way (950 feet). • Relocate a distribution circuit underground on Douglas Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue (1,000 feet). 10-24 Prior to the issuance of each building permit Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans for review and approval which shall ensure that buildings exceed the State Energy Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential buildings (Title 24, Part 6, Article 2, California Administrative Code) by a minimum of 10 percent. Public Utilities Department, Business and Community Programs Division 10-25 Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall install their portion of the underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System as determined by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications of Underground Systems. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. The underground electrical service will consist of the following improvements to the current electric facilities: • Two new distribution duct banks on Katella Avenue from Anaheim Way to Lewis Street (800 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Katella Avenue from Douglas Road to Howell Avenue (2,000 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on State College Boulevard from Cerritos Avenue to Katella Avenue (2,600 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Orangewood Avenue from I-5 to the Santa Ana River (4,800 feet). • A ne w distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from Haster Street to the east side of I-5 (2,500 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Gene Autry Way from I-5 to State College Boulevard (2,500 feet). Public Utilities Department, Electrical Engineering Division; Page 17 of 19 MMP No. 316 Measure No. Timing Measure Responsible for Monitoring Completion • A new transmission duct bank on Anaheim Way from 700 feet north of Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,400 feet). • A new transmission duct bank on Lewis Street and Santa Cruz Street from Katella Avenue to Orangewood Avenue (3,000 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on the east side of the Angel Stadium parking lot from Orangewood Avenue to the SR-57 (2,000 feet). • A new distribution duct bank on Douglas Road from SR-57 to Cerritos Avenue (4,000 feet). 10-26 Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, the property owner/developer shall provide an electrical load analysis to the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD). The analysis shall include a load schedule and maximum electrical coincident demand. Should the property owner/developer’s load analysis result in a contributed load forecasted to exceed 20 MVA above the existing 40 MVA capacity of the electrical system currently serving the Platinum Triangle area, the APUD will initiate construction of a new electrical substation within the Platinum Triangle project area. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees for the electrical substation will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. Public Utilities Department, Electrical Engineering Division; Greenhouse Gas Emissions 11-1 Implementation timing is identified for each individual mitigation measure. Mitigation measures for greenhouse gas emissions are comprised of mitigation measures used for other environmental topical sections of this EIR and are listed above. These mitigation measures, specified on Table 1-1 in the Executive Summary of the Draft SEIR, would reduce GHG emissions associated with the project and are consistent with the California Attorney General’s mitigation measures for energy efficiency, renewable energy and storage, water conservation and efficiency, solid waste, land use, transportation and motor vehicle, and agriculture and forestry measures. There are no additional mitigation measures identified for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions impacts. Responsible parties are identified for each individual mitigation measure. Page 18 of 19 MMP No. 316 Photographic Log – Patrinely Group December 2013 1005-1105 E. Katella Avenue, Anaheim, California 92805 EEI Project No. WOL-71418.1a Photograph 11 – View east towards the subject property along the north side of East Katella Avenue. Signage for the former Mr. Stox Restaurant at 1105 East Katella Avenue remains on the property. Photograph 12 – Car detailing area on the north side of 1105 East Katella Avenue. ATTACHMENT NO. 10 Photographic Log – Patrinely Group December 2013 1005-1105 E. Katella Avenue, Anaheim, California 92805 EEI Project No. WOL-71418.1a Photograph 1 – View north along the drive way towards the entrance to the property off of East Katella Avenue. Building 1005 East Katella Avenue is in view. Photograph 2 – View northeast towards buildings 1015 and 1025 East Katella Avenue from the driveway area on the southern side of the buildings. Photographic Log – Patrinely Group December 2013 1005-1105 E. Katella Avenue, Anaheim, California 92805 EEI Project No. WOL-71418.1a Photograph 5 – View south along the western side of building 1015 East Katella Avenue. Photograph 6 – View south towards the former restaurant building at 1105 East Katella Avenue. View is from the north side parking area associated with the restaurant, now used as a storage lot for a car dealer. Photographic Log – Patrinely Group December 2013 1005-1105 E. Katella Avenue, Anaheim, California 92805 EEI Project No. WOL-71418.1a Photograph 3 – View north along the driveway area between buildings 1015 and 1025 East Katella Avenue. Photograph 4 – View south along the eastern margin of the subject property (east of building 1025 East Katella Avenue). Photographic Log – Patrinely Group December 2013 1005-1105 E. Katella Avenue, Anaheim, California 92805 EEI Project No. WOL-71418.1a Photograph 7 – View east along the northern margin of the property north of 1015 and 1025 East Katella Avenue. Photograph 8 – View north towards the entrance into the 1105 East Katella Avenue parking area. Addendum No. 3 to Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 339 State Clearinghouse No. 2004121045 PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS City Of Anaheim Planning Department/Planning Services 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Prepared by: Keeton Kreitzer Consulting P. O. Box 3905 Tustin, CA 92781‐3905 August 2014 ATTACHMENT NO. 11 ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO THE FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 339 State Clearinghouse No. 2004121045 PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS Prepared for: City of Anaheim Planning Department/Planning Services 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Contact: Vanessa Norwood (714) 765‐4934 Prepared by: Keeton Kreitzer Consulting P. O. Box 3905 Tustin, CA 92781‐3905 Contact: Keeton K. Kreitzer, Principal (714) 665‐8509 August 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 i ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 339 PLATINUM VISTA APARTMENTS ANAHEIM, CA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ................................................................................................................................. 1‐1 1.1 CEQA Compliance .................................................................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.2 Decision Not to Prepare a Subsequent EIR ............................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.3 Use of an Addendum .............................................................................................................................................................. 1‐3 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................................ 2‐1 2.1 Project Location ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2‐1 2.2 Project History ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.3 Approved Project ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2‐4 2.4 Existing Improvements ........................................................................................................................................................ 2‐4 2.5 Amended Project Description ........................................................................................................................................... 2‐4 2.6 Discretionary Approvals ................................................................................................................................................... 2‐10 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................................... 3‐1 3.1 Aesthetics ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐1 3.2 Agricultural and Forest Resources ................................................................................................................................. 3‐7 3.3 Air Quality .................................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐9 3.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................................................................... 3‐16 3.5 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................................................................... 3‐19 3.6 Geology and Soils .................................................................................................................................................................. 3‐20 3.7 Greenhouse Gas/Climate Change ................................................................................................................................ 3‐24 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .............................................................................................................................. 3‐27 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................................................................................................ 3‐31 3.10 Land Use and Planning ...................................................................................................................................................... 3‐40 3.11 Mineral Resources ................................................................................................................................................................ 3‐43 3.12 Noise ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐44 3.13 Population and Housing .................................................................................................................................................... 3‐50 3.14 Public Facilities ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐53 3.15 Recreation ................................................................................................................................................................................. 3‐59 3.16 Transportation/Traffic ...................................................................................................................................................... 3‐62 3.17 Utilities and Service Systems .......................................................................................................................................... 3‐83 3.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance ........................................................................................................................... 3‐97 3.19 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................................................................................................................. 3‐98 4.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED ..................................................................................................... 4‐1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 ii LIST OF EXHIBITS Page 2‐1 Project Location ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2‐2 2‐2 Approved Site Plan ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 2‐5 2‐3 Aerial Photograph .................................................................................................................................................................................... 2‐6 2‐4 Proposed Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................................................... 2‐7 3.1‐1 Proposed Elevation – Katella Avenue .......................................................................................................................................... 3‐4 3.1‐2 Proposed Elevation – North and West Sides ............................................................................................................................ 3‐5 3.1‐3 Conceptual Landscape Plan ................................................................................................................................................................ 3‐6 3.9‐1 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan ...................................................................................................................... 3‐35 3.15‐1 Open Space Plan ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐61 3.16‐1 Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................................... 3‐67 3.16‐2 Proposed Project Trip Distribution and Assignment .................................................................................................... 3‐69 3.16‐3 Existing Conditions Plus Traffic Volumes .................................................................................................................................. 3‐70 3.16‐4 Future (2015) Volumes ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐73 3.16‐5 Future (2015) Plus Project Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................................ 3‐74 3.16‐6 Connector Road and Driveway – Future (2015) Traffic Volumes ............................................................................... 3‐79 LIST OF TABLES Page 2‐1 Development Intensities in the Platinum Triangle PTMU Overlay Zone .............................................................. 2‐3 2‐2 Summary of Proposed Floor Plans ................................................................................................................................................ 2‐8 2‐3 Private‐Leisure Open Space ............................................................................................................................................................... 2‐9 3.6‐1 Summary of Major Active Faults .................................................................................................................................................... 3‐21 3.9‐1 Section 303(d) Impairments and Applicable TMDLs ...................................................................................................... 3‐32 3.9‐2 Project Site Surface Conditions ....................................................................................................................................................... 3‐34 3.9‐3 Routine Non‐Structural BMPs .......................................................................................................................................................... 3‐37 3.9‐4 Routine Structural BMPs ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐38 3.13‐1 Estimated Population, Housing, and Employment Generation – Platinum Triangle .................................. 3‐52 3.14‐1 Potential Student Generation ............................................................................................................................................................ 3‐56 3.16‐1 Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary ................................................................................................................. 3‐65 3.16‐2 Trip Generation Summary ................................................................................................................................................................ 3‐66 3.16‐3 Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Summary .................................................................................... 3‐68 3.16‐4 Future Baseline Intersection Level of Service Summary ............................................................................................... 3‐72 TABLE OF CONTENTS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 iii Page 3.16‐5 Future (2015) Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Summary ...................................................................... 3‐72 3.16‐6 Caltrans Methodology Level of Service Summary .............................................................................................................. 3‐75 3.17‐1 Planning Areas Contributing to Platinum Gateway and Platinum Vista .............................................................. 3‐86 3.17‐2 Planning Areas Contributing to Model Area 28B Only .................................................................................................... 3‐87 3.17‐1 Domestic Water Demand ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐89 3.17‐2 Solid Waste Generation ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐92 TABLE OF CONTENTS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 iv This page purposely left blank CHAPTER 1.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Addendum No. 3 to Final SEIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 1‐1 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 1.1 CEQA Compliance The City of Anaheim is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed Platinum Gateway Project (the “Project”). In accordance with Section 15164(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration, this Addendum to the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) (SCH No. 2004121045) has been prepared by the City of Anaheim. Section 15162(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines states the following with respect to an Addendum to an EIR: (a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. On October 26, 2004. the City of Anaheim certified the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Final SEIR No. 339 (“Final SEIR”) for the project described in Section 3.0 of the Final SEIR, Project Description (the “Original Project”). Subsequently, the applicant is proposing to amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) to replace the residential units and office commercial square footage allocated to the subject property and the public park site in order to increase the number of residential dwelling units and reduce the square footage of office and commercial development permitted within the mixed use land use designation of the Platinum Triangle. Pursuant to the analysis contained in this addendum, the City has determined that the proposed modifications to the Original Project do not require preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR as discussed below. 1.2 Decision Not To Prepare a Subsequent EIR The City of Anaheim, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed modifications to the Original Project do not require the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR. Sections 15162 and 15163 of the State CEQA Guidelines mandate that: Section 15162. Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or CHAPTER 1.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Addendum No. 3 to Final SEIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 1‐2 (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Section 15163 Supplement To an EIR: (a) A lead or responsible agency may choose to prepare a supplement to an EIR rather than a subsequent EIR if: (1) Any of the conditions described in Section 15162 would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and (2) Only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation. (b) The supplement to the EIR need contain only the information necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the project as revised. (c) A supplement to an EIR shall be given the same kind of notice and public review as is given to a draft EIR under Section 15807. (d) A supplement to an EIR may be circulated by itself without recirculating the previous draft or final EIR. (e) When the agency decided whether to approve the project, the decision‐making body shall consider the previous EIR as revised by the supplemental EIR. A finding under Section 15091 shall be made for each significant effect shown in the previous EIR as revised. CHAPTER 1.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Addendum No. 3 to Final SEIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 1‐3 The potential environmental consequences of the proposed modifications to the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project have been thoroughly analyzed with respect to the conditions cited above in Section 15162 and Section 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines. Based on an analysis of the proposed modifications to the Original Project, no new significant environmental impacts would occur, nor would the severity of impacts previously identified substantially increase. Nor is there any new information that suggests that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or that mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. The City of Anaheim has determined that none of the conditions identified in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines have occurred. Therefore, an addendum, pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, has been prepared and submitted to the City’s decision‐makers, along with the Final SEIR for the Platinum Triangle, for consideration prior to taking action to approve the proposed Amendment to the Original Project. 1.3 Use of an Addendum This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to Section 15164(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which states: (a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The revisions to the Original Project described in this Addendum to Final SEIR No. 339 are considered to be a refinement of the approved plan that will not require any major revisions to the Final EIR. Most importantly, the proposed revisions have been determined to be minor and, further, would not result in significant new or more severe impacts and/or the requirement for additional mitigation measures. As a result, the proposed changes do not require the preparation of a subsequent EIR or supplemental EIR. However, should a future proposal for development of the subject property exceed the parameters described in the Final SEIR and this addendum, meeting the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines, it will be subject to additional environmental review beyond this Addendum. The Anaheim City Council and, if necessary, other responsible agencies identified in the Final SEIR will consider the information contained in this Addendum along with the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Final SEIR No. 339 prior to making a final decision on the proposed revisions to the Original Project, which revisions propose changes to the residential and retail commercial land uses and the locations of these and other land uses as originally approved. CHAPTER 1.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Addendum No. 3 to Final SEIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 1‐4 This page purposely left blank CHAPTER 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION Addendum No. 3 to Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 2‐1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Project Location The subject site parcel is situated at 1005‐1105 East Katella Avenue, northeast of the intersection of East Katella Avenue and South Lewis Street in Anaheim, California. The Platinum Vista Apartments project site encompasses approximately 4.13 acres within the 820‐acre Platinum Triangle. The rectangular‐shaped property is currently developed with a vacant restaurant building and two industrial buildings. Exhibit 2‐1 (Project Location) illustrates the location of the subject property. The subject property is located the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) and Platinum Triangle Mixed‐Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone. 2.2 Project History On August 17, 2004, the Anaheim City Council Certified Final EIR No. 332 and 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 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) and an associated standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement. At that time, the PTMU Overlay Zone encompassed approximately 375 acres and five (5) Districts (the Katella, Gene Autry, Gateway, Arena, and Stadium Districts) within The Platinum Triangle. 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 (i.e., those properties designated for Mixed Uses by the General Plan) were finalized on September 23, 2004. In October 2010, the City certified Final Subsequent EIR No. 339 and approved the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, which included the following discretionary approvals: (1) Platinum Triangle Water Supply Assessment; (2) General Plan Amendment No. 2008‐00471; (3) Amendments to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, including the Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement Form; (4) Amendments to the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone; and (5) Zoning Reclassification No. 2008‐ 00222. Subsequent Draft Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) 0339, which was prepared to evaluate the potential impacts of the project, was certified by the Anaheim City Council on October 27, 2010. As a result of the land use approvals by the City, the development intensities of The Platinum Triangle PTMU Overlay Zone were increased. Table 2‐1 provides a summary of the development intensities. In addition to the increase in development intensity, the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project also included upgrades to existing infrastructure to serve the proposed increased intensity of land uses. The upgrades included roadway improvements, sewer upgrades, two new water wells, a new electrical substation, natural gas infrastructure improvements, and an additional fire station. Table LU‐4: “General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City” of the Land Use Element of the General Plan indicates the maximum development intensity for each of the land use designations permitted within the Platinum Triangle. Approval of the Revised Platinum Triangle Project by the City resulted in the changes summarized in Table 2‐1. CHAPTER 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION Addendum No. 3 to Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 2‐3 Table 2‐1 Development Intensities in the Platinum Triangle PTMU Overlay Zone Platinum Vista Apartments Project Land Use Originally Approved Intensity Currently Approved Intensity Increase Residential 10,266 DUs 18,988 DUs 8,722 DUs Commercial Floor Area 2,264,400 sq. ft.4,795,111 sq. ft.2,530,711sq. ft. Office Floor Area 5,055,550 sq. ft. 14,131,103 sq. ft. 9,075,553 sq. ft. Institutional Floor Area 0 sq. ft.1,500,000 sq. ft.1,500,000 sq. ft. DUs – Dwelling Units sq. ft. – Square Feet SOURCE: SEIR NO. 0339/Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Notice of Determination (Posted October 27, 2010) The PTMLUP and PTMU Overlay Zone further divide the portions of the Platinum Triangle designated for Mixed Use Land Use by the General Plan into seven mixed‐use districts. The Platinum Vista Project is located within the Katella District. This district allows for the development of up to: ▪ 5,786 residential dwelling units ▪ 718,043 square feet of commercial development ▪ 1,921,639 square feet office development Appendix G: PTMU Overlay Zone District Sub‐Area Development Intensity Maps, of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, indicates the permitted amount of development for certain areas within the Platinum Triangle. The Platinum Vista Project is located within Katella District Sub‐Area A, which permits development of the project site with up to: ▪ 1,113 dwelling units ▪ 105,500 square feet of commercial development ▪ 1,005,760 square feet of office development Specifically, development permitted on the Platinum Vista site by the PTMU Overlay Zone District includes 350 dwelling units of the total 1,113 units permitted for the sub‐area. In addition to FSEIR No. 332 and FSEIR No. 339, two addenda have been prepared for projects located within the Platinum Triangle. Addendum No. 1 to FSEIR No. 339 was prepared for the Katella Avenue/I‐5 Undercrossing Improvements project and Addendum No. 2 was prepared for the Platinum Gateway Apartment project located adjacent to the proposed project site. Although the latter project site is located adjacent to the subject property, the analysis presented in Addendum No. 2 to FSEIR No. 339 did not directly affect the project site. CHAPTER 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION Addendum No. 3 to Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 2‐4 2.3 Approved Project On January 8, 2008, a Development Agreement was executed between the City of Anaheim and the property owners, to govern the development of an approximate 4.13‐acre site located at 1005 through 1105 East Katella Avenue. The original project included a 327‐unit condominium project and 9,500 square feet of commercial space. On May 29, 2012, the Anaheim City Council unanimously approved an amendment to extend the term of the Development Agreement for an additional five years, to expire on January 15, 2018. Subsequent to this action, on January 15, 2013, the City Council approved the First Amended and Restated Development Agreement in conjunction with a revision to the previously approved development project. This revision increased the number of dwelling units from 327 to 350 units and eliminated the commercial area. The property was subsequently sold to Platinum Vista Apartments, LP, on January 22, 2014. The approved Final Site Plan is illustrated in Exhibit 2‐2. 2.4 Existing Improvements The subject property is developed with three buildings, including two industrial buildings and a vacant restaurant structure. The two industrial buildings are each approximately 15,000 square feet. To the south of these buildings, is an approximately 10,000 square‐foot vacant restaurant building. A mini‐warehouse (1005 East Katella Avenue) is located to the west of the restaurant and is utilized for storage. These structures, along with related improvements, will be razed prior to the proposed new construction. Current access to the site is afforded by Katella Avenue, which bounds the property to the south; Lewis Street is west of the Platinum Vista project site. The site is also bound on the north generally by industrial development, and on the west by the Platinum Gateway residential development that is currently under construction on the former industrial property. Residential development exists adjacent to the site on the east. The A‐Town Metro property, which has been improved with a street system but is otherwise undeveloped, is located south of Katella Avenue; light industrial development is located immediately west of the A‐Town Metro property south of Katella Avenue. The existing site improvements and those surrounding the subject property are illustrated in the Aerial Photograph (refer to Exhibit 2‐3). 2.5 Amended Project Description The project applicant, Platinum Vista Apartments, LP, is proposing to construct a multiple‐family residential apartment project consisting of five‐story “wrap‐style” buildings (five levels of apartments) and a six‐story parking structure (including one subterranean parking level). No commercial areas are proposed as part of the revised project. The Platinum Vista Apartment project consists of a total of 389 multiple‐family dwelling units, including 39 studio units, 244 one‐bedroom units, and 106 two‐bedroom units as summarized in Table 2‐2. As indicated in Section 2.3 (Approved Project), the project design has been revised to include 39 additional dwelling units, necessitating the additional environmental analysis presented in this Addendum. The proposed Site Plan is illustrated in Exhibit 2‐4. CHAPTER 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION Addendum No. 3 to Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 2‐8 Table 2‐2 Summary of Proposed Floor Plans Platinum Vista Apartments Project Plan Type No. of DUs Average Square Feet Percent of Mix Total Square Feet Studio Apartments S1 20 550 5.1 11,000 S2 19 584 4.9 11,096 Sub‐Total 39 ‐‐ 10.0 22,096 1‐Bedroom Apartments A1 88 695 22.6 61,160 A1A 24 714 6.2 17,136 A2 49 727 12.6 35,136 A3 58 795 14.9 46,110 A4 25 795 6.4 19,875 Sub‐Total 244 ‐‐ 62.7 179,417 2‐Bedroom Apartments B1 20 1,012 5.1 20,240 B2 42 1,074 10.8 45,108 B3 40 1,077 10.3 43,080 B4 4 1,119 1.0 4,476 Sub‐Total 106 ‐‐ 27.3 112,904 Total 389 314,417 SOURCE: Architects Orange (April 9, 2014) Open Space Based on the requirement that every residential development must provide 200 square feet of recreational‐ leisure area for each dwelling unit within private and/or common areas, the proposed project would require a total of 77,800 square feet of such open space. Table 2‐3 provides a summary of the mandatory open space requirements and the open space provided for the proposed 389 multiple‐family residential dwelling units. As reflected below, the proposed project complies with the open space requirement by providing a total of 78,232 square feet of recreational‐leisure open space, which includes private open space, within the project limits. CHAPTER 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION Addendum No. 3 to Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 2‐9 Table 2‐3 Recreational‐Leisure Open Space Platinum Vista Apartments Project No. of Dwelling Units Required Area Per DU (sq. ft.) Total Area Required (sq. ft.) Open Space Required 389 200 77,800 Total Area Provided (sq. ft.) Private Ground Floor 7,907 Upper Floor 23,505 Common Recreation Courtyard 11,825 Along Katella Avenue 734 Main Motor Court 1,808 Secondary Motor Court 4,607 Along Northerly Property Boundary 4,653 Other Roof Deck 23,193 Total Open Space Provided 78,232 DU – dwelling unit sq. ft. – square feet SOURCE: Architects Orange (April 9, 2014) Parking Based on the City’s parking code requirements, the proposed project would require a total of 627 parking spaces to serve future residents and guests, including 49 spaces for the studio apartments (1.25 spaces/DU), 366 spaces for one‐bedroom apartment units (1.5 spaces/DU), and 212 parking spaces for the two‐bedroom apartment units (2.0 spaces/DU). The applicant is providing 635 parking spaces, including 13 handicapped spaces, which exceeds the City’s parking standards by eight (8) spaces for the 389 dwelling units. CHAPTER 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION Addendum No. 3 to Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 2‐10 2.6 Discretionary Approvals The applicant, Platinum Vista Apartments, LP, is requesting approval of several discretionary actions by the City of Anaheim, including: ▪ General Plan Amendment To amend Table LU‐5: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City to increase the number of residential dwelling units and decrease the commercial area allocated within the mixed use designation of the Platinum Triangle as reflected below: - Addition of 39 dwelling units - Elimination of 60,000 square feet allocated for commercial area ▪ Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan Amendment To amend the allocated number of residential dwelling units and eliminate 60,000 square feet of commercial area allocated to the property. ▪ Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone Amendment To amend the allocated number of residential dwelling units and eliminate 60,000 square feet of commercial area allocated to the property. ▪ Final Site Plan To amend the Final Site Plan exhibit of the Development Agreement to reflect the proposed project and determine its conformance with the provisions of the PTMU Overlay Zone and PTMLUP, including the site plan, elevations, floor plans, building materials, landscape plans, signage, etc. ▪ Development Agreement Amendment To amend and restate the provisions of the Development Agreement to reflect the proposed project. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐1 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The purpose of Chapter 3.0 of this Addendum to Final SEIR No. 339 for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project (SCH No. 2004121045) is to provide an analysis of the potential environmental consequences that are anticipated to occur as a result of implementation of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments Project (“Proposed Project”) that were not analyzed in the Final SEIR No. 339. Specifically, the analysis contained in this chapter includes a discussion of the potential impacts associated with the development of the proposed modifications to the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion and any impacts that result from those modifications, as described in Chapter 2.0 (Amended Project Description). 3.1 Aesthetics 3.1.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis According to FSEIR No. 339, the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area is highly urbanized with industrial, commercial, and recreational uses, which do not exhibit any significant geographic features or natural resources of importance. Although the development of the Platinum Triangle would result in an intensification of the existing urban character of the area through demolition or renovation of existing structures and construction of new structures, after mitigation, the impacts to aesthetic resources were not found to be significant. FSEIR No. 339 also did not identify any designated scenic resources or scenic highways within the project area. The Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project site is not characterized by unique visual resources, and no historic structures exist within the 820 acres comprising the area. Therefore, no adverse impacts on designated scenic resources would result from future development anticipated as a result of implementing the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. A transition from light industrial to mixed‐use development within the Platinum Triangle is occurring through the development of residential, commercial, and office uses. Landmarks include man‐made elements such as Angel Stadium of Anaheim and the Honda Center. Because of the predominately urban character of the Platinum Triangle, night‐lighting is widespread and characterized by parking lot lighting; structural lighting for hotels and restaurants; overhead street lighting; vehicle headlights; sign/building illumination; and lighting during nighttime sporting events. Additionally, at the time of FSEIR No. 339 preparation, Angel Stadium of Anaheim, the Honda Center, and several high‐rise office and residential uses created shade and shadows throughout the project area. FSEIR No. 339 identified that increased density and height would result in increased shadow lengths and widths beyond the existing conditions at that time. The issue of shade and shadow pertains to the blockage of direct sunlight by on‐site buildings, which affect adjacent properties. Shading is an important environmental issue because the users or occupants of certain land uses, such as residential, recreational, outdoor restaurants, and pedestrian areas have expectations for direct sunlight and warmth from the sun. Based on the land uses approved for the A‐Town Metro component of The Platinum Triangle, structures in A‐Town Metro could be up to 400 feet high. However, according to FSEIR No. 339, compliance with design standards would reduce shade/shadow impacts by breaking up continuous shade lines. However, despite these design guidelines, there is a potential that over 50 percent of on‐ and off‐site shadow‐sensitive areas would experience shade/shadow effects for more than 50 percent of the sunlight hours. Future development projects, including those in Sub‐Area A, where adjacent uses are deemed shadow sensitive, would be required to demonstrate that their projects would not interfere with those uses’ exposure to natural sunlight, and incorporate design features that allow direct sunlight for at least 50 percent of the sun‐sensitive areas for at least 50 percent of duration for the season, as appropriate. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐2 In order to visually unify the area, new mixed‐use development within the Platinum Triangle would be required to adhere to the design standards and principles for the PTMU Overlay Zone. FSEIR No. 339 found that potential impacts related to the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion. Development occurring on the property in accordance with the increased development intensities would inevitably result in changes to the visual appearance of the project area as the height, size, and scale of structures increase. Although it was determined that future development within the Platinum Triangle could result in significant visual impacts, such impacts could be reduced to less than significant levels through mitigation. 3.1.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project The current visual character of the project site and surrounding area within the Platinum Triangle is characterized by low‐ and mid‐rise commercial buildings, light industrial uses, and residential apartment/condominium complexes with varying architectural styles. The 4.13‐acre property was the site of a restaurant, until 2013 when the restaurant closed, and is also occupied by two industrial buildings. The western portion of the site is vacant. In order to implement the proposed project, the existing vacant restaurant building and the two industrial buildings would be demolished and replaced with the proposed 389‐unit apartment development. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? A scenic vista is generally defined as a view of undisturbed natural lands exhibiting a unique or unusual feature that comprises an important or dominant portion of the viewshed. Scenic vistas may also be represented by a particular distant view that provides visual relief from less attractive views of nearby features. Other designated Federal and State lands, as well as local open space or recreational areas, may also offer scenic vistas if they represent a valued aesthetic view within the surrounding landscape. Because the site’s topography is flat and the area in which the project is located in City is extensively urbanized, distant views are obstructed by existing development. Buildings (including existing residential, commercial and industrial structures), Anaheim Stadium and the adjacent roadways and arterial highways and freeways comprise the dominant visual elements not only in the City’s environment but also in the project environs. No important scenic vistas have been identified in the immediate project environs. Project implementation includes the development of a high density, multiple‐family residential development encompassing 389 apartments in a six story “wrap style” structure. Although conversion of the undeveloped/vacant site to the proposed 389‐unit apartment and parking structure will change the character of the site, the proposed redevelopment of the site would not result in any substantial adverse effect on a designated scenic vista. The proposed building height is consistent with building heights of similar residential development along Katella Avenue and also with building heights anticipated elsewhere within the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? As indicated above, the proposed project is located in an urbanized area and the site neither possesses any important aesthetic features nor any significant aesthetic resources such as rock outcroppings and/or historic buildings. The State Scenic Highway System includes a list of highways that are either currently designated as scenic highways by the State or are eligible for that designation. Neither the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) nor the County of Orange identifies any designated or eligible scenic highways within Anaheim or in its immediate vicinity, including the project area. The project area is extensively developed and is characterized by a variety of uses, including transportation facilities (Katella Avenue, State College Boulevard, Gene Autry Way, etc), high density residential, and commercial development on the north, Anaheim Stadium and commercial on the east, and industrial development is located west, CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐3 south and east of the subject property. The subject property and immediate project area are devoid of any aesthetic resources. As a result, no significant impacts to such resources would occur. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? The building height of the proposed six story apartment and garage structure is approximately 70 feet, which is similar to the existing building height of nearby multiple‐family residential development along Katella Avenue. Exhibit 3.1‐1 and Exhibit 3.1‐2 illustrate the character of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project. For example, the height of the Platinum Gateway multiple‐family residential development located adjacent to the subject property on the west is approximately 62 feet. The height of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project would be substantially lower than the 400‐foot maximum building height currently permitted (subject to approval of a conditional use permit) within the A‐Town Metro Master Plan Area located south of Katella Avenue in the project environs.1 Exhibit 3.1‐3 illustrates the proposed landscaping plan, which will enhance the visual and aesthetic character of the proposed development. The project’s design, building massing, and impacts are consistent with those analyzed in FSEIR No. 339, which anticipated and analyzed the effects of light and shadow on the surrounding environment. The potential shade and shadow effects on adjacent properties and structures would not significantly affect nearby sensitive uses. Although mitigation prescribed in FSEIR No. 339 requires applicants to demonstrate that their projects would not interfere with sensitive uses’ exposure to natural sunlight, and incorporate design features that allow direct sunlight for at least 50 percent of the sun sensitive areas for at least 50 percent of duration for the season, as appropriate, this mitigation would not apply to the proposed project because there are no sensitive uses located in the immediate project vicinity as reflected in FSEIR No. 339. Potential shade and shadow impacts would be similar to those previously analyzed. Thus, design of the projects as prescribed in FSEIR No. 339 to avoid adverse effects on sensitive uses will reduce potential shade and shadow to a less than significant level. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The security lighting for the proposed residential development would create a new source of light and glare within the limits of the subject property. However, the project would comply with the applicable provisions of The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and PTMU Overlay Zone with regards to landscaping, lighting, and setback requirements. It is also anticipated that all lighting fixtures would include the necessary shielding, such as hoods, filtering louvers, and glare shields may be required to maintain adequate lighting throughout the area without undue glare impacts on adjoining residential areas. Therefore, less than significant impacts associated with additional light and glare would result from project implementation. No mitigation measures are necessary. 1Lennar has submitted an application affecting the A‐Town Metro Master Plan. If approved, building heights in the A‐Town Metro Master Plan area (Sub‐Areas A and B within the Katella and Sub‐Areas A and C within the Gene Autry Districts) of the Platinum Triangle located south of the project site would be limited to 100 feet in height. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐7 FSEIR No. 339 anticipated the effects of light and shadow on the surrounding environment. MM 1‐1 requires applicants to demonstrate that their projects would not interfere with sensitive uses’ exposure to natural sunlight, and incorporate design features that allow direct sunlight for at least 50 percent of the sun sensitive areas for at least 50 percent of duration for the season, as appropriate. The proposed project was reviewed by the City concurrently with the Platinum Gateway project located immediately adjacent to the site on the west and determined that neither project would adversely affect natural sunlight on adjacent sensitive uses. The proposed project will not result in an increase in building height or other features that would affect sunlight exposure on adjacent sensitive uses. Therefore, the proposed Platinum Vista project will not be subject MM 1‐1 because no potential significant sunlight impacts will occur as a result of project implementation.2 Cumulative Impacts Project implementation would not result in any significant cumulative impacts because the project site is not located along any designated scenic roadway or within a designated important view corridor. Furthermore, the proposed project includes a building height of approximately 70 feet, which is consistent and compatible with the adjacent Platinum Gateway multiple‐family residential development that adjacent to the subject site. The Platinum Gateway project was approved and is under construction. Furthermore, the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project has been designed in accordance with applicable development standards and requirements in the Platinum Triangle Maser Land Use Plan and also incorporates landscaping that complements the site design and enhances the aesthetic character of the proposed development. Therefore, no potential significant cumulative impacts to aesthetics will occur as a result of project implementation. Conclusion FSEIR No. 339 concluded that, with the implementation of the PTMLUP and the PTMU Overlay Zone, no unavoidable significant impacts related to aesthetics would occur. The proposed project would comply with the applicable design standards in accordance with City of Anaheim requirements and those analyzed in FSEIR No. 339. Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that the changes to the project require a major change to FSEIR No. 339. The project would not result in any new significant aesthetic impacts and there is no substantial increase in the severity of impacts from that described in FSEIR No. 339. Therefore, the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project does not require any changes to FSEIR No. 339 related to aesthetics. 3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 3.2.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis Potential impacts to agricultural resources were evaluated in the initial study prepared for the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. As reflected in the initial study, no potential impacts to agricultural resources were identified through the initial study process. Consequently, FSEIR No. 339 does not contain any specific analysis related to agricultural resources. FSEIR No. 339 did not provide specific analysis of forest resources. 2Vanessa Norwood, City of Anaheim Community Development Department; July 14, 2014. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐8 3.2.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non‐agricultural use? The project site has been substantially altered as a result of grading that has taken place in the past to create building pads to accommodate development that occupied the subject property. Consistent with the prior initial study, the project site is devoid of any agricultural soils and/or resources. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency designates the project site as Urban and Built‐Up Land. In addition, the project site is not currently used for agricultural production or under any Williamson Act contracts, and no such designated land is nearby. Therefore, consistent with the findings presented in the initial study for the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, development of the site as proposed would not adversely affect any important agricultural resources and, furthermore, due to the nature and extent of the urbanization that has taken place in the project environs, no other agricultural uses are located in the project area that would be adversely affected by development of the site as proposed. No impacts to agricultural resources are anticipated. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? The project site is neither designated nor zoned for agriculture. As indicated above, no agriculturally‐zoned land exists on the site or in the immediate vicinity of the project and there are no existing Williamson Act Contracts covering property or in the project area. Since there are no agricultural uses or Williamson Act contracts affecting the project site, project implementation would not result in any significant impacts (i.e., conflicts with existing zoning or Williamson Act contract) to potential agricultural uses. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? Although the CEQA checklist questions related to forestry resources were not included on the environmental checklist at the time FSEIR No. 339 was prepared, the site has been substantially altered and does not support forestry and/or timber resources. There is no zoning for forest land in the City of Anaheim and no areas within the City are classified as forest or timberland as defined by PRC section 4526, including the subject property and surrounding area. Therefore, project implementation would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, any forest or timberland. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non‐forest use? As indicated above, there are no forest lands present either on the subject property or in the City. Therefore, project implementation would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non‐forest use. No impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non‐agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non‐forest use? As previously indicated, no important farmland, agricultural activity, or forest and/or timberlands exist on the project site or in the surrounding area. Therefore, conversion of the undeveloped/vacant property to a CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐9 multiple‐family residential land use as proposed would not result in environmental changes that would convert farmland to non‐agricultural uses or forest land to non‐forest uses. No impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts Project implementation will not result in the loss of either prime or locally important farmlands or designated forest lands. Therefore, no cumulative impacts will occur. Conclusion Consistent with the analysis presented in the initial study prepared for FSEIR No. 339, the subject property does not support any agricultural or timber/forestry resources. Furthermore, no portion of the site is designated for such use. As a result, implementation of the proposed project will not result in any impacts not previously identified an analysis in the prior environmental analysis. 3.3 Air Quality 3.3.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis FSEIR No. 339 analyzed air pollutant emissions associated with the Platinum Triangle area for build‐out of the PTMLUP. Air pollutant emissions associated with new development occurring in the Platinum Triangle area would increase carbon monoxide (CO) emissions, volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), respirable particulate matter less than or equal to 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10), and respirable particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5) within the project vicinity. Short‐Term Air Quality Impacts Associated with Construction Air pollutant emissions from construction activities were included in Table 5.2‐6 of FSEIR No. 339. The primary source of construction‐related CO, SOx, VOC, and NOx emissions is gasoline‐ and diesel‐powered, heavy‐duty mobile construction equipment, such as scrapers and motor graders. The primary sources of PM10 and PM2.5 emissions is clearing and demolition activities, excavation and grading operations, construction vehicle traffic on unpaved ground, and wind blowing over exposed earth surfaces. Air pollutant emissions generated from construction activities would cause temporary increases in air pollutant emissions that exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) threshold criteria for CO, NOx, VOC, PM10, and PM2.5. Therefore, FSEIR No. 339 concluded that the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project’s construction‐related air quality impact was a Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted by the Anaheim City Council. FSEIR No. 339 also concluded that due to the proximity of the existing and proposed residences within the Platinum Triangle in addition to the magnitude of construction activities, construction activities associated within build‐out of the Platinum Triangle could result in exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations during construction activities based on Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). Consequently, this impact would be significant for both the Adopted MLUP and the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐10 Long‐Term Air Quality Impacts Associated with Operation Operation of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would generate air pollutants from stationary sources and mobile sources. The stationary source emissions from operation of the proposed land uses would come from its consumption of natural gas. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project at buildout would generate 443,263 average daily trips. Emissions associated with the project were calculated and included in Table 5.2‐7 of FSEIR No. 339. As shown in that table, project‐related emissions would exceed the SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds for CO, VOC, NOx, PM10 and PM2.5. Mobile sources represent the largest source of operational emissions for the project. Although the development would be subject to SCAQMD rules to reduce pollutant emissions and, furthermore, mitigation measures were prescribed in FSEIR No. 339, long‐term air pollutant emissions remained above the significance threshold for each of the pollutants with the exception of SOx. Therefore, FSEIR No. 339 concluded that the long‐term (i.e., operational) air quality impacts resulting from the implementation of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project were considered Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted by the City Council. CO Hotspot Analysis Localized concentrations of air pollutant emissions associated with the new development occurring within the Platinum Triangle area would increase pollutant concentrations that could contribute to violations of federal and state ambient air quality standards (AAQS). Localized concentrations of pollutant emissions from operation of the Platinum Triangle were modeled using CALINE4, for their potential to contribute to CO hotspots and were included in Table 5.2‐8 of FSEIR No. 339. As shown in this table, localized concentrations of CO at congested intersections would not exceed the most stringent AAQS. Consistency with the AQMP FSEIR revealed that the Adopted MLUP and the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project would result in an overall increase in both trips and VMT in the Platinum Triangle because the project would substantially increase the density of development in the Platinum Triangle. Although the revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project would increase VMT and trips in the local area, it would result in a net benefit to the SCAG region as a whole because it precludes the need for people to be housed in less dense development, farther away from employment centers. The anticipated decrease in average trip length is due to the proximity of employment and housing compared to housing located in outlying areas, which would result in longer home‐ to‐work trips and increased emissions. The need for residents within the project site and surrounding area to travel long distances to other commercial and entertainment centers would be reduced. SCAG’s Compass Blueprint program identifies changes to land use and transportation trends on key infill areas located near transit and existing jobs and housing in the region to reduce VMT. Portions of the Platinum Triangle, including the Platinum Vista project site, are identified in the Opportunity Area Map for Orange County. SCAG has identified these 2 percent areas as the key parts of the region for targeting growth, where projects, plans and policies consistent with the Compass Blueprint principles will best serve the mobility, livability, prosperity and sustainability goals of the Growth Vision. Although potential impacts would be slightly greater under the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project compared to the Adopted MLUP, the both would remain consistent with the SCAG’s strategies to reduce VMT in the SCAG region and future development would be consistent with the AQMP under the second indicator. Consequently, impacts are considered less than significant relative to project consistency with the AQMP. The consistency evaluation concluded that because the Master Land Use Plan would reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), the project is consistent with the AQMP. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐11 3.3.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Although the proposed project would allow for an increase in the number of dwelling units, the 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area allocated to the project site would be eliminated. The increase in dwelling units would result in an increase of 260 daily trips (39 DUs x 6.65 trips/DU).3 However, the elimination of the commercial land use would result in the elimination of 2,562 trips per day (60,000 sq. ft. x 42.7 trips/1,000 sq. ft.)4 previously anticipated in FSEIR No. 339. As a result, it is anticipated that less traffic than what was approved for the Platinum Vista site and analyzed in FSEIR No. 339, which was the basis for the pollutant emissions included in the long‐range forecasts for the South Coast Air Quality Management District, would be generated from development of the project site. As a result, project‐related emissions would be less than the emissions estimated as a result of the previously approved project. Furthermore, the proposed project would be consistent with the long‐term emissions forecasts and would not obstruct the implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). SCAQMD’s most recent adopted comprehensive plan is the 2012 AQMP, which was adopted on December 7, 2012. Regional growth projections are used by SCAQMD to forecast future emission levels in the SoCAB. For southern California, these regional growth projections are provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and are partially based on land use designations included in city/county general plans. Typically, only large, regionally significant projects have the potential to affect the regional growth projections. While the proposed project would result in an increase in population, the increase would be approximately 12 percent more than that anticipated to occur as a result of the approved residential component within Sub‐Area A, the increase would be offset by reductions in residential density that have occurred and are proposed with the Platinum Triangle. In addition, the elimination o f 60,000 square feet of retail/commercial floor area would also reduce employment in the City of Anaheim; however, it would not substantially affect the regional growth projections. The project would reduce emissions and would not affect the regional emissions inventory or conflict with strategies in the AQMP to attain the AAQS. Although the project would increase the number of residential units by 39, the applicant is also proposing to eliminate 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area. The net reduction of approximately 2,300 daily trips resulting from project implementation would reduce the VMT for the project within the SoCAB when compared to the approved project, and the project would continue to be consistent with the AQMP as determined in FSEIR No. 339. The proposed project would not conflict or obstruct implementation of the AQMP. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Short-Term (Construction) Impacts Construction activities of the proposed project would have a short‐term impact on air quality. Temporary construction emissions would result from demolition of the existing structure, pavement, and utilities, excavation, and grading activities, and from construction of the proposed project. As a result, construction‐ related air pollutant emissions would be consistent with the pollutant emissions anticipated to occur as a result of construction activities forecast for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion analyzed in the FSEIR No. 339. The maximum development intensities permitted by the proposed project would not increase the maximum daily air pollutant emissions generated by the previously approved project during construction activities. The project would contribute to emissions of CO, NOx, VOC, PM10, and PM2.5 that exceed the 3Traffic Impact Analysis Update, Platinum Vista Residential Development; LSA Associates, Inc.; June 2014 (ITE Trip Generation, 9th Edition). 4ITE Trip Generation, 9th Edition. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐12 SCAQMD’s construction emission thresholds identified in FSEIR No. 339 and would, therefore contribute to the SoCAB’s ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 non‐attainment designation. Construction impacts would be similar to those calculated under the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project and would not result in any new significant impacts which were not previously anticipated. As previously indicated, potential sensitive receptors in the project area would be exposed to pollutant concentrations that exceed LSTs established for the site. However, implementation of MM 2‐1 through MM 2‐ 4 prescribed for the Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would be implemented to reduce the pollutant emissions. Such measures include the use of Tier 3 (or higher) construction equipment, suspension of grading activities during periods of high winds, fugitive dust control pursuant to Rule 403, etc., in order to reduce potential construction emissions to an acceptable level. Long-Term (Operational) Impacts The primary source of regional emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles. Other pollutant emissions would be generated from the combustion of natural gas for space heating and cooking and the generation of electricity at off‐site locations. Emissions would also be generated by the use of natural gas and oil for the generation of electricity off‐site. As discussed in Section 3.16, Transportation/Traffic, long term operational impacts associated with vehicle trips generated from the proposed project would be approximately 47 percent less than the trips associated with the land uses estimated for the site based on the approved development of 350 multiple‐family residential dwelling units and 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area, which was analyzed by FSEIR No. 339. Based on the project as currently proposed for the Platinum Vista Apartments project, the increase in the number of dwelling units would result in an increase in of 260 vehicle trips when compared to the approved project. However, this increase in residential traffic is offset by the elimination of the commercial component, which is estimated to generate approximately 2560 trips per day.5 As a result, the proposed project would result in a net reduction of approximately 2300 vehicle trips (i.e., 47 percent) and about 13,000 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on a daily basis when compared to the previously approved land uses (i.e., 350 multiple‐family residential dwelling units and 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area), which generated over 5,000 trips per day. Since the primary source of operational emissions are the result of vehicle emissions, the reduction in vehicular trips and miles traveled would result in a reduction in operational related air emissions when compared to the approved land uses for the subject property. The operational air emissions from the proposed project would not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously anticipated. No new significant impacts would occur when compared to the air quality impacts analyzed for the Platinum Vista Apartments project. CO Hotspot Analysis Localized air quality effects would occur when emissions from vehicular traffic increase CO concentrations at congested intersections. As previously stated, the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project would generate approximately 2,300 fewer daily trips per day when compared to the approved land uses for the subject site. Therefore, the reduction in development would result in a decrease in the number of vehicles generated by the proposed project at local intersections within the vicinity of the project. Further, the proportion of project‐related vehicle trips is small in relation to the volume of traffic at local intersections. As indicated in Table 5.2‐8 (CO Concentrations at Congested Intersections in the Project Vicinity) in FSEIR No. 339, CO concentrations at the critical intersections would not be exceeded based on buildout of the Platinum Triangle as previously approved, including the more intensively developed Platinum Vista property. 560,000 square feet of commercial/retail floor area X 42.7 trips per 1,000 square feet (Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 9th Edition). CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐13 Therefore, because vehicle trips would be reduced by approximately 40 percent, the proposed project would also not expose sensitive‐receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations at those intersections and no new air quality impacts would occur. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non‐attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? As indicated above, project implementation would result in a decrease in the number of vehicular trips and vehicle miles traveled. Therefore, the amount of pollutants emitted into the air basin associated with long‐ term, operations would be less than the emissions anticipated to occur as a result of the approved Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion. Although the SCAQMD is currently designated a “non‐attainment” area for ozone and PM10 and PM2.5, the reduction in pollutant emissions associated with the proposed project will not result in one or more new significant impacts or in greater severity of an impact identified for the approved Platinum Vista development analyzed in the Revised Platinum Triangle Master Plan. Therefore, potential impacts will be less than significant. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site are the occupants of multiple‐family residential dwelling units located adjacent to and in the vicinity of the subject property. Pollutants resulting from project implementation will occur during the construction phase and following completion and occupancy/use of the Platinum Vista Apartments project. The emissions will be comprised mostly of dust and particulate materials during the construction phase that will be dispersed in the area of operations. Such emissions will be controlled through the implementation of standard conditions and rules prescribed by the SCAQMD as prescribed in FSEIR No. 339. In addition, post‐development operational emissions will be less than previously estimated in the prior environmental analysis due to the significant reduction in development intensity. As a result, pollutant emissions would be the same as and less than the construction and operational emissions, respectively, of the approved project. No additional significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Odors are one of the most obvious forms of air pollution to the general public. Odors can present significant problems for both the source and the surrounding community. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can cause agitation, anger and concern to the general public. Most people determine an odor to be offensive (objectionable) if it is sensed longer than the duration of a human breath, which is typically 2 to 5 seconds. Land uses that result in or create objectionable odors typically include agriculture (e.g., livestock and farming), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, etc.). The proposed project includes the conversion of a vacant property to a multiple‐ family residential land use on the 4.13‐acre site. The only potential odors associated with the project are from site construction during the application of asphalt and paint. Any asphalt and paint odors, if perceptible, are common in the environment and would be of very limited duration. Therefore, any odor impacts would be considered less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary. Cumulative Impacts As indicated in the preceding analysis, project implementation will generate approximately 47 percent fewer daily vehicle trips than the existing commercial land use occupying the site. As a result, air emissions are anticipated to be less than the amount currently generated by the approved Platinum Vista development CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐14 intensities (i.e., 350 multiple‐family residential dwelling units and 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area). Compliance with the applicable SCAQMD rules would ensure that dust emissions are minimized during construction to further reduce short‐term cumulative impacts. Operational air emissions will likewise not be significant because the project would not exceed the City’s long‐range projections anticipated for the subject property, which are the basis for air emissions forecasts in the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). As a result, neither construction‐ nor operational‐related air pollutant emissions would exceed the projections in estimated in FSEIR No. 339. Although the project would contribute a smaller percentage of air pollutant emissions, conclusion in FSEIR No. 339 that the cumulative air quality impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable would not change... Conclusion The proposed project will reduce project intensity of development within Sub‐Area A of the Platinum Triangle from that allowed in FSEIR No. 339 through the reduction in the commercial floor area allocated to the subject property. As indicated above, the Platinum Vista Apartments will also generate 47 percent fewer vehicle trips than would be generated by the existing entitlements for the same area. Therefore, because the project is building out at less than anticipated in FSEIR No. 339, short‐term air quality impacts related to construction would be the same or less than the short‐term construction emissions associated with the previously approved project. Although the proposed project could result in greater pollutant emissions due to the increase in residential dwelling units (389 DUs) compared to the approved project (350 DUs), construction emissions related to the construction of the 60,000 square feet of commercial development would be eliminated. In addition, long‐term operational air emissions will be less than the air emissions projected in FSEIR No. 339 as a result of the significant reduction in vehicular trips associated with the 60,000 square feet of commercial development when compared to the trips occurring as a result of the additional 39 residential dwelling units. Additionally, implementation of FSEIR No. 339 Mitigation Measures Nos. 2‐1 through 2‐6, which address emissions from grading, construction equipment operation and stationary sources will further reduce air pollutant emissions. The project will not result in any new significant environmental impact nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of impacts from that described in FSEIR No. 339. FSEIR No. 339 Relevant Mitigation Measures MM 2‐1 Ongoing during grading and construction, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to reduce construction‐related emissions; however, the resultant value is expected to remain significant. a) The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations to reduce operational emissions. b) The contractor shall use Tier 3 or higher, as identified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, off‐road construction equipment with higher air pollutant emissions standards for equipment greater than 50 horsepower, based on manufacturer’s availability. low emission mobile construction. c) The contractor shall utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean‐fuel generators rather than temporary diesel‐power generators, where feasible. MM 2‐2 Ongoing during grading and construction, the property owner/developer shall implement the following measures in addition to the existing requirements for fugitive dust control under South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 to further reduce in order to reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions. To assure compliance, the City shall verify compliance that these measures have been CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐15 implemented during normal construction site inspections. The measures to be implemented are listed below: a) During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall re‐establish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering as quickly as possible to achieve a minimum control efficiency for PM10 of 5 percent. b) During all grading activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply chemical soil stabilizers to on‐site haul roads to achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 85 percent compared to travel on unpaved, untreated roads. c) The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. d) The property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall schedule activities to minimize the amount of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. e) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall sweep streets with Rule 1186–compliant PM10‐efficient vacuum units on a daily basis if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. f) During active demolition and debris removal and grading, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall suspend demolition and grading operations when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour to achieve an emissions control efficiency for PM10 under worst‐ case wind conditions of 98 percent. g) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall maintain a minimum 12‐inch freeboard on trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials and tarp materials with a fabric cover or other suitable means to achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 91 percent. h) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall water exposed ground surfaces and disturbed areas a minimum of every three hours on the construction site to achieve an emissions reduction control efficiency for PM10 of 61 percent. i) During active demolition and debris removal, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall apply water to disturbed soils at the end of each day to achieve an emission control efficiency for PM10 of 10 percent. j) During scraper unloading and loading, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall ensure that actively disturbed areas maintain a minimum soil moisture content of 12 percent by use of a moveable sprinkler system or water truck to achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 69 percent. k) During all construction activities, the property owner/developer’s construction contractor shall limit on‐site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to no more than 15 miles per hour to achieve a control efficiency for PM10 of 57 percent. MM 2‐3 Prior to approval of each grading plan (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for Demolition Plans), the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export Plans detailing construction and demolition (C&D) recycling and waste reduction measures to be implemented to recover C&D materials. These plans shall include identification of off‐ site locations for materials export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials on‐site or to an adjacent site, sale to a soil 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 firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects if not all can be reused at the project site. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐16 MM 2‐4 Prior to issuance approval of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence that high‐solids or water‐based low emissions paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of buildings, in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District’s regulations. This information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. Additionally, the property owner/developer’s shall specify the use of high‐volume/low‐pressure spray equipment or hand application. Air‐atomized spray techniques shall not be permitted. Plans shall also show that property owner/developers shall construct/build with materials that do not require painting, or use pre‐painted construction materials, to the extent feasible. MM 2‐6 Prior to approval of building permits, the property owner/architect shall submit energy calculations used to demonstrate compliance with the performance approach to the California Energy Efficiency Standards to the Building Department that shows each new structure exceeds the applicable Building and Energy Efficiency Standards by a minimum of 10 percent at the time of the building permit. Prior to issuance of a building permit, plans shall show the following: a) Energy‐efficient roofing systems, such as vegetated or “cool” roofs, that reduce roof temperatures significantly during the summer and therefore reduce the energy requirement for air conditioning. Examples of energy efficient building materials and suppliers can be found at http://eetd.lbl.gov/ CoolRoofs or similar websites. B Cool pavement materials such as lighter‐colored pavement materials, porous materials, or permeable or porous pavement, for all roadways and walkways not within the public right‐ of‐way, to minimize the absorption of solar heat and subsequent transfer of heat to its surrounding environment. Examples of cool pavement materials are available at http://www.epa.gov/heatisld/images/extra/level3_pavingproducts.html or similar websites. c) Energy saving devices that achieve the existing 2008 Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards, such as use of energy efficient appliances (e.g., EnergyStar® appliances) and use of sunlight‐ filtering window coatings or double‐paned windows. e) Shady trees strategically located within close proximity to the building structure to reduce heat load and resulting energy usage at residential, commercial, and office buildings. 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The project site has been substantially altered as a result of grading and development that has taken place on the subject property. At the present time, the 4.13‐acre property is devoid of native habitat as a result of the past development of the site that supported a restaurant and light industrial development. The initial study prepared prior to the preparation of FSEIR No. 339 determined that the site does not support any important biological resources. Because it was determined through the initial study process that no significant impacts to biological resources would occur as a result of implementing the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, FSEIR No. 339 did not include an analysis related to biological resources. Based on the City of Anaheim General Plan Green Element, no locally designated species or natural communities, wetland habitats, or wildlife corridors are known to exist within the Platinum Triangle, including the 4.13‐acre Platinum Vista Apartments property. The project area is not part of the Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) and did not impact any resources within the NCCP area. As a result, implementation of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts to biological resources. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐17 3.4.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Neither the 4.13‐acre site nor project environs support any native species of plants or animals. Although the project site is currently vacant, it was previously developed with commercial (restaurant) and light industrial uses that are either closed or have been removed. At the present time, the site is devoid of any native plant or animal species. All of the vegetation that exists on the site and within the project area is either ruderal or ornamental (i.e., non‐native) plant materials that are common in urban landscapes. There are no species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status species within the limits of either the site or in the immediate project area, which has been completely altered by development. Therefore, no significant impact would occur to any sensitive species designated by the resources agencies as a result of project implementation. Further, the Project is not directly affected by any regional plans, or policies of other resource agencies. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The subject property is located within an urbanized area and does not contain riparian habitat or other sensitive habitat or natural community. Although some small rodents and mammals that adapt to urban development may exist on the site, no native habitat or grasslands exist on the subject property that would represent an important source of foraging for raptors and other sensitive or protected species. No significant biological resources are identified in the Anaheim General Plan either for the site or for the immediate project area. Due to the location and nature of the proposed project, implementation will not result in significant adverse impacts to riparian or other sensitive natural community; no mitigation measures are required. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? The site is partially covered with impervious surfaces in the form of an unoccupied restaurant structure and surface parking. The remainder of the property is pervious; however, there are no federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act located within the limits of the project site. Further, no marshes, vernal pools, or coastal habitats exist in the project area according to the Anaheim General Plan. Therefore, there will be no significant impacts resulting from project implementation and no mitigation measures are required. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? As previously indicated, the Platinum Vista property is located in an area of the City that is extensively urbanized and devoid of natural habitat and/or species. The subject site has been improved and previously supported commercial and light industrial land uses, which have since closed or been removed in anticipation of buildout of the Platinum Triangle development as approved by the City of Anaheim. Furthermore, the area surrounding the site is intensively developed with a variety of urban uses and no native habitat that would service as a wildlife migratory corridor exists in the area. The I‐5 and SR‐57 Freeways are located in the CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐18 project environs and are also considered barriers to wildlife movement. Development of the site as proposed would not alter the existing biological character of the area. Project implementation would result in converting the existing vacant land use to a high density residential development (i.e., apartments). Due to the urbanized nature of the area and lack of natural habitat and native species and the distance of the subject property from any natural habitat, implementation of the Platinum Vista Apartments project will not interfere with the movement of any native resident species of wildlife or with the migratory patterns of fish or other wildlife species. No significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures are required. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Implementation of the proposed project will result in physical changes to the existing site; however, project implementation will not result in significant impacts to biological resources for the reasons discussed above. The City’s General Plan does not identify the project site as one that supports sensitive habitat and/or important biological resources. As indicated previously, no significant or important biological resources, including native trees, exist on the site. While the existing introduced landscaping located along the perimeter of the site and within the parking lot may be eliminated as a result of project implementation (i.e., construction of the 389‐unit Platinum Vista Apartments), the landscape concept plan prepared for the proposed project will offset the loss of any existing non‐native landscape species. Similarly, the project will be designed to accommodate landscaping that complements the proposed residential development as well as the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood. No significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation; no mitigation is required. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Neither the project site nor the surrounding area support any sensitive habitat and/or species that are protected by an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Furthermore, the project site is not located within a designated NCCP area. Conversion of the existing professional office/commercial development to a residential development will not conflict with local, regional, or state resource preservation and/or conservation policies. Therefore no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation; no mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts As indicated in the preceding analysis, the site is devoid of sensitive habitat and/or important biological resources. Project implementation will not result in any impacts to biological resources and would not, therefore, result in any significant cumulative impacts to biological resources. Conclusion As indicated in FSEIR No. 339, implementation of the proposed project will not cause any significant impacts related to biological resources, and no mitigation measures will be required. Therefore, no new impacts are anticipated that were not previously addressed in FSEIR No. 339. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐19 3.5 Cultural Resources 3.5.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis According to FSEIR No. 339, no impacts related to cultural resources were identified through the initial study process. Consequently, FSEIR No. 339 does not contain any specific analysis related to cultural resources. Based on the City of Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element, the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area, including the subject property, is not located within the Anaheim Colony Historic District. As such, none of the structures in the project area are identified on the Qualified Historic Structures List of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan and no impacts would result from implementation of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. There were no known archaeological or paleontological resources, unique geologic features, or human remains at the project site, and no significant impacts to such resources were anticipated according to the initial study prepared in support of FSEIR No. 339. 3.5.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5? The subject property is currently vacant although three structures (a former restaurant and two industrial buildings) currently exist on the site. No historic resources are located within the project site, although two historic resources were identified within a one‐half mile radius of the subject property. Neither the subject site nor the surrounding properties are identified as sites containing historic resources in the City’s General Plan. Although Project implementation includes the construction of a high density multiple‐family residential development on the site, no significant adverse changes to any historical resources would occur. Project implementation would necessitate some grading and site alteration in order to implement the Platinum Vista Apartments project and ancillary improvements; however, no historic resources would be directly affected. Therefore, no significant impacts to historical resources will occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures are required. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5? According to the initial study prepared for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project that was analyzed in FSEIR No. 339, no cultural resources are known to exist within the Platinum Triangle, including the Platinum Vista property. Nonetheless, because project implementation requires the approval of a General Plan Amendment, consultation with Native American representatives is required pursuant to SB 18 in order to ensure that potential impacts to cultural resources are adequately addressed. Letters requesting consultation with Native American representative were sent out by the City of Anaheim on May 20, 2014. To date, no responses from any of the Native American representatives contacted have been received. No potentially significant impacts are anticipated to occur, due to the nature and extent of surface and subsurface alternative that has occurred as a result of development that has occurred on the site and in the project area. However, consultation with Native Americans representatives will ensure that any potential cultural significance of the site would be identified, if any, and appropriate actions taken based on those consultations. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? As indicated above, the proposed project site is located within an urbanized area of the City of Anaheim and has been previously graded and developed/improved. Any near‐surface paleontological resources that may have existed at one time have likely been disturbed and/or destroyed by prior development activities. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐20 Therefore, it is unlikely that potentially significant impacts are anticipated. As a result, no mitigation measures are required. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Due to the extensive landform alterative and site disturbance that has occurred in the project area, including the subject property, it is unlikely that project implementation would affect any sites or properties that possess known cultural values. It is not known to be utilized by any Native Americans for religious or other culturally important rites and no important cultural resource sites have been identified within the project area. Furthermore, no formal cemeteries are located on the site or in the project environs and no human remains are known to exist in the project area. Although project implementation will require grading and excavation to implement the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project, the discovery of human remains is not anticipated. Nonetheless, development projects must comply with applicable laws when human remains are encountered during grading and construction to ensure that no significant impacts to cultural resources, including human remains. Cumulative Impacts As indicated above, the subject property has been extensively altered as a result of the extensive landform alteration and prior site development that has taken place on the Platinum Vista property. As a result, no cultural and/or paleontological resources are expected to occur that would result in significant cumulative impacts. Conclusion Based on the information and analysis presented above, there is no evidence that the proposed project would result in a new significant impact to cultural resources or an impact of greater severity than previously analyzed in FSEIR No. 339. Furthermore, there is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to FSEIR No. 339. 3.6 Geology and Soils 3.6.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis According to FSEIR No. 339, impacts related to geology and soils were identified as less than significant through the initial study process. Consequently, FSEIR No. 339 does not contain any specific analysis related to geology and soils. 3.6.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project A preliminary geotechnical evaluation was conducted by EEI Geotechnical & Environmental Solutions (EEI) for the proposed project. The assessment, which was prepared in July 2012, evaluated a residential development that consisted of a five‐story apartment building that included 350 dwelling units. In addition, the proposed project included 7‐level parking structure (to be constructed at‐grade), underground utilities, and drive areas and other associated improvements. Although the proposed project has been revised to include a six‐story “wrap style” building, including 389 units in five levels and associated parking garage. The findings and recommendations presented in the geotechnical analysis remain applicable and are summarized in the analysis that follows. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐21 Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. The Project is located in the seismically active southern California region. Primary ground rupture or fault rupture is defined as the surface displacement that occurs along the surface of a fault during an earthquake. No active faults are known to project through the site nor does the Platinum Vista site lie within the boundaries of an “Earthquake Fault Zone” as defined by the State of California in the Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. The potential for ground rupture due to an earthquake beneath the site is considered to be low. As a result, proposed structures and future residents would not be exposed to fault rupture during a seismic event. No significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? As indicated above, the portion of Southern California that includes the subject site is considered to be seismically active. Due to the proximity of the site area to several nearby active faults, strong ground shaking could occur at the site as a result of an earthquake on any one of the faults. The closest faults are the Puente Hills Blind Thrust Fault and San Joaquin Hills Fault located at distances of about 7.7 and 8.5 miles from the site, respectively. The Whittier and Newport‐Inglewood Fault Zones are located at distances of about 8.9 and 10.4 miles from the site, respectively. Table 3.6‐1 provides a summary of the major active faults and maximum moment magnitude (Mw) associated with each potentially causative fault. Table 3.6‐1 Summary of Major Active Faults Platinum Vista Apartments Project Fault Approximate Distance From Site (miles) Maximum Moment Magnitude San Joaquin Hills 7.7 6.6 Puente Hills Blind Thrust 8.5 7.1 Whittier 8.9 6.8 Newport‐Inglewood (LA Basin) 10.4 7.1 Chino‐Central Avenue (Elsinore) 11.9 6.7 Newport‐Inglewood (Offshore) 14.8 7.1 Elsinore (Glen Ivy) 15.2 6.8 San Jose 16.3 6.4 Palos Verde 20.1 7.3 Upper Elysian Park Blind Thrust 21.7 6.4 Sierra Madre 23.1 7.2 Cucamonga 24.2 6.9 Raymond 24.9 6.5 SOURCE: EEI (Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation, July 3, 2012) CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐22 As indicated in Table 3.6‐1, potential maximum moment earthquake magnitudes range from 6.5 to 7.3, with potential magnitudes associated with the San Joaquin Hills and Puente Hills Blind Thrust Faults estimated to be 6.6 and 7.1, respectively. However, due to the distances of active faults from the site, ground surface rupture is not a significant hazard. As indicated above, the site lies in relative close proximity to several active faults; therefore, during the life of the proposed improvements, the property will probably experience similar moderate to occasionally moderate to severe ground shaking from these fault zones, as well as some background shaking from other seismically active areas of the Southern California region. Based on the analysis conducted for the proposed project, the proposed multiple‐family residential/parking structure s the adjusted maximum considered earthquake spectral response parameters are recommended for seismic design of the project. The geotechnical evaluation recommended that the proposed structures should be designed in accordance with seismic design criteria developed by the Structural Engineers Association of California. In addition, compliance with the California Building Code, applicable codes and ordinances of the City of Anaheim, and implementation of the measures prescribed in the Geotechnical Report and subsequent detailed soils engineering reports will adequately address the issues related to potential ground shaking. As a result, potential ground shaking impacts will be less than significant; no additional mitigation measures are required. Based on the geography, topography and site‐specific geotechnical conditions encountered during our geotechnical evaluation at the site, the potential for ground lurching or shallow ground rupture at the site is considered to be low; however, due to the active seismicity of California, the possibility for such potential effects cannot be completely ruled out. Therefore, a “flexible” design for onsite utility lines and connections should be considered in the final design stage. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic‐related ground failure, including liquefaction? Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which the strength and stiffness of a soil is reduced by earthquake shaking or other rapid loading. Liquefaction and related phenomena have been responsible for substantial structural damage in historical earthquakes, and are a design concern under certain conditions. Liquefaction occurs in saturated soils, (i.e., soils in which the space between individual particles is completely filled with water). This pore water exerts a pressure on the soil particles that influences how tightly the particles themselves are pressed together. Prior to an earthquake, pore water pressure is typically low; however, earthquake motion can cause the pore water pressure to increase to the point where the soil particles can readily move with respect to each other. When liquefaction occurs; the strength of the soil decreases and the ability of a soil deposit to support structural loads are reduced. Due to the observed lack of a near surface static ground water level at the site (groundwater was not encountered to a depth of 51.5 feet), along with the observed nature of the encountered materials comprising the Quaternary aged Alluvium that underlies the site, it is anticipated that the potential for liquefaction to occur is not a significant geotechnical concern at the site. Therefore, potential liquefaction impacts are considered less than significant; no mitigation measures are required. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides? Landslides typically occur along pre‐existing zones of weakness within bedrock (i.e., previous failure surfaces). Additionally, landslides have the potential to occur on over‐steepened slopes, especially where weak layers, such as thin clay layers, are present and dip out‐of‐slope. Landslide potential in the project area is considered low due to the flat topography of the site and majority of the area. The project site proposed for development of the multiple‐family residential development, including the parking structure, is virtually flat and devoid of any significant natural or man‐made slopes that would be subject to failure. Therefore, no CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐23 potentially impacts associated with landslides and slope instability will occur and no mitigation measures are required. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Clearing, excavation, and grading associated with future development and improvements proposed for the subject property would expose soils to substantial short‐term soil erosion or loss of topsoil, since fill material of unknown origin and varying composition currently covers most of the City. Future development would be subject to compliance with the City’s standards, as well as National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit requirements, including the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for erosion control, grading, and soil remediation during the grading and construction phase and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that also identifies measures to minimize the long‐term potential for erosion and loss of soil. Grading Plans prepared for proposed development must include an approved drainage and erosion control plan to minimize the impacts from erosion and sedimentation during grading. Additionally, development sites that encompass an area of 1.0 acre or greater would be subject to compliance with the NPDES program’s General Construction Permit requirements and consequently the development and implementation of an SWPPP as prescribed by the City of Anaheim. In addition, compliance with the City’s grading and excavation ordinance will also ensure that potential erosion and loss of topsoil is minimized. The SWPPP prepared for the proposed Platinum Vista project will identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control erosion and pollutant transport during the construction phase. Similarly, BMPs prescribed in the WQMP would also minimize potential erosion and pollutant transport following development of the Platinum Vista Apartments as proposed. Therefore, because the proposed project would be subject to compliance with the City’s standards, as well as NPDES General Construction Permit (i.e., SWPPP) requirements for erosion control, grading, applicable soil remediation, and implementation of the BMPs prescribed in the WQMP, project‐related impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in an on‐site or off‐site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Seismically induced settlement can occur due to reorientation of soil particles during strong shaking of unsaturated sands, as well as in response to liquefaction of saturated loose granular soils. The potential seismically induced settlement within the upper alluvial soils was estimated. Differential earthquake induced settlements are estimated to be less than ½‐inch across a 50‐foot span. As indicated above, due to the nature of the soils and historic groundwater table that is 50 feet or great below ground surface, liquefaction potential is considered to be low. Furthermore, the site is devoid of steep slopes that would be subject to failure. Finally, the future development must comply with the applicable grading and building codes as well as the measures prescribed in the soils and geologic reports prepared for individual projects within Sub‐Area A of the Platinum Triangle. As a result, neither new or more severe impacts than previously identified would occur. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18‐1‐B of the California Building Code (2001), creating substantial risks to life or property? Results of the Expansion Index laboratory testing of the upper soils on the subject property indicate a very low expansion potential. A conventional shallow foundation system appears to be suitable for use to support the structures proposed for residential development, provided the property is graded and improved in CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐24 general conformance with recommendations presented herein, as well as the effective edition of the California Building Code (CBC), the City of Anaheim and/or County of Orange grading ordinances. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? The subject property and environs are currently served by a sanitary sewer system. Sewer facilities, which are located in the adjacent streets, would continue to serve the proposed multiple‐family residential development. Raw sewage generated on the site by the Platinum Vista Apartments project will be collected and conveyed by the existing sanitary sewage collection and conveyance system and not a septic system or other alternative means of collecting and treating raw sewage. As a result, potential impacts associated with a septic system are not anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts Project implementation would not result in any significant cumulative impacts associated with site soils or geology because the project will be designed to meet current CBC and City Building Code requirements to ensure that potential impacts that include the loss of property and life is minimized. In addition, mitigation measures have also been prescribed to ensure that no significant cumulative loss of property and/or lives would occur. Therefore, cumulative impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. Conclusion Based on the foregoing analysis and information, there is no evidence that the changes to the project require a major change to FSEIR No. 339. The project would not result in any new significant environmental impact nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of impacts from that described in FSEIR No. 339. There is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to FSEIR No. 339. 3.7 Greenhouse Gas/Climate Change 3.7.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis FSEIR No. 339 evaluated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with build‐out of the PTMLUP based on the Technical Advisory for addressing climate change through CEQA released in 2008 by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and the amended CEQA Guidelines (released on December 30, 2009). Operational emissions were calculated for area sources as well as project‐related water demand, energy use, and waste disposal, and transportation sources. An estimate of construction emissions was also generated. Build‐out of the PTMLUP would generate substantial greenhouse gas emissions and cumulatively contribute to climate change impacts in California. Implementation of mitigation measures related to solid waste reduction, transportation and motor vehicles, energy efficiency, and water conservation and efficiency would reduce greenhouse gas emission. Nevertheless, the emission levels would continue to represent a Significant and Unavoidable Adverse Impact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted by City Council. Despite this finding, it was determined that buildout of the PTMLUP would be consistent with statewide and regional greenhouse gas reduction strategies to integrate land uses and improve transportation planning. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐25 3.7.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? The proposed Platinum Vista Apartments Project involves an increase in the number of residential units and the elimination of the commercial floor area approved for the property. Specifically, the proposed project would result in the development of 389 apartment units, which equates to an increase of 39 dwelling units based on the 350 dwelling units approved for the property. In addition, the 60,000 square feet of commercial area would be eliminated. Operational GHG emissions include the direct emissions from vehicle trips and natural gas use and the indirect emissions resulting from the off‐site generation of electricity used on‐site and used to obtain, transport, and treat water used on‐site. The average daily trips associated with development of the site is approximately 50 percent less than the trips associated with the land uses analyzed by FSEIR No. 339 for the same project area within the Platinum Triangle. Similarly, the proposed project will reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled by about 13,000 vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Therefore, GHG emissions from vehicle trips would be reduced as a result of project implementation. In addition, it is determined in Section 3.17, Utilities and Service Systems of this addendum that the proposed project would generate less demand for utilities including natural gas, electricity, and water. This decrease in both vehicular trips and demand for utilities would result in a reduction in GHG emissions related to the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project would not increase GHG emissions levels beyond what was analyzed in FSEIR No. 339, and no new or more severe long‐term GHG emissions impacts would occur. The proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project is considered to be infill development that would provide housing opportunities in close proximity to retail, service, entertainment and office opportunities available within the Platinum Triangle. Although the proposed project would result in more residential development than previously approved for the site, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) provides several bus routes along the project site which connect users to the Anaheim Metrolink Station and the future Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC), further reducing the number of vehicular trips. In addition, the proposed project would be designed to comply with Title 24 of the State Building Code to reduce energy consumption and would meet building efficiency requirements per the relevant mitigation measures identified in FSEIR No. 339. Finally, several mitigation measures prescribed in FSEIR No. 339 would be implemented by the project, which would facilitate a reduction in project‐related GHG emissions. These measures include those prescribed for Air Quality (MM 2‐3, MM 2‐5 and MM 2‐6) as listed, Traffic/Transportation (MM 9‐14), and Utilities and Service Systems (MM10‐9, MM 10‐12 through MM 10‐14, MM 10‐18 through MM 10‐22, and MM 10‐24). Refer to Section 3.3 (Air Quality), Section 3.16 (Transportation/Traffic), and Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems) for a listing of each measure. Therefore, similar to FSEIR No. 339, the proposed project is consistent with statewide and regional greenhouse gas reduction strategies. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The General Plan Update for the City of Anaheim was adopted in May 2004. The City of Anaheim General Plan, Green Element, while not specifically addressing GHG emissions or climate change, addresses topics concerning conservation of natural resources including vehicle emissions reduction; reducing vehicle work trips; expanding transit trips; sound land use planning; efficient, clean‐burning public transit; energy conservation; and building performance standards (see also Section 5.4, Land Use and Planning). CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐26 In accordance with AB 32, CARB developed the Scoping Plan to outline the state’s strategy to achieve 1990 level emissions by year 2020. To estimate the reductions necessary, CARB projected year statewide 2020 BAU GHG emissions (i.e., GHG emissions in the absence of statewide emission reduction measures). CARB identified that the state as a whole would be required to reduce GHG emissions by 30 percent from year 2020 BAU. Therefore, the Scoping Plan defines the future baseline emissions scenario to mean in the absence of the statewide emissions reduction strategy. In order to determine whether the project’s GHG emissions are consistent with the overall goal of AB 32, emissions shown previously in Table 5.11‐4 are compared to GHG emissions with implementation of the Scoping Plan GHG emissions reduction measures. Additionally, the Scoping Plan identified several early action measures to reduce GHG emissions in the State of California. These early action measures include: • Green Building: Implementation of newer, more energy‐efficient California Building Standards within the California Building Code (CBC). The new 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards are 15 percent more energy efficient than the 2005 standards. • Renewable Energy Portfolio: Requiring that California use renewable energy to represent 33 percent of California’s energy portfolio. Renewable energy currently comprises 12 percent of the state’s energy portfolio. • Per‐Capita Water Reduction: Reducing per‐capita water use by approximately 20 percent. The draft 20X2020 water conservation plan identifies strategies to reduce water use in the state. In addition, plumbing and landscaping codes amended with the new CBC result in a 50 percent reduction of water use for new commercial and residential plumbing fixtures. • Low Carbon Fuel Standard: Adoption of a new Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). The LCFS requires the carbon content of fuels sold in California to be reduced by 10 percent by year 2020. • Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards: Adoption of higher fuel efficiency standards (Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards). The United States Environmental Protection Agency granted the waiver to California to implement higher fuel efficiency standards on July 1, 2009. California’s fuel efficiency standards require the average fleet fuel economy of cars to be 43 miles per gallon (mpg) by year 2020. This results in an increase in fuel efficiency of 42.8 percent from the current 23 mpg average fleet economy in California. Table 5.11‐5 in FSEIR No. 339 shows the GHG emissions inventory at build‐out of the Revised Platinum Triangle Master Plan with the associated GHG emissions (654,375 MT CO2e/year), reductions (353,237 MT CO2e/year) and the percent reduction (35 percent) from business as usual (BAU). To be consistent with GHG reduction targets of AB 32 for year 2020, the City would need to reduce GHG emissions by 30 percent from BAU by year 2020. As shown in this table, the statewide GHG emissions reduction measures identified in the Scoping Plan and that are being implemented over the next 10 years would reduce GHG emissions by 353,237 MTCO2e or 35 percent, from the BAU scenario. Because the GHG emissions reductions for transportation, buildings, energy, and other economic sectors would be implemented by year 2020, the percent reduction associated with the Scoping Plan for the project for 2030 would be similar for forecast year 2020. Implementation of the proposed project would result in the reduction of GHG emissions by approximately 45 percent compared to the approved Platinum Vista land use plan, which would further reduce the total Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan emissions presented in FSEIR 339 and would, therefore, be consistent with the previous analysis. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐27 Cumulative Impacts Similar to cumulative air quality impacts, project‐related cumulative impacts would be reduced proportionate to the reduction in stationary and mobile‐source emissions generated by the proposed project when compared to the approved residential and commercial land uses; however, the GHG emissions would continue to contribute to the significant unavoidable adverse GHG impacts identified for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project in FSEIR No. 339. Conclusion The proposed project does not result in a new significant environmental impact nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of impacts from that described in FSEIR No. 339. Therefore, approval of the proposed project would not require any changes to FSEIR No. 339 related to greenhouse gas emissions. FSEIR Relevant Mitigation Measures Refer to Section 3.3 (Air Quality), Section 3.16 (Traffic/Transportation), and Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems. 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 3.8.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis According to FSEIR No. 339, no impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials were identified through the initial study process. Consequently, FSEIR No. 339 does not contain any specific analysis related to hazards and hazardous materials. 3.8.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The applicant is proposing to increase the number of apartment units on the Platinum Vista property from 350 to 389 and eliminate the 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area. It is anticipated that construction activities would involve the use of commonly used hazardous materials such as oil, gas, tar, construction materials and adhesives, cleaning solvents and paint associated with the construction of the multiple‐family residential development. Transport of these materials to the site and use on the site would only create a localized hazard in the event of an accident or spills. Hazardous materials use, transport, storage and handling would be subject to federal, state and local regulations to reduce the risk of accidents. Equipment maintenance and disposal of vehicular fluids is subject to existing regulations, including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Measures to prevent spillage and/or seepage of materials into the ground would be required to ensure that potentially significant hazards are not created either during construction or in the future. Given the nature of the project in terms of scope and size, it is anticipated that normal storage, use and transport of hazardous materials would not result in undue risk to construction workers on the site or to persons on surrounding areas. The use and disposal of any hazardous materials on the site and in conjunction with the project will be in accordance with existing regulations. With the exception of small quantities of pesticides, fertilizers, cleaning solvents, paints, etc., that are typically used to maintain residential uses. On‐going operation of the site as a multiple‐family residential development within Sub‐Area A of the Katella District in the Platinum Triangle will not result in the storage and/or use of CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐28 hazardous materials that would rise to the level of creating a potentially significant adverse impact. Thus no significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? As previously indicated, the Platinum Vista property previously supported commercial and industrial development. During the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) conducted for the proposed project, minor quantities of cleaning products, lubricants, and or paint were noted in the existing structures occupying the site. In addition, small quantities of motor oil, waste oil, and fuel, as well as used tires, were noted. In general, housekeeping was adequate to good, with no evidence of significant spillage/leakage, or significant accumulation of waste. All interiors of the former industrial structures were paved with concrete, minimizing concerns in that regard. No potentially hazardous groundwater and/or soils conditions are known to exist within the limits of the project area that would result in the release of hazardous materials from the site. Furthermore, future land uses include only residential, retail/commercial and park uses, which are compatible uses that would neither utilize hazardous materials nor create hazardous conditions that would expose the public to such conditions through the discharge of hazard materials into the environment. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. The property is generally bordered by commercial/industrial and residential development. It is immediately bound by Omni Duct (1700 South Lewis Street) to the north, A‐Town Metro south of Katella Avenue, residential development to the east, and the Platinum Gateway residential development that is currently under construction and Lewis Street to the west. A former gas station (Former Unocal ‐1818 South Lewis Street) was located to the southwest at the northeast corner of Katella Avenue and Lewis Street. None of the adjacent properties were identified as having environmental related issues on any of the databases researched. Several nearby sites have reported releases; however, these sites are not considered an environmental concern. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one‐quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Paul Revere Elementary School at 140 W. Guinida Lane (northwest of the project site) and the Ponderosa Elementary School at 2135 South Mountain View Avenue (southwest of the project site) are within the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan area and are located approximately one‐quarter of a mile from the subject property. Additionally, the Anaheim City Unified School District operates the Family Oasis at 131 W. Midway Drive and the Facilities and Operations Center at 1411 South Anaheim Boulevard. These facilities, operated by the school district, are also about one‐quarter mile from the Platinum Vista project site. Nonetheless, as indicated previously, use or handling of hazardous materials or substances within the project area would comply with appropriate state and federal rules and regulations through permitting process. No unauthorized use of hazardous materials would be allowed. The project area is occupied by various industrial uses and implementation of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments Project would not result in substantial adverse impact to school population due to increased amount of hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. No additional analysis in the EIR is warranted. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐29 Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Database records searches were conducted as part of the Anaheim Stadium Area Master Land Use Plan FEIR No. 321 in 1999 and the FSEIR No. 332 in 2005 to identify properties that could potentially pose a variety of environmental hazards within the boundaries and immediately adjacent to The Platinum Triangle. Action status on many of the identified properties were “closed” and required no further remediation and some were undergoing environmental remediation. However, these impacts are site‐specific and implementation of mitigation measures prescribed pursuant to FSEIR No. 332 would ensure that identified hazardous waste and/or hazardous material is handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5) and according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22. FSEIR No. 332 and, subsequently FSEIR No. 339, determined that development of The Platinum Triangle, including the Platinum Vista project site, would not create a significant hazard to the environment through the release of hazardous materials and the proposed project does not involve actions that would affect the impact finding. In addition, existing Federal and State regulations that govern hazardous material and waste management help to minimize the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The Phase I ESA conducted for the proposed project included records searches of all applicable data bases and determined that the subject property is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code 66962.5. Furthermore, the Phase I ESA concluded that there is no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs) in connection with the property. Therefore, the conclusion of the FSEIR No. 339 remains valid and no further analysis is required. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? There are two public airports in Orange County: John Wayne Airport (JWA) located approximately 8.25 miles south of the site and Fullerton Municipal Airport (FMA), which is located seven miles to the north. Based on the location of the airports, the subject property is not located within a two‐mile radius of either airport and, therefore, is neither subject to nor affected by an adopted airport land use plan. Furthermore, development of the Platinum Vista Apartments project as proposed would not subject future residents to safety hazards associated with aviation operations at either airport. No aviation‐related impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? As indicated above, two airports are located in northern and central Orange County; however, no private airstrips are located within the project environs. Future development as proposed would not be subject to any safety hazards associated with operations at a private airstrip. In addition, although three heliport facilities are located in the vicinity of the project area, the initial study prepared for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion determined that operations of these heliports would not pose safety hazards to future residents of the project area and that future development pursuant to the PTMLUP, including the subject Platinum Vista property, would not expose future residents to heliport safety hazards based on the analysis included in FSEIR No. 332, which preceded FSEIR No. 339. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐30 Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The City of Anaheim has an emergency preparedness plan that complies with State law and interfaces with other cities and counties within Southern California. The plan outlines the operations that shall be taken in the event of a disaster. It also allows for coordination with other agencies in the event that Anaheim is affected by a disaster elsewhere. The plan addresses a warning system, emergency broadcast system (EBS), Emergency Operations Center (EOC), and shelter system. The plan provides a foundation to conduct operations and coordinate the management of critical resources during emergencies. It also provides the framework for which nongovernmental agencies and organizations that have resources needed to meet emergency requirements are integrated into the program. The City of Anaheim also participates in the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS). The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services administers SEMS and coordinates multi‐agency responses to disasters. SEMS is required by the California Government Code and was developed to provide a “common language” for emergency response personnel to request resources and equipment from other agencies. In addition to resource allocation, SEMS was established to minimize the duplication of efforts during emergency response by defining common tactics and identifying a clear chain of command. The SEMS program is developed to respond to incidents as they occur, and does not provide long‐term recovery guidelines. Although project implementation would result in an increase in the number of dwelling units within Sub‐Area A in the Katella District, it would eliminate the potential development of 60,000 square feet of commercial development allocated to that sub‐area. Although it is not anticipated that development within the PTMLUP would adversely affect emergency response or evacuation plans, new development, including the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project, would be required to accommodate emergency vehicles. Furthermore, the City of Anaheim has several policies in place to minimize risks to life and property through emergency preparedness and public awareness. Therefore, no additional impacts are anticipated and no further analysis is warranted. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The subject property is neither located within nor adjacent to a designated wildland area and would not, therefore, be exposed to the potential for wildland fire. As indicated above, the Anaheim Fire Department provides fire protection and would respond to fire and/or emergency situations occurring in the project area, including the subject site. No significant wildland fire impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts Compliance with all regulatory requirements related to the use and storage of hazardous materials would ensure that any potential health hazard is eliminated or reduced to a less than significant level, which would also eliminate the potential for cumulative hazards to occur. Furthermore, project implementation does not include any feature that would be considered a hazard or create hazardous conditions. As a result, no cumulative impacts would occur. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐31 Conclusion The proposed project does not result in a new significant environmental impact nor is there a substantial increase in the severity of impacts from that described in FSEIR No. 339. Therefore, approval of the proposed project would not require any changes to FSEIR No. 339 related to greenhouse gas emissions. 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality 3.9.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis Hydrology According to FSEIR No. 339, the portion of the Platinum Triangle east of State College Boulevard is located within the Santa Ana River Watershed and the portion of the Platinum Triangle west of State College Boulevard is located within the Westminster Watershed. The Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project site is located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance study area within the Zones A99 and X. In the pre‐project condition, runoff from the graded pad areas is contained within each paid and allowed to infiltrate into underlying soils. Runoff from the paved street areas are allowed to flow northerly to Katella Avenue and southerly to Gene Autry Way. Runoff from both Katella Avenue and Gene Autry Way is conveyed westerly to Lewis Street storm drain system (County Facility No. C05P21) and conveyed approximately one mile south to the East Garden Grove‐Wintersburg Channel (County Facility No. C05) and Haster Basin (County Facility No. C05B02). Downstream receiving waters include Bolsa Chica Wetlands, Huntington Harbour and Anaheim Bay. The project site does not receive off‐site run‐on from adjacent properties. Additionally, the Platinum Triangle is located within the Orange County Groundwater Basin. Although FSEIR No. 339 identified that implementation of the Platinum Triangle would increase the demand on groundwater supplies, it was determined that adequate water supplies would be available without lowering the local groundwater table level. Water Quality FSEIR No. 339 incorporated the water quality analysis prepared and included in FSEIR No. 332 for the Platinum Triangle. As discussed, pollutant concentrations for the project condition were anticipated to decrease both with and without the best management practices (BMPs) as a result of changes in land use, which in general would result in a reduction in light industrial/commercial and a greater amount of mixed uses, including residential development. With implementation of mitigation measures identified in FSEIR No. 332, anticipated pollutant concentrations were expected to further decrease and the project water quality impacts would be less than significant; water quality conditions were expected to be better than the existing conditions at the time of the report. FSEIR No. 339 found that no significant unavoidable adverse effects were anticipated from the implementation of the Platinum Triangle. 3.9.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? The project is located within the Anaheim Bay‐Huntington Harbor Watershed and is tributary to the East Garden Grove‐Wintersburg Channel. Currently, there is no approved Watershed Infiltration and Hydromodification Management Plan (WIHMP) for the Anaheim Bay‐Huntington Harbor Watershed. The project’s receiving waters are considered impaired under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. Table 3.9‐1 reflects the Section 303(d) impairments for each of the water bodies as well as the applicable total maximum CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐32 daily loads (TMDLs). There are no Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) or ESA’s within the project site. Table 3.9‐1 Section 303(d) Impairments and Applicable TMDLs Platinum Vista Apartments Project Water Body Section 303(d)Impairment Applicable TMDLs Anaheim Bay Pesticides Metals/Metalloids Other Organics Toxicity Dieldrin (tissue) Nickel PCBs Sediment Toxicity Huntington Harbor Pesticides Metals/Metalloids Other Organics Pathogens Toxicity Chlordane Copper/Lead/Nickel PCBs Pathogens Sediment Toxicity SOURCE: Hall & Foreman, Inc., Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (September 2012) The primary pollutants of concern associated with the proposed project include suspended solids/sediment, pathogens (bacteria/virus), and pesticides. Other pollutants of concern include nutrients, oil and grease, trash, and debris. The proposed project will incorporate best management practices during construction prescribed in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and post‐construction as required in the Water Quality Management Plan. Implementation of the BMPs will ensure that water quality standards would not be exceeded; no additional mitigation measures would be required. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre‐existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? The primary source of groundwater for the City is the Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin) that underlies the north half of Orange County beneath broad lowlands. The Basin covers an area of approximately 350 square miles, bordered by the Coyote Hills and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and terminating at the Orange County line to the northwest, where its aquifer systems continue into the Central Basin of Los Angeles County. As discussed in FSEIR No. 339, from a hydrogeological standpoint, City wells are ideally located within the Basin, that they pump from geological structures and that they are relatively high up and geologically differentiated from other parts of the OCWD groundwater basin. In addition, because the City’s wells are located relatively near to the Prado Dam outlet to the Santa Ana River, particularly as compared to the well locations of other producers in the Basin, the City’s well fields draw water from easily accessible groundwater tables that are recharged on a naturally‐occurring priority basis due to: 1) the location of OCWD recharge basins in or adjacent to the City, and 2) the City’s wells’ location in or near the upper reaches of the Santa Ana River. In essence, Santa Ana River water has the natural effect of recharging the portion of the OCWD Basin that provides groundwater to the City wells prior to such Santa Ana River water reaching the lower portion of the river. Thus, construction of an additional groundwater well in the City would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐33 substantially affect the production of groundwater production wells operated by other producers located in other portions of the Basin. According to the preliminary geotechnical evaluation prepared for the project, the depth to groundwater was measured between 80 to 124 feet below ground surface (bgs) at various locations near the project site. Goundwater was not encountered in any of the exploratory borings to the maximum depths explored of 51.5 feet below existing grades during the subsurface exploration. Groundwater is sufficiently deep that it is not anticipated to adversely impact the proposed development. The project site is not located in a groundwater recharge area. The site will not utilize groundwater for operation; water would be supplied by the local municipal water service. Therefore, no impacts related to groundwater supplies or recharge would result from the proposed project. The proposed project encompasses the same area as previously analyzed in FSEIR No. 339 for the subject property. As concluded in FSEIR No. 339, project implementation would not result in a potential significant adverse affect groundwater recharge within the basin. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on‐ or off‐site? No stream or river exists within the limits of the 4.13‐acre Platinum Vista site. As previously indicated, the existing site had been significantly altered in order to support commercial (restaurant and industrial development that existed on the property. Although project implementation would result in the conversion of the property from a commercial/industrial development to a multiple‐family residential development and would result in alterations that would affect existing drainage conditions, it is anticipated that the existing surface drainage conditions and characteristics would generally be maintained as discussed below. Although additional grading and landform alteration necessary to prepare the site for development as proposed could result in some erosion during that phase of construction, best management practices (BMPs) would be implemented pursuant to a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in order to prevent downstream transport of sediments resulting from site grading. BMPs are required pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and also prescribed by the City and reflected in FSEIR No. 339. As stipulated in that document, the property owner/developer shall also prepare and submit to RWQCB, 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, would describe the structural and nonstructural BMPs that will 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. Implementation of the BMPs will ensure that potential erosion and siltation would not be transported downstream and, therefore, will not adversely affect downstream drainage features. No significant impacts would occur. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on‐ or off‐site? As previously indicated, the Platinum Vista Apartments property encompasses approximately 4.13 acres. A Preliminary Water Quality Management Plans (WQMPs) has been prepared for the project that addresses pre‐ and post‐development drainage conditions. Currently, the project site generally drains from the northeast to the southwest. All drainage is taken by surface flow into a network of concrete gutters prior to discharging into Katella Avenue through existing driveways. An existing catch basin in Katella Avenue collects the drainage from the site and ultimate joins the existing 54‐inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) in CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐34 Katella Avenue. All discharge from the site is ultimately received by the existing 78‐inch RCP storm drain in Lewis Avenue. Table 3.9‐2 summarizes the pre‐ and post‐development surface conditions of the proposed project. As reflected in the table, 64.4 percent of the site is currently pervious. However, after development of the property as currently proposed, the pervious surfaces on the site would increase by approximately 21 percent to 78 percent. Table 3.9‐2 Project Site Surface Conditions Platinum Vista Apartments Pervious Impervious Acres Percent Acres Percent Pre‐Project Conditions 0.43 10 3.89 90 Post‐Development Conditions 1.21 28 3.11 72 SOURCE: Hall & Foreman, Inc. (September 2012) As indicated in Table 3.9‐2, development of the site would result in a reduction of the impervious surface coverage on the site. Based on the site plan, the impervious coverage would be reduced from 90 percent to 72 percent coverage. As previously indicated, the runoff conditions and storm drain system under the post‐ development condition would closely mimic the existing conditions. Multiple sump‐areas are proposed within the common areas in order to collect drainage before routing it off the site by the underground storm drain system. The on‐site drainage system would discharge at the same locations as under existing conditions. Hydrologic conditions of concern (HCOC) do not exist. The goal of the low impact development (LID) strategy to address project‐related drainage is to infiltrate, harvest and use, evapotranspire, or biotreat/biofilter, the 85th percentile, 24‐hour storm event (i.e., design capture volume). There are no known constraints on the project site that would cause infiltration strategies to be infeasible. As a result, infiltration is proposed as the primary low impact development (LID) strategy; the full design capture volume will be infiltrated. LID performance criteria can be satisfied using infiltration BMPs. Pre‐treatment of underground infiltration areas would be provided to remove sediment, trash and debris. The project has been designed to include multiple drainage management areas. Best management practices (BMPs) are proposed at strategic locations within the various landscape areas in order to achieve the LID performance criteria for infiltration for each drainage management area. Due to limited available area, and consideration to structural elements of the project, multiple BMP strategies are proposed. The LID infiltration BMPs proposed for the project include corrugated metal pipe (CMP) infiltration chambers, Dry Well systems, and Bioretention/Bioinfiltration Basins. The Preliminary WQMP illustrated on Exhibit 3.9‐1. Implementation of these BMPs will ensure that the project would meet current regulatory requirements to reduce water quality impacts. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐36 As described above, the proposed project has been designed not only to replicate the existing drainage conditions but also to accommodate the on‐site storm runoff generated by the development as proposed. This conclusion is consistent with the findings and conclusions presented in FSEIR No. 339. Implementation of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project would be subject to the mitigation measures prescribed in that document. No significant drainage impacts will occur as a result of future development within Sub‐Area of the Platinum Triangle. Create or contribute runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Pursuant to the City of Anaheim Municipal Code Title 10, Chapter 09, Section 030.010, the project is subject to the requirements of New Development and Significant Redevelopment projects to control urban runoff, in accordance with County of Orange Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). As indicated above (refer to Table 3.9‐2), project implementation will result in a decrease in the amount of impervious surface on the site. Furthermore, LID infiltration BMPs are proposed that will infiltrate the full DCV for the site and an on‐site, underground detention basis is also proposed to reduce peak flows to existing conditions. The proposed project has been designed to maximize drainage existing patterns to provide opportunities to convey stormwater to areas that will maximize the effectiveness of the low impact development (LID) BMPs prescribed in the WQMP. Specifically, the LID BMPs that will be incorporated into the project design are intended to retain, onsite, (i.e., infiltrate, harvest and use, or evapo‐transpire) stormwater runoff as feasible up to the Design Capture Volume established for the project. Based on the nominal post‐development volume of stormwater runoff generated by the proposed project, the existing and proposed drainage systems would be adequate to accommodate the post‐development runoff volumes. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Although conversion of the property as proposed would not result in any unique or unusual water quality impacts, site preparation, grading and construction could result in some erosion potential and the potential for a discharge of silt and other pollutants associated with the proposed development into the surface waters. However, as indicated above, it would be necessary to implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan as prescribed in MM 3‐2 in FSEIR No. 339. As indicated in that mitigation measure, the applicant must file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). As part of the NOI, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. A Water Quality Management Plan and related Best Management Practices has been prepared as required by MM 3‐2, to ensure that water quality impacts that may occur during grading and construction are minimized. Implementation of the BMPs prescribed in the SWPPP would avoid potentially significant water quality impacts during the construction phase of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project. As a result, project‐related construction impacts to water quality would be less than significant. In addition, non‐structural and structural BMPs included in the WQMP and reflected in Table 3.9‐3 and Table 3.9‐4, respectively, will ensure that potential long‐term, post‐development water quality impacts are also avoided or reduced to a less than significant level. Non‐Structural BMPs As indicated in Table 3.9‐3, BMP Nos. N6, N7, N8, N13 and N16 are not included with the non‐structural category because the proposed project does not include the facilities referenced in those BMPs. Each of the categories of the non‐structural BMPs that are applicable to the proposed project and that will be implemented are described in greater detail in the Conceptual WQMP, which is available for review at the City of Anaheim. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐37 Table 3.9‐3 Routine Non‐Structural BMPs Platinum Vista Apartments Project BMP No. Name Incl. N/A N1 Education for Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants X N2 Activity Restrictions X N3 Common Area Landscape Management X N4 BMP Maintenance X N5 Title 22 CCR Compliance (how development will comply) X N6 Local Industrial Permit Compliance X N7 Spill Contingency X M8 Underground Storage Tank Compliance X N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Compliance X N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation X N11 Common Area Litter Control X N12 Employee Training X N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks X N14 Common Area Catch Basin Inspection X N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots X N16 Retail Gasoline Outlets X SOURCE: Hall & Foreman. (September 2012) Structural BMPs In addition to the non‐structural BMPs identified above, the applicant would also be required to install structural BMPs through the construction and development phases of the project. The routine structural BMPs, which are included in the Preliminary WQMP and identified in Table 3.9‐4, include a variety of mandated elements, including trash and waste storage, efficient irrigation systems and landscaping, and slope protection. As previously indicated, the nature and extent of each of the BMPs included in the proposed project are thoroughly described in the Draft WQMP, which is available for review at the City of Anaheim. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐38 Table 3.9‐4 Routine Structural BMPs Platinum Vista Apartments Project BMP No. Name Incl. N/A S1 Provide storm drain system stenciling and signage X S2 Design and construct outdoor material storage areas to reduce pollution introduction X S3 Design and construct trash and waste storage areas to reduce pollution introduction X S4 Use efficient irrigation systems and landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control X S5 Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation X Incorporate requirements applicable to individual priority project categories (from SDRWQCB NPDES Permit) X S6 Dock areas X S7 Maintenance bays X S8 Vehicle wash areas X S9 Outdoor processing areas X S10 Equipment wash areas X S11 Fueling areas X S12 Hillside landscaping X S13 Wash water and control for food preparation X S14 Community car was racks X SOURCE: Hall & Foreman (September 2012) Place housing within a 100‐year flood hazard as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? The project site is located within a 100‐Year to 500‐Year Flood Zone as identified in the City's Safety Element of the General Plan (Figure S‐6). However, in the event that a flood should occur, it is expected to be less than one foot deep. Also, the site is located outside of flood hazard and floodway areas as defined on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) (FIRM Map for Orange County and Incorporated Areas, Community Panel 060213, and Panel Map No. 06059C0142J, 2009). Nonetheless, as prescribed in MM 3‐1 in FSEIR No. 339, with the exception of parking structures, all structures must be designed to be at least three (3) feet higher that the 100‐year flood zone, where applicable, unless otherwise required by the City Engineer. All structures below this level must be flood‐proofed to prevent damage to property or harm to people. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation; no additional mitigation measures are required. Place within a 100‐year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? As indicated above, the project site could be subject to potential inundation and/or flooding because a portion of the site is located within the 100‐year flood zone, as designated by FEMA. Therefore, as prescribed in FSEIR No. 339, all habitable structures would be designed to be at least three feet higher than the 100‐foot CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐39 flood zone, and facilities are or would be constructed to eliminate such potential flooding. Compliance with MM 3‐1 as indicated above will ensure that potentially flooding impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Furthermore, no significant increases in impervious surfaces or structures that could potentially impede or redirect flood flows will occur in a FEMA‐designated 100‐year flood zone as a result of project implementation. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated and no additional mitigation measures are required. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Project implementation would not expose either people or structures to flood hazards as a result of the failure of a dam or levee. The site is not subject to inundation as a result of the failure of a dam or levee because no such structure is located near the subject property that would adversely affect the site in the event of a failure. Therefore, no flooding or inundation impacts would result from implementation of the project. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? A seiche involves the oscillation of a body of water in an enclosed basin, such as a reservoir, storage tank, or lake. According to the City’s General Plan, no enclosed bodies of water are located in the immediate vicinity of the site; therefore, no impacts from seiches are anticipated as a result of project implementation. A tsunami, commonly referred to as a tidal wave, is a sea wave generated by submarine earthquakes, major landslides, or volcanic action. The City of Anaheim is located well inland, away from the Orange County coastline. Due to the elevation and the distance from the coastline, tsunami hazards do not exist for the project site and vicinity. Similarly, the two sites are essentially flat and devoid of steep slopes (either natural or manmade) that could be undermined by seismic activity or other instability to cause mudflows. Implementation of the proposed residential project will not expose people or structures to seiches, tsunamis or mudflows. Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. Cumulative Impacts With the implementation of the BMPs and features proposed in the project, storm runoff would not exceed volumes prescribed for site development. In addition, surface water would be treated to ensure that pollutant loads are minimized and meet discharge requirements. Therefore, project implementation would not significantly contribute to the cumulative degradation of either storm runoff or water quality. Project‐ related impacts are less than significant. Conclusion Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a new significant impact or an impact that would be more severe than previously analyzed in FSEIR No. 339. The analysis included in FSEIR No. 339 adequately analyzed the potential impacts anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed project. No significant impacts would occur and no additional mitigation measures are required. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐40 3.10 Land Use and Planning 3.10.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The FSEIR concluded that the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Plan was consistent with all of the applicable goals, objectives and policies of the City’s General Plan, despite the need for the requisite amendments to the General Plan, PTMLUP, and PTMU Overlay District. Despite the amendments required for that project, the City determined that implementation of the revised PTMLUP achieves the goals and objectives articulated in the local and regional plans because the land uses would: • Balance and integrate uses • Stimulate market‐driven development • Create a unique, integrated, walkable urban environment • Reinforce transit‐oriented development opportunities. • Maintain and enhance connectivity • Create great neighborhoods The Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project provides additional housing, commercial, and office opportunities in a unique, mixed‐use urban environment, all of which address the relevant goals and objectives articulated in the City’s Land Use, Economic Development, and Community Design Elements as well as related regional plans addressing transportation/mobility. Because the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion builds upon the planning principles of the Platinum Triangle MLUP, the relevant goals policies and objectives would continue to be achieved. Furthermore, creation of the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) District would reinforce transit‐oriented development opportunities desired in SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan, and adjustment of mixed‐use boundaries would enhance connectivity and create dynamic neighborhoods. As a result, the FSEIR determined that the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion was consistent with the long‐range plans adopted by the City. However, one inconsistency with Goal 8.1 of the City’s Public Services and Facilities Element would occur. FSEIR No. 339 revealed that A‐Town Metro includes high‐rise residential towers located north of the existing Southern California Gas (SCG) microwave tower that could potentially conflict with the tower’s operation. The Development Agreement for A‐Town Metro allows high‐rise residential towers up to a maximum of 400 feet within designated development areas (i.e., project site), including some in the line‐of‐sight from the SCG microwave tower located south of the plan area. Because A‐Town Metro was an approved project with a signed and recorded Development Agreement, which was approved on October 25, 2005, it was not a part of the prior project actions associated with the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project. As a result, the analysis presented in FSEIR No. 339 concluded that, provided that development within A‐Town Metro occurs as currently approved (i.e., residential towers up to 400 feet high), relocation of the microwave tower may be necessary to prevent service disturbances. In the event that the property containing the microwave tower is redeveloped with future mixed uses, the tower could be relocated. However, because the City of Anaheim could not require any actions on A‐Town Metro to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, FSEIR No. 339 concluded that the potential interference/inconsistency with the General Plan Goal 8.1 would be a significant unavoidable impact. (Although the proposed project site is located within the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle, it is not located within the A‐Town Master Plan area and does not, therefore, affect the operational capabilities of the SCG microwave facilities.) CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐41 3.10.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Physically divide an established community? The property that is the subject of the proposed development project encompasses approximately 4.13 acres within Sub‐Area A in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan area. The site is generally bound by Katella Avenue on the south, multiple‐family residential and commercial development is located to the east and industrial development is located north of the subject property. The approved Platinum Gateway multiple‐family residential development site abuts the Platinum Vista Apartments project site on the west. As indicated previously, the area surrounding the subject property is entirely developed with a variety of land uses, including residential, commercial, industrial, and sports venue development (east of State College Boulevard). The applicant is proposing to increase the density of the approved multiple‐ family residential project previously approved, resulting in an increase in the number of dwelling units to 389, or 39 more units than approved for the site. Although the use of the subject property would change from its present undeveloped condition, project implementation would not divide or otherwise adversely affect or change an established community because the development located adjacent to the site is comprised of a variety of land uses, including residential existing to the east and residential approved to the west. The proposed project does not contain any features or elements (e.g., roadways, channels, incompatible development, etc.) that would physically divide the existing residential neighborhoods in the project vicinity. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Implementation of the proposed project would require amendments to the approved plans affecting the Platinum Vista property. Specifically, the amendments include: ▪ General Plan Amendment To amend Table LU‐5: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City to increase the number of residential dwelling units and decrease the commercial area allocated within the mixed use designation of the Platinum Triangle as reflected below: - Addition of 39 dwelling units - Elimination of 60,000 square feet allocated for commercial area ▪ Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan Amendment To amend the allocated number of residential dwelling units and eliminate 60,000 square feet of commercial area allocated to the property. ▪ Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone Amendment To amend the allocated number of residential dwelling units and eliminate 60,000 square feet of commercial area allocated to the property. Although the proposed project requires the approval of the amendments cited above, future development proposed within Katella District of the Platinum Triangle area would be consistent with all of the applicable goals and policies of the General Plan, Land Use, Economic Development, and Community Design Elements as CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐42 reflected in Table 5.4‐1 in FSEIR No. 339. The increase of 39 residential dwelling units and elimination of 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area from the approved land use allocations for Sub‐Area A and the Katella District would not significantly change the land use allocations in a manner that would render the project inconsistent with the applicable policies. The proposed project would continue to be compatible with surrounding land uses and would comply with applicable design guidelines. Furthermore, any potential impacts would be avoided or lessened through the implementation of the mitigation measures applicable to the project prescribed in FSEIR No. 339. Finally, development of the Platinum Vista Apartments project would provide housing opportunities, which are consistent with the long‐range goals and objectives of the Anaheim General Plan and related long‐range plans and programs adopted by the City. As a result, the proposed project would continue to achieve, albeit to a quantitatively lesser degree, the goals, objectives, and policies of the relevant adopted plans and programs. In addition to the consistency determinations related to the Anaheim General Plan, the proposed project would also be consistent with other applicable regional plans and programs, including Compass/Growth visioning principles identified in SCAG’s Compass Blueprint 2% Strategy, and SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan. As indicated above, the proposed revisions to the land use plan for the Platinum Vista plan property would not significantly affect achieving the goals as previously analyzed for the Revised Platinum Triangle Plan Expansion as articulated in Table 5.4‐4 and Table 5.4‐5 of FSEIR No. 339. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? The Anaheim General Plan identifies the City’s open space and conservation areas. However, because the area of the City in which the subject property is located is nearly completely developed, natural open space and habitat are limited in the project environs. The subject property encompasses approximately 41 acres that are currently undeveloped; however, the Platinum Vista Apartments project site previously supported commercial and industrial development that has since been demolished or is pending demolition. The project site has been entirely altered in order to accommodate the prior land uses. As a result, no natural features and/or habitat that would support sensitive species exist on the site. In particular, neither the site nor the surrounding areas is located within a Natural Community Conservation Plan or Habitat Conservation Plan. Therefore, project implementation would not adversely affect such a plan, sensitive habitat and/or resources. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation. Cumulative Impacts As indicated above, although the project would require approval of a General Plan Amendment and related amendments to adopted long‐range plans, the proposed project is consistent with the relevant land use policies adopted for development as articulated in the City’s General Plan and applicable regional plans with the exception of the potential interference with the existing SCG microwave tower south of the subject property. Although project implementation would result in an increase in residential dwelling units and elimination of 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area currently allocated for Sub‐Area A within the Katella District, the proposed project would not exceed the maximum intensity of development currently approved in the Katella District. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent and compatible with the surrounding land uses in the project environs. Thus, no significant cumulative land use impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. Conclusion Because the proposed project will allow for the development of 39 more dwelling units (11.1 percent) than allocated to the project site less commercial floor area, all of the associated land use impacts were previously CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐43 evaluated in FSEIR No. 339. As indicated in that FEIR and confirmed in the preceding analysis, no significant impacts will occur. 3.11 Mineral Resources 3.11.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis According to FSEIR No. 339, no impacts related to mineral resources were identified through the initial study process. Consequently, FSEIR No. 339 does not contain any specific analysis related to mineral resources. 3.11.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? The Platinum Vista Apartments project site is located within an area of the City of Anaheim that has been extensively developed and urbanized. The site, which was previously developed, is currently vacant and designated for mixed uses (i.e., residential and commercial) on the PTMLUP. Neither the Anaheim General Plan nor the State of California has identified the project site or environs as a potential mineral resource of Statewide or regional significance. No mineral resources are known to exist either on the site or in the project environs. Therefore, as indicated in the initial study prepared for FSEIR No. 339, project implementation would not result in any impacts to mineral resources and no mitigation measures are required. Result in the loss of availability of a locally‐important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? As indicated above, the Anaheim General Plan does not identify either the project site or environs as having potential value as a locally important mineral resource site. No mineral resources are known to exist on the site, which has been significantly altered as a result of past development. Project implementation as proposed (i.e., multiple‐family residential development) would not result in the loss of any locally important mineral resource site and, therefore, no significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts As identified above, the subject property is not designated for mineral resources either by the State of California or County of Orange and is not known to contain such resources. As a result, no mineral resources would be lost with site development and, therefore, project implementation would result in any potentially significant cumulative impacts to mineral resources. Conclusion Based on the information and analysis presented above, there is no evidence that the proposed project would result in a new significant impact to mineral resources. Furthermore, there is no information in the record or otherwise available that indicates that there are substantial changes in circumstances that would require major changes to FSEIR No. 339. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐44 3.12 Noise 3.12.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis Short‐Term (Construction) Noise Impacts Short‐term noise impacts are impacts associated with site preparation, grading, and building construction of the proposed land uses. Construction of individual land uses under the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project would occur over a period of approximately 20 years in the 820‐acre area. Two types of short‐term noise impacts could occur during construction. First, the transport of workers and movement of materials to and from the site could incrementally increase noise levels along local access roads. The second type of short‐ term noise impact is related to noise generated at the job site during demolition, site preparation, grading, and/or physical construction. Construction is performed in distinct steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. However, despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction‐related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. Noise levels generated by construction equipment would range between approximately 70 dB to over 100 dB at 50 feet from the source, depending on the specific piece of equipment utilized in the construction activity. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that although the City of Anaheim restricts the hours of construction activities to the least noise‐sensitive portions of the day (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM, excluding federal holidays), construction activities would occur over an extended period of time (approximately 20 years) and would result in temporary exceedances of 65 dBA up to 446 feet from the construction site, which is a significant impact. FSEIR No. 339 also identified potential vibration impacts associated with new construction within the Platinum Triangle Master Plan area and the potential effect on nearby sensitive receptors. Specifically, the analysis indicated that potential vibration impacts resulting from the use of impact equipment (e.g., pile drivers) during the construction of buildings taller than 12 stories. would be significant. Although a mitigation measure was prescribed, the analysis concluded that such potential impacts would remain significant, even with mitigation. Long‐Term Noise Impacts Based on the criteria used in the 2005 SEIR to determine level of significance (i.e., a 5 dBA increase in an ambient noise environment of less than 65 dBA CNEL or a 3 dBA noise increase in an ambient noise environment of 65 dBA CNEL or more), the proposed Project would result in new significant noise increases along multiple roadway segments in Anaheim and Orange, including roadway segments of Anaheim Way, Cerritos Avenue, Collins Avenue, Disney Way, Douglass Street, Eckhoff Street, Gene Autry Way, Haster Street, Howell Avenue,. Katella Avenue, Lewis Street, Main Street, Manchester Avenue, Orangewood Avenue, Phoenix Club Drive, Rampart Street, State College Boulevard, Struck Avenue, and Sunkist Street. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that potentially significant noise impacts for noise‐sensitive uses placed in proximity to freeways and major arterials could also occur if the sensitive uses fall within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour. However, because not all noise‐sensitive areas constructed under individual development proposals under the Platinum Triangle may meet the City’s noise compatibility standards and impacts would need to be evaluated on a case‐by‐case basis. Nonetheless, any siting of sensitive land uses within the vicinity of major arterials and freeways represents a potentially significant impact and would require a separate noise study through the development review process to determine the level of impact and required mitigation. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐45 Placement of noise‐sensitive land uses within the vicinity of Angel Stadium of Anaheim would also expose residents to temporary increases in ambient noise environment during a stadium event. During a game day, cheering, PA systems, and fireworks (when the Angels have a home run) would be audible at residential areas surrounding the stadium. These events typically occur in the evening hours and could last past 10:00 PM, which is considered the noise‐sensitive portion of the night. Temporary increases in the ambient noise environment during the baseball season, which lasts from April until October, in the event the Angels play post‐season games, which could result in nighttime awakenings for future residents. Typical noise levels within the stadium during a sporting event range from 94 dBA to 114 dBA for spectators within the stadium, while fireworks shows are 150 dBA as measured at a distance of 10 feet. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that any siting of sensitive land uses within the vicinity of the stadium that would be exposed to interior noise levels of 81 dBA SEL due to the stadium would result in a potentially significant noise impact. 3.12.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The project site and vicinity are located within an urban area that is developed with a variety of land uses, including single‐ and multiple‐family residential, commercial, institutional, sports, transportation, and other land uses. Ambient noise levels on the subject property and in the project environs are the result of vehicular traffic utilizing the surrounding roadways, including Katella Avenue and Lewis Avenue. Project implementation would convert the existing vacant property to a high density, multiple‐family residential land use. Although project implementation would result in a reduction in project‐related traffic when compared to the trip generation associated with the existing mixed use designation that would accommodate residential and commercial development, both on a daily and peak hour basis, it is anticipated that potential noise impacts would be similar, albeit slightly reduced, as the noise level projections along the roadway segments identified previously. Because residential development is proposed along the Katella Avenue corridor, these sensitive land uses would be subject to virtually the same noise level exposure as identified and described in FSEIR No. 339. Furthermore, other sensitive land uses along those same roadway segments would also be adversely affected by the high roadway noise levels. Because the traffic generated by the proposed project would not result in an increase in noise levels but rather contribute to a small potential decrease in noise mobile‐source noise levels anticipated identified in the FSEIR, the project as currently proposed would not result in any significant impacts. As concluded in FSEIR No. 339, potential noise impacts identified in FSEIR No. 339 would not exceed the City’s significance criteria (i..e., a 5 dBA increase in an ambient noise environment of less than 65 dBA CNEL or a 3 dBA noise increase in an ambient noise environment of 65 dBA CNEL or more). As prescribed in MM 5‐2, the proposed residential development will comply with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise levels, as required by the California Building Code and California Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24 and 25 of the California Code of Regulations).The potential impacts identified and described in FSEIR would not change significantly and the potential mobile‐source noise impacts identified in FSEIR No. 339 is adequate to address the proposed amendment to the Platinum Vista Apartments project. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Although grading and construction of the site would employ heavy equipment, significant groundborne vibration impacts are not anticipated because pile driving and/or similar activities that typically generate vibration impacts would not be utilized in the construction of the proposed project. Typical background vibration levels in residential areas are usually 50 VdB or lower, below the threshold of human perception. Perceptible vibration levels inside residences are typically attributed to the operation of heating and air CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐46 conditioning systems, door slams or street traffic. Construction activities and street traffic are some of the most common external sources of vibration that can be perceptible inside residences. The level at which groundborne vibration is strong enough to cause structural damage has not been determined conclusively. The most conservative estimates are reflected in the Federal Transportation Agency (FTA) standards as reflected in Table 5.5‐6 in FSEIR No. 339, which range from 90 VdB (vibration level) in buildings that are extremely susceptible to vibration damage to 102 VdB for building constructed of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster). Construction activities generate ground‐borne vibration when heavy equipment travels over unpaved surfaces or when it is engaged in soil movement. The effects of ground‐borne vibration include discernible movement of building floors, rattling of windows, shaking of items on shelves or hanging on walls, and rumbling sounds. Vibration related problems generally occur due to resonances in the structural components of a building because structures amplify groundborne vibration. As indicated in FSEIR No. 339, construction activities can generate varying degrees of groundborne vibration depending on the construction procedures and equipment used. Operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish with distance from the source. The effect on buildings near the construction site varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and receptor building construction. The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Groundborne vibration from construction activities rarely reaches levels that can damage structures, but it can achieve the audible and perceptible ranges in buildings close to a construction site. Groundborne vibration would be generated by construction equipment during construction activities for the proposed project, primarily during the demolition, grading, and foundation phases of the proposed structures. Unless there are extremely large generators of vibration, such as pile drivers, or receptors in close proximity to construction equipment, vibration is generally only perceptible at structures when vibration rattles windows, picture frames, and other objects. The maximum levels of vibration that would be experienced at vibration‐ sensitive structures located 25 feet from the construction equipment would vary from about 60 dBV to over 110 dBV. Typically, only construction equipment generating extremely high levels of vibration, such as pile drivers, has the potential for vibration‐induced structural damage. Construction of buildings taller than 12 stories, which generates substantial levels of vibration that can be perceived at even farther distances and could result in structural damage. Construction activities related to future development within the Platinum Triangle could result in vibration levels exceeding the FTA’s criteria for vibration‐induced structural damage within the Platinum Triangle, and would be considered significant. Such impacts were identified and described in FSEIR No. 339 and a mitigation measure was prescribed to reduce such potential vibration impacts to a less than significant level. However, even with mitigation as prescribed in FSEIR No. 339, vibration impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable. Because the proposed project is less than 12 stories in height and would not require the use of impact equipment such as pile drivers in the construction of the proposed residential buildings and parking structure, potentially significant vibration impacts are not anticipated. Therefore, MM 5‐5 prescribed in FSEIR No. 339 (use of auger cast piles for a pile‐supported transfer slab foundation system to reduce the duration necessary for the use of impact pile drivers) would not be required. Both stationary and mobile sources were determined in FSEIR No. 332, the precursor to FSEIR No. 339, to result in potentially significant impacts to noise‐sensitive residential units proposed within the Platinum Triangle. The Noise Element of the City’s General Plan indicates that noise thresholds are to be attained in habitable exterior areas and need not encompass the entirety of a property, and that special consideration should be given in the case of infill residential development along the City’s arterial corridors or railroad lines CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐47 in order to achieve an appropriate balance between providing a quality living environment and attractive project design. Residential, office, institutional, and commercial land uses should be considered in light of achieving this type of balance. It should be noted that the City of Anaheim does not regulate noise levels for balconies less than six feet in depth. However, ground‐floor patios at future residences facing major arterials and within the vicinity of rail lines would be exposed to high noise levels that exceed the City’s normally acceptable compatibility criterion. Numerous major arterials, highways, railroads, and other noise‐generating land uses are located within and surrounding the Platinum Triangle and could affect future noise‐sensitive land uses. The primary sources of noise within the Platinum Triangle are traffic on roadways in the vicinity of the project and locations near at‐ grade rail crossings where railroad traffic (and train horns) generates substantial noise. Major transportation sources within and surrounding the Platinum Triangle include I‐5, SR‐57, Katella Avenue, Gene Autry Way, Orangewood Boulevard, State College Boulevard, and the Orange County Line. In addition to transportation noise sources, existing industrial and entertainment land uses can generate high levels of stationary‐source noise that can affect proposed land uses if new noise‐sensitive residential developments were within close proximity. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Table 5.5‐9 in FSEIR No. 339 illustrates that that noise from roadways within the Platinum Triangle would exceed 65 dBA CNEL along several roadway segments as a result of vehicular traffic generated by the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project, resulting in noise levels that exceed the City’s conditionally acceptable noise compatibility criterion for noise‐sensitive residential uses. Noise from SR‐57, I‐5, and the Orange County Line also contributes to the exterior noise environment. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that potential mobile‐source noise impacts under the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion plan would be similar to those identified in FSEIR No. 332. Because the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments Project would result in a reduction in the overall intensity of use within Sub‐Area A and, thus a reduction in project‐related traffic, it would be anticipated that some noise levels projected within the project area, including Katella Avenue, Gene Autry Way, State College Boulevard, and Lewis Street would be reduced to some degree based on the reduction in traffic. However, the noise levels throughout the project area would not be significantly reduced and the potentially significant adverse noise impacts would remain despite the reduction in traffic associated with the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments Project. Therefore, where applicable, the proposed project would be subject to the same mitigation measures identified in FSEIR No. 339. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? As described for Impact 5.5‐7 in FSEIR No. 339, Short‐term noise impacts are impacts associated with site preparation, grading, and building construction of the proposed land uses. Construction of individual land uses under the Proposed Project would occur over a period of approximately 20 years in the 820‐acre area. Temporary construction noise impacts will vary markedly because the noise strength of construction equipment ranges widely as a function of the equipment used and its activity level. Short‐term construction noise impacts tend to occur in discrete phases dominated initially by demolition activities, then foundation work, followed by construction and paving activities. Demolition or construction noise impacts vary markedly because the noise strength of construction equipment ranges widely as a function of the equipment used which changes during the course of the project. Construction noise tends to occur in discrete phases dominated initially by demolition and/or earth‐moving sources and later for finish construction. The earth‐moving sources are seen to be the noisiest, with CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐48 equipment noise ranging up to about 90 dB(A) at 50 feet from the source. Spherically radiating point sources of noise emissions are atmospherically attenuated by a factor of 6 dB per doubling of distance, or about 20 dB in 500 feet of propagation. The loudest earth‐moving noise sources may therefore sometimes be detectable above the local background beyond 1,000 feet from the construction area. An impact radius of 1,000 feet or more pre‐supposes a clear line‐of‐sight and no other machinery or equipment noise that would mask project construction noise. With buildings and other barriers to interrupt line‐of‐sight conditions, the potential “noise envelope” around individual construction sites is reduced. Construction noise impacts are, therefore, somewhat less than that predicted under idealized input conditions. Construction noise exposure can be further worsened when several pieces of equipment operate in close proximity. Because of the logarithmic nature of decibel addition, two equally loud pieces of equipment will be +3 dB louder than either one individually. Three simultaneous sources are +5 dB louder than any single source. Thus, while average operational equipment noise levels are perhaps 5 dB less than at peak power, simultaneous equipment operation can still yield an apparent noise strength equal to any individual source at peak noise output. Whereas the average heavy equipment reference noise level is 85 dB(A), short‐term levels from either peak power or from several pieces operating in close proximity can be as high as 90 dB(A). During most intensive heavy equipment operations, the peak hourly average noise level from several pieces of equipment in simultaneous hourly operation is 85 dB Leq at 50 feet from the activity. Even with closed windows at an adjacent residence, such levels could interfere with quiet interior residential activity. There are existing residences east of the project site that could experience a temporary construction noise nuisance. In order to reduce short‐term construction‐related noise impacts, several mitigation measures were prescribed in FSEIR No. 339, including MM 5‐7 through MM 5‐10. MM 5‐7 requires that the developer ensure that noise levels at the property boundary not exceed 60 dBA between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., limit the hours of use of equipment that generates excessive noise levels to 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., and properly maintain and employ muffler systems on all construction equipment. The other measures include proper maintenance and tuning of all construction equipment (MM 5‐8), location of all stationary noise sources (e.g., generators, compressors, etc.) away from noise‐sensitive receptors (MM 5‐9), and restricting material delivery, soil haul trucks, and equipment servicing to the hours set forth in Section 6.70 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (MM 5‐10). Implementation of these measures will result in the reduction of construction noise levels and such impacts are less than significant. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? As previously discussed, the nearest public airport to the project site and environs is Fullerton Municipal Airport (FMA), which is located approximately seven miles north of the project site. John Wayne Airport (JWA) is located approximately 8.25 miles to the south. Aviation operations at these facilities would neither be affected by nor would affect development of the project site as proposed as concluded in FSEIUR No. 339. . For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No private airstrips are located within the project environs. Future development as proposed on the project site would not be subject to any excessive levels associated with operations at a private airstrip. No significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. In addition to the two public airports, there are three heliports in the project area, including the North Net Fire Training Center (2400 East Orangethorpe Avenue), UCI Medical Center Heliport (Chapman Avenue/The City Drive intersection), and Anaheim Stadium, which is used by the Anaheim Police Department for training. Although the proposed CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐49 project includes sensitive receptors (i.e., residential), FSEIR No. 339 concluded that while noise‐sensitive uses could be potentially placed in proximity to heliports and areas of helicopter activity, use of these heliports and the occurrence of helicopter activity would be infrequent. As a result, noise impacts from heliport use and helicopter activity under the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Because the proposed project only includes the reduction of density, potential impacts would remain less than significant and no mitigation measures are required Cumulative Impacts Although project implementation includes a reduction in the density/intensity of development within Sub‐ Area A in the Platinum Triangle and potentially a reduction of project‐related noise, short‐ and long‐term impacts associated with the project would contribute to the potentially significant construction‐related noise impacts and long‐term, mobile‐source noise impacts caused by the generation of additional trips (albeit reduced). Neither the increase in the number of dwelling units nor the decrease in retail/commercial development, which results in a net reduction in vehicle trips, would substantially reduce noise levels projected for the project area and cumulative construction and long‐term noise impacts would remain significant an unavoidable. Conclusion Implementation of the proposed project would neither create a new significant noise impact nor cause an impact to be more severe. The analysis presented in FSEIR No. 339 adequately evaluated the potential noise impacts of the proposed project, which must comply with all applicable mitigation measures to ensure that potential noise impacts are reduced to the maximum extent feasible. FSEIR No. 339 Relevant Mitigation Measures MM 5‐1 Prior to approval of street improvement plans for any project‐related roadway widening, the City shall retain a qualified acoustic engineer to design project acoustical features that will limit traffic noise at noise sensitive uses to levels that are below the City’s noise ordinance. These treatments shall be noted on the street improvement plans to the satisfaction of the Planning Department and may include, but are not limited to, the replacement of windows and doors at existing residences with acoustically rated windows and doors. MM 5‐2 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project property owner/developers shall submit a final acoustical report prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. The report shall show that the development will be sound‐attenuated against present and projected noise levels, including roadway, aircraft, helicopter, stationary sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, stadium, etc.), and railroad, to meet City interior noise standards as follows: a) The report shall demonstrate that the proposed residential design will result in compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise levels, as required by the California Building Code and California Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24 and 25 of the California Code of Regulations). b) The report shall demonstrate that the Proposed Project residential design shall minimize nighttime awakening from stadium event noise and train horns such that interior single‐event noise levels are below 81 dBA Lmax. The property owner/developer shall submit the noise mitigation report to the Planning Director for review and approval. Upon approval by the City, the project acoustical design features shall be incorporated into construction of the Proposed Project. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐50 MM 5‐4 Prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that occupancy disclosure notices regarding potential for exterior noise levels to be elevated during sounding of train horns will be provided to all future tenants facing an at‐grade crossing of the Orange County Line MM 5‐7 Ongoing during grading, demolition, and construction, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring contractors to implement the following measures to limit construction‐ related noise: a) Noise generated by construction, shall be limited by the property owner/developer to 60 dBA along the property boundaries, before 7:00 AM and after 7:00 PM, as governed by Chapter 6.70, 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 AM to 4:00 PM. c) All internal combustion engines on all of the construction equipment shall be properly outfitted with well maintained muffler systems. MM 5‐8 Ongoing during construction activities, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring project contractors to properly maintain and tune all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. MM 5‐9 Ongoing during construction activities, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring project contractors to locate all stationary noise sources (e.g., generators, compressors, staging areas) as far from occupied noise‐sensitive receptors as is feasible. M 5‐10 Ongoing during construction activities, material delivery, soil haul trucks, and equipment servicing shall also be restricted to the hours set forth in the City of Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 6.70. 3.13 Population and Housing 3.13.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis The Revised Platinum Triangle Maser Plan would directly induce population growth through allowing additional residential development and indirectly induce population growth by allowing additional non‐ residential development in the Platinum Triangle. As shown in Table 5.6‐6 of FSEIR No. 339, build‐out of the Revised Platinum Triangle Master Plan is anticipated to add 12,965 residents and 26,860 employees in the project area, increasing the total Platinum Triangle population to 28,364 and employees to 41,500. The jobs/housing balance is one indicator of a project’s effect on growth and quality of life in the project area. Jobs/housing goals and ratios are advisory only and no ideal jobs/housing ratio is adopted in state, regional, or city policies. As shown in Table 5.6‐6, build‐out of the Adopted MLUP would create 1.43 jobs per one housing unit produced, compared to 2.19 jobs created for one housing unit with the Proposed Project. However, this is a significant improvement over the existing jobs/housing ratio within the Platinum Triangle, which was 13.47 at the time the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project was approved. Jobs and housing estimates for the City of Anaheim are forecast to becoming increasingly balanced with time from 2.02 jobs/housing ratio (estimated ) to 1.77 by 2035. Unlike the City, the County is anticipated to become more jobs‐rich as a whole, changing from 1.57 jobs/housing ratio (2003) to 1.72 by 2035. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that buildout of the Platinum Triangle would result in a jobs/housing ratio that remains significantly more CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐51 balanced compared to the existing conditions in the area. Providing a more balanced, mixed‐use community within the Platinum Triangle would promote alternative transportation choices and is anticipated to reduce per capita vehicle miles travelled. The Proposed Project would result in direct and indirect growth in the area and, at build‐out, contribute towards a higher jobs/housing ratio for the City. Although a balanced jobs/housing growth is encouraged, SCAG also encourages job growth to be concentrated near transit services and transit nodes, and near existing freeways to facilitate existing and new residents’ use of transit to get to their places of employment. The Platinum Triangle, due to its unique location with two freeways and ARTIC in close proximity, lends itself as an ideal candidate for a high employment center. Build‐out of the Proposed Project would slightly increase the projected jobs/housing ratio in the City from 1.77 to 1.85. However, the Proposed Project would be consistent with regional growth management policies that facilitate future job growth at strategic points along the commuter rail, transit systems, and freeway corridors. Although build‐out of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project would increase the jobs/housing ratio numerically, it would be consistent with many of SCAG’s growth management policies intended to better coordinate infrastructure development with projected population, housing, and employment growth. 3.13.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Implementation of the proposed project will result in an increase in the total number of dwelling units within Sub‐Area A of the Katella District. The proposed project would allow for an increase of 39 multiple‐family residential dwelling units and the elimination of 60,000 square feet of commercial development, resulting in a total of 1,102 dwelling units and 45,000 square feet of commercial floor area for Sub‐Area A, compared to 1,063 residential dwelling units and 105,000 square feet of commercial floor area currently approved for Sub‐Area A. The amount of office floor area (1,005,760 square feet) approved for Sub‐Area A of the Katella District would remain unchanged. The addition of 39 dwelling units would increase the total number of dwelling units permitted in the Platinum Triangle to 19,027 dwelling units. As a result, the total population estimated for the Platinum Triangle would be increase slightly to 28,731 residents, compared to 28,672 estimated for the 18,988 approved dwelling units. In addition, the potential employment generated within the Platinum Triangle would also be reduced based on the reduction of 60,000 square feet of commercial development, resulting in a maximum of 45,000 square feet for Sub‐Area A. The total number of jobs estimated for the Platinum Triangle would also be reduced from 300 to 180 as a result of the reduction in the commercial floor area currently approved for the same area. Table 3.13‐1 reflects the changes in housing, population and employment associated with the proposed project. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐52 Table 3.13‐1 Estimated Population, Housing, and Employment Generation – Platinum Triangle Platinum Vista Apartments Project Land Use Approved Platinum Triangle MLUP Proposed Project Change (+/‐) Platinum Triangle MLUP w/Proposed Project Housing 18,988 DUs 28,672 Population +39 DUs +59 Population 19,027 DUs 28,731 Population Office 14,131,103 sf 41,500 Employees ‐‐‐120 Employees 14,131,103 sf 41,380 Employees Commercial 4,795,111 sf ‐60,000 sf 4,735,111 sf Institutional 1,500,000 ‐‐ 1,500,000 sf Jobs/Housing Ratio 2.19 ‐‐ 2.17 SOURCE: FSEIR No. 339 Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The project site does not support housing at the present time. Project implementation includes the conversion of an existing undeveloped property to a high residential (i.e., apartments) development. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the elimination of any existing residential dwelling units and would not require the provision of any replacement housing. Therefore, no significant impacts to the City’s existing housing inventory would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? As indicated above, project implementation would not result in the elimination of any existing residential dwelling units, and, therefore, would not displace any residents in the City of Anaheim. Although the proposed project would result in a small increase in the number of dwelling units previously approved by the City for the subject property, the project does include the development of 389 apartments, or 39 more than allocated for Sub‐Area A within the Katella District that would be added to the City’s inventory of housing, which would not only increase the City’s housing stock, but also provide housing intended to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts FSEIR No. 339 concluded that potential cumulative impacts of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project would be less than significant. The analysis presented in the FSEIR estimated that the City’s jobs/housing ratio would be 1.77 without the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project and 1.85 with build‐out of that project as approved. With or without the expansion, the City of Anaheim is anticipated to have higher jobs/housing ratio compared to the County as a whole and the southern California area. Implementation of the Vista Platinum Apartments Project as proposed would result in minor changes to both population and employment. Similar to the larger Platinum Triangle, the projected jobs/housing ratio for the City with the Proposed Project is an improvement from the 2.02 ratio in 2003. As a result, cumulative population and housing impacts are not considered significant, consistent with the prior determination included in FSEIR No. 339. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐53 Conclusion Although the proposed project would not significantly alter the forecasts for either population and housing or jobs. When compared to the approved PTMLUP land use plan, the relatively small reductions in both housing (five percent) and commercial development (two percent), would not result in any significant impacts either to housing or employment. The proposed Platinum Vista Apartments Project would continue to be consistent with the relevant long ‐range plans for housing and land use and, furthermore, would not significant alter the jobs/housing balance forecast for the City. FSEIR adequately evaluated the potential impacts resulting from the proposed project. No new or more severe impacts to population and housing would occur as a result of the proposed project. 3.14 Public Services 3.14.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis Fire Protection Services As discussed in FSEIR No. 339, the City of Anaheim Fire Department (AFD) provides fire protection, emergency rescue and medical services to the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area. There are 11 fire stations located throughout the City plus one station in the Disneyland Resort. No fire stations currently exist within the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area; however, the two nearest fire stations are located approximately one‐half mile from the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area. Stadium Station #7 is located at 2222 East Ball Road, and Resort Station #3 is located at 1717 South Clementine. AFD has a plan to construct three new fire stations to serve the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area. The first station, the Battalion Headquarters Station, will be located along Santa Cruz Street north of Orangewood Avenue, the second station will be located in the north central area of the Platinum Triangle, and the third station will be located at an undetermined location. FSEIR No. 339 indicated that due to the additional population, density, and usage generated by the development of the Platinum Triangle, demand for emergency medical services, ambulance transportation, and rescue operations would increase. These increases would result in delayed response times for first engine response, and additional fire facilities were identified as necessary to provide adequate fire protection services. The impact on fire protection services is considered significant. Additional fire facilities and staff needed to serve the Platinum Triangle as a result of the increase in service demands would be funded through payment of the Public Safety Impact Fee as development within the Platinum Triangle progresses. FSEIR No. 339 found that with implementation of mitigation measures (e.g., sprinklers in all buildings and payment of the Public Safety Impact Fee), no significant and unavoidable impacts to fire protection services would occur. Police Protection Services Law enforcement and crime prevention services are provided by the Anaheim Police Department (APD). The City of Anaheim is divided into four districts and one police heliport. The Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area is located within the South Police District. The two nearest police facilities are Main Station, located 3.5 miles west of the Platinum Triangle at 425 South Harbor Boulevard and South Station, located 3.6 miles west of the Platinum Triangle at 1520 Disneyland Drive. At the time FSEIR No. 339 was prepared, the APD was authorized for 370 sworn officers. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that the development of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would create an increase in service calls, which would create a need for additional officers and support personnel, office space, vehicles and equipment, resulting in a significant impact. However, with implementation of mitigation measures prescribed in FSEIR No. 339, no significant unavoidable impacts on police protection were anticipated to occur. Mitigation measures include CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐54 the incorporation of crime prevention measures, review and approval of site plans by the APD, and payment of the Public Safety Impact Fee). School Services The Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area is located within the boundaries of the Anaheim City School District (ACSD) and the Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD) and within the attendance boundaries of Paul Revere Elementary School, South Junior High School, and Katella High School. A demographic consultant for the ACSD conducted a survey of current student generation rates for residential projects in Southern California that are similar to the type of residential development that would occur in the Platinum Triangle, and found the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would generate fewer students than the number of students expected to be generated from the traditional housing type. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would generate new students within these school district boundaries that would necessitate the need for new school facilities. Additionally, the serving elementary school is located outside the boundaries of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area; therefore, project implementation would create a need for additional buses and supporting services. However, implementation of mitigation measures, including payment of school impact fees in compliance with Senate Bill 50 and working with the respective school districts to identify opportunities for future school sites, would reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. Library Services As indicated in FSEIR No. 339, the Anaheim Public Library system consists of a central library, five branch libraries, and two bookmobiles. The nearest library facility to the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area is the Sunkist Branch Library located at 901 South Sunkist Avenue. A joint use library facility with the Anaheim City School District located at 2135 South Mountain View Avenue was under construction at the time of EIR preparation. The Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area is also served by virtual Anaheim Library services through the network at the Central Library located at 500 West Broadway. According to FSEIR No. 339, implementation of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would increase demand for library collections, staff, space, and services, resulting in a potentially significant impact. This impact would be reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures (i.e., update to the library facilities fee program). Day Care Services Privately owned and operated day care and child care centers are located throughout the City of Anaheim. Three day care centers are located within or in close proximity to the Platinum Triangle including Tara Hill Montessori School located at 2130 West Crescent Avenue, Childtime Learning Center located at 1000 South State College Boulevard, and Kinder Care Learning Center located at 2515 East Street. It was determined that development of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would increase the demand for day care centers and child care facilities in the project area. However, permitting the uses in the PTMU Overlay Zone as primary and accessory uses would allow development of day care centers where necessary to serve the Platinum Triangle residents. Therefore, development of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would not result in any adverse impact. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐55 3.14.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Fire Protection Services Implementation of the proposed project would result in an increase of 39 additional apartments and a reduction of 60,000 square feet of retail commercial floor area on the project site and within Sub‐Area A in the Katella District of the Platinum Triangle. As described in FSEIR No. 339, the increase in the intensity of development within the Platinum Triangle would result in a significant impact on fire protection services in the City, necessitating potential increases in manpower and equipment resources in order to maintain an adequate level of fire protection service. With the increase of 39 apartment units proposed by the applicant for the project site, there would be a small, incremental increase in the number of calls for emergency services provided by the Anaheim Fire Department related to residential development; however, the elimination of the commercial land use allocated to the site will also potentially affect fire protection services by reducing potential emergency responses compared to the analysis included in FSEIR No. 339. As such, a “worst case” analysis was included in FSEIR that evaluated a greater degree of potential adverse effects overall for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion. Thus, project implementation will not result in a new, significant impact or worsen an impact previously identified in FSEIR No. 339. Nonetheless, as analyzed in that document, the development of the project as proposed would create a demand for fire protection services and contribute to the overall impacts on the AFD. As prescribed in FSEIR No. 339, all of the buildings have fire sprinklers (MM 7‐1) and that the applicant pay the Public Safety Impact Fee in effect at the time building permits are issued (MM 7‐2). With the implementation of these mitigation measures, project‐related impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level and no additional mitigation would be required. Police Protection Services Similar to fire protection services, the project would also result in an incremental increase in the number of emergency calls for police and law enforcement services associated with the development of 39 additional residential dwelling units and a decrease in commercial‐related calls resulting from the elimination of 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area from the project site and within Sub‐Area A of the Katella District. The proposed land use changes proposed for the subject property will have the effect of having a small, incremental increase the number of emergency response calls for residential development within the project area. As indicated in FSEIR No. 339, development of the project area would increase the demand for police protection/law enforcement services; however, the implementation of the mitigation measures would ensure that potential impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level as indicated in FSEIR No. 339. Specifically, the project applicant would be required to submit plans to the APD for review and approval to ensure that: (1) crime prevention features are incorporated in the development (MM 7‐1); closed circuit monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures may be incorporated (MM 7‐4); project; and evaluate controlled access to parking lots and parking structures in order to determine the need for limit ingress/egress (MM 7‐5). In addition the applicant would also be required to reimburse the City, on a fair share basis, if Anaheim Traffic Management Center personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services during construction (MM 7‐6) and to pay the Public Safety Impact Fee in effect at the time building permits are issued for the project (MM 7‐7). Implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure that the project‐related impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. School Services Project implementation would result in an increase of 39 multiple‐family residential dwelling units when compared to the previously approved Platinum Vista Apartments project, which allowed for the development of 350 apartments on the 4.13‐acre site. Based on the student generation rates utilized to determine the number of school‐age children generated for Sub‐Area A of the Katella District, the proposed project would CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐56 result in the generation of 25 additional school‐age students (i.e., K‐12) in that sub‐area,. A comparison of the proposed project and approved residential development within Sub‐Area A is presented in Table 3.14‐1. Table 3.14‐1 Potential Student Generation Platinum Vista Apartments No. of DUs Student Generation Rates No. of Students Sub‐Area A Project‐Related Students Approved Sub‐Area A –Katella District1 1,063 Elem: 0.3609/DU 384 126 Jr. High: 0.1040/DU 111 36 High: 0.1790/DU 190 63 Total 685 225 Proposed Sub‐Area A –Katella District 1,102 Elem: 0.3609/DU 398 140 Jr. High: 0.1040/DU 115 40 High: 0.1790/DU 197 70 Total 710 250 Difference +25 +25 1Approved Sub‐Area A totals reflect 350 multiple‐family residential dwelling units for the Platinum Vista site. 2Proposed Sub‐Area A totals reflect 389 multiple‐family residential dwelling units as proposed by the applicant for the Platinum Vista site. SOURCE: FSEIR No. 339 As indicated in Table 3.14‐1, implementation of the proposed project would result in the generation of 250 school‐age children, compared to 225 for the approved 350‐unit project. As a result, a total of 710 K‐12 students compared to 685 students based on the approved land use plan for Sub‐Area A as previously analyzed in FSEIR No. 339. Of those totals, 225 students were estimated for the approved 350‐unit Platinum Vista project compared to 250 for the 389‐unit proposed project.. As reflected in the table, the proposed project would result in an increase of 25 K‐12 students when compared to the approved project. Nonetheless, the proposed project would be subject to the same mitigation measures, including MM 7‐8 ( working with the affected school districts to identify opportunities for locating new school within the Platinum Triangle) and MM 7‐9, which requires payment of the mandatory developer fees subject to SB 50. Although the potential impact would be less than previously analyzed, the effect on the affected school districts would remain significant; however, project implementation would not result in a new or more severe significant impact to school facilities and would not, therefore, necessitate additional analysis beyond that already undertaken and presented in FSEIR No. 339. Library Services FSEIR No.. 339 concluded that implementation of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would require building of physical space for library services as a result of the increase in population associated with the residential development components. The analysis determined that in order to maintain current per capita levels and licensing agreements, additional physical and virtual resources need to be added to the CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐57 Anaheim library system. Therefore, additional funds to support increased demand for library services are required to maintain the current level of community support. Because the Platinum Vista project would result in an increase in the number of dwelling units (39 more dwelling units), the proposed project would contribute to the deficiency in library facilities anticipated from the buildout of the Platinum Triangle as approved. As indicated in the FSEIR, as the population intensifies and usage expands from the increase in population associated with the Platinum Triangle, space in the immediate area will be identified for focused service to the future residents. In considering the proposed project, which proposed fewer residential dwelling units than previously analyzed by the City for the Platinum Triangle, FSEIR No. 339 adequately evaluated the potential impacts to library facilities associated with buildout of the Platinum Triangle. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project that includes an increase of 39 apartment units and the elimination of 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area would not result in a new significant impact or a more severe impact than analyzed in FSEIR No. 339. Nonetheless, the applicant would be required to comply with MM 7‐10 in FSEIR No. 339, which would require payment of the library system fee to offset the potential incremental impacts of development. It is anticipated that the library system fee will be updated and added to the Standardized Development Agreement. This fee is anticipated to be reviewed annually and adjustments will be made based upon the inflation/deflation costs for library construction, land, library materials, and computers. Payment of the current library fee, which would be paid prior to the issuance of building permits, will be stipulated in the approved development agreement approved for the project. Payment of the library impact fee assessed to the project would reduce potential project‐related impacts to a less than significant level. Day Care Services As indicated in FSEIR No. 339, the increase in population due to the buildout of the Platinum Triangle, including the proposed project, will increase demand for day care centers and child care facilities in the project area. Day care and child care facilities are privately owned and operated in the City of Anaheim. Provision of day care facilities is not required by the PTMLUP and no such requirements or standards exist in the City, including the Platinum Triangle. However, as with the rest of the City, permitting the uses in the PTMU Overlay Zone as primary and accessory uses would allow development of day care centers where necessary to serve the Platinum Triangle residents. Therefore, FSEIR No. 339 concluded that implementation of the Platinum Triangle land uses would not result in any adverse impact to local day care facilities and there are no long lasting adverse physical impacts associated with providing adequate day care services to the project area. Although the proposed project includes 39 additional residential dwelling units more than the approved project, the potential demand for day care to serve the residential development would not be significantly affected. Thus, the proposed project would not result either in a new significant impact or a more severe impact than previously analyzed in FSEIR No. 339. No changes and/or additional analysis of day care facilities is required. Cumulative Impacts Consistent with the conclusion presented in FSEIR No. 339, implementation of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project as proposed would not contribute to any potentially significant cumulative impact with the implementation of the mitigation measures prescribed in that document. All of the public services and related facilities would continue to provide an adequate level of service on a project‐ and cumulative‐wide basis. Conclusion As indicated in Chapter 2.0 of this Addendum to FSEIR No. 339, project implementation would result in a small increase in residential dwelling units and a decrease in commercial floor area within Sub‐Area A of the CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐58 Katella District. The potential significant adverse impacts associated with project implementation have been adequately analyzed in FSEIR No. 339 and appropriate mitigation measures were prescribed to ensure that potential impacts of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project on public services are reduced to a less than significant level. As a result, the proposed land use changes to the subject property, which is located within Sub‐Area A in the Katella District within the Platinum Triangle, would result in a small incremental increase in the project’s residential demand for public services and a reduction in the demand for the same services associated with the reduction in commercial floor area. Therefore, the project would not result in any new or more severe impacts to public services. FSEIR Relevant Mitigation Measures MM 7‐1 Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, plans shall indicate that all buildings shall have fire sprinklers in accordance with the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said sprinklers shall be installed by the property owner/developer prior to each final Building and Zoning inspection. MM 7‐2 Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the property owner/developer shall pay the Public Safety Impact Fee, as amended from time to time, for fire facilities and equipment impact fees identified in Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 17.36. MM 7‐3 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including implementation of Ordinance 6016 and the concept of crime prevention through environmental design (i.e., building design, circulation, site planning and lighting 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 four feet in height and two feet in width. The lines for the numbers shall be six 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. MM 7‐4 Prior to the issuance of each Building Permit for a parking structure, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Anaheim Police Department for review and approval indicating the provision of closed circuit monitoring and recording or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Anaheim Police Department. Said measures shall be implemented prior to final Building and Zoning inspections. MM 7‐5 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall submit design plans that shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Anaheim Police Department, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Anaheim Police Department. MM 7‐6 Ongoing during project operation, if the Anaheim Police Department of Anaheim Traffic Management Center (TMC) personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fair share basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. MM 7‐9 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall pay the school impact fees as adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Anaheim Union High School District and Anaheim City School District in compliance with Senate Bill 50 (Government Code [GC] Section 65995 [b][3] as amended). CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐59 3.15 Recreation 3.15.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis FSEIR No. 339 concluded that the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would generate additional residents (approximately 15,399 residents based upon 1.5 persons per dwelling unit) in the City of Anaheim. Based on the City’s goal of providing 2 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents, development of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would require approximately 31 acres of parkland. According to FSEIR No. 339, the 0.77‐acre Magnolia Park located north of Katella Avenue at Auburn Way and Wright Circle is the only existing park facility within the Platinum Triangle area. FSEIR No. 339 also classified large Park Deficiency Areas within the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area. Therefore, FSEIR No. 339 concluded that development of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would increase the demands on existing parks and recreational facilities that are already subject to overuse, resulting in a significant impact on recreation. To serve the demand for parks within the Platinum Triangle, developers of residential units in this area are required to pay higher park‐in‐lieu fees than residential development in other areas of the City in order to provide the funding necessary for the development of future parks as residential uses are introduced into this area. Development on parcels eight acres or larger with over 325 residential units are required to provide and construct an on‐site privately maintained public park, ensuring that small parks are distributed throughout the residentially developed portions of the Platinum Triangle. These mini‐parks must be at a minimum size of 44 square feet per each dwelling unit within the proposed development. This park requirement is in addition to the payment of park‐in‐lieu fees; however, the value of the parkland dedication is credited against the overall park‐in‐lieu fees paid for the project. This credit is given for parkland dedication only and does not include improvements to the park. In addition, every development is required to provide 200 square feet of recreational‐leisure area for each dwelling unit within private and/or common areas. MM 8‐1 through MM 8‐3 prescribed in FSEIR No. 339 required the City to (1) continue to seek property acquisition opportunities for parkland in and adjacent to the project area (MM 8‐1); (2) continue to work with developers to seek alternative means of providing recreational amenities (MM 8‐2); and (3) continue fostering partnerships with other public entities and private organizations to seek alternative means of providing various types of recreational opportunities (MM 8‐3). FSEIR No. 339 concluded that impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of mitigation, including the dedication of property to the City for park and recreational facilities, the development and maintenance of pocket parks by the developer or homeowners’ associations, and the payment of enhanced park‐in‐lieu fees as required under the City of Anaheim Municipal Code, Section 18.20.110. 3.15.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The proposed project would allow for the development of 389 multiple‐family residential dwelling units, which would generate approximately 584 residents and create an increase in demand for recreational facilities. Based on the parkland, mini‐park, and recreational‐leisure requirements for projects located in the Platinum Triangle, the proposed project would require approximately 1.16 acres of parkland, a 16,116 square foot (0.37 acre) mini‐park, and 77,800 square feet of recreational‐leisure areas. These requirements would be met through the design of several recreational amenities and leisure areas throughout the project area, including a public park located within the Platinum Gateway project, and 78,232 square feet of recreation‐ CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐60 leisure areas comprising a landscaped courtyard and entry as well as additional landscaped areas along project perimeter and private spaces as illustrated on Exhibit 3.15‐1. As identified in FSEIR No. 339, the Platinum Vista Project would be required to pay Platinum Triangle park in‐ lieu fees per the City’s parkland requirement. Collectively, these recreational amenities and park in‐lieu fees meet the park dedication requirement and conditions, including PTMU Overlay Zone standards with respect to amount of private recreational space per unit. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. The proposed project would not have any increased impact on the demand for recreational services and park space above that identified in the FSEIR N. 339, because the project includes on‐site recreation and facilities, and the project applicant is required to pay community park fees. The proposed project includes a number of recreational amenities to accommodate recreation demand on site. Therefore, the proposed project would not require any changes to FSEIR No. 339 related to recreation. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project would result in the development of 389 multiple‐family residential dwelling units, which is 39 more units than now approved for the 4.13‐acre Platinum Vista site. With the allocation of the open space dedications as proposed and payment of the park in‐lieu fees, the proposed project would not result in any potentially significant impacts to recreational facilities/amenities in the City of Anaheim. Cumulative Impacts Although the proposed project includes residential development that would create a demand for recreational amenities in the City resulting from the increase in population, the project includes open space features that meet the dedication requirements and, furthermore, would be subject to park dedication fees to address the incremental demand for recreational facilities and service. Therefore, with the payment of the park fees and consistent with the conclusion in FSEIR No. 339, project implementation would not result in any additional significant cumulative impacts to existing or future recreational facilities within the City. Conclusion As indicated in FSEIR No. 339, the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion previously approved by the City of Anaheim adequately evaluated project‐related impacts to parks and recreational facilities. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in any new potentially significant impacts nor create a more severe impact than previously analyzed in FSEIR No. 339. No significant impacts would occur and no additional mitigation measures are required. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐62 3.16 Traffic/Transportation 3.16.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis According to FSEIR No. 339, the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would significantly impact levels of service (LOS) for the roadway system due to the increased number of trips generated by the project. However, with implementation of planned roadway improvements by responsible agencies such as Caltrans and the City of Orange, all arterial roadways and intersections would operate at an acceptable LOS or no worse than under “No Project” conditions. As indicated in Table 5.9‐17, FSEIR No. 339 determined that 31 intersections in the Platinum Triangle area (including five intersections in the City of Orange and one shared intersection in Anaheim and Orange) would operate at an LOS E or LOS F during the AM and/or PM peak hour, necessitating the need for mitigation. These intersections are identified below. 1) Euclid Street at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 2) Ninth Street at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour) 3) Disneyland Drive at Ball Road (PM Peak Hour) 4) Disneyland Drive/West Street at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour) 5) Harbor Boulevard at Ball Road (AM and PM Peak Hour) 6) Harbor Boulevard at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour) 7) Anaheim Boulevard at Vermont Avenue (AM Peak Hour) 8) Anaheim Boulevard at Ball Road (PM Peak Hour) 9) Anaheim Boulevard at Cerritos Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 10) Anaheim Boulevard at I‐5 NB Ramps (PM Peak Hour) 11) Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 12) Haster Street at Gene Autry Way (AM and PM Peak Hour) 13) Anaheim Way (I‐5 Northbound Ramps) at Katella Avenue (AM Peak Hour) 14) Lewis Street at Cerritos Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 15) Lewis Street at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 16) Lewis Street at Anaheim Connector (future) (PM Peak Hour) 17) State College Boulevard at Cerritos Avenue (AM Peak Hour) 18) State College Boulevard at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour) 19) State College Boulevard at Gateway Center Drive (AM and PM Peak Hour) 20) State College Boulevard at Gene Autry Way (AM Peak Hour) 21) State College Boulevard at Orangewood Avenue (Anaheim/Orange) (AM and PM Peak Hour) 22) State College Boulevard/The City Drive at Chapman Avenue (Orange) (PM Peak Hour) 23) Sunkist Street at Howell Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 24) Howell Avenue at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 25) Sportstown at Katella Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 26) Rampart Street at Orangewood Avenue (PM Peak Hour) 27) Orangewood Avenue at SR‐57 Southbound Ramps (Orange) (PM Peak Hour) 28) Douglass Road at Katella Avenue (AM and PM Peak Hour) 29) Main Street at Collins Avenue (Orange) (PM Peak Hour) 30) Glassell Street at Katella Avenue (Orange) (PM Peak Hour) 31) The City Drive at Garden Grove Boulevard (Orange) (AM and PM Peak Hour) CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐63 In addition to the intersections identified above, several arterial segments were forecast to operate at an unacceptable (i.e., deficient) LOS with implementation of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project (based on daily traffic volumes). As shown in Table 5.9‐20 of the FSEIR, the traffic analysis found that there are 42 arterial segments with significant impacts with implementation of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, including six segments in the City of Orange. These deficient roadway segments requiring mitigation include: 1 Anaheim Boulevard from I‐5 to Cerritos Avenue 2 Anaheim Boulevard from Cerritos Avenue to Ball Road 3 Anaheim Way from Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 4 Ball Road from Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 5 Ball Road from Harbor Boulevard to Anaheim Boulevard 6 Ball Road from Anaheim Boulevard to East Street 7 Ball Road from East Street to State College Boulevard 8 Ball Road from State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 9 Ball Road from Sunkist Street to SR‐57 10 Ball Road from SR‐57 to Main Street (City of Orange segment) 11 Cerritos Avenue from Sunkist Street to Douglass Road 12 Collins Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street (City of Orange segment) 13 Collins Avenue from Batavia Street to Glassell Street (City of Orange segment) 14 Douglass Road from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 15 Eckhoff Street from Orangewood Avenue to Collins Avenue (City of Orange segment) 16 Gene Autry Way from I‐5 to State College Boulevard 17 Harbor Boulevard from Chapman Avenue to Orangewood Avenue 18 Harbor Boulevard from Orangewood Avenue to Convention Way 19 Harbor Boulevard from Convention Way to Katella Avenue 20 Harbor Boulevard from Katella Avenue to Disney Way 21 Harbor Boulevard from Disney Way to Manchester Avenue 22 Harbor Boulevard from Manchester Avenue to I‐5 23 Howell Avenue from State College Boulevard to Sunkist Street 24 Katella Avenue from Euclid Street to Ninth Street 25 Katella Avenue from Ninth Street to Walnut Street 26 Katella Avenue from Walnut Street to Disneyland Drive 27 Katella Avenue from Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard 28 Katella Avenue from Manchester Avenue to Anaheim Way/ 29 Katella Avenue from Anaheim Way to Lewis Street 30 Katella Avenue from Sportstown to Howell Avenue 31 Katella Avenue from Howell Avenue to SR‐57 32 Katella Avenue from SR‐57 to Main Street 33 Katella Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street (City of Orange segment) 34 Lewis Street from Katella Avenue to Cerritos Avenue 35 Manchester Avenue from Orangewood Avenue to Katella Avenue 36 Orangewood Avenue from Harbor Boulevard to Haster Street 37 Orangewood Avenue from State College Boulevard to Rampart Street 38 Orangewood Avenue from Rampart Street to SR‐57 Freeway 39 Phoenix Club Drive from Honda Center to Ball Road 40 Rampart Street from Chapman Avenue to Orangewood Avenue 41 State College Boulevard from Katella Avenue to Howell Avenue 42 Struck Avenue from Katella Avenue to Main Street (City of Orange segment) CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐64 With proposed improvements, including roadway widening, restriping, facility upgrades, etc., all of the intersections forecast to operate at unacceptable levels of service (i.e., LOS E or LOS F) in the Platinum Triangle area would operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours based on peak hour volumes. FSEIR No. 339 also identified six roadway segments in the City of Orange and four arterial roadway segments in the City of Anaheim that would be significantly impacted as a result of traffic generated by development permitted by the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. Mitigation measures were identified for these deficient arterial roadway segments to ensure that they operate at an acceptable level of service. Implementation of the recommended improvements was projected to reduce impacted intersections LOS to a less than significant level. However, mitigation measures recommended for 13 impacted intersections were determined to be infeasible and project impacts were identified as significant and unavoidable. Not all identified improvements would be feasible due to a number of reasons such as the inability to undertake right‐of‐way acquisitions as a matter of policy to preserve existing businesses, environmental constraints, or jurisdictional consideration. Additionally, it was anticipated that a number of improvements would have been economically infeasible due to the anticipated costs of some of the improvements. Inasmuch as the primary responsibility for approving and/or completing certain improvements located outside of Anaheim would lie with agencies other than the City of Anaheim (i.e., City of Orange and Caltrans), the potential was identified that significant impacts may not be fully mitigated if such improvements are not completed for reasons beyond the City of Anaheim’s control (e.g., the City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim’s jurisdiction or the City cannot construct improvements in the Caltrans right‐of‐way without Caltrans approval) and the project’s traffic impact would remain significant. The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact. Since the major freeway facilities within the study area, I‐5, SR‐22, and SR‐57 have reached their design capacity or will have reached it by 2030 and the required physical improvements are largely the result of background regional traffic, consultation between the City of Anaheim and Caltrans was determined to be necessary to reach consensus on any potential operational improvement measures. State highway facilities within the study area are not within the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim. Improvements to State Highway Systems were deemed to be matters of federal, State, regional, and local concern and are planned, funded, and constructed by the State of California through a legislative and political process involving the State Legislature; the California Transportation Commission; the California Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency; Caltrans; and OCTA. Therefore, impacts to Caltrans facilities were identified as significant and unavoidable. The City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact. 3.16.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non‐motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was prepared for the proposed project to identify the potential traffic impacts resulting from the development of the revised Platinum Vista project. The conclusions and recommendations presented in the TIA, prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) are summarized in the analysis that follows. The TIA prepared by LSA has been included as Appendix A. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐65 Existing Traffic Conditions Existing Intersection Levels of Service Table 3.16‐1 summarizes the existing operational characteristics of the eight key study intersections in the project environs. As reflected in the table, all of the intersections are currently operating at LOS A and LOS B during the AM and PM peak hours. Existing traffic at the key study intersections are illustrated on Exhibit 3.16‐1. Table 3.16‐1 Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary Platinum Vista Apartments Intersection Existing AM Peak Hour Existing PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS Manchester Avenue/Katella Avenue 0.525 A 0.558 A Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue 0.425 A 0.547 A Lewis Street/Katella Avenue 0.524 A 0.661 B State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue 0.566 A 0.614 B Sportstown/Katella Avenue 0.347 A 0.438 A SR‐57 SB Ramps/Katella Avenue 0.338 A 0.392 A SR‐57 NB Ramps/Katella Avenue 0.362 A 0.392 A Howell Street/Katella Avenue 0.432 A 0.564 A SOURCE: LSA Associates, Inc. (June 2014) Project Trip Generation and Distribution The project trip generation summary is presented in Table 3.16‐2. As indicated in the table, the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project is estimated to generate 2,587 average daily trips (ADT), including 199 AM peak hour trips (40 inbound and 159 outbound) and 241 PM peak hour trips (157 inbound and 84 outbound). The distribution of the AM and PM peak hour trips generated by the proposed project is illustrated on Exhibit 3.16‐2. The number of trips generated by the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project is approximately 11 percent higher than the trips generated by the Approved Platinum Vista Apartments project, which generated a total of 2,327 ADT. However, with the elimination of the 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area, which would be expected to generate approximately 2,560 daily vehicular trips, the proposed project would generate fewer trips than the approved land uses for the site. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐66 Table 3.16‐2 Trip Generation Summary Platinum Vista Apartments Land Use No. of DUs\ Floor Area ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Trip Rates1 Apartment DU 6.65 0.10 0.41 0.51 0.40 0.22 0.62 Project Trip Generation Apartment 389 2,587 40 159 199 157 84 241 1Trip rates based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 9th Edition. SOURCE: LSA Associates, Inc. (June 2014) As illustrated in Exhibit 3.16‐2, approximately 15 percent of the trips are destined north via I‐5; 5 percent north via State College Boulevard; 15 percent north via SR‐57; 10 percent south via I‐5; 20 percent south via State College Boulevard; 10 percent south via SR‐57; 10 percent west via Katella Avenue; 10 percent west via Gene Autry Way; and 5 percent east via Katella Avenue. Figure 8 shows the regional trip distribution and assignment for the proposed project. A full‐access driveway (Connector Road) at Lewis Street is located north‐west of the Platinum Vista Apartments development, and a right‐in/right‐out access driveway (Connector Road) at Katella Avenue is located west of the project site. The north and west Connector Roads will not only provide access and circulation to the project site, but to the adjacent properties to the north and west as well. The connector roads (both at Lewis Street and Katella Avenue) will be constructed as part of this project. The project would have access via both connector roads in Existing plus Project and Future plus Project conditions. The Future (2015) plus Project assumes the Platinum Gateway project and the Lennar A‐Town Phase 1 apartments as a committed/approved projects. The project trips are assigned to both the connector roads in the Future (2015) plus Project conditions. All turn movements can be accommodated along the connector road to Lewis Street/Katella Avenue. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐68 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions The existing plus project‐related traffic intersection conditions are summarized in Table 3.16‐3. As reflected in the table, all of the key study intersections are forecast to operate at the same service levels under the existing conditions (i.e., LOS A and LOS B during the AM and PM peak hour) with the implementation of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project. The project will not result in a significant impacts at any of the study area intersections in the Existing Plus Project scenario. The existing plus project traffic volumes at the key study intersections are shown in Exhibit 3.16‐3. Table 3.16‐3 Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Summary Platinum Vista Apartments Intersection Existing Conditions Existing Plus Project Difference AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM PM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU ICU Manchester Ave/Katella Ave 0.525 A 0.558 A 0.532 A 0.567 A 0.007 0.009 Anaheim Way/Katella Ave 0.425 A 0.547 A 0.430 A 0.550 A 0.005 0.003 Lewis Street/Katella Ave 0.524 A 0.661 B 0.592 A 0.699 B 0.068 0.038 State College Blvd/Katella Ave 0.566 A 0.614 B 0.579 A 0.624 B 0.013 0.010 Sportstown/Katella Ave 0.347 A 0.438 A 0.356 A 0.447 A 0.009 0.009 SR‐57 SB Ramps/Katella Ave 0.338 A 0.392 A 0.363 A 0.396 A 0.008 0.008 SR‐57 NB Ramps/Katella Ave 0.362 A 0.392 A 0.363 A 0.396 A 0.001 0.004 Howell Street/Katella Ave 0.432 A 0.564 A 0.434 A 0.573 A 0.002 0.009 SOURCE: LSA Associates, Inc. (June 2014) CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐71 Future Baseline Conditions Cumulative Projects It is anticipated that the proposed project could be completed in 2015. Therefore, traffic volumes obtained from the City were escalated by 1 percent per year to determine existing traffic volume, future year baseline traffic volumes were escalated 1 percent from existing 2014 to future 2015 to account for the growth of regional traffic. In addition to regional traffic growth, the following approved or pending projects are anticipated to increase traffic at study area intersections (refer to Appendix A for specific project parameters). 1. Platinum Gateway (905 East Katella Avenue): 399 dwelling units 2. Lennar A‐Town Phase I Apartments: 400 dwelling units: 400 dwelling units 3. Vivere Phase 2 (1331 East Katella Avenue): 244 dwelling units 4. Park Viridian Phase 2 and 3 (1415 East Katella Avenue): 771 dwelling units 5. LNR Platinum Stadium (2025 East Orangewood Avenue): 525 dwelling units 6. Gateway Apartments Phase 2 (2100 East Orangewood Avenue): 341 dwelling units 7. Orangewood Apartments (2111 East Orangewood Avenue): 365 dwelling units 8. Springhill Suites (1160 West Ball Road): 120 rooms 9. Hyatt House (1800 South Harbor Boulevard): 252 rooms 10. Ramada Maingate (1650 South Harbor Boulevard): 13 rooms 11. Springhill Suites (1801 South Harbor Boulevard): 172 rooms 12. Residence Inn (640 West Katella Avenue): 274 rooms 13. Hyatt Place (2035 South Harbor Boulevard): 178 rooms 14. Courtyard by Marriott (1400 South Harbor Boulevard): 221 rooms 15. Holiday Inn Express (1411 South Manchester): 96 rooms 16. Hilton Homewood Suites (2010 South Harbor Boulevard): 215 rooms 17. Staybridge Suites (1050 West Ball Road): 124 rooms 18. Roscoe’s House of Chicken and Waffles (2110 South Harbor Boulevard): 8,000 sf In addition to these development projects, the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) is scheduled to open before 2015. However, to present a conservative analysis, the TIA did not assume an increased transit mode share for the approved/pending projects. The project trip generation for the approved/ pending projects was calculated using trip rates documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, 9th Edition (2012) and is presented in Table B. Based on the trip generation rates for the various uses, the cumulative projects are expected to generate a total of 31,467 daily trips, including 2,419 during the AM peak hour and 2,785 during the PM peak hour. The cumulative projects’ traffic was assigned to the local street based on logical travel corridors and minimal time paths. Tab le 3.16‐4 summarizes the future baseline with cumulative project traffic ICU and LOS for each of the key study intersections. As indicated in the table, all of the intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable levels (i.e., LOS C or better) during the AM and PM peak hours. Future (2015) traffic volumes are illustrated on Exhibit 3.16‐4. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐72 Table 3.16‐4 Future Baseline Intersection Level of Service Summary Platinum Vista Apartments Intersection Existing AM Peak Hour Existing PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS Manchester Avenue/Katella Avenue 0.594 A 0.647 B Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue 0.462 A 0.585 A Lewis Street/Katella Avenue 0.599 A 0.709 C State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue 0.652 B 0.686 B Sportstown/Katella Avenue 0.410 A 0.502 A SR‐57 SB Ramps/Katella Avenue 0.385 A 0.463 A SR‐57 NB Ramps/Katella Avenue 0.386 A 0.434 A Howell Street/Katella Avenue 0.463 A 0.630 B SOURCE: LSA Associates, Inc. (June 2014) 2015 Plus Project Traffic Conditions The future (2015) AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions forecast for the key study intersections are summarized in Table 3.16‐5. As reflected in the table, all of the area intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable levels of service (i.e., LOS D or better) in 2015 with cumulative projects’ traffic and growth, and the additional traffic generated by the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project. Project implementation would not result in any significant traffic impacts. The 2015 AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the key study intersection, including project‐generated traffic are shown on Exhibit 3.16‐5. Table 3.16‐5 Future (2015) Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Summary Platinum Vista Apartments Intersection 2015 w/out Project Traffic 2015 Plus Project Traffic Difference AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM PM ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU ICU Manchester Ave/Katella Ave 0.594 A 0.647 B 0.600 B 0.657 B 0.006 0.010 Anaheim Way/Katella Ave 0.462 A 0.585 A 0.466 A 0.588 A 0.004 0.003 Lewis Street/Katella Ave 0.599 A 0.709 C 0.666 B 0.747 C 0.067 0.038 State College Blvd/Katella Ave 0.652 B 0.686 B 0.665 B 0.701 C 0.013 0.015 Sportstown/Katella Ave 0.410 A 0.502 A 0.419 A 0.512 A 0.009 0.010 SR‐57 SB Ramps/Katella Ave 0.385 A 0.463 A 0.403 A 0.475 A 0.018 0.012 SR‐57 NB Ramps/Katella Ave 0.386 A 0.434 A 0.387 A 0.439 A 0.001 0.005 Howell Street/Katella Ave 0.463 A 0.630 B 0.465 A 0.640 B 0.002 0.010 SOURCE: LSA Associates, Inc. (June 2014) CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐75 Caltrans Intersection Analysis Consistent with Caltrans methodology, intersection LOS at four State facilities were analyzed using the HCM 2000 methodology for the Existing and Future (2015) (with and without project) conditions. The following study area intersections were included in this analysis: ▪ I‐5 Southbound Ramps: Manchester Avenue/Katella Avenue ▪ I‐5 Northbound Ramps: Anaheim Way/Katella Avenue ▪ SR‐57 Southbound Ramps/Katella Avenue ▪ SR‐57 Northbound Ramps/Katella Avenue Table 3.16‐6 summarizes the results of the Existing and Future (2015) (with and without project) AM and PM peak‐hour LOS analysis for the signalized intersections identified above utilizing the HCM methodology. Based on the Caltrans methodology, all State facilities are forecast to operate at LOS D or better in the Existing and Future (2015) (with and without project) conditions. As a result, no significant project‐related traffic impacts would occur. Table 3.16‐6 Caltrans Methodology Level of Service Summary Platinum Vista Apartments Intersection Existing Conditions Existing Plus Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 Manchester Ave/Katella Ave A 15.3 B 15.8 B 15.7 B 16.3 Anaheim Way/Katella Ave B 16.2 B 18.2 B 16.2 B 18.2 SR‐57 SB Ramps/Katella Ave B 14.0 B 16.2 B 13.9 B 16.4 SR‐57 NB Ramps/Katella Ave B 19.6 B 12.9 B 19.6 B 13.0 Intersection Existing Conditions Existing Plus Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 Manchester Ave/Katella Ave B 16.0 B 17.5 B 16.3 B 18.0 Anaheim Way/Katella Ave B 16.2 B 18.6 B 16.2 B 18.6 SR‐57 SB Ramps/Katella Ave B 13.4 B 17.0 B 13.3 B 17.2 SR‐57 NB Ramps/Katella Ave B 19.5 B 13.3 B 19.5 B 13.5 1Delay measured in seconds. SOURCE: LSA Associates, Inc. (June 2014) Although the project would not result in any impacts greater than those previously identified and evaluated in FSEIR No. 339, it would be subject to several mitigation measures prescribed in the traffic analysis and EIR prepared for the expansion of the Platinum Triangle, including: (1) payment of applicable traffic impact and assessment fees (MM 9‐4); (2) dedicate rights‐of‐way as applicable to the project (MM 9‐5), (3) prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses as required (MM 9‐6);(4) determine when intersection improvements applicable to the project must be constructed (MM 9‐7); (5) identify fair share responsibility for mitigating project‐related impacts and the fair share to the City (MM 9‐8); (6) identify the project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair share responsibility (MM 9‐9); CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐76 (7) pay the fair share identified in MM9‐9 (MM 9‐10); and (8) offer for dedication the ultimate arterial highway right(s)‐of‐way adjacent to the property (MM 9‐11). Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? As concluded in the traffic impact analysis conducted for the proposed project, none of the key study intersections would be adversely affected by the proposed project even with the increase in the number of dwelling units proposed by the applicant. However, FSEIR No. 339 concluded that several intersections and roadway segments are forecast to operate at unacceptable levels of service and will require mitigation in the form of roadway and intersection improvements in order to function at adequate levels of service. Although the Platinum Vista project includes 39 more dwelling units than the approved plan for the project site, the proposed project would contribute fewer trips on a daily and peak hour basis than previously identified and analyzed as a result of the elimination of 50,000 square feet of retail/commercial development. Although the proposed project must comply with the applicable mitigation measures and payment of fair‐share fees intended to pay for improvements (i.e., mitigation) as prescribed in FSEIR No. 339. However, several intersections are forecast to operate at an unacceptable level of service either because the mitigation measures are infeasible or the affected intersection and/or roadway segment are located outside the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim. As a result, even though implementation of the proposed would result in fewer daily and peak hour trips, traffic impacts will remain significant and unavoidable, as concluded in FSEIR No. 339. Recommended improvements on the following City of Anaheim intersections are not feasible and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. ▪ Euclid Street/Katella Avenue ▪ Disneyland Drive/Ball Road ▪ Disneyland Drive/West Street/Katella Avenue ▪ Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road ▪ Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street/Katella Avenue ▪ State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue ▪ State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue Recommended improvements on the following City of Orange intersections are not feasible because the City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the implementation of these improvements; and, therefore, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. ▪ State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue (shared intersection between Anaheim and Orange) ▪ State College Boulevard/The City Drive/Chapman Avenue ▪ Orangewood Avenue/SR‐57 Southbound Ramps ▪ Main Street/Collins Avenue ▪ Glassell Street/Katella Avenue ▪ The City Drive/Garden Grove Boulevard ▪ SR‐22 Westbound Ramps at Metropolitan Drive The following six arterial segments within the City of Orange are identified as deficient and would continue to operate at unacceptable levels of service in the future due to right‐of‐way constraints and the City of Orange has no plans for improvements along the roadways. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐77 ▪ Ball Road from SR‐57 Freeway to Main Street ▪ Collins Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street ▪ Collins Avenue from Batavia Street to Glassell Street ▪ Eckhoff Street to Orangewood Avenue to Collins Avenue ▪ Katella Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street ▪ Struck Avenue from Katella Avenue to Main Street Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? There are two heliports in the project vicinity: the North Net Training Facility and UC Irvine Medical Center. The Anaheim Police Department also uses the parking lot at the Angel Stadium of Anaheim for helicopter training exercises. There are no private airstrips within the City. Heliport safety hazards include hazards posed to aircraft from structures located within navigable airspace and crash hazards posed by aircraft to people and property on the ground. The primary risks associated with heliports are take‐offs and landings. The City typically seeks to minimize public exposure to heliport‐related risks primarily through minimizing the siting of incompatible land uses surrounding the City’s existing heliports. As discussed in previously, the project site is not located within two miles of any public airport or other aviation facility. As such, the proposed structures do not pose a hazard to navigation. Therefore, project implementation will not result in a change to air traffic patterns at either John Wayne Airport or Fullerton Municipal Airport. Furthermore, traffic associated with the proposed residential development was thoroughly evaluated in FSEIR No. 339 and in the supplemental traffic analysis prepared for the proposed project. Based on that analysis, project implementation would not result in any substantial safety risks or hazards to aviation activities occurring in the vicinity of either aviation facility in the County. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Implementation of the proposed project would not result in inadequate design features or incompatible uses because it has been evaluated to determine the appropriate land use permit for authorizing its use and the conditions for their establishment and operation. At a minimum, compliance with relevant Municipal Code standards would be required. Furthermore, the TIA prepared for the project evaluated project access to determine adequacy. As illustrated in the site plan, access to the project site would be provided via a right‐ in/right‐out connector road along Katella Avenue and a full access connector road along Lewis Street. The connector road along Katella Avenue is located along the westerly boundary of the project site. The connector roads are approximately 26 feet wide. Access to the parking garage is provided on to the westerly connector road via two driveways. These full accesses are also 26 feet wide. Traffic generated by the proposed project and the adjacent property (Platinum Gateway Development) was distributed along the connector roads (refer to Exhibit 3.16‐6). An all‐way stop‐control warrants analysis conducted for the three access locations along the easterly connector road for both the proposed project (Platinum Vista, one access) and the adjacent property (Platinum Gateway, two accesses) for the Future (2015) with Project conditions.6 6 Criteria from Section 2B.07 ‐ Multiway Stop Applications from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) were used to determine whether an all‐way stop was warranted at the three locations. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐78 Based on the peak‐hour volume (less than 150), the three intersections do not satisfy the peak‐hour traffic signal warrant. Therefore, the intersections do not satisfy Signal Warrant Criterion A. Since all these intersections will be built in the future, currently there is no accident data available. Hence, Criterion B is not applicable. Based on the projected peak‐hour volumes along the easterly connector and at the three intersections (less than 150), the minimum volume (Criterion C) is not satisfied. Since Criterion B is not applicable, Criterion D (which is based on Criterion B) is also not applicable. Therefore, based on the all‐way stop‐control warrant analysis conducted for the project, all‐way stop‐control is not recommended at the three intersections along the easterly connector. The intersections should be controlled by stop sign at the project accesses, with uncontrolled traffic operation along the easterly connector. Additionally, traffic signal warrants analysis was conducted at the location where the connector roads intersect Lewis Street and Katella Avenue for the Future (2015) with Project conditions. The peak hour volume at the connector intersections is low (refer to Figures 12 and 13 in Appendix A) and they do not satisfy the peak‐hour signal warrant (Warrant 3). Hence, a signal is not recommended in the Future (2015) conditions. The project would also be evaluated by the City of Anaheim to ensure that adequate access and circulation to and within the development would be provided, as discussed in Section 3.16(e). Access to the site must comply with all City design standards and would be reviewed by the City and the Anaheim Fire Department to ensure that inadequate design features or incompatible uses do not occur. The City and the Anaheim Fire Department would LAO review the proposed development plans for the site in order to ensure that they are designed to meet adopted standards and provide adequate emergency access. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in significant impacts involving inadequate design features or incompatible uses. Result in inadequate emergency access? As indicated in FSEIR No. 339 prepared for the Revised Platinum Triangle Master Plan Expansion, proposed development projects would be required to comply with the City’s development review process, including review for compliance with the City’s Zoning Code. As previously indicated, access is provided via a right‐ in/right‐out connector road along Katella Avenue and a full access connector road along Lewis Street. The proposed development would be required to comply with all applicable fire code and ordinance requirements for construction and access to the site. Individual projects would be reviewed by the Anaheim Fire Department to determine the specific fire requirements applicable to the specific development and to ensure compliance with these requirements. This would ensure that new developments would provide adequate emergency access to and from the site. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐80 Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? The Anaheim train station is located near the project site, but outside of a comfortable 0.25 mile walking distance. Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner and the Metrolink Orange Line use the Anaheim train station. Metrolink currently offers 15 northbound and 14 southbound trains to the Anaheim train station daily. The project area is widely served by public transit provided by the Orange County Transportation Authority. Two Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) bus routes operate near the project site. Route 50 operates east‐ west along Katella Avenue. Its hours are 4:00 a.m. to 1:30 a.m., with buses every 25 minutes during peak commute periods, every 45 minutes outside of peak commute periods, and every hour late at night. Route 50 has a stop near the Anaheim train station. Route 57 operates north. Project implementation would not, therefore, adversely affect either public transit or other forms of alternative transportation, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities. No significant impacts to alternative transportation would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts As indicated in the preceding analysis, project implementation would result in an increase in traffic generated by the proposed residential development; however, the project would result in a decrease in the overall daily traffic generated on the site when compared to that generated by the development permitted by the approved land uses that include both residential and commercial development. Project‐related traffic would continue to contribute to the impacts at key study intersections, including those where mitigation measures are infeasible and/or where the City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction (i.e., City of Orange and Caltrans facilities). Potential impacts at those intersections would remain significant and unavoidable. Conclusion Based on the ICU analysis conducted at the eight intersections, the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project will not create any significant CEQA‐related traffic impacts at the key study intersections. Furthermore, because the proposed projects includes the elimination of 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area and the resulting traffic, project‐related traffic would result in less traffic filtering to other intersections in the project area. As a result, potential project‐related traffic impacts as the key study intersections within the project area would not result in a new significant impact or create a more severe impact than previously analyzed for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion project. No additional intersection improvements are required as a result of the Platinum Vista Apartments project. Nonetheless, impacts to several intersections, including in those in Anaheim and Orange as well as Caltrans facilities identified in FSEIR No. 339 and in the preceding analysis would remain significant and unavoidable. FSEIR No. 339 Relevant Mitigation Measures MM 9‐4 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each building, the property owner/developer shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal Assessment Fees, Traffic Impact and Improvement Fees, and Platinum Triangle Impact Fees to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit with credit given for City‐authorized improvements provided by the property owner/developer; and participate in all applicable reimbursement or benefit districts which have been established. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐81 MM 9‐5 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)‐of‐way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan and consistent with the adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. MM 9‐6 Prior to approval of a Development Agreement for any project forecast to generate 100 or more peak hour trips, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager utilizing Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model Trip Generation Rates, property owner/developers shall prepare traffic improvement phasing analyses to identify when the improvements identified in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Draft Traffic Study Report, Parson Brinckerhoff, August 2010 (Appendix F of this SEIR) shall be designed and constructed. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to implement traffic improvements as identified in the project traffic study to maintain satisfactory levels of service as defined by the City’s General Plan, based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339, Orange County Congestion Management Program and established in City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. MM 9‐7 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9‐6, property owners/developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 9‐6. The improvement phasing analyses will specify the timing, funding, construction and fair‐share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Anaheim and surrounding jurisdictions. At minimum, fair‐share calculations shall include intersection improvements, rights‐of‐way, and construction costs, unless alternative funding sources have been identified to help pay for the improvement. The Development Agreement Conditions of Approval shall require the property owner/developer to construct, bond for or enter into a funding agreement for necessary circulation system improvements, as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager, unless alternative funding sources have been identified. MM 9‐8 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9‐6, the following actions shall be taken in cooperation with the City of Orange: a) The traffic improvement phasing analysis shall identify any impacts created by the project on facilities within the City of Orange. The fair‐share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts shall be calculated in this analysis. b) The City of Anaheim shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair‐share responsibility in cooperation with the City of Orange. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐82 c) The Proposed Project shall pay the City of Anaheim the fair‐share cost prior to issuance of a building permit. The City of Anaheim shall hold the amount received in trust, and then, once a mutually agreed upon joint program is executed by both cities, the City of Anaheim shall allocate the fair‐share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow at the impacted locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to both cities. MM 9‐9 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9‐6, and assuming that a regional transportation agency has not already programmed and funded the warranted improvements to the impacted freeway mainline or freeway ramp locations, property owners/developers and the City will take the following actions in cooperation with Caltrans: a) The traffic study will identify the Project’s proportionate impact on the specific freeway mainline and/or freeway ramp locations and its fair share percentage responsibility for mitigating these impacts based on thresholds of significance, performance standards and methodologies utilized in SEIR No. 339 and established in the Orange County Congestion Management Program and City of Anaheim Traffic Study Guidelines. b) The City shall estimate the cost of the project’s fair‐share responsibility in cooperation with Caltrans. MM 9‐10 Prior to the approval of the final subdivision map or issuance of a Building Permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall pay the identified fair‐share responsibility as determined by the City as set forth in Mitigation Measure 9‐9. The City shall allocate the property owners/developers fair‐share contribution to traffic mitigation programs that result in improved traffic flow on the impacted mainline and ramp locations, via an agreement mutually acceptable to Caltrans and the City. MM 9‐11 Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)‐of‐way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan and consistent with the adopted Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, regardless of the level of impacts generated by the project. MM 9‐14 In conjunction with the preparation of any traffic improvement phasing analyses as required in Mitigation Measure 9‐6, property owners/developers will analyze to determine when the intersection improvements identified under Impact 5.9‐4 shall be constructed, subject to the conditions identified in Mitigation Measure 9‐6. MM 9‐15 Prior to the approval of a Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall meet with the Traffic and Transportation Manager to determine whether a bus stop(s) is required to be placed adjacent to the property. If a bus stop(s) is required, it shall be placed in a location that least impacts traffic flow and may be designed as a bus turnout or a far side bus stop as required by the Traffic and Transportation Manager and per the approval of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐83 3.17 Utilities 3.17.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Analysis FSEIR No. 339 analyzed impacts to utilities and service systems including wastewater treatment, water supply, storm drainage, solid waste, electricity, natural gas, and communications. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that the potential impacts to public utilities and services could be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Wastewater Treatment and Collection According to FSEIR No. 339, the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area is served by the City of Anaheim’s local sanitary sewer collection system, which is a tributary to the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), District 2. Wastewater from the City sewer system is conveyed to OCSD’s trunk and interceptor sewers to regional treatment and disposal facilities. The Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area is served by the Newhope‐Placentia Trunk (State College Avenue), the Olive Subtrunk, the Orangewood Diversion Sewer, and the Santa Ana River Interceptor (SARI) line. It was determined in FSEIR No. 339 that the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would require sewer improvements to accommodate project buildout. With implementation of these improvements, the sewer system, including sewer treatment, was anticipated to accommodate development within the development within the Platinum Triangle based on future buildout conditions. With implementation of the mitigation measures in FSEIR No. 339, no significant unavoidable impacts were identified. Further, it was determined that the potential for sewer spills during a ten‐year storm event would be low and would not represent a significant impact. Water Supply and Distribution Systems The City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department, Water Division provides water service to the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area. As of 2007–2008, the City received approximately 79 percent of its water supply from its groundwater wells and 21 percent from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). The MWD contracts for water from the State Water Project (SWP) and the Colorado River. According to FSEIR No. 339, buildout of the Platinum Triangle would result in a total water demand of 5,249 acre‐feet per year. A comparison of projected demand and supply concluded that there are adequate water supplies to meet the water demand created by the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. According to the Water Supply Assessment (WSA), there would be surplus water through the 20‐year planning period. Rule 15‐D of Anaheim’s Water Rules, Rates and Regulations (Plan No. W2524D) specifies the water facility improvements required to accommodate the projected land use water demands within the City, including the Platinum Triangle. Under Rule 15‐D, a new 3,500 gallons per minute (gpm) Well No. 45 was constructed in 2003, and currently supplies most of the demands in and around the Platinum Triangle area. Ultimately, changes in land use projections and addition of water facilities will require updating Rule 15‐D; however, under existing Rule 15‐D, the projected demands for new office, commercial, and industrial land uses have already been accounted for in determining water facility improvements. The only significant changes, in terms of projected demand quantity for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, were the demands resulting from new residential dwelling units. Once the City approves the necessary improvements, Rule 15‐D and associated rates and figures will be revised. According to FSEIR No. 339, compliance with Rule 15‐D would ensure that adequate water facilities are provided to serve the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project. Implementation of the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan would not adversely impact the water delivery system. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐84 Storm Drain According to FSEIR No. 339, the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove‐Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area (prepared in January 2006) identified that the existing storm drainage system was deficient under the existing condition in the Platinum Triangle at the time FSEIR No. 339 was prepared. The analysis determined that specific projects would be evaluated by the City Engineer to determine if they are located within an area served by deficient drainage facilities as identified in the appropriate drainage study; it also determined that the developments in the Platinum Triangle would be required to incorporate additional local systems into their plans to meet the City’s current drainage criteria in terms of street flooding limits and other surface flow parameters. Construction of these facilities would occur in compliance with the standard engineering rules and regulations and would not result in a significant environmental effect. Solid Waste According to FSEIR No. 339, the Olinda Alpha Landfill is the closest facility to the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area and would be the solid waste facility most often receiving waste from the project site. Development of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would increase the service demand for solid waste disposal beyond existing conditions and would provide more solid waste to the Olinda Alpha Landfill. Development of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project would generate a total of 372,457 pounds (168 tons) of solid waste per day. However, the Orange County Landfill System has adequate capacity and regularly imports solid waste from Los Angeles County. He analysis presented in FSEIR No. 339 concluded that there would be available landfill capacity in the Orange County landfill system to accommodate the anticipated solid waste stream generated by implementation of the PTMLUP, including both project‐related solid waste generation and cumulative development solid waste. Additionally, because implementation of the PTMLUP would generate increased construction and operational solid waste in the area, it was further determined that each development project in the project area would be required to submit project plans to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated Waste Management Plans as administered by the City of Anaheim. Compliance of future development projects within the Revised Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan with the City’s existing recycling and diversion programs would reduce the potential project‐related solid waste impacts generated by the additional development density. As a result, potential impacts were determined to be less than significant. Electricity According to FSEIR No. 339, the Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD), Electrical Division provides electricity to Anaheim’s citizens and businesses. Implementation of the PTMLUP would increase the electrical load on existing facilities and require upgrades to the existing 12 kilovolt distribution systems. A number of electric utility improvements were identified at the time FSEIR No. 339 was prepared. Those improvements were either in the planning stages or would be required in the future to serve the Platinum Triangle development, including a new electrical substation. The APUD determined, assuming all identified improvements are implemented, ,that project‐related impacts resulting from the implementation of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, would be within the expansion capabilities of the existing service and such expansion would not be detrimental to the environment. FSEIR No. 339 concluded that impact on electrical service would be less than significant. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐85 Natural Gas The Southern California Gas Company (SCG) provides natural gas service in the City of Anaheim and has facilities throughout the City, including the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area. FSEIR No. 339 states that implementation of the PTMLUP would increase the natural gas demand in the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area and would require an additional 1.5 miles of gas transmission pipelines; placement of at least two additional pressure limiting stations; and alteration of at least three miles of existing gas mains in the area to increase capacity. With necessary system upgrades and facility improvements, SCG would be able to service the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area with natural gas, which would be provided in accordance with SCG’s policies and extension rules on file with the Public Utilities Commission when the contractual arrangements are made. Although the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project was found to create additional demands on natural gas supplies and distribution infrastructure, the increased demands would be within the service capabilities of SCG, provided necessary improvements are made in coordination with SCG. FSEIR No. 339 found that implementation of the PTMLUP would not result in any unavoidable adverse impacts to natural gas service or resources. Communications AT&T and Time‐Warner provide telephone and cable television service to the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area, respectively. According to FSEIR No. 339, no impacts related to telephone service systems or cable television service were identified through the initial study process. Consequently, FSEIR No. 339 does not contain any specific analysis related to telephone service systems or cable television service. 3.17.2 Analysis of Proposed Amended Project Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? The Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) has two operating facilities (Reclamation Plant No. 1 and Treatment Plant No. 2) that treat wastewater from residential, commercial, and industrial sources in central and northwest Orange County. The City of Anaheim (along with the cities of La Habra, Fullerton, Buena Park, Cypress, La Palma, Stanton, Los Alamitos, Westminster, and Fountain Valley) is located within OCSD Revenue Area 3. All sewage flow from Revenue Area 3 is collected and treated at Treatment Plant No. 2, which is located at 22212 Brookhurst Street, Huntington Beach. Reclamation Plant No. 1 and Treatment Plant No. 2 are constructed to together treat 372 mgd of primary treated wastewater and 332 mgd of secondary treated wastewater. Fiscal Year 2011‐2012 average daily ocean discharge under dry weather conditions was 207 mgd without (and 152 mgd with) reclamation.7 A sewer system study was prepared for the proposed Platinum Gateway project, which also addressed sewage generation and facilities of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project. The study, dated November 1, 2012, was prepared by Hall & Foreman (November 1, 2012). The study shows that the Platinum Gateway project would generate a substantially reduced volume of sewer flows than the previously approved project would have. The study also shows that the increase in flow from the additional area, including the Platinum Vista property, is more than offset by reduction in flow from completed and approved projects downstream. Therefore, flows from the entire Platinum Gateway project as well as the Platinum Vista Apartments project can be accommodated in the Katella system. Table 3.17‐1 provides a summary of the sewer generation within the sewer shed 7California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Santa Ana Region; Order No. R8‐2012‐0035, NPDES No. CA0110604; Waste Discharge Requirements and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System for Orange County Sanitation District; Reclamation Plant No. 1 and Treatment Plant No. 2 (June 18, 2012). CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐86 Table 3.17‐1 Planning Areas Contributing to Platinum Gateway and Platinum Vista Platinum Vista Apartments Project Project Name Original Design (gpd) Actual Design (gpd) Change (gpd) Percent Reduction Actual Design (cfs) Platinum Gateway (Within 28B) 219,565 85,398 ‐134,168 ‐61.11 0.13 Platinum Vista (Within 28B) 374,418 206,593 ‐167,825 ‐44.82 0.32 Subtotal 593,983 291,991 ‐301,993 ‐50.84 0.45 Platinum Gateway (Within 28A) 439,131 170,796 ‐268,335 ‐61.11 0.26 Total 1,033,114 462,786 ‐570,328 0.72 gpd – gallons per day cfs – cubic feet per second SOURCE: Hall & Foreman (November 1, 2012) There are three existing sewer mains within the surrounding streets. Lewis Street has an existing 8‐inch sewer main flowing southerly to Katella Avenue where it confluences with an 18‐inch sewer main that flows westerly along Katella Ave. and continues westerly towards Harbor Boulevard in a 21‐inch sewer main. Two 18‐inch sewer mains exist in Katella Avenue, including one that flows east and one that flows west. The existing 18‐inch sewer main on the northerly side of Katella Avenue flows westerly and connects to the aforementioned Lewis Street sewer at the intersection of the two streets. This other sewer flows easterly within the southerly side of Katella Avenue towards State College Boulevard. The City of Anaheim has recommended that the Platinum Vista Apartments Project should be connected to the 18‐inch easterly flowing sewer main in Katella Avenue, along with the Platinum Gateway project adjacent to the site.8 The eastern‐flowing sewer was designed to accept flows from Platinum Triangle projects within a sewer model area identified as 28B, which is located immediately adjacent to Katella Avenue on both the northerly and southerly sides between Lewis Street and State College Boulevard. The eastern half of the Platinum Gateway site is within sewer model area 28B. The westerly parcel of the Platinum Gateway project is within model area 28A, which is tabled to sewer to the impacted westerly sewer shed. Table 3.17‐2 provides a summary of the various projects tributary to easterly Katella system (28B) and their original sewer flow design versus the actual design of those projects. 8Preliminary On‐Site Sewer System Study – Platinum Gateway; Hall & Foreman; November 1, 2012. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐87 Table 3.17‐2 Planning Areas Contributing to Model Area 28B Only Platinum Vista Apartments Project Project Name Original Design (gpd) Actual Design (gpd) Change (gpd) Percent Reduction Platinum Gateway + 219,565 85,398 ‐134,168 61.11 Stadium Lofts 441,970 230‐641 ‐211,319 47.81 Stadium Park Apartments/Condominiums1 868,242 173,355 ‐186966 52.89 Platinum Triangle Condominiums2 378,704 75,446 ‐28,230 27.06 Platinum Vista3 374,418 206,593 ‐167,825 44.82 A‐Town Metro 3,079,113 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Wright Circle 67,568 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Total 4,182,634 ‐728,508 gpd – gallons per day 1Only 41.5% constructed as of November 1, 2012. 2Only 27.4% of the residential have been constructed and no commercial had been Constructed as of November 1, 2012. 3Based on 350 multiple‐family residential dwelling units, including 30 studios, 143 1‐bedroom units, 159 2‐bedroom units, and 8 3‐bedroom units. SOURCE: Hall & Foreman (November 1, 2012) As indicated in Table 3.17‐2, the actual project design for the existing and proposed development within Model Area 28B have resulted in a reduction of over 725,000 gpd from the original design of the same projects. Further reductions would also be expected if the proposed Amended A‐Town Metro Master Plan, which would result in a reduction of 935 dwelling units and 100,000 square feet of commercial floor area, is approved. As previously discussed, implementation of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project would result in an increase of 39 multiple‐family dwelling units and the elimination of the commercial development allocated to the subject property. Based on the results of the Platinum Gateway Sewer System Study and reflected in Table 3.17‐2, the addition of 39 units proposed to be added to the Platinum Vista Apartments project could be accommodated as a result of the prior reductions in density/development intensity have already occurred. The sewer system study prepared for the Platinum Gateway project located adjacent to the Platinum Vista project in Sub‐Area A of the Platinum Triangle concluded the following: ▪ The proposed Platinum Gateway project would generate significantly less flow to the sewer system than would have been produced by the previously approved version of the project. ▪ The Platinum Gateway, Platinum Vista, and three recently completed projects along Katella Avenue generate sewers flows below sewer generation amounts allocated by the Master Plan of Sewer Study. Accordingly, the proposed Platinum Gateway development will not CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐88 adversely impact downstream pipe capacity as the easterly flowing sewer in Katella Avenue will have the capacity to accept the sewer flows from the entire Platinum Gateway project, including the portion of the site within Area 28A. ▪ The on‐site development flowing to the upstream 18‐inch sewer main connection in the easterly flowing Katella line flows at 33.5% pipe capacity, which well within the 0.75% d/D guideline. ▪ The combined sewer flows for the entire sewer shed within Model Area 28B and the proposed development demonstrates the existing downstream 21" sewer main flowing easterly in Katella Avenue to State College Blvd. flows at 85.3% pipe capacity. This is slightly above the 0.75% d/D guideline, but demonstrates the pipe is not flowing full and has capacity to carry the developed sewer flows. The values provided are based on peak sewer flows. An alternative flow rate calculation based on average dry weather flow and peak dry weather flow or a peaking factor of 2.5 can produce a lower sewer flow rate, which would be appropriate for a trunk main pipe sizing evaluation, which would provide additional pipe capacity within the 21" sewer pipe main. An applied peaking factor of 2.5 would equate to 3.56 cfs or 67.3%, which satisfies the pipe carrying capacity. As a result, the estimated decrease in raw sewage generated by the proposed use would neither exceed the treatment plant’s capacity to accommodate the project nor exceed the existing treatment requirements imposed on the OCSD by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The raw sewage generated by the proposed project would be entirely residential in nature and would not contain constituents that would affect the waste discharge requirements imposed on the treatment plant. The project‐related raw sewage would be treated in accordance with the current treatment requirements. Due to the anticipated reduction in the amount of raw sewage generated by the proposed project, no new significant or more severe impacts to sewage treatment than previously analyzed and evaluated in FSEIR No. 339 would occur. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? As indicated above, there is excess primary treatment capacity at Treatment Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach. The OCSD has indicated that no deficiencies exist within their facilities serving the City of Anaheim and anticipates that available capacity would be available to serve buildout of the City based on the prior analysis presented in FSEIR No. 339. Although the proposed project represents a departure from the adopted land use plan for Sub‐Area A, the reduction in the intensity of use proposed by the applicant would not require the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities not previously identified and evaluated in FSEIR No. 339. The small, incremental decrease in raw sewage generated by the project can be accommodated without the construction of a new treatment facility or expansion of an existing facility. Furthermore, the proposed project would be subject to applicable mitigation measures prescribed in FSEIR No. 339, including construction of all requisite sanitary sewers, conducting additional sewer studies as each development is proposed to ensure that the facilities are adequate to accommodate the raw sewage generated, and contacting OCSD to ensure that adequate treatment capacity is available. Based on such compliance with the City’s requirements for the provision of sewer facilities, no significant impacts are anticipated and no additional mitigation measures are required. As indicated in FSEIR No. 339, the total buildout of the Platinum Triangle would result in a total demand of 5,249 acre feet per year (afy); however, the additional water demand for the was estimated to be 1,804 afy after subtracting the existing water use by the existing uses and other existing demands for water in the CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐89 Platinum Triangle. Table 3.17‐3 summarizes the reduction in the demand for domestic water that would occur as a result of the proposed project. As reflected in that table, the proposed project would have a demand for 40,845 gallons per day (gpd) or 45.5 afy, compared to the approved land use plan which would have a demand for 48,450 gpd (54.4 afy), resulting in a decrease of approximately 16 percent. Table 3.17‐3 Domestic Water Demand Platinum Vista Apartments Land Use Units Demand Factor Total Domestic Water Demand Approved Platinum Vista Development Residential 350 DUs 105 gpd/DU 36,750 gpd Commercial 60,000 sq. ft. 195 gpd/Ksf 11,700 gpd Total – Approved Platinum Vista Development 48,450 gpd Proposed Platinum Vista Development Residential 389 DUs 105 gpd/DU 40,845 gpd Total – Proposed Platinum Vista Development 40,845 gpd DU – dwelling units Ksf – thousand square feet gpd – gallons per day sq. ft. – square feet SOURCE: FSEIR No. 339 Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly increase surface runoff generated by future development because it is anticipated that the amount of impervious area would similar to the coverage of the development now proposed for subject property. Nonetheless, as indicated in Section 3.9 (Hydrology and Water Quality), project implementation will require the construction of in‐tract drainage improvements, including BMPs, to accommodate post‐development runoff generated by development proposed for the Platinum Vista Apartments project. FSEIR No. 339 required that future projects within the Platinum Triangle would be required to mitigate any potential drainage impact to adequately serve the area. Such projects would be required to install the drainage facilities based upon the Development Mitigation within Benefit Zones of the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove‐Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area. Additionally, the property owner/developer would also be required to participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program, if adopted for the Project Area, which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. Compliance with these requirements would mitigate potentially significant impacts to storm drain facilities. No additional mitigation measures are required. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐90 Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? As indicated in FSEIR No. 339, the City’s water supply projection assumed up to 67 percent groundwater and 33 percent imported, was confirmed by MWD. In 2013‐14, the City received approximately 80 percent of its water supply from its groundwater wells and 20 percent from the MWD, reflecting a one percent increase in groundwater and a one percent decrease in water from the MWD when compared to 2007‐08 as reflected in the FSEIR. Additionally, analyses of normal, single‐dry, and multiple dry year scenarios demonstrate the City’s ability to meet demand during the 20‐year analysis period. Finally, an analysis was conducted utilizing assumed temporary shortages in MWD’s water supply, which demonstrated the City’s ability to meet demand under reasonably foreseeable temporary allocations to deal with cutbacks in SWP deliveries due to Delta smelt and other environmental issues discussed in the prior environmental analysis. FSEIR No. 339 also identified a number of water supply challenges for MWD and its service area, such as critical dry conditions and protective measures for the delta smelt in the Sacramento‐San Joaquin River Delta which resulted in uncertainty about future pumping operations from the SWP due to ruling in the federal courts in August 2007. However, the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) prepared for the Platinum Triangle included, as a worse‐case scenario, an analysis under the assumption that state Water Project (SWP) deliveries will be reduced by both 35 and 40 percent, which went beyond the scope and requirements of SB 610. In the event that the SWP water supply is temporarily reduced by 40 percent, the project’s water demand would be met by implementing water conservation in the range of 0.3 to 3 percent, as shown in Table 5.10‐11 of FSEIR No. 339. Should extraordinary circumstances require it, the City can meet its water demand by (1) increasing production of groundwater beyond the basin production percentage up to the basin safe yield, (2) increasing imported water purchases from available storage programs, and/or (3) decreasing demand through water conservation measures. Moreover, under temporary MWD allocation shortages, the City would trigger its Conservation Ordinance and call for at least a 10 percent reduction in usage by all customer classes with rate penalties if users exceed 90 percent of their previous year’s water use. With planned water supplies and facilities, the WSA prepared for the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan concluded that there is adequate water to serve the Proposed Project. The water supply would be provided by the City of Anaheim through an existing 16‐inch waterline within Katella Avenue and an existing 12‐inch water line within Gene Autry Way. The proposed on‐site water system consists of 12‐inch diameter water mains and includes five connections to the City’[s water mains surrounding the project area. The proposed water system provides pressures greater than 45 pounds per square inch (psi) for all nodes within the system. In addition, the project’s water system has been designed to meet the fire flow requirements based on the City of Anaheim Design Guidelines, which require a fire flow demand of 4,000 gallons per minute (gpm) for commercial development and the residential development currently proposed. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? As indicated above, although the proposed project would result in an increase in the number of residential dwelling units on the site and, therefore, an increase in sewage generation, the proposed amendment would also eliminate 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area and, thus, the resulting raw sewage that would be generated by that land use. Furthermore, as reflected in Table 3.17‐2, development that has occurred within the sewer Model Area 3B is generating over 725,000 gpd less raw sewage as a result of the reductions in development density/intensity compared to the original design. In addition, a further reduction in the total generation of raw sewage would also occur in the event the proposed Amendment to the A‐Town Metro CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐91 Master Plan, which proposes a reduction in both dwelling units and commercial floor area, is approved by the City. Therefore, even with the approximately 10 percent increase in the number of dwelling units and resulting increase in the generation of raw sewage, implementation of the proposed project would be expected to adversely affect the existing treatment capacity at the OCSD treatment plant. As a result, potential impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? Future development associated with buildout of the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project and associated cumulative projects within the local area would not significantly impact solid waste collection and disposal services provided by OC Waste & Recycling. The City of Anaheim is situated within a region that is extensively urbanized and built‐out. Anaheim, along with cities in the surrounding area, would continue to use common landfill resources, thereby reducing the capacity of local landfills. The project would be served by the Olinda Alpha Landfill, located at 1942 N. Valencia Avenue, Brea 92823. The Olinda Alpha Landfill is owned by the County of Orange and operated by the OC Waste & Recycling department. The landfill is permitted to accept up to 8,000 tons per day (tpd) of solid waste and currently accepts a daily average of approximately 6,500 tpd. The landfill has an estimated remaining airspace capacity of 43.92 million cubic yards as of June 30, 2013 with a projected closure date in December 2021. If the Olinda Alpha Landfill closes in December 2021, the project would be served by the Frank R. Bowerman (FRB) Landfill located at 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road, Irvine, 92602. The FRB Landfill is permitted to accept up to 11,500 tpd and currently accepts an average of approximately 6,000 tpd. The landfill has an estimated remaining airspace capacity of 192.3 million cubic yards with a projected closure date in 2053. The total capacity of the County’s landfill system is approximately 363.5 million cubic yards in three landfills (including Prima Deshecha Landfill in San Juan Capistrano. Although the proposed project would necessitate the approval of a General Plan Amendment, the potential generation of solid waste generated by the proposed project is less than the volume estimated to be generated by the approved PTMLUP for the project site with the elimination of the 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area. Table 3.17‐4 provides a comparison of the approved and proposed Platinum Vista Apartments development project and the difference in the generation of solid waste that would have resulted from the approved development scenario (i.e., 350 apartments and 60,000 square feet of commercial floor area. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐92 Table 3‐17‐4 Solid Waste Generation Platinum Vista Apartments Land Use No. of DUs/ Floor Area (sq. ft.) Solid Waste Generation Rate Total Solid Waste Generation Approved Platinum Vista Development Residential 350 DUs 12.23 lbs/DU 4,280 lbs/day Commercial 60,000 sq. ft. 3.12 lbs/100 sq. ft. 1,872 lbs/day Total – Approved Platinum Vista Development 6,152 lbs/day Proposed Platinum Vista Development Residential 389 DUs 12.23 lbs/DU 4,757 lbs/day Difference ‐1,395 lbs/day DUs – dwelling units lbs/day – pounds per day sq. ft. – square feet SOURCE: OC Waste & Recycling Based on the solid waste generation rate of 12.23 pounds per day per household (i.e., dwelling unit) and 3.12 pounds/100 square feet for commercial development, respectively, the land uses allocated for the Platinum Vista property would generate approximately 6,152 pounds per day (approximately 3.1 tons/day) of municipal solid waste compared to the 4,757 pounds per day (2.4 tons/day) estimated for the 389‐unit apartment project currently proposed by the applicant. Therefore, project implementation will result in a nearly 23 percent reduction in the amount of solid waste generated by development proposed for the Platinum Vista Apartments compared to the approved land uses. The Orange County solid waste landfill system has sufficient capacity to accommodate solid waste generated by the project, both on a project‐ specific and cumulative basis. The County maintains 15‐years of Countywide solid waste disposal capacity, in compliance with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (i.e., AB 939). In addition, pursuant to AB 939, every city and county in the State is required to divert 50 percent of solid waste generated in its jurisdiction away from landfills. Implementation of source reduction measures, such as recycling and converting waste to energy, that would be implemented on a project‐by‐project basis, including the proposed project, would serve to divert solid waste away from landfills. The contribution solid waste generated by the proposed project would be less than significant. Furthermore, with the reduction of solid waste associated with the proposed project, when compared to the approved land uses, the reduction of refuse generation would also not contribute to a potential cumulative impact. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? As indicated above, the City is required to comply with AB939, which requires reducing the amount of solid waste by 50 percent. Site development will be subject to the requirements established in the City’s Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) that reflect the manner in which solid waste reduction would occur. Compliance with the SRRE will ensure that such reductions occur, not only at the project site but also throughout the City of Anaheim. It is possible that some of the demolition debris (i.e., existing streets that CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐93 would be demolished) resulting from the implementation of the proposed project could be recycled, which would result in a reduction in the amount of construction debris that would be landfilled. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. Cumulative Impacts Project implementation would create a demand for domestic water and would generate both raw sewage and refuse as well as natural gas and electricity; however, the demand or generation would be less than that estimated for the residential and commercial land uses allocated for the Platinum Vista property. Furthermore, the project is consistent with the long‐range plans and policies adopted for the subject site and would not create demands for water or generate sewage and/or refuse that exceed what is anticipated as a result of development that is consistent with those plans. Therefore, because demand and generation rates associated with the proposed project can be accommodated by the existing infrastructure, their potential cumulative impacts would be less than significant. Conclusion In each case for the project’s demand on utilities, including sewer, water, electricity, natural gas, and landfill capacity, project implementation would result in a nearly 23 percent reduction in the demands for the respective utility based on the reduction in density/intensity of development currently proposed compared to the residential and commercial land uses allocated to the 4.13‐acre site. These reductions in the demand and/or generation of utility resources serving the City of Anaheim would not result in any new, significant impacts not previously identified or more severe impacts. As a result, FSEIR No. 339 adequately evaluated the potential impacts of the proposed project; no changes to FSEIR No. 339 are required. FSEIR No. 339 Relevant Mitigation Measures MM 10‐1 The City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient sewer facilities, as identified in the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. If the project will increase sewer flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan sewer study for the area or if the project currently discharges to an existing deficient sewer system or will create a deficiency in an existing sewer line, the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation of the impact to adequately serve the area to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s Office. Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development based upon the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. 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. MM 10‐2 Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) will be upsizing trunk lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner/developer shall coordinate with the OCSD to ensure that all improvements and construction schedules are coordinated. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐94 MM 10‐3 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit for each development project, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall contact Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) regarding sewer capacity. Additionally, if requested by the OCSD, the property owner/developer shall place up to three flow monitoring devices for up to a month to verify capacity and ensure consistency with the OCSD’s modeling results. MM 10‐4 Prior to approval of sanitary sewer connections for each development project, the property owner/developer shall be required to install the sanitary sewer facilities, as required by the City Engineer, to prevent the sewer spill for below‐grade structures of the proposed development based upon the latest updated sewer study for the Platinum Triangle. Where requested by the City Engineer, sewer improvements shall be constructed with larger than recommended diameter to maintain the surcharge levels within the pipe and the invert elevation of sewer laterals shall be located above the hydraulic grade line elevation of the surcharge levels when they are above the pipe crown. MM 10‐5 Prior to the approval and ongoing during construction of any street improvement plans within the Platinum Triangle, which encompass area(s) where OCSD will be upsizing trunk lines and/or are making other improvements, the City and/or property owner shall coordinate with OCSD to ensure that backflow prevention devices are installed by OCSD at the lateral connections to prevent surcharge flow from entering private properties. MM 10‐6 Prior to final design approval, additional analysis shall be performed and provided for each individual project using flow, wet‐weather data, and other information specific for that project in order to obtain more accurate results of the surcharge levels for final design. MM 10‐7 Prior to issuance of a building permit, submitted landscape plans shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Anaheim adopted Landscape Water Efficiency Guidelines. This ordinance is in compliance with the State of California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (AB 1881). 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; ▪ 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 recirculation 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. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐95 In conjunction with submittal of landscape and building plans, the applicant shall identify which of these measures have been incorporated into the plans. MM 10‐8 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide engineering studies, including network analysis, to size the water mains for ultimate development within the project. This includes detailed water usage analysis and building plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering reviews and approval in determining project water requirements and appropriate water assessment fees. MM 10‐9 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation meter when the total landscaped area exceeds 2,500 square feet. MM 10‐12 Prior to issuance of a building permit, submitted landscape plans for all residential, office and commercial landscaping shall demonstrate the use of drought tolerant plant materials pursuant to the publication entitled “Water Use Efficiency of Landscape Species” by the U.C. Cooperative Extension, August 2000. MM 10‐13 Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans water efficient design features including, but not limited to (as applicable to the type of development at issue) waterless water heaters, waterless urinals, automatic on and off water faucets, and water efficient appliances. MM 10‐14 Prior to issuance of a building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans installation of a separate irrigation lines and use recycled water when it becomes available. All irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with recycled water. MM 10‐17 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the City Engineer shall review the location of each project to determine if it is located within an area served by deficient drainage facilities, as identified in the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area. If the project will increase stormwater flows beyond those programmed in the appropriate master plan 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 impact to 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 of the Master Plan of Storm Drainage for East Garden Grove Wintersburg Channel Tributary Area, 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 fees, credits, reimbursements, construction, or a combination thereof. MM 10‐18 Prior to the final building and zoning inspections of each development, the property owner/developer shall submit project plans to the Streets and Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department for review and approval to ensure that the plans comply with AB 939, and the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, and the County of Orange and City of Anaheim Integrated CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐96 Waste Management Plans as administered by the City of Anaheim. Implementation of said plan shall commence upon occupancy and shall remain in full effect as required by the Street and Sanitation Division and may include, at its discretion, the following plan components: ▪ Detailing the locations and design of on‐site recycling facilities. ▪ Participating in the City of Anaheim’s “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City or governing agency. ▪ Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially in retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collection and bailing. ▪ 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. MM 10‐19 Ongoing during project operations, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: ▪ Usage of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead, and packaging. ▪ Recovery of materials, such as aluminum and cardboard. ▪ Collection of office paper for recycling. ▪ Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. MM 10‐20 Prior to the approval of each grading plan (for import/export plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permits (for demolition plans), the property owner/developer shall submit a Demolition and Import/ Export Plans, if determined to be necessary by the Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division and/or Street and Sanitation Division. The plans shall include identification of off‐site locations for material export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials on‐site, 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 firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if all cannot be reused on the project site. MM 10‐22 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall indicate on plans energy‐saving practices that will be implemented with the project in compliance with Title 24, which may include the following: ▪ High‐efficiency air‐conditioning with EMS (computer) control. ▪ Variable Air Volume (VAV) air distribution. ▪ Outside air (100 percent) economizer cycle. ▪ Staged compressors or variable speed drives to flow varying thermal loads. ▪ 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. CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐97 ▪ Use of cold cathode fluorescent lamps. ▪ Use of EnergyStar ® exit lighting or exit signage. ▪ Use of T‐8 lamps and electronic ballasts where applications of standard fluorescent fixtures are identified. ▪ Use of lighting power controllers in association with metal‐halide or high pressure sodium (high intensity discharge) lamps for outdoor lighting and parking lots. ▪ Consideration of thermal energy storage air conditioning for spaces or facilities that may require air‐conditioning during summer, day‐peak periods. ▪ Consideration for participation in Advantage Services Programs such as: o New construction design review, in which the City cost‐shares engineering for up to $15,000 for design of energy efficient buildings and systems. o New Construction – Cash incentives $400 per kW or $0.15 per kWh saved for each measure and up to $200,000 per facility for efficiency that exceed Title 24 requirements.. o Green Building Program – Offers accelerated plan approval, financial incentives, waived plan check fees and free technical assistance. ▪ Use of high efficiency toilets (1.28 gallons per flush [gpf] or less). ▪ Use of zero to low water use urinals (0.0 gpf to 0.25 gpf). ▪ Use of weather‐based irrigation controllers for outdoor irrigation. ▪ Use of draught‐tolerant and native plants in outdoor landscaping. MM 10‐25 Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall install their portion of the underground electrical service from the Public Utilities Distribution System as determined by the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department. The Underground Service will be installed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations and Electrical Specifications of Underground Systems. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. MM 10‐26 Prior to issuance of each building permit or grading permit, the property owner/developer shall provide an electrical load analysis to the City of Anaheim Public Utilities Department (APUD). The analysis shall include a load schedule and maximum electrical coincident demand. Should the property owner/developer’s load analysis result in a contributed load forecasted to exceed 20 MVA above the existing 40 MVA capacity of the electrical system currently serving the Platinum Triangle area, the APUD will initiate construction of a new electrical substation within the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project area. Electrical service fees and other applicable fees for the electrical substation will be assessed in accordance with the Electric Rules, Rates, Regulations or another financial mechanism approved by the City. 3.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance Implementation of the proposed Platinum Vista Apartments project would not result in any potentially significant impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, biological resources, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, recreation, or utilities and service systems. No significant geologic constraints were identified, although the site would be subject to seismic ground‐shaking typical of all areas of Southern California. Short‐term noise and air quality impacts would be CHAPTER 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 3‐98 associated with grading and construction activities. However, these significant impacts were considered in FSEIR No. 339, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for unmitigated environmental effects, including these air quality impacts. For all other environmental impacts analyzed, feasible mitigation measures included in FSEIR No. 339 have been incorporated into the proposed project which avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level as analyzed in this Initial Study/Addendum. Based on the information and environmental analysis of potential environmental impacts contained in this Initial Study/Addendum, it has been determined that none of the conditions set forth in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR and described in Chapter 1.0 of this Addendum have been met. Therefore, the City of Anaheim cannot require a subsequent EIR. As described in detail in Section 3.1 through Section 3.17, there are no new significant impacts resulting from the proposed modification nor is there any substantial increase in the intensity of any previously identified environmental impacts. The impacts previously identified for the Revised Platinum Vista Expansion project are not significantly increased due to implementation of the project from anticipated levels documented in the certified Final Subsequent EIR No. 339 for the Platinum Triangle. 3.19 Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts were addressed in FSEIR No. 339. As described in the preceding analysis, the proposed project does not result in any new significant environmental impacts which were not previously addressed in the certified Final Subsequent EIR No. 339 for the Platinum Triangle. As a result, no new potentially significant cumulative impacts would occur with the implementation of the proposed project beyond those previously identified in the certified Final Subsequent EIR No. 339 for the Platinum Triangle. CHAPTER 4.0 – ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED Addendum No. 3 to Final SEIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 4‐1 4.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED 4.1 City of Anaheim Planning Department Vanessa Norwood, Associate Planner Public Works Department David Kennedy, P.E., Transportation Planner Keith Linker, Principal Civil Engineer Raul Garcia, Principal Civil Engineer 4.2 Project Applicant The Wolff Company Mark Kaminski, Project Manager The PRS Group Phillip R. Schwartze, Consultant 4.3 Applicant’s Consultants EEI Geotechnical & Environmental Solutions William R. Morrison, Senior Geotechnical Engineer Jeffrey P. Blake, Senior Engineering Geologist Polly Ivers, Staff Scientist Bernard Sentianin, Principal Geologist Hall & Foreman, Inc. Gavin Powell, P.E., LEED AP Edward T. Oune, P.E., Q.S.D. LSA Associates, Inc. Arthur Black CHAPTER 4.0 – ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED Addendum No. 3 to Final SEIR No. 339 – SCH No. 2004121045 Platinum Vista Apartments Project – City of Anaheim, CA August 2014 4‐2 4.4 Environmental Consultant Keeton Kreitzer Consulting Keeton K. Kreitzer, Principal 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item.