Loading...
MIN 08 22 16_Item 8_Scott_gmAUGUST 22, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES Page 1 of 3 ITEM NO. 8 ADDENDUM NO. 6 TO FINAL SUBSEQUENT EIR NO. 339 AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 334 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2015-00504 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2015-00001 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05806 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2015-00128 MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2016-00631 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 17918 (DEV2015-00024) Location: 2040 South State College Boulevard Request: The following actions will be considered relating to the proposed project: 1) Amend the General Plan to revise Table LU-4 of the Land Use Element to modify the density provisions for properties within the Platinum Triangle area, designated for mixed-use land use, to reduce the maximum number of dwelling units from 19,027 to 17,348 dwelling units; to increase the maximum square feet of commercial space from 4,735,111 to 4,782,243 square feet; and, to reduce the maximum of amount of office space from 9,652,747 to 9,180,747 square feet. In addition, a modification to the Land Use Plan (Figure LU-4), Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities (Figure C-5) and Green Plan (Figure G‐5) of the Anaheim General Plan is required in order to remove the designation of a public park on the Project Site; 2) Approve a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and LTG Platinum LLG to provide for the development of a Master Site Plan for a mixed-use community of up to 405 residential units, 433,000 gross square feet of commercial uses, a 200-room hotel, and 77,000 gross square feet of office. The development agreement includes a Master Site Plan that provides the framework for the development of the site; 3) Approve the sale and service of alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption for 21 restaurants, including two Brew-Pubs (as defined by the California State Department of Alcohol Beverage Control), and the sale of alcoholic beverages for off-site consumption for one market; 4) A zoning code amendment to allow a conversion and transfer of unused development intensity from the Gateway, Gene Autry, Katella, and Orangewood Districts to the Stadium District. In addition, the overall allowable residential units and office square footage within the Platinum Triangle would be reduced and the allowable commercial square footage would be slightly increased; 5) amend the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) to revise Resolution No. PC2016-069 Resolution No. PC2016-070 Resolution No. PC2016-071 Resolution No. PC2016-072 Resolution No. PC2016-073 Resolution No. PC2016-074 Resolution No. PC2016-075 (Lieberman/Seymour) Approved, recommended City Council approval VOTE: 4-0 Chairman Caldwell and Commissioners Henninger, Lieberman and Seymour voted yes and with one Commission vacancy. Commissioners Bostwick and Dalati were absent. Project Planner: Scott Koehm skoehm@anaheim.net AUGUST 22, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES Page 2 of 3 the district boundaries for the Stadium and Gateway Districts, allow a reduction, conversion, and transfer of unused development intensity from the Gateway, Gene Autry, Katella, and Orangewood Districts to the Stadium District, and modify the park and street locations consistent with the Proposed Project; and, 6) Approve Tentative Tract Map No. 17918 to subdivide the site into two parcels that correspond with the two Development Areas shown on the proposed Master Site Plan for the project. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will determine whether an addendum to the previously certified Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339 for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, along with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 334, together with other previously-approved environmental documentation, serves as the appropriate environmental documentation for the Project Actions. Scott Koehm, Senior Planner provided a summary of the staff report dated August 22, 2016, along with a visual presentation. Commissioners Seymour and Lieberman and Chair Caldwell disclosed that they met with the developer prior to tonight’s meeting. Commissioner Seymour asked if anyone had a comment regarding the Angels letter received. He stated that his responsibility relates to the land use, not the City’s negotiation with the Angels. Ted Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney reiterated that the issue raised in the letter from the Angels is something that should be dealt with by the City Manager’s Office, with respect to the City Council. Chair Caldwell opened the public hearing. Randy Jefferson, the applicant described the proposed project and provided a visual presentation. He stated he has read the staff report and was in agreement with the conditions. David Kersh, Executive Director of the carpenters/contractors committee, 533 S Fremont, Los Angeles. Mr. Kersh said his members would like to be able to work on the proposed project. He urged the commission to move the project along. Dennis Kuhl, Chairman of Angels Baseball, 2000 S. Gene Autry Way, Anaheim. Mr. Kuhl expressed that the proposed project irreparably harms the Stadium and Angels Baseball. He said granting commercial rights at the LT Global site, which is intended for residential development, will delay the prospect of additional development in the area surrounding the Stadium; impacting all the businesses, and creating a significant impediment to any development within the Stadium district for the next decade, at the minimum. He asked the Commission to disapprove the unmerited zoning increase to LT Global as it comes at the expense of the Stadium District and businesses which were purchased to AUGUST 22, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION [DRAFT] MINUTES Page 3 of 3 develop the area as originally entitled. LT’s project is in direct conflict with the City’s long term goals for Angel’s Stadium and the Platinum Triangle. Molly Jolly, Sr. Vice President for Angels Baseball. Ms. Jolly stated that LT’s plans adversely affect Angels Baseball and the Stadium. The proposal states that there may be a trail leading to and from the Stadium which will also have an adverse impact on their surrounding business. Ms. Molly said believes the proposal is premature given the impact to the surrounding area. Steve Faessel, 1005 S Cardiff Street, Anaheim. Mr. Faessel said the modest changes to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use as suggested should not get in the way of the realization of the vision that Commission had back in 2004. Chair Caldwell closed the public hearing. Commissioner Lieberman said she agrees with Mr. Faessel and stated that developments seen thus far, no one has had the chutzpah to put in what was intended to be put in. She agrees with staff’s justification of the densities of the surrounding areas and that they were not built as originally intended. She stated she supports this project. Commissioner Lieberman offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner Seymour and the motion carried, recommending that the Planning Commission adopt the resolutions attached to the August 22, 2016 staff report, determining that an addendum to the previously certified Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339 for the Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project, along with Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 334, together with other previously-approved environmental documentation, serves as the appropriate environmental documentation for the Project Actions and recommending City Council approval of Addendum No. 6 to Final Subsequent EIR No. 339 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 334, General Plan Amendment No. 2015-00504, Development Agreement No. 2015-00001, Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05806, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2015-00128, Miscellaneous Case No. 2016-00631, Tentative Tract Map No. 17918 (DEV2015-00024). Eleanor Morris, Secretary announced that the resolutions passed with four yes votes. Chairman Caldwell and Commissioners Henninger, Lieberman and Seymour voted yes and with one Commission vacancy. Commissioners Bostwick and Dalati were absent. OPPOSITION: Two persons representing Angels Baseball spoke expressing opposition to the subject request. IN GENERAL: One person provided comments related to the subject request. IN SUPPORT: One person spoke expressing support of the subject request. DISCUSSION TIME: 32 minutes (8:12 to 8:44 p.m.)