Resolution-PC 90-277~ ~
~~~ ~
R~;54LUT~ON~NO. PG 90-~.~,
A RESOLUTIUt~ OF THE ANAHGIM CITY PI,ANNING rOMMISSIUN
RECOMMENpYN(3 TFIAT mHE CITY :OUNCIT. iNTROnUCE AND ADOP'T AN Ol2DINNNCE
'PO APPFtOVE DEVELUPM~NT ACFi~EMTUNT NU. 90-02
S9ElEREAS, pur~uant to the auth~~ri.ty aQt for~h i.n GnliEornia Gov~rriment
Code Section 658ci4, Cit~r of Anatielm Oxdinancc~ No. 4377 und Reoolutiun No.
82R-5G5 (Procc~dures Reeol.utfon), RAR ANAljEIM, L.F., has rc~gueeted tho CiY.y to
enLer ir.to Dov~lopment Agre~msnt No.90-02 in connection wiL•h the Central Par'k
T~wQra complox or. pruperty conr~tatin5 of appr~x.tmatoly 11.79 acr.eo loaa*.ed ~t
the northeaat cornar of State C~11Qga Boulevard And Katella Avenue, ~nd ::urther
dPacriUed aa 1750 South State Co1l.ege eoulevard; and
WfiERrAS, pureuant to tho Calif.ornia l:nv.ironmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and the 5tatA and City ::EQA Gu.i.del.t~iee, Rnviro~lmental Impact Repo.c [30. 344 has
bec~n pt-eparc~d; and
WHEREAS, pursuacit to Sections 2.1 ana 2.2 of the Proceduree
P.esolutxun, tt-o Anaheim City Pl~rining Commiesion did h~ld a public hearing at
the Anaheim Civic Centor, CoUncil Chamber, 2UU South Anat-eim Boulavard, in the
City of AriahESim, on Uecember J, 1990, at 1:3U p.m., notice of eaid public
hearing t~aving been given as required by law and in accordance with the
provisione nf the Anah~im Municipal Code, Chapter 18.03, to hear and cottsidex
E:videncQ for an~ againat sa.id davelopment agrQement: and to invoatigate and make
fi.ndingb and recommend~~tiona in connection therewith; and that the publlc
heari~tg waa continued tu December 17, 1990; and
WHF.RE:AS, pureuanL- to the Froccduree Reool.ution, the Develoger han
demonetrated ~ligi.bility to enter into thi~ aa"e~~ment by nhowinq the follawinq:
A. Thar the pcoject will reault in the conatruc~ion of at least
250,000 oyuare feet of commerr.ial/offi_ce space.
E3. Ttiat t:~~ proiact will be cons~ructad in phasee ovor an
antieipated per.iod of nor. lean than five r5) yonre.
Wtt~REAS, 9aid Commiseion, after dua conoi:leration, i.nr~pection,
inveatiqation and study made by itealE, and ~f~er due coneLderation of all
evi<lence and c•e.porta of fered ~t sai.d hear~ing, DOES HER~BY FINU:
(1) Tt,at the pr.oj~ct is cnnelatant with thcs Geheral Plan of the City
of Anaheim;
(2) 'That th~ proJ~ct ie compatibl~ witti thQ ua~se authurized in and
the r~qulationa pr~acri.bed for ln the applir,able zoning dietric~t
(3) Z`hat the pro}ect ie~ compatit:le 41irF1 th~ orderly d~svcslopment of
property in the ~urrounrling area; an~9,
(4) That thQ pro}ecY. ie not ott~erwiee dc~trimental t~ the health,
Qafety and general welfar~s of r.he ci.r.izen~ of Ana!teim.
.. .1 _
PC 9d-277
Revi9ed 1/10/91
';
t'.~~r~ . ' . ~ i. '•~
. . . . , , ~l',.~
~
~' ~
~
~
NOW, THEREF'ORL, F3E I~P RESdLVL~D th~t the Anaheim City Pl~nning
Commieaion doQO hezeby Ei.nd pureuant to tli~ California Fnvironmental Quality
Aet arid the StatQ and City CEQA GuidolinE;~, that aftAr coneidoring Draft EIR
No. 304 ;Eor~ the pro~~o~ed Cc~n~:ral Park Towere projQCt and reviowing evidonce
prc~eentad, buth writton and oral, to supplain~n~ Draft b:YR No. 304, the Planning
Comrr,iQeion finde thats
(a) Draft GIR No. 304 la in cam~l.iance with the Ca].iforr-ia Envir~nmontal
puality Act and tho Stute and Clty CEQA GuidelinesJ
(b) The project i~ conai.stent with tha i.ntent ot ~he City~a l3oneral Plan
for thQ ait~ and will be compatible wi.th eurrounding lr~nd uses;
(c) L`raft EIR Na. 30~~ i.dentitieo the tollc+wir~g impacts whieh are
considered to be botla unav~idahle ~nd advezse in nature and not fully
mitigated to a level of ir.aignific.~nce;
. Z'rar..,~~,ortation/Circtilatioti - UndQr project apecii ic conditiane, the
nixteen ~t~dy intersections will operate ak an aacoptable Level af
5ervice (LOS) D ~r batter after mitigation. FIo~aever, under
cumulative cunditiona after mttiyatior~, tt~e inta.raection af 3tate
College Boulevard/Ratalla Avenue wlll oparate at LOS D during the
a.m. F~eak-hour and LOS I' without the Paciftao AvQnue Overcroesinq
and LOS E witti the Pacifico Avenue Overcroseing i;~ the p.m.
p~,ak-hoii~:. Improvements beyond th~ critical intoreeatian etandard
wou.Ld be requirQd L-o miti~~ate this .tnteraection to an T,03 D or
better during the p.m. peak-:1our.
.+~ir ~uality - Even t.hougli thQ thrc~nhold for otat+onary and mobile
c~aurc:e em.lAaiona for on-site uees will not exceed the csitezin
opacified by ttie South Coaet Air. Quality Managemen~ Dis~trict, the
South Coaet ~ir Ba~in duea not meet Stat~ and FQdgral Atand~rda .for
ambS.er~t ~ir guality. This eFfect w~~ld occur witli or without thR
project.
rzN~rrres•
(d) Ser.tion 15091 of th~ CCQA Guidel.inen requirea that one oi more
findingn be madQ for. each c~iqnif.ic3nt envirnnmental ef•fect~. Three
finding r_ateyoriea are pos~ihla. Sections a, Ei and C below state
each finding, and then iden~ify tho impact categories far which these
findingt~ rire apqropriate.
A. "Changee or alter~3tiona have been requir~id in, or incorporated
inta, thA project which avoid or subc~tantiall~ ldaeen the
si.c~niffcant environmental o:fer.t a~ identiflod ~n the Araft
EIR.'~ Thie finding applies to the fallowing environmental
etfects of the project:
. Land [Jae
. Ceology/Snilo/Sei~micity
. Nydro2ogy
. S~ci.oacnnomica
. ACOUDt.tCB
. Public Sn_L'V1Ce9
. Aeflthc~tica
- 2 -
~ ;;;:r_ . .
PC 90-277
Revieed 1/10/91
~~~ ''~~R :R~~
;
,>1p
: ~i
~~1'
': ~
~ i c; t u': !; . '' r y`~',"~'~aj~, "~!J~1'1;
~''~~ , . ",
At~"Q`P3~ '~ 5..
~~
Rc~Eer ta the Draft ~IR F~tir a tull diecusoion of the above
tmpacts, the n;itigati~n mc~asuren pr~~cribed and a~3iecunsion of
impact ~±c~nificancc-~ aftor mit~.gatioxl.
B. "Such cha-:geo or altor.a~tions are within the redponeibility and
jurisdiction oF ~nothor public ~gyncy nnd n~t the agoncy ma::ing
~hfl finding. ~;uch chA.ngee havQ beon ad~pted by s~uch o~her
agency or, can and ~hQUld be adopted by ~uch othor agency.°
s:. There are no other ayflncieA that ha,ve been idQri~lfiAd through
the EIR prncean which have juriadict.i.on ~ver thie sita.
C. "5p~r.i.fic eco~~omic, social, or other conaideratic.~ns make
infeasible the mitigation m~rzaures or ;,rojoct altzr.nativee
identified in tl~e DraFt EIR"
The follo~ving df.ACUSaton id~n~ifies the varioue ~lternativee
consid~rEd in thP Draft L~IR, followed ::,y an explanation of the
r~t.lanale for finding theae alternatives infeasible and/or
re•~ec':tng BdRi~.
NO PRO:J~CT ALTERNATIVF.
This alternative a~aumes
conditions. 'Che ~ita would
and vacan~ area. Economic
current ce,n~ral Plan object
actdition, approximately 2~4b4
wn~ild not be r.ealizc~d.
thQ continuation of. existing
retain the bank, agricultural uaes
bc~nefite to the community and the
Lvee would not be realized. Ici
l~~ng-term emgloyment opportun.ities
Thi~ all-er.native doen n~t, however, proclude futuxe ~3evelupment
in accorr~ance with planning and zor.ing atandarda in ax~.etence at
the time of perm5.t iasuance.
The No Proi~ct Alter.nah~ve could be cor~eidered environmenL•ally
auperior to the p.:oject as it would eliminsste thosa
Qnviro~mental effecto of the pro3ect idantifiFd in the AraEt
EIR. O~t~er effecr.~ msy, hawever, k~r~ mpre significa~nt duct~ ae
du~t Lzom ttie agricultural oper.ation. ~Projoct objectives
ap~c.if.ied in ~;he Draft ~IR would ~iot be acc~mplishe~l.
7'}~i.s alternat.ive ia consid~red infe.ssibl~ and, therefore,
rejccted bec:au~e it faile L•o meet any of the ~rujact ohjectives
or. to provide oocial and econc~mic benefits associated with the
pro jc~:t.
ftk;OUCED OF:'ICF. SFACE R TE ZNATIVC
Thie alterr.ativa reduc~~ the toca.l amount of offi.ce/bank epace
bY 22 percent which equatos to an elimination of 124,4U0 nquare
feet or approximat~ly 3 fJ.ooro in b~th offica t~wers, The
proj~cted tripe genarated wouid bQ i•educpd to 5,093 (ur a 17
percent re,duetion Erom the pr~pon~d proj~:ct?. Thie alternative
would generate 498 leoo empl.oyment opporl•unitien and all servlce
desm~nde would ~~ rQduced.
- 3 ' PC 90-277
Revieed 1/10/91
E~~;~ ~~
~Phca Reduced O~.e~ Space Altornat ve ic~ aoneidored
envi.ronmentully euperio~. because of the ~ewer c?ai],y tripa
generated an9 the reduction in impac~e ugGn pub,iic servi.cae
compared tn th~ pro}ect.
This altorna~iv~ would not meeL• projoct abjEC~'_vetc. The Reducad
Office 3~1cr~ Alternative .ia a 1Qao Qconomically feaeible
altc~rztive for tho appltcant, i:herefcre, the g~.te may remain
undevelope~~. Thle alternai:ive ir~ consid~red infeasible and,
thorefore, i.s re~octed.
NO R~:STAURANT GR I2'GT]~IL', ALTk;RNA'PTVE
This alternative propor~es the oame amount of oEfic,~ and hotel
ueQO but would eliminate tlte ret~~il and reetaurar.t ~~z~tion o£
the project. Si.nce no rF:stau~ant or retai? uses ar.e propaaed,
dally traff.lc t::ips genei~ated would be reducr~d to 8,244
(approxfmately 13 p~rcQnt less then tlze proposed pr.ojeat). Yn
addition, no ~al~e tax woulci b~ c~enc~rated and ~he abeence of
reta.il and re3taurant usea could lower ttie hotsl ~ccupancy ~nd
thus lower City tranoient uce~,~ancy taac revenues.
The Na Re~staurant or Retail AJ.~prnative i.a Cotl~3idared
envir.onmontally auperior due to th~ fewer tripa genarai:Qd.
However, additional traff.ic may be genera~ed duri.ng the lur~ch
h~ui, in con~pa.rieori with the proposed project. All aaso~iated
public oorvice de-nands arQ sli.ghl-ly lower than the propoeed
pruject (due t~ reducec~ square footagej.
7hie aLter.nativE in cr~nsidered infea3ible based upon thb above
r.omments and, Cher.E~fora, is rejecte@.
(e) AND CURTHEY., tho Ylanning Commies.ion fuzther dete::minQa tha~ the
benefits ~f the praje:t havc~ been weigh~:d againat tl~e unavoidr.bld
adveree environmen;.al impact,~ and puzauant to Sec;fon 15093 a£ the
State CF.pA Guidelines, t1~e ~ccurr~ncn of the significant
enviranment.~l impacte iclenti.fiHd in Draft EI~t Plo. 304 se aet forth
above, :nay be permitted without furthF~i~ miti.gatfon due to the
.following overriding co~sidPrati.ona:
To the extent that any impacts (i.ncludi.ng, without li~titation,
cumulative impactn) attrik~utable to the Cf~~:tral ~ark Towers proje~t
remain unmitfg.ited, s~uch impacts are accpp~able in light of the
overriding nocial, econamic and other considerations aet forth
herein. The projoct alternativQe tset forth in ~he EzR are infeasible
for thosQ re35oris ~nd ie+ea desirable than the propoeQd project.
Addlttoi~al mitigatiun m~asucos and th~ altiernativea would imgc~ee
limi.tation~ and resir;.ction~ on tho developmenz of the Central Park
Towers project. which woul.d protiibit obtafni.ng the epecific aocial,
Qconomi.c and nthar b~nefita of th~ project whi.ch outweigh the
unmitigated impacto, a;id which juRt:fy approval oi this project.
- 4 - PC 9U-27%
Rp~i~ea i/zo/si
i .~~ r~ ~ i~k . ~~ y~.• r ~ a,i
.. . ., . _ . ,J;~ . . . .~ . , ,~t9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~' . 1 ~ i ~ ~ ~.itRf~17~Q~f( ~r ~
~ k '. ~?~~~? ~
~~ti1x ~ : ~+;,
. ~r GY;~;~
The tollowiny eocial, economi.c and other considerat~.one warzant
approval of thia praject notwithntanding ~ny unaWOidabl+a or
unmitigated impac;rs reaultiny from thQ Q~ntral Paz~k Z'c,wers pr~ject. ,
A. Jobe arid Econom~.c ~row~h
The projec.t aito ia located ir~ cloae proximity +:o majQr irnaway
and ia.ilroad ey9teme, and ie centrully lacated within the
;; County. The ~ito cantinuoa the office 6mphaeis created in the
~`~ Anahoim Stadium E3u~ineas Genter. The p
pr~jact will rovide
~ apprc~ximatel.y 2,464 empl~yment oppo.rtunities, And wi11 ::e~sult in
a positive fiecal impact on the City's Gane~ral Fund (ennual
eurplua of 586,306).
~3. Traffic/Cir.r,ulation
Fr~~ect and r.umulative tra£fic impacte can be reducecl by the
recommended mit3.ytition meaeures for the project, bu':. the
iritereer.ti.on of State Ccllege Daulovard/Katella .A~~env~ •~ill
ront~nue to op~rate at unaccept3bl~ J.evelra of a~rvice witt~
mit•igation for Cumulative condition9. All feasil~le ~itigation
measures have been r~commended :Eor the project. PSydicu,t
c°netra:.zto preclude £~.~rther cizculation im~~rovemQnta at the
affected interEection (Stat.e Gollege Boulevard,/Kateila R•~enue).
~. Air c~uality
Siiort-term ~o~l~truction em2.QSiona are mitigated to a level of
insigrzificanr,e and carbon monoxide emiE~sions ar.~ r$duced to the
extent feaaible by facilita~ing ~raffi•~ ~low, by providing new
jobs in cFntra.l Orar~ge Caunty and by lr,c.~ti.ng a hotel in olase
prnximity t•.o bu9inesa and recreationa~. facilit.ios ~i~hich wi].1
reduce total vehi~le milea. Although project-gr~nerated
emisoions are ~tot conaidored regtonally significant, eoma State
and I'ed~ral daily air ~ollution atandarde (i.e., ozone,
particula~es) ~r.e exceeded with or without the project.
(f) S~ction 21001.6 of the Publi.c Resourcea Code r~quizee l:hat whest ~
public agency is maicing the findinga required by Sertion 21081(a) of
the Publir. R~sourcae Code, the Agency shall adopt a reporting or
monit~ring pr.ogram for the chan~es tu the projRCt which it has
adapted or made a conditi~n of project a~proval, in order to mitigate
or avo.id signific~nt r~ff~cto on the onvironment.
The City tu~reby findA that the mitiga.tion meaaures (liflted in Sectian
I~ - R~con,mended Conditionc~ of Approval) have been incorpcrated in~o
a Mitigation Montt~x•inc~ Progra-n that cr,eeta thg requirements of
Sec~i.on 210A1.6 of chQ P~iblic Reaourcaa Code anci nubotantially
recluces th~ project's envirnnmen~al effects ta an acceptable Ievel.
(g) Thereforo, the Planning Cortunissfan hereby recommenda cartiFica~ion of
EIR Ne. 304 and adopts this Sratement of Overric~ing Coneiderations
and Mitigation Monitorinq Prayrarn.
- 5 - PC 90-277
Revieed 1/7.0/91
i ,to i ~ „t,. 4 a,1~_;%~ ti~. ~er'!~7 ~ i~~:R~ '11~~4h~J~.4r.~ YfiM( .i;s~ ;i i~1~t!1~.' .. ~i. . t ~ ~
, . - . . . . . .1 . . . . .. ~.~'~ ~ , , .. . . .
DE
Anaheim C3.ty
dcamonetratod
dc+es hereby
Agr.eement No.
~~~
IT FURTHER TtESOLVED ~hat
Planning Comrnisaion doea h
e].igibility to enter. i~ito
recomrnpnd L•hat tha City CAi~r
9U-Q2.
fJ4`iR~ia . ~ ..
pursuant ~4 th~ above findinger ~he
sreby determine th~t the developor has
nevolopment Agrec~ment No. 90-02, and
.il approve and enter :Lr~t~ Davelopment
TEiE FOREGOING RESOT.UTION wae adopted at the Planni.ng CommieaS.on
meeting of ll~cember 17, 1990.
I ..
~ ~i , _ ~~__....
. ~; , ; ,
~ f' + , ,
, i ;„_,
.~+ - .~~,. =l•~~ 1 ~~~`~. . .:•~.~1-'~L.%~,, ~
"CHAIRWOMAN ~
RNAHEI:i CITY ?LANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
, ' ~
. ~ --
SFCR~;TARX
ANAHEIM CI~Y PI,A.NNING C~MMISSIQN
I, Edirh L. Harr.i~, Socretary of the Anaheim City Planning
Commission, do I:erFUy certify that the foregoing rQSO].utinsi wao paaAed and
a~3opt~d at s meeting oF the Anaheim City Planniny Commi.~eion held on DeCC~mbQr
17, 199U, by th~ followfn,y vote oP the members thereof:
AYES: BOUAS, BOYASTUN, FELDHAUS, HF,I~LYER, HENNINGFR, N,ESSE, PERAZA
NOFS: NONE
AHSENT: NONE
IN W=TNESS 4JHGRCOF, T have heL•eur.to set my hand this _~~~ day
of ,~~Q~, 199~. y ~
~s2~~(N_.~13 - ~~
SECFETAf2Y,
ANAH~IM GITY PLANNING COMMIS~TON
-- 6 -
PC 90-277
Revieed 1{1Of91
~1Y.T.y vply,~~
~{ti
' ~I'
r~',
~ ''