Resolution-PC 89-71'E'r~
:'. e
~~
i
l~ M U~I.HSL1t.{~L.~.Y.2.~}L1f.Y.~ `! ft
A RESOLU'fTON OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANN'iNG COMI~tISSTON
THAT PF~T.ITIQN kOR CONDITYQNAG U5F PERMIT N0. 3106 BE GRANTED
WEIEIi~:AS, the Anaheim City Planning Commission did ceceivo a verified
Poti~ion for Conaitional Use Permit ~rom CALIFORNIA DRIVE-IN TAEATRES, 120
North Rubertson, Lo~ AngQ~os, CA 90A4a, owndr, rsnd IDM CORPO~tATION, 5150 East
Pacific Coast Highway, Long Eipacti, CA 40804, agont, of cerL•ain real property
sitixated in the City of Anaheim, County ~f Orange, State oE Californaa,
doscribed as foilows:
PARCEL 2:
Th~r, portaon of: Lot 1'3 of the Lockhart T.ract, in the City
of An~heim, County of Orango, State of Ca.li.fornia, aa~ per
mag recorded in Book 4, Page 512 of tfisr,ellaneou~ Maps, of
the~ Cou~ity Recorder of f..os Angoles County, California,
d~scribc~d a~ follows:
Aeginning at rlie most Norrherly aori~er of thy 5. ~5-acrc
L-r~cC of land conveye8 by FIarry J. Brainerd to William F.
Gade by deed recorded in Baok 527, Prsge 276 of Deeds oE
said Los Angeles County;
Ther.ce S 49° 09' 36" W a distance ot 503.'74 feet;
Thenc~ tt 60° 41' 10" W a distance of 118.84 fc~et; ~o t~he
beginn;ng of a 392.00-fuoC tanget curve, co~icave to the
Northeast;
Thenca 27orthwesterly ~s1o»g said curve, t}irough a centra3
anglo of 60° 31' 48" an ~rc distanco of 361.31 foet;
The~ic.e N 00° U9' 22" W a distance of 596.4(3 feet;
xhence N 02° 28' OS" E a clis~tance ot 240.18 foet to the
TRUE POINT QF HEGINNING.
Thence N 00° 09' 22" V7 ~ distanc~ oE 397.93 feP~;
Thenc~ li 89° 59' 00" ~ a distance of 761.39 feot;
Thenca S 0~° 09' 20" E~ distance of 347.93 -t'
Thonce S 99° 5~' QO" W a distance ot 760.88 f.oet, to the
'~fRUE PUINT 0~ ~?FGINNItJG.
The aroa of the nbove deacribed parcel is 264,821 square
fe~t or 6.Oa acras.
0716r
-1-
PC89-71
!~
,;
S
~~,
,Y~
1 ;~~
'.~~.. 7 k P:~f~
ir 5 c~;
~ ~~ o
1~' \:'t
~. )
,x , ,
!~,
~"~"`~ ~
WFiFREAS, th~ City Flanning r,Qm,nrgsion did hold a public haaring at
th~ Civic Cen~er in tY-t~ City o£ Anaheim on Januarp 4, 1989, at 1:30 p.m.,
noticR oE saiQ public heari.ng having boen duly given a~s requirod by 1r~w and in
accordauce wi.th th~ provisions af the Anahe3m Municipal Cac1e, Chgpter 18.03,
to he~r ttncl con3ader evidence for and again~t said proposod concli~ionA1 use
perm:~ and Co 3nvestigate and make finc~ings and reaommondatzons in connec~:;.on
therawitht and said public !-.daring was aor.;.inued to the~ m~etings oL• Fobruary
13, ].989, and March 13, 1989; and
WHEREAS, ~aid C~~nunission, after due inspection, invetttigation and
sCudy mado by itself ~snd in its behalf, and after due con9iderat.ion of all
evidence anQ reports ofFered ar said haarinq, does find and r~etermine tne
following fact~:
1. That the praposad i:se is properly one fox which a r.onditional
use permit is authorazed by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.91.G4.03U to
wiC: to permit L•he con~truction of one (1) 18•-story, :i91,66'1-aquare foot
comm3rc.ial:office building arid a 3,843-~.pace, G-level parking strue~ure
(witt.:ci tt~e Ci~y o.E Anaheim) in conjunction wi~h ~wo (2) Cen-stor~r, 250,000-
~c~•iare foot commorcial office bui.ldings and two (2) 14-story, 39'l,fi6T-square
foat ~ammercial/office buildi.ngs arid a 6-1eve1 pa.k.:ng structure in ~he City
cf Orange.
2. That t;2ie proposed u~P, as granted, will not advers~ly affect
tho adjoining land uses and tht growth and devQlopmtlnt u~ the area in ~hich i.t
is pr4posc~d to be locatet~.
3. That the sizP and shape of the s,ite proposecl for the use~ is
c:doquate l:o allow the full clc~velopment of L•he proposed use, a~ qranted, in a
mannor not detrimental to tFie particular area n~r to t2ie paace, hoalt.h, safety~
and genoral welfare of tha ~:itiz~ns of L•he City of ~tnaheim.
4. That thQ gran~.ing of th~ Coni!itional U~e '_'c3cmit under tihe
conditions i~nposed, if any, wi71 not be detrimental Co the ~eace, healCh,
safety and general Welfare of the Citizeus ~f the City of Anahoi.m.
5. That the traffic gon~rated by the proposcd use; as granted,
will not 3mpose dn undue burden upon the streets and highways desi.gncsd and
improved to carry thQ traffic xn the ~rea.
6. Thak on~ perso~i indicaCed his presence at said publi.c hearing
in opp~3ition; ~nd that one ier.r.er was receivQd in appo~ition to the s;~bj~ct
petition.
~ALIEQR!3IA EN'V~~Q~~F~~$,L QUA(~~i~X A~T,__FxNDI~.~; Aftor considerfnq
Environmontal Ympact Report tt~. 288 tur the proposed IDM Dusiness Center and
r~viFwinq ~evicSence, both wriLten dnd oral, prc~s~ntod ko 3upplemenr. L'iR No.
28a, the Anaheim Cxty Planning Commisaion finds thnt F.IR No. 288 is in
complinnce with the Cnl.i.fornia Envfronmental Qualit:y Act ancl the Stato and
Ctty Cuidelinesj and that F,Ik No. 284 identifies the ~ollowing impacts which
ar,Q consideroQ to be bokh unavoidable and adverse in nature and not fully
mitigatafl tio a levol oE insfqnificance:
~
~.z _ PC89 -71
~ti~..w~vw~ti 5~h~w -~.t•r.';,Y .:p14•P.`i)~1~Nt
• ' iii'•'' :. (" ~ ..~',~^. . ..i.yi ~.~~.~ .~.
. i . . ~~ ~ 'i~.. ~~~ ..., ~~ .. ,
. .. . ,: ~~~~i. .:~~.,~, 1 e.~, ..'~~r ~ '.~! :t7 1 ~ ~~:{'r Is~.~{i.Yi:
. ... . . , . . . .. . . ~ F .
~~ !p
r ' .
~
:~,`~~y;~a
r~,
. , . ~~;~'',.ry5
•'~
T.t+..~.~~ ~:C ::i ~'St.~l a t.i o n
l:von without the pr~jec~, a11 segments of thQ L-5 and SR-57
.E'repways t~x~alyzed in tho EIR will aparatie at Level o~ Sarvice F
u,~der 19y1 cumiilative do~velopmen~ condit~on3.
Al~h.~ugh n~t a sigrsificant impaat un an ~ndi•~~.dual project; basis,
lhe ii~cr.emental ~ddita~n of traf.fi~ from a11 3evelapment in the
a~~e,;Y is conaidQred a cwnulatively significant impact. Tablds 11
and 12 3n the ~inal EzR demonstrato t'h~st, with the mf~igations
rneaa~,re~ idenL•ified in the EIR anc] ou~linaci her.e3n, th~s
in~.~+r,3oc;t.Qns afEacted by the projer_t ~,~zll operato a~ a T~evel of
Servi~:e D ar b~tter in thQ year 2010. Although the cumulative
traifi<; impact ~s canaiderecl significant, the ruadway netwoxk has
been mitigatad such that the :;ysrem wi,ll operate at an accepL•able
level.
pir Oual3r,y
The proposea pxnjocl exr,r~eds the threshold cr.itc~ria specifiec~ by
the SCAQt~ and is inconsistent with the Air. Quali~y Management
Plan. The projo~t-specific and cumt~lativo air qua~ity impacts are
r,onsider~~ signif.icant.
~~d tJse
ThQ adjacent mobilehomQ park will b~ significantly affocted by
~roject development as to ttie pr~posed bu.ilding hei~hts, bu:.k ancl
intensity. 'rheso cc~nditiuns will potentially affQCt privacy,
viewsheds, slzade and shadow and cioise levals.
.~~K€.~'~~ction
The proposed projec~, together w.i~h othor devc~lopmt~nt in the
project area, will rosult in a neQd for an additionn~ firo station
.in Anaheim; and, f.he expansion and rebuilding and/or relocation of
Fire Station Pto. b in Orange. Thi~ irnpac~ fs considered
~igr.ificant on a cumulativ~ leve.l.
~w~! ~~r Tra~men~
Tha impacts of the praj~~c~ and other devel~pment in the area on
sewage hreaCm~nt facili.ties are considerod potentially significank
on a cumulaLive basis. (xhe nrojec~'s individual impact ~n
wastewater trc~at:mQnt is ~onsido--t~d insiqnificant) .
~.~~ ~
The 3.mpacts o£ tha project and other development in the area on
water supply are considerQd pot•enP:ially siynificant an a cumulativa
basis. (The project's 3ndiviciual impacr_ on water supply is
considered insigni.ficanL).
F~~$y
Project implem~ntation wi12 increm~ntally add to tt.e demand for
finite resources Quch as Qn~rqy and wat~r.
'a- PC09-71
~
~
. e; ~ ~~~
~ ~~ i
;a~
~
and, tho Planning Commiss:ion doe,s fur~her find parsuant r,a Section
15091 oL• tho CEQA Guxiielinea that cYianges or slterdtions have baen rec~uirAd
in, or incorporated into the project wh.ich avoid or substan~ially lesaen the
significanL• environmental effgcta af ~ho following, as 3.dentified in ~he Final
EIR:
,. Traffic Impacts (project-spacifyc)
. No.i9e
. Shade and 5hadow
. Populatio.n, Flmployment and Fiotising
. Gg~lagy and GroundwatQr
. Hydrology
. Biological Resources
. Palice ProtocL-.ion
. Fire Protection (projoct-specific)
. Parks and F;ecreation
. Public Transportat3on
. Sewer/Wc~stowaCer Treatment (pr.oject-specific)
. Water (project-spacific)
. Solid Waste
. Natu.ral Gas
. Eloctricity
. Communication/Telovisian Reception
. Cultural Resuurces
and, ~urthnr that thQ fol:iowing suah changes or alterations are
withiti tt,e responsibility and juriscl3ction of another public agency and not
the agancy mnking t2ie Eir.Bing; and thnt su~h changes have besn a84ptad by such
otb.er agency o~• can and shuuld bP adopted by such othor a~oncy:
Tho mitigatxon measur.as idontified contain meaeuras for both the
cities of Anaheim and Orange. The implemeutati~n of mitigation
measures within the nther ciCy represc~nt maasures that ara under
the jurisdiction oF another~ agency as uutlined in the above
finding.
The planned widen?ng of tho I-5 Freeway is cri~ical in provi.ciiiig a
workable circv..lation systom in tho pr~joct viCinity. Phaso II of
the IDM Businoss C.antc~r ia contingent upon the completion of this
i.mportant project. Sinco ~he widening of I-5 ia undox tb.e
juri~rl:cCion of CAL~xRANS and i;~ noC under th~ conCrol o~ eithor
~iL•y, the abovF finding is appropriate for Chie impact.
and, ~urther that specific economic, social, or other.
cansiderations m~ke infeasfY,la the mitii.qation measures or project alternatives
i@entiffed in the Fir.a]. EIR;
and, that the P'lanning Commfssxon did consider Che various
alternatfves consid~racl tn the EIR, ~s f~llows:
No Projoct/No Dvveloprr~nt A1tr~rnativa
xhis altern8tive woi~ld leave tho Ornn~e Drive-In in iCs
current state and asoum~~ that the drive-in and sWap meet
operations would continue undisturbod.
-4- PC89-71
~r..<vir.. ..... . ,.,.~n
~..Sdn~
i
'~.:' . ":~Y
. -.C': ~ ~f~,°ii ~'1,1~:
,i J
. . . ~ ,..:..,t
Under tk~is altarnative, seven intorsec~ions wa.ll operate at ~`~:~
unacceptable levels of service in 2010 wi~hout the projdeti. x.;
This compares sn~avorably to tha project mitigation candi.tion ~`
w~ich shawe nn int:ersectiuns oper~ting at unacceptable
conditions in 2010, Tab1v~ 11 and 12 0~ the Final EIR,
comparing columns titled "2010 Base" with "2U10 Mitigation".
The air pollut:an~ emissions generat~u bl the projec~ wo~~xld not
occur under this a.itQrnative.
,'
Tiiis alternative wauld aliminaL•e any impacts resultrng tram ~;`
conflicts betwaen the IDM Business Conter and the adjacont x:`:
'
mobilehome park. Fiowever, th~ existing conflicts between the ~
A
mobilehome parl: and the drive-in/swap moet represent a ~:
~
trnr.l,eoff with this a].L-ernatiue since existin,q con£1lcts would y1
~~
nat be rosolved. ~'
;
,
~
This alterriative would e~liminate the groje~ct's cer.tribution ,~,
rd what hava been idonrified as cumulativel~- significant
towa ?,
.
impactr on water consumption and wastewater treatment. ~'
Industrial Altornative `;~
This altexnativ~ woula develflp thQ Anaheim portion of the
project ~ite uncier thp curr~Y~t General P~.an designatian of
Business OfEice/Ser~vice/Inc]ustrial 3nd MG (Limited Industrial)
zoning. Tha OrangQ portion of the project site wokld l~e
developeii under tne curr.ent City of. Arange's Indugtrial
designation and M-1 (Light Manufacturinc~) xonzr~q. This
alternative is similar in nat.ure to the industrial development
north and northoast oE the site and rr~+xld include 343,980
squar~ feet ot indust.rial anci ~44,907 square feot af office
uses.
Thi~ a1L•Qrnativo generates only 1,17.2 daily trips at the
site. While t~ reduction in project traffic is unnecessary to
provid~ an adequately warking transportation sy~tem in the
year 2010, tYae cha:ng~ would reduce the project's incremental
r.outribution to cumulatio~e ~raf£ic growtih. This reduction in
traffic would e7.imir_ate the significan~ project-level impact
on nir quality, but tho cumulative]y signific:ant impact on air
quality would remain. The Ind~strial Alternative would roduce
Lhe developmenL- intensity at the sito. A1L•hough adoption of
t~is alternative would reduco the visi.bility of the on-site
cievQlopment, indus~r.ial buildings are of~en co~sidered
unattractivo. The land use co:iflicts between industrial uses
and the exisL•ing mobilehome park would romain sig;i3ficant.
Industrial ~ases represent a tradeoff in ~erms of trafEic
impac:ts, a~+sL•hetics, air quality, anQ land uso conflicts,
privucy and job crdation. Baseii on the above considerations,
the Industrial Altarnative is not considered env3.ron.~rtantally
superior tu t.he r.u:rent projar.t,
.,5_ PC89-71
~ ~
~ ~
anc~ Mi13.ion Squ~ro F'oot ~,lternaL•ive
~
~ ~;~,~~ ~,~~.~
,
~ °`,~
;'!',i
~ ~ ~ ,.d
This altornativa anducos two 6-story and three 11-~tory office
bixildinga. The praject si~e wou~ld contain a rotal oE
1,000,000 ~quaL•e f~ot of building SPIICfT.
~~.
This alternative would genQratQ less tra£Pic than the ~roposod
praject, and would redueo ~ho am~urit oE resulting pollutant
emi.,~sions. Thas altern2tive wou'ld have a less drt~matic visual
impact, although at 6 and 11 stor.ies, the office buildings
would have tre sumo potential For privacy and visual impacts
on the actjacont mobilehome park. The One blillior~ Square Foot
A1tQrnatr.ive would creata 9,OU0 permanent jobs, with a 3imilar
reduction zn demand for public serviaes and utilities.
Although incrementally r•~ducad, this projecL•'~ impact on
traffic, land use, cumulative water consumFtxon, cumulative
wr~stewat•er treatmenL• anc~ cumulative air quality would be quite
similflr to the aurrent pro3ect and would still repre~c~nt
significant exivironmental i.m~acts. Al~hough t+do~tion o~ this
a~tornat3ve w~ulcl produce incremental improvements in ~he
above catQgori.es, t~Zis alternative woulc~ produce fewer job
upportu~iti.es at tih~ site. This alt~xnative would not
eliminaLo any signif•icant erivironmental impac~s associa~ed
with the current project.
btired I1se Alternative
This ulternative rrould combine oftico/commercial, retail and
hotel uses un the project ~ite. Approximat~ly 8.8 acres •would
be doveloped with a 200-room ho~el. Tho remaining 10 acres
would entail a total of A60,000 square feet af commercial
development. The commerc,ia7. center w~uld include 430,000
squar.o ~eet of of~ice uses a:~d 30,000 square feet o£ ret,ail
uses. The commercial office space would be contained within
two 10-story builclings.
~ .
~,.
~I~; r
This alternativo would generate approx:im~tely 8,080 daily
trips, fewar than the curr~nt vrojec~. Since the ultimate
2010 traffic conditions are aaceptable unde.r the current
projprt, a reductior~ in trafFic ~s unn~cessary ~o reducs ~
significant impact. Howevar, the incr~mental addit.ion to
advers~ short-term traffic conditions anc~ tho additien oE
tra,..°.ic to avarall kraffic growth in the area is s~i~.l
consia:~red a sigi~ificant cumu:.~tive imp3ct. This alternat3.vA
would les~en the air pollutdnts emitted by the project, but
similar to the current projc~ct, it is also incons~stent wi1;h
the Air Quality Managemant P].ax~. The cumulative air quality
impact would remain signiEf~ant. The reduction in devalopment
intensity does provide more flexibility in site planning and
~.ossibly allows for largor setb~cka and biiffer zones from the
mobilehome park. HowevKr, due ~o the height~ of the
buiZdings, potpntial impacts associatatl with privacy and views
remain. The cumulativr impact on watex and wastewater would
remain.
'~' PC89-71
'~~~
', ~
:`t~,
;~ ~~
.,':;;~,?c%
F'~~~\ ~
cTt':"-',4
OCher Site A1tQr.native
. . . ^.'1 ~ +y~~
. , ~ . 1 .r~',~fj
~ti15
~ ~~~ t
... ..,.~, ~~.
This alternative assumos that i.ho proposecl IAM Busxness C~ntar
remains as currecitly proposdd, but that it is dc~volopaa AL
another loeation in tho same general v3.cinity. The proj~ct
description re-nains the same; 1,675,001 square f~et of
cc~mmorcial/oPfice dovelopment on an 18•-acre site. The
developnent tivould consist of two 10-st-ory office buildinqs and
threF 18-story a~fice buil8wngs. Althouqh no site p1o,n has
been devdlopQd, it is assuma3 that this alternative woulci
s2~ara similar charac~eristics with l:he current site plan in
terms o£ site acces~, floor area ratio, and site covQrage.
'.fha Orenge Drive-In aite rernains u~ichanged and the drive-in
and swap meet activities aoirtinue.
Tz.~o specific sitas wnre identifiod based on the locational
-~eeds of the IDM Husine~s Center. 5ite !11 is 18.6 acres 3n
size azicl is bounded by Chapman Avanue, SCat-e College
~ioulevard, Rarr~~ art SL-reet and the Santa Ana River. Tlie site
currently contains t2~e Cinedome TheatQr and its parking lot,
thc~ Rodeway Inn, a gas statian and office buildings. IInder.
this alternative, these uses would be displaced. by
cons~ruction uf the IDM BusinQSS Center.
Site 1~2 is 15.1 acros in size and is bounded by Katella
Avenue, the I-5 Freeway, Pacifico Avenue, ancl the AT & SF
Railr.oad tracks. Tha site contains several busin~sses,
incJ.uding LVestern Mobile Phone, Steel Fabrxcatioxi, a motel,
Waker Spas/Distrihution, Marble Imports and an electrical
subska~ion.
ThQ impacts essociata3 with development Af Che IDM Susin~ss
Conter are more relatod to tlie type rand siwo of the project,
rather th~n the sitQ's una.quo physical or cultural
characce~istics. Impact~ sur,h as tra;Ef.ic, air quality and
sArvice dem~rids remain essentially identical to the current
projoct. 5i.te ~2 woulCi oliminate th~ irnpacts identiEied With
~he pr~jact rela~ed to canflicte with the mob3le~home park. In
no nther caso does the selection o~ one of these two
alterna~zves aliminate a signi:Eicant environmeiital imkact.
ANU, the Planning C~mmission do~~ ht~reby find that the
Altern~tives are infeasible and less desirable thmr. tkie current pr.oject, and
rejects the v~rious Alternat.iv~s far the fallowing rQason3:
1. Mitigatinn measures incorporatecl into the IDN. Business Center
hnvQ substantially roduced the project's envirorunental
Offec~s. While cumu~ativc~ traffic volumes are projeated to
increase due to the amuunt Af development proposed fn the
area, mitigsstion has baen iQentified that wfll provide
acr,eptab].K 1QVr~ls ot soxvice L•hrougliout the area A~fec:ted by
the ~+roject ~r~r the year 2010 aondition. Although 3ir quality
is considered Co be significantly impacted, a number o~
mitigatinq factors have beeza requirecl of L•he project,
including a transportation demand manag~r~ent proqram. Land
use conflicts havo been iden~i~ied as a patentially
-7- PC89-71
:~~t;
. .. ~ . ~ . ~ . ., . .. ..~ ~ i ~ 1 ~~' ~ ' .. 1 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ^ ~ ~ ~t.r ~ I Jf}.`i.
~'7i:k4.^
~r~
significant impapti wue to pro~cimity o~' the project to the
mob.i~ehomg park. Nevertheless, buEEering hms baen raquirQd or
the project to protecr. the homes from visual irnpacts and
privacy conc~rns, an~ t~23
opportuni~y to eliminate conflir~s~ ith thel xis~ing~ dr votin
and swap m~et operntions~ Finally, whi1e water consump~i411
azl~i wa.stewater treatm~nC have been identiEiec~ as signif.icant
impactw, the impacts ident:tt;~d are reg3onal and cumulativR in
nature, and with ~ilanned exoansions, fukure growth can be
accommo~lated.
2. The 1No Project/No Devolopment, rndustrial,
Foo~, and Mixed Use Alternarives would r~su0tein1 ~i~e los~s aof
jobs as conipared to t;he su~7Q~t project. In additi,on,
approval of the No Project Alternative would result in the
1c~ss of an unspecit'ied number oi tempornry construction jobs
to be created by the develnpm@rit of the IDM Busznegs Center.
3• Although same of tho significant cumulative im~acts identiifed
w.ith the proposed project would be irscremantallx reduced, by
the adoption of tha On~ Million Square Foot and Mix~d Use
Altern ~tiives, ~hose im~acts would remain signi~ican~ on a
cumulat:.ive ba~is. Since rhese impacts would not be reduced ~o
a lovel o~ insigniPicance bx these alternatives, adop~ion oF
thpse alternatives would not substantiall
significant environmentaZ impacts Af the IvM Bus np:ss Cerit~r~he
~~Q Na Project A1L•arnative woul~ eliminate the projec~'~
c.ontribution town~d the funding of r8qxnnal transportatian
fmprovements. A comparison o~ future ctunulative 3mpacts
without thr projecL• and future conditions with ~:he pxoject and
its mitigation, shows that regui.rec~ mitiqakion would create
improvements that beneLit the region.
Industrial t~.ses renresent a tradeoff in terms of traffic
imPacts, aes,theticN, air quality, land use conflicts, privac.y
and job creatiun. Based on theso consir]gi~ations, the
Industrial A].ternative is not considered environmontalix
sup~rior to the current project.
'1• Tha Tndustrial Alternativo would possibly cr.eaL•e addition~l
conflicts w,ith t:k~e ac?jacent mobilehome park.
5. The No Proj~rt Altexnative would eliminntQ the net surp2us 3n
rovenue ~v~x expenditures accruing ta the City,
x~l~ subject project ~ s economir., co~t/revt~nue and other
benaEits would be obtaineci ~o a 1es~~c degree af tho
Tnciustrial, One Million Square Foot and Mix~c~ ~se Alt~rnative
w~ie implemenCed.
6. In rc,njunc~ion with the OCY,er Site AlCernativ~, wit2x one
exaeptaon, khe selecLion of one of the sites would not
e~im.inate any of t~ie signi£icant impacts associated with :~he
IDM }3usiness Center. I~ $~,tQ ~Z were selec~ed, certain
potential land use conflxcts with the mob~lehAme park might
-8-
1'C89- 71
r,~~~
r+~
not occux. Fiowover., mitiga~tl,on measures have baen included in
the, project tn minimize visual and privacy impactis, and sinae
th~re are some can~~icts becween tha homes and t~e existing
drive-in/swa.p meet ope,rations, imp].emontat3on of Sate #2 would
elimznate the po~sibility oF removing existing conflicts.
and, thE Planniiig Commission iioea h~rt~by determine that the
benefits oF tho project have beQn weighed ag~inst tho unavoidable adverse
env.ironmental i.mpaets and puxsuant t~ Sectipn 15093 of i:hQ S~ate CEQA
C,uidelines, the oocurrence of the significant environmental impacta idc~ntified
in EIR Nc,. 288 as set forth above~, may b~ permit~ted without Eurther mitiqation
due to the following overr.iding considerations:
T~ the extent that any impac.ts (including, withaut li.mi.tation,
cumulative impacts} attributable l:o the IDM Business Center remain
unanitigated, such impacts are acceptable in light of t:he
overridang social, economic and other considerations set forth
herein. The ~roject alternative~ se,t forth in the EIR are
infeasible for these rea3ous a~d less ~asirable than ~he current
project. Additi.ona]. mitigation measures ar.d the alternativos
woul.d im~ose limit~tions and reszrictions on thQ devalopmen~ oE
thQ TDr6 Rusiness Center w2iich would prohibit obtaining tihe
specific social, econ~mic and other bEnefit5 af the projgct •which
au~weigh tra unmi~igated impacts, and which justify appra~val of
this groject.
The followinc:r soczal, econornic and other considQrations wa_rant
approvaJ. of rha.s project nutwithstanding any unavoidable or
unr~atxgated impacts resulting frum the InM Buszxi~ss Centar.
A. Jobs and Ecor~omic Growth
U~timate buildout of the IDM Business Centor will provide
up to 6,700 pprman~:it jobs, i,n addition to numerous
construction jobs. Therefore, the Planning Commiasi~n
finds thaL• the unmi~igateci impaats aro justified by ~he
need to create jabs and provide For economic growth in the
City; and that the crea:tion uf additional permanent jobs
will indirectly areal:e an increa~ed demand for goods and
servi4es within t~e Cir_y, thua pr~vzdinq oth~r potential
employm~nt opportunities and c~ntributing to over.aZl
economic growth anci we7..1-bsxng wi~hia the City.
The jobs created by the swap rneet operations will not be
tost as a rosult of the project. The relocation of the
swap meet to AnahQim Drive-In will retain the economic
ben~EitS gQneratgd by ~he estimated 750 vendors and 10,000
visiL•ors that use the fr~cility each weekenQ.
B. Cost/Rovenue Benefiks
The F'lanning Commission ffa@^, ~hat IDM Business Center
will enhance the City~s a~,ili.ty to fund services and
improveme~its due to the additional revenues gonexated by
the project. 2he net r~venue to cost rr~tio at full
buildout for the Ci~y of Anaheim is 1.40. This surplus
amou~.ts to $36.5 thousand per yoar aPter full buildout.
eia
._ :~Y~
~~
~
C. TrAffic/Circulation
~
Even without tha projQCt, al]. segments of kha T-5 and SR-57
freeways analyzed in ttie EIR will ~pexa~e at LOS F under 1891
cumulaLi~~e conditiuns. The additxox~ of project. traf~ic wi11
add to an already adverse condi~iun. The incremexital addition
of traffic from a11 cievelopment in thQ area is :.~onsidered ..
cumulatively significanfi, impact.
Therefore, the 1?lanning Commission findQ thnt the unmitigatEd
xmpacr_s are justifisd by the benefits of the project, and
recognizes ~hat such impacts are only temporary in nature; and
that the ultin+ata mitigatian of this regional problem is the
responsibilitg oE an~ther agency (Caltrans), axid is not under
~h~ cuntray uf h.hc~ r.~ r.~.
and, furthermore, the Flannzng Commission finds that the
project's specifzc tr~tfic impacts are micigated to a 1eve1 of
insignitzcance. Fees will be applied toward tlio construction
of improvements noaded thraug'r~~ut this region. A review af
Tab.les LI and 12 of the F'inal EIR flQmonstrates t'~e improvement
in tru£Eic operation produced by th~ proposed miti.gation
measures. A comparison of Columns 2(1.991 Growth) and 7(2010
Miti~ation) shows that at several intersections, levels of
service will actually improve after prajeat m.i~ig~Fion as
compared to 1991 cumulative conditions withou~ the pr~jec~.
The dogree to w:hich these conditions improve r~flects a
benefit to th~s region.
D. AS.r Quality
Notwithstandang the mitigatiAn measures and other eonditions
which are imposed on thi~ projeat, thP EIR iclen~ifiQ3
omissions of air pollutants firom vahicuZar traffic which v~ill
be gPnerated by development of the site as significant. The
EIR also identifies the combination of this project and ohher
growkh in tre area as having a cwnulatively significant
impact. The E~lanning Commis~ion finds that this i.mpact canno~
be avaided except by apnroval of tha No nrojec~/io Develogment
AlteznativQ, which totally eliminates Cha projoct's benefits
as set forth above. The Planning Commission furthar f.inds
that all of ~he social, economic and other considerations set
£arth hereinabove ~aarrant approval of this project
r~~t~rithstand.ing this signifirant impact.
E. Wastewater Treatmen.t
Notwithstarxding 1:he miti.gation measures and other conditions
whicl~ t~re a.dopted and incorporated into this projoct, the E~R
identifies the impact upon wastewater treatment as signi.ficant
on u r.umulativo basis. Section 3.12.1 of tha ~IR stat~s that
the Orange County Sanitation Distrzct (OCSL~) is contiinuously
expandann ita r.onveyance and treatment facilities to
accommodate the g:owth in its service area. OCSD has
indicaked that its treaLr~ent faczlities, axpanded as plannea,
-x0- PC89-71
'B
~*''a
p
~
i ;,a~ a! ~,~{'
I, M
~ . ~ . .. .~ ~.:~•.4~
~i
will be ac~equa~e ro handle the increas~cl flow cf th3e and
other projocL-s in the area. The Planninq Cnmmissaon finds
~hat this cumulative impact cannot he avoided except by
approval of the No Pro ject/No Developrnenl: Alternative, whzch
totally elimina~es the project' S benefita as sr~~ foxth above.
The Planning Commission further finds that all oE the socia].,
economic and other conyiderations set Porth hereinabove
warran~ approval of this project notwiL•hstanding the
cumulativQ signz~icant impact.
F. Water/Energy
Notwithstanding the mitigation measures and other conditions
of appro•~al which are adopted and incorporat•ed 9.nt:o this
praj~ct, the EIR i8entifies the impa~t upon water supply a~
signiFicnnt on a ctunulative basis~ ;;ection 3.12.2 0~ the EIR
states that both Cities havQ ~he capability to serve the site
witli water and ne,ither of the two cities anticipatas any
adverse environmental impacts aJJOC.,1~,~Qu ivith prov~idi,ng water
;, facilitie~ and services to rhe site. The Pl~nninq Commission
` find~ that tr.i~ cumulative irnp~ct cannot be avoided excepi: by
`s apprc~val of the Na Project/No Development Alternative, which
; totall~~ dlimina~es the project's bene£i~s as set fo.rth s~bove.
a The Plannin~ Commission furhher finds that all of the ~acial,
ecnnomic ar-c7 aL-her considPrations set forth herexnabav~o
warrant ap~roval of this project no~witbstax~&ing the
cumulativo signifi~ant impact.
and the Planna.ng Commission cloas £ind that tho projeet is
conaistent with th4 intent of the City's General Plan Fa.r the
si~e and will be compatible with ttie pr.ojected uses of the
surroundinq land uses; and t2-.at mitig~E;ion moasures have been
inaurnorated into the project to reduce Cho m~~praty of
environmental impacts t~ an acceptable 1QVe1; and, therefore,
the Planning Commission hereby certifies Envirozimental Impact
Report No. 2a8 nrid adopts this Statement of Overriding
Considorations.
WH~,REAS, the staff report to tho Planning Commission datec,l
March 13, 1989~ and Fnvironmental impac~ Reror•t Nd. 288 are incorpora~ed
herein and copies oE both the staff report a:id onvironmental imgact report are
availab].e in ~he Plannxny Department of the City o~ Anaheim.
WHEREAS, as required b;~ Section 21001.6 oF the k~ublic
Resources Cude, in ordez to insure ccmpliance with the miL•igataon moasures set
forth Y~erein, a program is hereby established to monitor a11 couditions/
mitigaLion measures. Saicl program shall consist of a~xritten statement to Lhe
fa.le by Planning Department, other City staff azid the develop~r list3ng Lhose
conditions/mitigatiion measures completed prior to each builfling permit. No
building permits or cartificate~ of occupancy shall be iasued unti'! the
mitigation measu_res as required by L•h~ conc?itiuns have bean met, as id.enti~ied
zn the projecC approvals.
-7,1- PC8y-71
~svd^~tiLY ~t ~, c ea~:;s~ ~; . H~~ .,:~:~+
" < <:~~, r".f,~;tCS ,a , ,,~~ ,,~ . ,~ i ~ ~ ~ ~~µ
a u.,.~ .,.. . . _ . .. . , .i... . _ .. . .. .. . ,. ..-. ~ .'~f.£ i t `r~.-(~~ !~~ i:.xlS i M114~V'1 .'t~i~~1~#~Y~T~Nt77~ii~
~ ~ ,.
y ty~i4.
.,~~ ~9~~~ ~ , !~~
1
, ,,,a.
,u~,
, ;sE.;
~ ,•~;
,.Y^'
. .~',`;,,.
~~
Nf-W, THBREFORE, BE IT RESOLV~:D Y.hat tlae Anaheim City Planning ,~~~
Commission c~oes hereby grant subject Feti~ipn for Conditional Use PermiL-, upon ~t
the followi.ng conditions which are hereLy fnund ~o be n nRCessary prerequisite r"
to the ~ro~osed use of the subjecL ~roper~y in order to pres~rve the safety ~~
anci
' . general welfare of. the Citizens af ~he Ci~y o£ Anahezm: y{
;
u
Y :
1.
Tha~ this Conditional Uso Permit is granted subject to the adoptian of ,
ij
'
the Zoning Ordinancc in connectinn with Reclassitication Nn. $8-gg-27,. "`:'::~i
now pe;nding.
~
}
2. `.Chat prior to the issuance of a building permi~ Eor any si:ructure in
Ph~se T, hhe owner of subject prop~rty shall submit a Zetter requesting ~°`'
: termination of Conditiona'1 Use Fermit No. 1144 to th6 Zoning Division.
' ':~
3. That uiiless an alternative Funciinq mechanism is imp].er~ented prior t~
issuance of a b~ildzng pQ:,mit for Building C, the owner shall pay ta the
City of ,Anaheim a fee in the amount of $3.68 per gross square foot of
build.ing area as a fair share contr3.bution to thc~ Anaheim Stadium ''+'
Business Conter infra~trur.ture funding shortEall. Said fes shall be `'s
~.~. coll~cted _ adjusted in the same manner ns t~:e a.nterim development fees r
for the Anaheim S~:adium Business Center as provided in Chagtsr 1'1.3Q of '
Title ].7 oE the Anaheirn Municipal Code, If the developer constructs or r\
pravides fun3s for any eligible ~ff-site improvement or portion thereuf ;;};
as set forth in ~xhibit D attached prior to the issuance of tt building '~?.
:
~ permit for Building C, credzt in an amount ($6~O,OOU) as determinod bx
• '~
; ,#
t
he Ci~ty TrafFic Engineer shaZl be yiven. ~~;
1. 'Phnt pur. suant t~ Chaptpr 17.30 oL- Title 17 oF thQ Auaheim Municipat Cade, ~'
priur to issuance of a buildinq permit for IIuilding C or as otherwzse ,.y,"
pzovicled Por in Section 17.30.050 of the Anah~im Municipal Code, a ,
>-?:~
davelopment fee for the Ariaheim ~taclium Ausiness Center shall be paid to `;~~
the City r~£ Anahaim in an amQUnt as detarmined by the City Counci7.. '';~
r
, 5. Tliat all air conditiuning faaili.ties and other roo£ and grouncl mounted '
;~
Qquipment sha11 be proper3y shzE].ded from vierr. ~~'.~
6. That prior to issuance of any b~.~ilding pormit in Phase I, a c~ordint~ted
~
sign program shall be reviewed and approved rv Cne Planning Commi.ssion. "`
~:~
~' ~til
7. That in tht; avent subject praperty is to be divided far the purpo3e of `~d4
' Sale, lease, or financinq, a parcel or tract m~p to record the appro~ved `"~
clivisi.on of subject pr~perty shal7. bQ su~imitted to and approvod by tho ;~
f City of Anaheim and then be recorded in the Office of Lhe Orange C4u~xtp `~;.~~c
`, Recarder. w.
8. That tk~e deve~ oper sYzall comply with the following mensures to raduae t?-e ;~i1
short-tiezm (construction) im~ac~s assaciated with implemesztataon of the `~!~
projsct: ;;s
,~;
a. Fugitive d~xst sha].1 be contr,olled through ra~~ular waterinq, pavinc~ ~':I^ri
construction roads, or oth~r dust palliative moasur~s per the i'
requiremQnts of SCAQMD. "~''?~
-12-
PC89-71
,;;:
~ -:;:t
. . . . .. 1 .1": J ~Lt~.1j~
f~.
~
. . . . ~•.• (~.~`,71A9~!'j."~?
~ N~ ~.
5i~~
'1..~~
~~~
~l,
,.. Cor,structfon ac:tiviti.os sha~ll be phaaed and ~cheduit~fl to ievel ,t
emi3~ion peaks.
c, ~qi~ipment enginos shall be maintained in pror~er tune.
d. Gonshruction shall be dirsaontinued rlur.ing first nnd second stage smog
slerta.
9. That a 6 to 8-fooL 2aigh sound barrier shall be canstructed along the
n~obtlehome park F~roperty line prior L~ thQ issuance of a Certificate af
Oacupancy For tihe .first building tn Phase I.
10. ThAt your.a of con~truction shall be lS.mitr~d Lo normtal w8ekd~y wor2cing
hours purs~.~aii~ to th~ Anahoim ancl Orange noisa ordinances.
s.~
11. That the developer shall complote and submi~~ a aite-spocific aPiami~
de~ign analysfs ~o the C.ity of Anaheim and C.iLy oE Orange for high-xise
ofEice structura3 prior to the issuance of each buildinq pormit.
Structures shou.lc2 be at least designod to reaist seismic l~toral loading
in accordanco with the Uni~orm Buildiny Coda of 1385, Section 2312, f.or
Zona 4,
12. Thrat buildi~nq materials shail no~ .cc~ed 30'b reflectivity to p.revent
gJ.are.
13. That the project developar shall provide a signal rc~poater ,~ystem on one
of the pr~ject buildinqs if adverse :adfo and/ar t~lovision reception
occurs as a resulk ef the project. The applicant shall provi~e ~n
asses~ment of significant stri~cturPS a~ter completion of any major
3tructural e'lements and instal.l said system, if required, prior to
occupar~cy. This requiramont shall apply to all buildings inclu~3ed in the
project.
I4. That subject property s}~a11 be developad substantially in accorc3ance Nith
plans and sp~ciiicdtions on fi7~ with the City of 1lnahaim marked Exhib.it
tios. 1 tl~rough 4, exceF.t as ~lovations may ba modified ~ursuant to
Condition No. 2~, horefn.
"t~
.~
~F
`~
~;'s
15. That prior to issuance ~f any building permihs in Phaao Y, a» agreement -
tor sh~red pro joct revonuos shall bo er.ecuted betwear~ the Cit,y of. OrangR
and khe CiCy of Anahei.m.
16. That a reciproc.al inqres~/egross, ~-tility, ~nd drainage easement be~ween ry
pacceln 3h~11 be recorded, if :esqulred by the Cfty of AnahRim, tor oach ,r~~
buildina prior t~ the isauance of building permits. ~:
].7. xhar. new/expanded facilities for wr,ter aup~ly s~n8 flood coatrol, and `*
waAtowater treaL•ment/Qisposal shall be requixed for thia project. r
A~~reement~s aith agencfa~ provid3ng ~ervice s2sa11 be aecured prfor to
3.sauonce of buildi.ny ~ermfts as detailed i.n thc~ Public Utixitiea +~nd
Hydrology Sectfor~s in EIR tJo. 288.
__...~
I.a. 7~'ht~t daytima picnic fw~ilitic:, nu~ uutdoor loisure ereas for employees -
aud IAM Buainesa Center visirors shttll be includefl in buflding plens. ,"
-13- PC89-71 '';
x ~,.. ~. r,~ ~, ~:.; , ~, ~ ~
_ ._ ,.. . _ , ,. .~._.,....~.
5~''' ~.1
~
' ~ `;r 4 ~ ~''1~ (~~#~ c
;~ ~. ~..
,ii,[.
19. ~.'h~a~ rhe proposod ~tfi.ca buildinqc~ ahall be dosignHC~ to meet an inter3or
no3.~e level guidoline aE 50 CNEI,.
20. ThaC all ~tructures shall moQt tho regu:lremant~ af Titlos 19 and 24 of
L•ho Californi~ Admini~tratxva Code.
27.. That the pra;~ect developor shall f.inance tha oxten~ion of hhe existing
gas mains to provid~ na~.ural g~s service to Che project ~ite.
22. That development plans sha11 employ energy--conservinq c;onstruction and
managemenL• technique;~ wher~ requir~d by S~ate law to 3.r.oure aff3c:ic~nt use
of naL•ural gas.
23. That the pro~~ct shall Qmploy, where feas~.b.le, ariorqy conservation
programs developed by th~ Southern Cali.fornia Gas C~mpaxiy 'to reduce the
project's conswnpL-ion of. natural gas.
24. T.hat 3olar wdter heating stia:ll bo c~nsidered to supploment the water
heating xequirements.
25. That thc~ devoloper sha1Z cons;der the inclusi~u of energy moaeures, such
a:s, but anot limitad to, the ;,rzen~atio.n ~nd c.onEigur~tion of bu5.l~iinqs to
take maximum advantage uf relaLive positi~•~s of the sun; the provision of
ready accesa to altern~tive moans af transpurlation, such as wa~king and
bicycling; landscaping to moderaL•e t.emper.atures; energy efff~ienk and
night-time ven~ilation to roclucq swnrner t~oat yain; insulation of w31].s,
ceilings, floors, windows and hot water line~; uscs ~f. space conditioninq
equipmerxt having high energy ~fficiency rati.ngs ~.nd :~onomizer c~c1e1
and, incorporation oF natural cl3matic contro],s.
26. That pzior to issuance of any building permits in Phase II, an aanlysis
of the housing/job balance and housing affordabili!;y ahall be canductc~d
by tho developer and shall be submitted to and appxoved t;~ both cit3.os.
27. That prior to the i:s~uance of x buil~]ing pe~rmit for any structuro in ~he
City of Anaheim, final deaign plans for the 3tructur~e :~;~all bp submitte8
to and approva~ by thQ Planning Commi~sion.
28. That Lho developex shall prPparQ ar.d comply witi. all reaommendat.ions of a
soils and geologiral repoi-t pr3ar to the issuance of tlie flrst builAinc~
parmft in Phase I.
29. Th:.c qrading plans shall be aubmitt•.ed to and approved by the City
Bngin9ore of Arahefm and Orange prior to th~ i.ssuance of c~ny building
permits. The gradinq plan shall be compatib.le wit~ rhe a,pprove~l site and
lanclscapiaiq pZans.
30. That the grafling and ~oundation pl~ns, includinq f.ountlot3on loa9a, ahrtll
be r$viowed by ts r::gistezed Soils Engineor.
31. Ttiat all qradiLq ana osrthwork shall be pe~cformed under thR observntion
of A regiskere3 Geotechnical Enginaei 3.n or~~r to achieve proper aubgrada
proparati~n, gelection ot sakisfar.t•ory matgrialb and p1a.cEmont aad
compection of all ~structurol fill.
-14- PC89-71 =~
~~
; .;ti
:'L
~~?rii
, ..~r
~
~~,.,'~
32. 'Chat existing on-site fills sha11 be removecl or recumpacted. N~
subsurface structural element~ such as existinq foun~3ations and ut~l3ty
linea shall r.emain an tho s3,tQ.
33. That khe Soil~ Enginaer shtsll be notffiad in thc~ evenc that ~subaurEace
con~~tions are exposed cluring constrixc~ion which are aignificantly
dif.f.er~n~ from those dascribod in the geute~.hnical inve~rigatfon.
34. That, 3f neceasary, speaial site ~~reparaL•ion nr specir~l foundation wark
shall be completed to correct pote»tial d3fferent•ial compach3on ~rid
expansive soil conditions.
35. That further i.nvestigation to d~lineatc- t2ie extQnt of ~h~ char_nel deposit
~hall be perEormod iP pzlc~s are anL•icipated for -ise in bu.ilding
foundations.
36. Thar furthur geoLechnical iuvestigations of ttie s.ite, inc2uding
site-specific subsurface expl~ration, sh~l.l be performed to identify
potaritial canstraints and to praviae geotechnical c~ata for preliminary
~,lanning and dosxgn. The depth, limit and consistency of poten4ially
c~mpressible ayluvial soils shall be detormiried in ~hese future
inve~L•~~ations anci, if re1uirecl, appropriah.o remodial recammendations b~
provided.
37. 'rhat all qrading work shall be monitored by a registerad archaoologist.
The archaeolagis~ shall bo empowored tc~ halt ~x• reduce grading Co allow
eval.uat•ion and re~r.ov~ery time iE signiEicant deposfts are encountc~red.
38. That therQ i~ r.o need f~r paleonlological monitoring during grading at
the 3ita. However, ii fossi'ls nre oncounterod siuring grading, the
daveloper sha'll contact a pal~qr.itologist so 'that they maX be evaluated.
ThE abovQ werk shall b~ describecl in a repart which receive~ suf£3cient
distributian to ensure its availability to future researchers. l~ny
,naterial collocted during the project chall be donated to a].ocal
institution which has the propor faci.litios for curation, diaplay and use
by interested parties.
39. That the front landscapea setbuck (Stato College Bo~tlevard fronL•age)
sha11 be a mini:num of 3Q feat in width and shall incJ.ude a landscaped
earthen bdrm anct shaJ,l be plantc~d with minimum fifteen (15) qal~on trees
located at minimum twenty (20) foot c~enters, ~rovi~ed that the City
~raf.fic Engineer may modify Y.his requiramen.t t,o ensure adequate vehicular
and p~destrfan visibil.ity.
90. That landscapinq and irrigation plans shal.l enccurage drouqht-tolorant
plaats, shr~ibbery and landscaping materia~s along wi~h an automatically
controiled moistuze sQnsing irr.iaation systern, and inclucie rai.ae~
planters anci bRrmfng in conjunctio~i witti closely apaced, low vo].ume, low
s~nqle sprfnkler heads. Llrip irrigation sht~ll be used w3ien fdasible.
Watering shall occur durinq es.ly morninq ar evening hous-s to reduce
watar usage. Tlie landacap:tng and irrfgation plans shalX bR aubmitted to
the City of Anahof~~ (Planning Depar.~ment an~1 Public Utill~tiss Dopartment
reviow and approval needed) and CSty of Orange tor rsvieW prior to
issuance af. aach buflc3fny pormit.
.1!i- PC89-71
.~!'
,, .e
~ ;;;
' ~~
".`~
~r
~;~~;~
:;t1,
;~M
b
~ :
~
'^
4'l. '~hat on-site and ofE-eito drainage frauiYiti.es aha11 be constructecl tu the
satisFt~etion of the City Enginoer pzior to occupancy oE the first
building ~n Phase I.
42. xhat c~.uring dosi.gn ~f the project, a clc~tailod hydroloyy study and
hydraulics study shall be prepared to finalize und ~ize the sto:•m drains
st~own an Figures 27 and 28 of F;IR No. 288, and set the pad alevataons.
43. The nor~hc~rly area of Phaso I is tributary ~o thc~ existiug E12 storm
drain faciliti~s. The proposed Buildinc~ C antl the parking struc~ure
shall drain into the existinc~ 33-inch RCP s~orm dr,sin (Line A in Fzgure
?7 of Araft FIR No. 288). The area of the ~,r~poaed Bu3ldings A and B
sh~ll drain into the proposad 2~1-inch RCP storm dra3n (I,ine H in Figure
27 of Draft EIR No. 280), and discharge into the existing E12 stox~m
drain. The parkiriq areas in the southern portion of Phase T an~ the
undevoloped lancl north of State College Boulevard woulU drain into the
proposecl storm drains (Lines C and D in Figure 27 of Dra~t EItt No. 288),
and discY,arge into the existing 2-5 b~xrol 6' x 3' x 6" RC culvert
cras~ing the Sant~ Ana Fraeway. Lix~e C storm drain shall be designed to
ma~ntain two moving traffic lanes of the entranc6 road duri.ng the 1Q-year
storm.
94. That the developor shall place 1 tn 3 feet of compacted earth fill within
the projQCt sitg to assure, that the proposed of£ice stxuctures and
pr~rkiny struc~ures wi11 be built above thQ 100-xc~ar flood leve~.
45. That all structures wzthin the City of Anaheim shall conform with the
City's Flood Hazard RQductinr. Ordinance No. 9:136 (Chapter 17.28 of the
Anai-eim Municipal Code},
a6. Thsst ttie devel~~ier sha11 control sh~rt-term erosiori and sec~.imentakion
impact•a by imploment.in~ the following erosxon control measuret~:
a. Dfv~rnion of o:f-site runoff away fron- the c~n~truction site of the
project.
U. Complete the gra~ing and paving between April and Octob~r (ciry
~eason}.
c. Prompt revegetati~n of proposed lan dacape areas.
Q. Perimeter sandbagging or temForary basins to trap seciiment.
e. Requ].ar sprinkling o~E exposac~ so31s durinq con3truction phases.
~
~
47. That all sewQr facilitic~s prepared for dotli.cation to tho Orange County
Sanitation District shait 'vo constructe8 at the develaper's expense and
all appliaable fees sh~11 be paic9 by tho developer Lo the City serving
the site and the Orange County Sanit~tion Disrrict No. 2 prior tio the
isauanco ot each bui~dir~q permi;;.
48. T,hat all sewor faciltties p:oparod for declication to the Orange County
Sanitary District sha.ll be locatec] within public ~trQets and shall mec~t ~~
all applicable District standards. ~
-16-
PC89-7I
1 tr. r ~t
, ~, n ~• ~0
•~^
~~
J~
:-a-
,~~;~y~ Ir~ ~F,'
1~ ,~,~\`~ ~ . ~F~~
RI't~!
i'
49. That the de~•c~loper shall cc~o:cdinal•e with Orange County Sanitt~~ion
Distx•ict No. 2 to datermino ~pF~ropriato flow rofluction techniques ta be
ixicorp~rated into dQSign plans.
50. That prior to issGance aL• a builcling permit for any structure 3n Anaheim,
Y.ho appropriate traffic signal ass~s;ment f.ee shal'1 bs paid to th~ City
of AnahQim in an amount as eskablishod b,y City Council xesolution.
51. 'rhat prior to issuanco of d bui].ding permi~ Eor any s.•.ructure 3.n Phase I,
a recipror,al ~ccess and parking agreement, for parcals within both
Anar.eim and Urange, in a form satisfactory to tne Ci~y Attorne}r, shall b~
recardec~ with t;he OfFice ot Che Orange County Racoriier. A copy oP the
recorded agreement shaJ.1 then .be submitted to t2:e 2oninq Divisinn.
52. Th~t prior tu issuance of each builc~ing pQrmtt, a plan sha].1 be providad
to the City Traffi.c Bngineer in both cit:ies for review and approval
addressing how the mazntenance of roquirocl parkzng and adeqti~ate accoss is
to be maintained cluring consCrucCion.
5:3. Thati all drivQways shall be cunsCructecl with ten (;LQ) foot radiua curb
returns as required 'by ~he C.ity Enqineer. Existing broken or cracked
drivoways shall be romovad anci rQplacQd as required by the City Engine~er.
54. Thnt the proposed parking structurQ design sha11 conEcrm ~o the
~ngineering Divisi~n's Standard Plan No. 4~2-B and/or 609 pertainiz 3 t~
sCandard details for parkinq strucL•ur~s and ramp requirements.
55. That prior to issuance of s building permit for any skructure in Phase I,
a p~rking plan zridicatinq compliance with City parking lot desiqn
standards sha].1 be submitted to and approved by the City Traffic Engineer,
',iG. That prior to thQ axpansion of the parking structure ~~r.ithin Anahaim in
Pk~ase 'tI, a plan shall be prcvided L•n the Cf.ty TraEfzc Engineer for hzs
review and approv~l. Thc~ Plan shall also addreSS how the maintennnce o£
required parking and adec~uats ac•cc~ss is ko be maintained during tY:e
expansioxi.
57. That Lhe propused parking atructuras shall be des.fgnecl td minimize
downwind air quelity impact:~. As air quality asse3smenL• o~ the potenti~l
d~wnwind air quality impac~s of ttie proposed par~ing strur.tures skiall be
submitted to the CiL•y of Mahe.im and the CiCy of Orange for their review
and approval pri~r to issuance ~f any buildiug permits Lor a parking
structure. The features of the parking ~tructure which wi11 minimize the
downwind air contamanant levels sha11 be inc.ludec3 in the report, a].oug
with dispQrsi~r. madeling projectinq thp downwir.d air quality l.ovels in
the nearby are~. (xhe vont exi~s of enclosec] parking structures can be
Qlaced straCegicalll to minimize downwind air quality impacts.)
58. 'Phak the devaloper sha~l encouraye public t;.rar.sportat3on concepts to
roduCe auto depencloncy and, tkie:eby, reduce total pollutant yields from
autnrnabiles entering ai~ii leaving the pro ject site.
'"17' PC89-71
~ .~t`
~
s
~~~
i ;~;~, ~ ~~t~j
t:. { ( YF
1 r~
IIA;d
~'il
59. ~'hat prior t~ issuance of any bui.lding permits, a Transportat3on Domand
Management (TDM) Plan sha11 be devolopod far a ride-~hare progr~un that
providas a verifiar~le 1.5 person por vehicle occupancy for eaph phase oE
the project w;i~h implemenh.atian with occupancy of the first buil~inr,.
Said P13n shall be subjoct to the apprnval of the City TraEfic Engineers
of boi:h citias, Tho deve~lopor shall use its bast efforta to achieve a
level of verifiable 1.5 person per vehic].e for eac2i phbae oE the project.
60. The Transportation Dema:zd Management (TADt) Plan ahall comply with
Rogulation XV of the 5auth Coast Air Quality Manageme<nt Llistrict. The
TUM nlan is also raquired by Orange County 7'ransportaLian Comttiission
(OCTC) and Orange County ~ran;,•portati.on Diatric:~ (OCTD).
Tliis TDM pr~gram shall includr~, but not be limitQd Y.o, the following:
- Provide an oi~-site, full-time, certified i•ide-share coordinator.
- Provide incentives to emp].oyec~s to ride-share inc'luding preFerential
parking, free or rQduced fee ~arking tor van-pools and carpools, and
provisions for transit use (i.e. bus ~urnouts, s2ielters tanc~ on-site
location af transit schQdules), arid subsidies of van-pools and transit
pzsQes.
- To encourag~ van-pooling, parking sCructurQS shalJ. have a ver~ical
clearance oE 7'2".
- Su~ turn~uta sZzall be prov.i3ed on Stata College Boulevard as required
hy the City of Anaheam TrafEic Engineer.
- Cncourago thA use of alternativ~ Cranspnrtation mode3 by ~romoting
publia tran~it usage and providinq sacur3 bicycle facilities and
prePerentiaT ratea, subsidios and/~r ~arking loc«tions for ride ~ools.
- Install ma3s transit accommo~~tions for OCTA ktoutes, including k,u~
turnout lanes Eor bUS stops, park anc3 rido areas and rus ahelter~ por
OCTU and L•he City Traftic Enginoers.
- Provide sutficient service establ.is.hments within tho office/commercial
areas, such as res~aurarits, copy c~ntQrs, ~inancinl services and tiealth
clubs to m.:nimi2e the numbc~r and length uf ~ri~a to obtain these
servic~s.
- Participato in an areawide Transportation Mar,agement Associat3.cn (TMA).
- Rnc.aurage e:nployers to provide s~aggered work schedul~s, ~lextime,
compress~d ~vork weoks or other Y-on-traQitiont~l ~ork schedvling.
- Eacilits~te bicycle access of the oEfice building~ by provicling on-site
bike trails linking with the Clacs T.II bicyclo trail on 5tate C~llege
Houlevard, safe and convanfent bicycJ.Q racks or lcckRrs, lockers £or
persona]. stor~s~~e and sh~wer L-acilities.
-~8- PC89-71
,rt
;,.;2
;(
_ ;'1;
~~~,'r,~~.
~ ~iY~.'4 t ~t r.4i~;~{r^~isf\I,. - f~ ~.~~_' , a.F~.,. ~~ !11'.-.;(tl 1~nV~~~~~1i~>'x;~.i..~e G,a.,~l'~jvl~1~.~•~. li4~efii7~kY~.'"~
. , . ~ . . ~ - . . .. . , . . . . . ~ . ~ r.',
mS'~
'~
G1, That ~he c~eveloper sha11 prov.i.de rogular maintenance and sweeping of.
parking facilities to coll~ct polluLants before they enter the draiiiage
system. I£ potPntial noise prob:lems arise Erom swoeping opRration~ in
pazking lots ~nd on••site r.oads, sweeping ~ha].1 be limitc~d to daytime
hours beCwoon 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
62, xhat prior to tha issuance of a building p~rmit, tne de~ign oE the
parking structure~ shall be reviowed and approved by the City of .~ndheim
and Citx of Orange in ot•der to locate h,k:e parking entrance/exit and
vehicular tra£fic away from the mobilehome park.
63. That the parki.ng surface of the parking structures aliall be asphalt or a
texture8 conerete surface to minimize the prob].em o~ tire squeal noise.
04. That the parkzng structure shall incorgora~e archir_ectural ~e~ai1 simx].ar
to that of the prop~sefl ~Efi.~:e towa.rs; demonstrate compatibilit~ o~
materials; be set back u minimtun of 5 fset £rom tho north property 13ne
wit-h said setback fully landscaged and perman~nt.',.y maintain~d with an
aut•omztic irrigation system; and, ~5e a maximum heighi: of 45 feet. Final
dosign plans for any parking struct~xre sha:.1 be submihted to ~nd approved
~y the Planning Comm.ission pri~~r to t}ie issu~znce of a bt:ildizig permit.
65. That prior to the issuance of any building per.mit whereiu parking will bd
provided iu Anaheim, the applicant si~a11 re~:ord a covenant in a form
~pproved by the City Attarney's 0£~ice Lo the e£fect tY.~t tlhe us~ of tPlg
parking faciliLies in r.naheim to be pr•~vicled •,`.~x• thR prc~ject shall be
limitec3 to henants and patrons ~f the p.roject; ar.c1, that said parking
faci.l.ity sha11 not be m~;cle availablo for usQ by viaitors an~i patr4ns of
the AnahQim Stadium or anl acena which m~y bQ constructed within the
Anaheim SCadiurn Business Canter without a•~vritt~n agreemes~~ k~etween the
applican~: and the City of Analieim. Th~ covenant shall further provide
khat on days oE schoduled events at AnahQim S~`.adium and/or the art~na, the
parking Eacilities r,hall be conspicuausly posted with signs in~9icating
Sta~i+am/ArQna parkir_g is prohibited.
66. That a feagiL~iliY:y study on potentibl use o£ fuL•;irb £reew~y right-o~-way
as a interim park-anu-ride facility shall be prc~pared pr~ar to issuance
o£ ~he first buildinq permzt in ?h8se I, subject ta t.he review and
approval at th~ Cicy 2raffic ~nginaers of the City of Anaheim a:id the
City of OrangF.
67'. That all ~ngineering requiremants of the City ~f Ana._eim iilonq State
College Eioulevard and Oranqowoo~ Avenua, Inc.~.udiny~ preparati,on of
•r.mprovement plans and insCaZlation of a11 improvort;onts 4uch as curbs and
guttnrs, sidewalks, water faciliti.es, street gratlir:g and pavement, seWer
anQ drain~sge ~aci:lities, or other appurtenant work ~3ha.il ;~e complaed with
as requirod by the City Engineer and as set for.th :ln the conditi.ons oE
approva.l of thi.s Conditional 1Jse Pe:mit and in ac:ordance w3th
specifications on file in the Office of the City Enginaers or thctt
security in the forsr. ~f a bon~i, cer~ificate of deposit, lettNr of creQik,
or cash, in an amount and form sati~factory to the City of Anaheim, snall
be post;ed with the City to guarantoe the gatisfactory complotion of sa~d
improvements. Sn addition, streQt sagning and pavement markings per City
of Anaheim standards sha:11 be installed ~lony project street frontages.
-19- PC89-71
~I;t,
~' ', I
. ., '~,~~,~~~~
'~_'~
~. °'_...
~
68.
~
r , ..~~_ ~ ,, y ~ ,~a~
~ f ~1~ ~t
~ ~"~~~
,~
~
~
,.,
,~;
:,,
~ :;~~
Tha~ devolopmenL- of tha ZDM IIusingss Center sh~11 proceed with Phase I as ''r~
outlined in ~IR t~o. 288 ~o be comploted with a11 necass~ry Cx~t~f•fic '
miti.gation msasures in pzace or ~roperly gua.ranteed (through security in
the f~r.m oE a bond, cerL•ifir,ate of depo~it, letter of credit or caah in
an amount anfl Eoxm satis£actoxy to the Cihy of Anaheim and City of
Orangcs) beEore con~truction of Phase IT as defined in EIR No. 28a.
69. That frontage alang St~te College B~u~.evazd shall be doclacated to
accommnaate major haghwa~ st:andards of tk~e ultimato alig;unent including
area for an additional (fc~urth) travel lane alonr, the length o:C the
pro;ject't; Statd Coliege Boulevard froz~.taqa; and, one northbouxicl
right-turYi lane from, generally, the future norl.2xbound I-5 r~mp
connection ko a Euture Walnut e:~c~ension eas~orly of Stato Collc~qe
Boulevar;~ prior ~o issuance c~£ any buildinq pe.rmit in Phase I, and
appropri.a~e documerits sha11 b~ r.ecorded with the Cit; ng.reeing to improve
such fron~age to City stand~zrds at such time as the State Collage
Boulevazd widening project occurs.
69a. That prior to ~r,e issuanca oE the i.irst buildinq permi~~ i.n k~h~ise I, the
legal owner shall acquire ancl irz•evocably offer to dedicate a 12-faot
wido, 350-foot luxig strip of lanc~ far a c?.eceleration lane on r_ha souzh
side of Orangewoqd ~venuQ ta serv~ the pt•oje,~t acce~s on O:~axigewood
Avenue.
69b. Tha~, zn the eveni; developer has been un~b.le to acquire the ,~ffsite
rights-oP-way necessary to comply wi~h Condik.i.~n 69a. of thi:s Re~olution
withir~ thirty (30) day;~ following an ofFer beirig mad~ to the ow~ei and,
to the extent permitCed by 3aw, tlie doveloper and the Ci~y shall ~n~er
into an acquisxtion agre~ment for 1:he acquisition of said .rights-of-way
tt~rough exercise of the power of en~inenr domain by tk~a City. Said
agi Q~ment shFxll be er,tered inL•o upon terms consi.3tent with the provisions
of. this Resolukion. In l,he event such ominent dom~.in action is filed in
court by the City, and notwithstanding any other provis3on o~ tkais
resolution, building parmits sha11 thereaf~er be is~L.ed by City ;xpon (i)
proper. appliaat;,on bX the developer, (ii) er.ecutiun by developer of ~~n
agreemen*_ obligating the develuper to ~ay the balance of any Fee~ as may
be determina~] to be due the Citp as the rc~sulC of rhe xiqht-af-way
acqu~sirion cost as finally d~:terminod by ~uch court judgment or
seLtlemerxt which fees shall be paid in Iull L•o City prior to final
-~ bui].ding inspection and occupancp of ar,y portian of the project, and
~ (iii) deposit oE security in an amcunt ancl form approved by the C3ty
~? Attorney to guaran~ee performance of su~h nnym~n~ obligation by developer.
,;
i; 70. That builc'.ng plans shall include a separate right-turn 1ane, to th,e
~ satisJ:acti~n of the City TraEf:ic Engineer, ~o en~er the northernmos'c
~ driv~way on itatie Collego 8oulevard, 1'nstallation of said driveway shall
be completed prior to the issuance of an~ Certificate of Occupancy sx~
E~hase I.
1
-20- PC09-71
,', ~
~;;; . ~
,. ,. . . ~,,. ...,..,, ,
. ' ~1''l~~~ t ~ {i jt~~{?~N?rY
~
~ ~G
J~
ry'Y{
'
'
.
71. :Chat as indica*ed on thc~ Phase II ~fte plan, the East-West Yrojec.t Road ~
i
~ '~~~~~~~~"7
~
sha11 be dodicated and cons~ructad to primary arterial highwt~p standards ~
prior i:o issuance of. buildxng pc~rmits Por Phase II. Arlditionally, no ,~
permits shall be issuod for any buildinqs in Ph~se IY t,h~st vvould resul~ ~
in any closurs of access frum the Stato College Bc-ulevard Frontago
!
Road/Anaheim Boulevard extension betweon State College BouYevard and ~~
Chapman Avenue unl~ss an adequate replacemont ro~d has been dedicated and !
constructed to City of Orange pri.mary arterial standards ~r a3equate ;
access to the site has been r3emons~.rated to tho sa~.isEac*i~n of the Citx ~;
of Orango Uirecto•r of E~ublic Work~. ~
72. That upon the construction of State Collaqe Boulevard to tbe alignment
proposed by the I-5 FreQway Widening Projc~ct, the primary project
entrance shall be relocatecl t~ the 5tatt~ College }3oulQVard frontage and
cunstrur.ted ~o critical int9rsection standards, includi.ng aJ.1 traffi.c
signal improvern~nt~ti that pertaiu directly to ~he site.
;
~
",3. That ~+riar to the issuance of any Cer~itic:at~ of Occupancy for o.ny
; structur.a ut3lizing the project access f.rom Orangewood Avenue, the
i dQVeloper shall cons~ruct a 12-foot wido, 350-foot long deceleration ?ane
' on the ~,outh side of• Oxangewood Avenue, per the Ca.ty Ex~gineer's
standard~, to servs Lhe projE.t a.ccess on Orangewooa 7~venue.
74. That p-`ior to issuanco of khe Certificute of Accupancy for any buildi.ng,
constxuction of the Anahaim Bnul~vard fzontage (Anarseim B~ulovard
Extension) to City or Qrange prim.axy highway standards with critical
intersection enhancement at Anahei.m 9oulevard and project entrance shall
be c~mplet~ed.
75. Thafi sco mit3gate the impac:ts of Yhasc I, the improve~m2nts identified
below shall be irnplQmented ixicremontally, and a~ naeded, with each
buildinc~, aa det~rminerl by the City T.r.affic Engineers of br~th cities, to
mainL•ain an in.tersection LOS D throughout the develr..pment of Phase I.
AYiy studic~s a~socinted wi`.h detormining an implementa~i.on program shall '
be L•he rdsponsibility of the developer. A11 improvemonts shs~ll be ';
pzoperly guaranteAd througti security in the form of a bond, certificate
'
of dQposit, l~~t~r o£ credit or aash, in an amount ~nd form saGisfaacory '
.`,~~
~ to thQ City of Anaheim and Ci~y of Orange, furni~sheii prior to i~suance of
the first building permit. The below improvements~ sli~ll be cdmpl~k~d ~;s
~ prior to the issuance of a CertiEi.catc~ of Occupancy Eor tho tir.al ';
, building in Phase I: `
i
'1
State Co,l].~ge Blvcl at Anahe•~~1.Y~ I,~i~.Q l~c~~s as s iQwn ,~i attar.h~ ,t
;;,,
~
Exhibit No. A-1 ~~
- Provide two through lanes in aach direction. 1,
,''~
- Provicle two gouthbound lef~-~urn lanes (spproxirt~ately 200 ft. stoz~age) r;;
into project ent.ry. ::;
- Yrovicle one uorthbound rxghL--turn laae (approximatelp 200 ft. storage)
south of project entry. ,
- Prov:de bus bay with handicapped accessibi7.ity (120 ft. u 10 ft.) north ~
,:
of pr.oject entry.
r; ~ Provide multi-phase, fullX actuated traffic signal at project entry and
~;: insta~l interconnect to the City of Anaheim Traffic Management Center '.
~.~ for sfgnal coordination. "~
,
~
_~1_ PC89-71 ~
~
`
~ ~
=~r
+~
» t{9
7
l
~
' ,i
i~
~~
. t
t•
~~~;~"~~( ., ~
.
. ,~
.... . . . . . . ... .. ... .._. . ~j
, v `~t•~i
.... c'~
~
~,
^~:;
~
' ~. ~ 141Y .~~ ~~j~'~,~~'
~ ~ p
. ~ ' = ~t{~ ~,
I'~~
~~~
Ir
f.rt
~i
;l
Qr~gg~wood Avenue at R~m~,~~Shre~t a~~sr~own_~n ~ttache~.Ex 3 i~ No. A_2
- Restiripe and widen as necessary ~,o prav.ide northbound approach to %'
provide a left, straight, right-~urn combina~ion lane and right-turn
only lane.
;
ran gw¢~~~y~nue at SB S.~_ 7 R mp.~as Jlinwn~n atta~h Ex~ibiC No. ~-2 ;~.
- Add an eastbound ri.gh~--h,urn lane.
~„hax~man Av~nu~~~SB SR-~r,~7 Ram~s a,~ shown on att~ched Exh~l~it No. A-4
- Add a second sout2,bound right-turn ].ane.
Qr.~ngewooa Avenue Pr~ject ACCe~s ~,s ~,hcZwn._Qn ~t~~rhed E~chibit No~, m-2
- Add an e~stbound right-turn lano in~o the ~~r.ojec:t.
- Construct a raissd mediar, ~o praclur~e 1eEt ~urns into or out of the
site access L•o the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer. ?'
S,~~te Colleae B ~~ ~roj~ct ACC~SS
- Ac?cl a northboun3 riqht-turn ldzi~ to the satiefac~ion of the Ci'ty ~
~
Traffic Engineer into the northerly project entry. '•
~itv Drive ~n~~rden Cr~ve ,~Rt. 22) Freewax ~nter~hang4 ::/'i
"
~
~
-
?1
- Compliance with City of. Oranye requi.roments sh~.ll satisty this portion ~:~
af this conditian. --:';',
Oranarewoo~Avgpue Bnd~S~ate CQ,lle~xa B~~lev~r In~erser.tx~n Fnhancemer},~ -~~';,
~ :
-:
';
- Provide $'~20,000 tow~rd ~kie Project's ob.liga.tion for one q~xar~er of the ~`
City of Anaheim's cost of the toL•~1 intersection improvement par
Critical Int~rsec+tion S~an~ards plus nny cost r~quirement associatefl
with mitigation measures beyond stiid sCandards us identi.FiecS in FTR No. ~`'%
288. The c~eve'loper's portion. of saS.cl obligation shall be oatisfied by '
FaymAnt of the ~320,000 tu the City of Oranqe Evr ~his intersection ~'~
~
improvement. `,;
tC~tolla Avenue_and S~ate Coliege Et~].evard :irit~r g~_ i n Enhancemer~t
- Provide $320,000 L•owarcl the Project's obl3gation for one quarter of the
Ci.ty of Anahoim's cost oF Che tot~l intN~~ration improvement par
Critical Intersection S~andards. The de~~eloper's porcion of saiQ
obligation sh~,ll be satis£ied by prymen~ of t.l:e ~320, 000 to the City of
Orange for this intersection improvsment,
~iky Drive and C~,i~m.~n A~~g~iue In r~gction .F_f}h~n~,emer~ '~"
- Campliance with City oE Orange requirements shall ~atisf~r this portion ~I~
of this con8iti.on. ,''~`L
,'::F
Anahezm Boulevard and Rampar~,_,Tra~.ic Sign~•1 ~;;r
`i
- Compl.iance wzth C3ty of Oranae requa.r~~nents shall satisfy this portion i
of this condition. ~J'~
t tl
J~l ~~
. . .. ~~, ~~+N~~
~ ~ ~
r~ ~ ~~ r,r~ti~f{ vh~ ~.
~' ~ i ~ f'~~
~ '
r
Is
XI
~
~e
7G. TY~at prior tio issuanc~ of any Phase I~ bt~ildir~g pez~mits, the following ie~.
items sha11 be aompleted: ~'`
- Fhase I public improvemenL•s, as conditionAd hexein, shall be complete ;`:`
'?'
o.r guar.anteed to the satisfactir.r oF the Cit~ Enqineer. ,;
,,
- Building plax~.s shall include det~iils fcr the east-west praj~ct road to ,;,
be developed to przmary arteria7 ~tandards to the satisfacti~n oE the ~';
City EngixiQers of bokh cities. ~,
is
- Prepare (under tk~P su~ervision of thE City of Orange and City of
Anaheim; ai~u. submit, at uo cost to ~he City, a traf.fic an~
transpori:ation study to dQtermiYie the comp].etQd l?ro;«t Pha3~ T impacts
o:~ the inf•rastrizcLure and transportation systam as it oxists ~rior to
commoncoment of coiistruction of any portion of Phase IT and to
determinQ what -nitigation measuros, if any, would be requirc~d of the
propert;~ own~r to proceo~l 'taith tha dQVe'lopment of any or all buildinq
elements ot Phaso TI. in th~ avent additional mitigatzon measures are
required, che property owner ~hall on?y be required to pay iks
prqportionate fair share of such mitigation measures based upon ar~
allocation arnong ttie project site ard ot2ier bexie~it3ng properties, as
dete~rmined in good faitli by the City Engineez•, as ~ condi.tion of the
issuance of any building permit in Phase II. Upon paymont. or guarante~
of payment to thQ satisfaatian of the Citl Engineer of ~ucli
proportionate fair share, this condi,tion shall b~ deemed satis£ied.
77. That to matigate ttze impacts of thP ultimate ~iuildout of th4 project
(Phase TI), t~P fol'lcwing xmprovarnents sha11 be implemented prior to
issuance nf the last CertiPicate of Occupancy in Phase TIs
- Ch~~.man Av~nu „~LeWla Street,
. Restri.pe the nur.thl~ound ric~:~t-turr~ lane to a11ow through traffic
movemQnts.
. Add a third ebst a:id westbound througln lano.
-• ~hapman A~gn~xe__at Rampt~._r~. . rz''.°~
~` . Construct a westbound Eree right-turn lane.
F;!. Said improvements sha11 be properly guaranteed tllrough sccuriCy in the
foi•m cf a bond, certizicate of deposit, ].etter af credit or cash, in an
~; ' amc+unt and form sutisfactor~ to the City af Anaheim anii CiV;y ~f Urange,
furnished prio~.• to Y,he i~suance uf the tirst building pesmit in Phase II
anii shall be comple-:ed prier to issuance of a Certifi.cat:e oE Occupancy
for the la~t building in Phase TI.
~
7g. That a bus turnov.L• sha11 be provided on the project site to ~he
satis£action of the City Traffic Enginepr, prior to issuanca oF a
Certificnte of Occupancy for the first. building.
- a. TY~e area adjacent ta the tiirnout shal'_ ir.clude a paved passenger
~` ~vaitin~ area complete with a bus sholter arid bench.
s;`:. '
;~ ; -23- PC89-71
,r , ,
s~ ,;,~ ~'
,
zt ~ lr~ ^C ~ ~r•; „ . , . . , . . ~ - ' . ~ . . .. ~ ~ . . ~ .~le t~if~~c" ~
ti/. ~r. i(.~~~' ~~ v ~ . . . . . . . ~ . ~ . ~ . ~ . .' ~ . ~ti~~~~
;!""~
~
~
b. The bus turnout shall be handica~pQd accessible,
a. A paved, lighted and han=3icapped-acae~si'ble pedestrian ~GCessway
shall be provzded b4tweQn this stap and the IDM Business Centgr
buxldings.
:;
~~
_; 1
~~:
t; :
r. ;
79. Tl~at prior to issuance of a buzlding permit for any ~tructure in Anaheim,
the approQriafi~o feas dus i•or primary mains and fire pratec~ion service
sha11 be paid to the Water ULility Divisi~n in accordance wi.th Rules 15A
and 20 o.E 1:rie Water Utility Rates, RuZes and Regulations.
80. 'Phat the developer shall provide an engineer.ing xeport whiah includes
at~iong otlier things; a de~ailed analysis af expected ~:ater use within the
project area (average annual, minimum hour, maximum hours, etc.), sizing
of water mains requzred tU deliver maximum hour wator demand caincidental
with fir2 flow demand as established by th2 Anaheim Fira Degartment, and
design Eeatures that incorpor.ate interior and exterior water conserv~tion
technique~ rer,ammended by the Califo~nia nep~rtment of Wator Resources.
The report sYzall be submitted for review a.nd approval by th+~ Gen~era3,
Manager, Public Utilities Department, p~ior to issuance of a building
permit fc~r any structure in An4heim,
81~ That the d~velnper shall conform with Rule 15D s~ the Waker ~7tility'ss
Ra~es, Ru1es and Regulations c:hich pro~ri.dos for, i.n part, a fee based on
squar.e foatage and ttie advbnc~monC of add3tioxial funds daemod ne~~ssary
to cor.struct th~ proposed upc~raded water £acilities as shown on drawings
W-2529 and W-2524. Said drawing3 are a part of Ru1e ~.5n and maX be
xevised by the General Manager, Public Ura.lities llepai~tmen~, from time to
time to reflect changes associat:ec~ with growth, phasing and oonstruction
cost iadices. The latest r9vision a£ Ru.le 15D is incarporate~ herein by
thi.s reference. The c~st of upgraded water ma~.ns which may be requir~d
to deliver water to any sL-ructure within Anal~eim exclusiveZy, shall be at
the developer's sole expense, in uccarda~nce with esi:aT~liched rules and
policS.ps.
82. Thbt interior and exterior watPr conservation techniques recommended by
the Califor.nia Department of Water Resources. as appx'opriai:e to specific
pxoject desigai shaYl be incorparated.
R3. That subject propsrLy shall bQ servECl by urlderground utilitiQS.
84. That clevelopment plans t'ar any structures withi,n the City of A,nahPtm
sha11 r~quire that all services and facilities be built xn accordanaa
with the City nf Anaheim Electric Ratos, Eules and Regulations,
B.i. That a11 buildings shall cornply wiCh the Energy Conversation Stanciarels
5et torth in Title 2~1 of tk~.e Ca].zfornia Admini~Crative Codo.
86. That prior to commencemant of structural framing, on-site fire hydrants :'~,~
shall be .~nstalled and charged as required anc~ approved by the City Fire `;'s,
Department. Ir~ addition, emergency vehiCle access shall be mainta3ned -- -
during a11 phases of construction and at buildout td the satis£action ot
the Fire Chiefs of bot}i cities . ~~~~
C,i
:
~ ii
A:
-24- PC89-71 ~
_. ~_~
.~7~J'N~~;
).~~lA
1~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ - ~ ~ ~ ~~,, ~ , ~~~~~~~~
~+~~ i
~',;'~ ~ ~ , ~i
,
:x
'.t'.fi,
, ~~
'~~
87. That fire sprinklers shatl ba ius~allc~d a3 requirds? by the City Firo "f
Dopartment;.
88. That tl:o devalopec• shall ~;~artic.ipat;e in anx foe programs, Community
Fac:ili~ie3 A~stricL or o~her mochanism adopted by trie City Coun.:il of
Uranqe or Anaheim, rospectivoly, ~hat are closigned ~Ear Eunding thR~ cost
of £ire staCion construction, oquipmant and operation.
89. TtiaL• prior to iss~xance of each building pormit, ~hg bui]di.ng ~lans .~ha~l
be roviewed and approved by the Anaheim Polico and kire Department:s for
socurity, sa.Eety, accesslbility, lighting and crime ~revention detai~~.
90. Thaf: Office B~.~i~ding C sha11 have raof addressing c~nslstRnk with roof
addre;:sin~g requirements for otlior buildings in the vicir,ity, to aici ai.X
unit (nellcopter) sur~• ;'tance.
91. Thtst security and de~iqn maasures whiCh employ c~efanstble space aoncapts
sha~l be utilized to the maximum ox~ent possible durinq Che formixlation
of detailod development plans. Such measuras i.nvolva the des3qn and
. placQment o£ doors, s~rindows, lighting, elevators, public accertowals and
p~rkinq structures.
72. That trbsh storago areas shall be provided and mainta:nbd in a lo~atfon
acceptable to the Street Maintenance and Sanita+~ion Division an8 3~n,
accordanc~ with approved plans on file with gaid Divisfon.
93. ThaC th9 projecL doveloper. sha11 make provisions for separation ot
recyc?able ref.use mskorials.
04. That sufficiont accosa to t~ccommotlate the maneuvexs of a larqe refuae
truck with a 45-foqt radius shall Ue provided.
94a xhat the storage of Cla3s "C" ex~,losives, ss parmitted rursuant tc
Ser,tion 18.~1.U30 of Title 16 of the Anahoim Municipal Code, sha12 be
prohibited.
95. That thfs Conditio;~al Use Permit will expires two yeara from the date oE ~"
~pprnvnl, unless utilized. Extcnsions for Eurthor time may t~o gravted in y
~:
accurdanae with 5ection 18.03.090 0.[ the Anaheim Muricipal Code. ";
96. That tho cleveloper shall be helr~ responsible for complying with the ~'
future monitoring and reportinr~ prog~ram osL•ablishe~I by Che City in s~
:;
complinnce with Section 21(381.6 of the F~ublic [tesuurcos Code.
s Furthermoro, th~ doveloper shall be responsible for any direct coats ~v
asaociated with the monitor3ng and reporting required tr~ enaure
{mplementation o~ those mitig~,tion meaawros i8entffied in Pinal ~'
Envirocunental ImpACt RQport No. 288 that have boRn incorposated as 4`
Condi~.fons of Approval for gab;~ect proj~~~.
?~; 9:. That appc~oval of tl~is app~.fc~stion constitutos ao~roval of the proposod •,
;~ reqtieat onl} to rhe axtent ~hat iC complios with ~ho Anaheim Municipal
'° ?,oning Cnde and ~ny othcr appllct-bl~ City regulationa. Appro~al doe~ not
~ incluQe ±nti• ~ction ac findinga ~.3 to compliance or approvtel o~ .he
reque~st req~rding any ocher applic~ble ordlnan~o, regule-rcion or
requiroment.
~2''- PC89-71
~,,•,~,.t ~ u ~ - ;
y ~,~ ti; ~, . Z.
- - - . .. . , . . „ . ~ . . . , . :.i~.wC'r~'.w'.~
~~.
m~.
s~
^~
,~
~
BE '!T FURxHLR RESOL'~lEn that tha Anaheim CfCy P].anning Commission
does herabp find and determine that adopt3.on of thi~ Re~oZution is expressly
predicated upon a~,plicant's r.umpli.ance w3;;ti ~ach and a11 of the conc~stions
harc~inabovo sc~C for~h. Should ~ny sucti conciitions, or eny part ther~~f, be
doc.lareci inval3d or uaen£urceable by the final }udcnnerit o~ any court ot
competent jurisdiction, t2ien this Resolution, and any approvals hsroin
containefl, shall htt deemed nu]1 and void.
THG rUREGOTNG RESOLUTION .is si,gnod and approved by me th~.s ],3th day of
Marc}t, 1989.
,
~ ''/i~..-f.'~~ :~ : ~t~';.'~~:- Gf ~~-..
_ . „~ _., ,~ / ~ ~....__.__.-----~„~---------~.~
C~IAIFWOMAN, ,ANAH~IM CITY PLANNING COI~"~tISS.iON
ATTEST: ~
SECREi'A£tY w -~~V="'""`" __._.
, ~-N~EZM CTTX PLI~NNING COhSMZSSZON
STATE O1F CALTFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) Ss.
CITY OF ANAFiEIM )
I, Edith L. FTarris, Secr~tary of the Anaheim City Planning Commission, do
hereby certify that the foregoing rusol+,tion was passed and adoptod at s
meeting of the Anah~im City Planning Conuni3sian held on Marc2: 13, 1989, by tho
fol.l.owing vote of the members thereof:
AYES: ~OMMT5SIONERS: BOUAS, BOYDSTUN, ~ARUSILLO, FE~,UHAUS, .~~lESSE
NOES; COt~4fISSIONERS: NONE
VACI~NT: COI~IISSIOIJERS: TWO SEA'.fS
IN WIT~JESS WHEREOF, I have hereuntio set my hand thiA 13th day of
March, 198g,
- ~ ~
SCCRETARY, ANAHEIM CSTY P1:ANNING COI~tISSrON
-2E-
.. } } i~;e'.1'lrKtl
' , ' ~ r ? i -z1Sf,'
i
r,
~ ~ •':t:j~ e~,
~r ~l
.. ' ;..~_,~%'~~
`:•~
;'y~;
PCD9-71 :