Loading...
Minutes-PC 2005/02/23FEBRUARY 23, 2005 PLANNING COMMlSS10N SUPPLEMENTAL DETAILED MINU' • 5a. Environmental Impact Report No. 328 and Mitiqation Buffa Monitorinq Proqram No. 126 5b. Amendment No. 1 to the Platinum Trianqle Master Buffa Land Use Plan - MIS2003-00071 Creatin Sub Areas A and B in the Gatewav District) 5c. Amendment To Title 18 "Zoninq" - ZCA2003-00025 Buffa/Eastman SAmendind Zoninq and Development Standardsfor the Platinum Trianqle Mixed Use OveriaVZone Related to Sub Area 6 of the Gatewav Qistrict) 5d. Conditiona{ Use Permit No. 2003-04763 Buffa 5e. Request for Citv Council Review of ltem No. 5d Buffa/Eastman Owner: Drive-in T'California, 920 North Robertson Boulevard, L:os Angeles, CA 90048 Agent: Archstone Communities, One Spectrum Pointe Drive, Suite 224, Lake Forrest, CA 92630 Location: Property is approximately 20.8 acres,'located within the cities of Anaheim and Orange, south of the southeast corner of State College Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue. ' • - 2150 South State Colle_qe Boulevard. This request pertains specifically to the northerly 8.4 acre portion of the project site, located within the City of Anaheim, within the boundaries of The Platinum Triangle, Gateway District (Formerly Orange Drive-in). Amendment to the Platinum Triangie MasterLand Use Plan (PTMLUP) (Miscellaneous Case No. 2003-00071) - Request to amend The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Amendment No. 1) to provide for the Gateway District to have two sub-areas (Sub-Area A consisting of 41.6 acres and Sub-Area B consisting of 8.4 acres). Amendment to Title 18 "Zoning" (Zoning Code Amendment Na 2003- 00025) - Request to amend the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Cade) to establish zoning and development standards for the Gateway District, Sub-Area B and to provide for the development of a multiple-family residential development in Sub-Area B subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. ~ES Recommended City Council approvaUcertitication Recommended City Council approval Recommended City Council approval of the draft Ordinance Granted Recommended City Council Review I MMP N0.126 ' Deleted SRR 3.3-1 of I Page 2 I cur Added a condition of `' I approval pertaining to I units being pre-wired for I cable & internet service; and renumbered timing I conditions, as applicable. I - Vote: 6-0 II One Commission vacancy Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-04763 - Request to construct a multiple- family residential development (the Archstone Gateway Project) in the Gateway District, Sub-Area B consisting of 352 apartment units with on-site tenant business and leisure amenities (the apartment complex is proposed to straddle the City limits of Anaheim and Orange with 352 units in the City of Anaheim and 532 units in the City of Orange for a total of 884 units). Environmental Impact Report Resolufion No. PC2005-30 • Amendment Na 1 to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan Resolution Na PC2005-31 sr8858cf.doc Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2005-32 02-23-05 ' Page 2 ' FEBRUARY 23, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL DETAILED MINUTES •` Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. Cheryl Flores, Senior Planner, introduced Item No. 5 and stated the subjecfproject is unique and the concept of this development was presented to staff in 2001. The'project was developed in anticipation of, but prior toj the General Plan Update allowing residential uses in the area and prior to The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone. The applicant was in the process of preparing an environmental . impact report as'the City was preparing the Update to the General Flan and developing the standards for the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone. The applicant has asked to amend ThePfatinum Triangle Master Land Use' Plan to designate a new Sub Area B in the existing Gateway District, ` specificaAy for the subject project and to'amend the Zoning Code as itemized in paragraph (31) oi today's ' staff report. Staff is supportive of these requests because of the location of the project, the architecture and landscaping and its overall conformance with current development standards. She stated if approved the project would be exempt from preparing a development agreement but would be subject to all the fees required by a development agreement and the property owner would be required to execute and record CC&R's creating maintenance obligations to maintain the projectfiacilities, the same as required ` by a development agreement. The applicant is also requesting a conditional use permit instead of a final site plan which is part of a development agreement. lf approved the contlitional use permit would authorize the development of the subject project in Sub Area B much like the approval of a final siteplan. She stated that#he EIR states that the project will be served by cable and the applicant indicates that all units'will be pre-wired for cable and infernet service; therefore, staff would recommend a condifion of approval requiring the pre-wiring. "She referred to Mitigation Measure SRR 3.3-1 and stated staff: recommends modification to require review of color and materials only and stated she has prepared copies of the color elevations that the Commission should have received. App(icanYs Statement: • Cynthia Hwang, Archstone-Smith, One Spectrum Pointe Drive, Suite 225, Lake Forest, CA, she gave some background information regarding Archstone Communities and also presented a PowerPoint presentation and relayed details of the subject project. She stated their company's philosophy is that they strive to build, own and operate for the long run and they only do apartment units. They don't contract out to a third party to manage the communities and they take a fot of pride in ownership. She further , continued explaining the different features and amenities of the project. Public Testimony: William Blume, 1 Via Neblina, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA, stated he is a representative from Carpenters Loca1803 in Orange County. He expressed concerns with Archstone because they consistently use "concrete parking structure° contractors who do not pay area standards, do not provide health beneflts for their employees and families and do not have a consistently high standard of safety in the work place: He feels they need to consider the actual people daing the work, and the conditions and standards for the employees. THE PUBUC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Buffa asked if the City has any requirements that the applicants utilize union contractors. Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, responded not to his knowledge and it is not a City Public Work's contract and they do not customarily get involved in dictating terms'of issues between the developer and its contractors. Commissioner Buffa asked staff for clarification regarding the recommendation to modify the Mitigation Measure SRR 3.3-1; Cheryl Flores clarified her comment to the Commission regarding the color renderings. ' • - ; 02-23-05 Page 3 _ FEBRUARY 23, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTALDETAILED MINUTES • Commissioner Buffa stated she would be comfortable deleting Mitigation Measure SRR 3.3-1 as they have a clear sense of the project's architecture, iandscaping and the color and materials;'Commissioner Velasquez' concurred. Cheryl Flores agreed and stated staff would review it during the building permit process to ensure that the colors do match the renderings which are before the Commission today. Commissioner Velasquez asked when a development agreement is required. Linda Johnson, Principal Planner, stated with the adoption of the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone the code states that to implement that zone for mixed use developments, either residential only or mixed use, that those projects would be implemented with the development agreement. That was a recent requirement that was adopted last year, and the subject project has been in process since 2001, and was going through the environmental process at the same time as they were developing the code - and the form of the development agreement. .What they included is part of the subject EIR or Mitigation Measures that addressed all of the fees that have been set forth in'the form of the Platinum Triangle Development Agreement and the subject project will pay all of the necessary fees. They have also inc~uded a measure about a maintenance agreement which was another key component of the development agreement and they have addressed the time frame'that the entitlement would be good for through the conditional use permit time frame. The Platinum Triangle Development Agreement has a typical time frame of 5 years. Therefore, a development agreement is only required in the Platinum ` Triangle to implement the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone. The particular request is asking to amend the code to exempt Archstone from that requirement. Commissioner Velasquez asked for clarification on the time frame. Linda Johnson responded it would be a 2-year initial approval with extension abilities that could take them • up to 6 years, but those extensions would come back before the Planning Commission.' Commissioner Flores asked if the representative for the City of Orange, Anna Pehoushek had any information to provide regarding the project. ' Anna Pehoushek, Acting Principal Planner, City of Orange, 300 E. Chapman Avenue, Orange, CA, stated their Planning Commission will be conducting a public hearing on the subject project on March 7, 2005, and currently their staff report is recommending approval of the project The Planning Commission expressed their support of the project. OPPOSITION: A person spoke in opposition to the'subject request Mark Gordon, Deputy City Attorney, stated since the subject items are recommended for City Council review and approval, an appeal period is not applicable and this item would be scheduled for a public hearing before the City CounciL DISCUSSION TIME: 34 minutes (3:06-3:40) ' • 02-23-05 Page 4 _, ~,.,~.,,..,,i . . _ - - - - Elly Morris Senior Secretary Received and approved by the Planning Commission on f1 ar i ~ ~ , 2005.