The URL can be used to link to this page

09/27/2022ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL REGULAR AND REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2022 The regular meeting of September 27, 2022 was called to order at 3:30 P.M. and adjourned to 3:30 P.M. for lack of a quorum. The regular adjourned meeting was called to order at 3:31 P.M. in the Council Chamber of Anaheim City Hall, located at 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard. The meeting notice, agenda, and related materials were duly posted on September 22, 2022. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tern Trevor O'Neil and Council Members Jose Diaz, Gloria Sahagun Ma'ae, and Stephen Faessel Council Members Jose F. Moreno and Avelino Valencia [Mayoral vacancy] City Manager Jim Vanderpool, City Attorney Robert Fabela, and City Clerk Theresa Bass ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: None CLOSED SESSION: At 3:32 P.M., Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil recessed to closed session for consideration of the following: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION (Subdivision (d)(1) of Section 54956.9 of the California Government Code) Name of Case: Santiago Geologic Hazard Abatement District v. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2021 01203933 (and related JAMS arbitration proceeding, Case No. 1200059076) 2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of California Government Code Section 54956.9: One potential case CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of California Government Code Section 54956.9: One potential case 4. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Subdivision (a) of Section 54957.6 of the California Government Code) Agency Designated Representative: Linda Andal, Human Resources Director Name of Employee Organizations: Anaheim Municipal Employees Association, Police Cadet Unit; and Anaheim Municipal Employees Association (General, Clerical, Part -Time Units) At 5:07 P.M., Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil reconvened the Anaheim City Council. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 2 of 33 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Pro Tern Trevor O'Neil and Council Members Jose Diaz, Gloria Sahagun Ma'ae, Jose F. Moreno, Avelino Valencia, and Stephen Faessel [Mayoral vacancy] INVOCATION: Pastor Roger Sullivan, Anaheim Christian Center FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Jose F. Moreno PRESENTATION: Presentation on the Community Schools Partnership Program Grant by Anaheim Union High School District Michael Matsuda, Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD) Superintendent, provided a brief overview of AUHSD's graduation rates, A-G Requirements completion, CTE Pathway completion, and State Seal of Biliteracy which have improved since 2016. He reported that AUHSD students lead every district in Orange County in both grade point average (GPA) and retention rates at the University of California Irvine. Al Jabbar, AUHSD Board President, reported the district has received over $23,000,000 in grant funds for 11 new schools and two (2) existing community schools. He thanked the City for collaborating with AUHSD to address food insecurity in the community. He reported through the $4,700,000 from the Californians for All Youth Corp Jobs Grant, AUHSD was able to employ 10 students to work at the Magnolia Science Community Center, also known as Magnolia Farm, and highlighted their achievements. He encouraged City Council to pass the resolution this evening to show their commitment to AUHSD. Carlos Hernandez, Director of Community Schools, Family & Community Engagement, reported the vision of AUHSD is to expand its support of an equitable and asset -based instructional approach focused on community, strengths, and nurturing potential. He advised AUHSD's vision, core values, and infrastructure aligns with the community school model to serve as a means to create a safe place where students, families, educators, staff, community members, and partners are connected and work together. He presented the Four Pillars of Community Schools which include Integrated Student Supports, Enriched & Expanded Learning Opportunities, Family & Community Engagement, and Collaborative Leadership & Practice, and provided examples of each. Grant Schuster, President of the Anaheim Secondary Teachers Association, provided a brief overview of the Shared Leadership Model and noted education partners that include students, parents, teachers, community groups, and districts were already meeting regularly to discuss what direction community schools could take, including authoring the grant together. He noted he looks forward to seeing what the process would do at the school site under the guidance of the District Steering Committee. Emma Alvarez, Sycamore Junior High School Associated Student Body (ASB) President, reported her understanding of community came from family and friends that helped support her and her mother who was a single mother. She expressed excitement about the possibility of her classmates having a community to rally around them to turn them all into future leaders. She advised she is a proud product of Anaheim Elementary (AESD) and AUHSD. She reported her school offers so much help in areas such as public speaking and provided an overview of some of her school experiences. Jessie Alvarez, Parent/Steering Committee Representative, reported she is a parent and life-long resident of Anaheim. She attended AESD and AUHSD and noted her son would be a third -generation graduate from Anaheim High School. She reported the community school approach gives parents an City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 3 of 33 opportunity for shared leadership and decision -making input on what they want and need from local schools to ensure student success. She noted, as a resident, she is looking to ensure the City and elected officials are working for the benefit of all of its community members. Araceli Huerta, Sycamore Junior High School Community Schools Coordinator, reported research shows that community schools are effective across a variety of communities and have proven so in under-resourced neighborhoods. She advised that AUHSD is seeing success with the community schools model, especially with students who would traditionally fall through the cracks or be overlooked. She provided a recent example of a student who has a challenging home life and special needs. She noted success for this child looks different and is proud to say they are moving the needle forward for this family by providing them with necessary services. Maritza Bermudez, Orange County Congregation Community Organization (OCCCO), and Dr. Anat Herzog, Los Amigos of Orange County, presented jointly. Ms. Bermudez reported that AUHSD schools have a strong foundation of educational partnership that has a great impact on shaping the learning and life experiences of students and families. Dr. Herzog reported that AUHSD is phenomenal at recognizing its community partnerships and the impact that they have. Ms. Bermudez reported that OCCCO and Los Amigos have been engaged in Anaheim communities for the last 30 years and 44 years respectively. Dr. Herzog advised each organization has its own flavor and reason for being. Ms. Bermudez provided examples of the work of each organization. Dr. Herzog advised that working together with educators, students, and families gives them greater opportunities to fulfill their purpose, mission, and goals. Ms. Bermudez noted it magnifies their abilities as organizations to connect resources to the specific population they serve. Dr. Herzog advised this is the City's opportunity to partner with AUHSD and community schools, to magnify the City's ability to connect resources and services directly to families and youth, and to increase the City's effectiveness in knowing and serving the community. Ms. Bermudez invited the City to join in this incredible work of integrating the collective efforts toward thriving students, families, and communities in the City. Dr. Herzog noted she looks forward to adding the City to its list of education partners. Superintendent Matsuda thanked City Council for the opportunity to share the great news and encouraged them to pass the resolution. DISCUSSION: Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil thanked everyone for their comments and noted Ms. Alvarez did a wonderful job speaking and is on her way to becoming a future leader. Council Member Moreno thanked City Manager Jim Vanderpool for getting the presentation organized. He reported he has been in the field of education for a few decades and has always said that the future of Anaheim is in the hands of its children. He thanked Ms. Huerta for her comments that adults control the condition that children live in. He advised that the work of AUHSD has helped influence the State Superintendent of Public Instruction on how they thought about this grant in partnership with the City. Council Member Moreno inquired where AUHSD sees the City being with the schools in five years. Superintendent Matsuda advised its students are impacted by poverty daily and he hoped the resolution would represent a commitment from the City to work with the school district. He noted that it needs to play out but hoped that in five years, everyone would be able to see the value of this program. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 4 of 33 Council Member Moreno inquired what concrete things Superintendent Matsuda could see the City doing as a partner over the next five years for the success of the grant. Superintendent Matsuda believed the metrics would speak for themselves in the reduction of mental health issues. He advised that increased coordination with not only the City but with County and non- profit services would see a continued reduction of crime and indicators of homelessness. He noted the City could be great with a continued commitment to the future of jobs and the type of corporations that come into the city. Council Member Moreno reported that the City has several initiatives and partnerships with the school districts and described a few examples. He advised the Housing and Community Development Department not only works on housing affordability with new developments but also looks to incorporate wrap -around services and support systems. Council Member Moreno reported he had asked to agendize AESD along with AUHSD and noted it was his oversight. He advised AESD received grants for two (2) schools and asked to make their presentation in December, but he recommended they come in January 2023. He thanked all of those who work in the school community and who made presentations this evening. Council Member Valencia thanked the speakers for their presentation and looked forward to seeing the program come to fruition. He inquired about the type of collaboration the City expects with this partnership and what the expectation is from the City to collaborate. Superintendent Matsuda advised it is all about access, communication, and ensuring that resources are not duplicated across partners. He also expects the City to help the school district navigate the County, the non-profit community, and the business community. Council Member Valencia commended AUSHD for their increased graduation rates and believed it would empower the next generation of the Anaheim community. He inquired how this program would help improve dropout and expulsion rates. Mr. Hernandez explained that AUHSD wants to understand its student's families, assets, strengths, as well as their needs. He reported over 17,000 families have participated in a needs and asset assessment to help understand their situations. He advised the grant is expecting a report showing that attendance, success, and graduation rates are up and drop -out rates are down and that would be a part of the process. Council Member Valencia inquired about the analysis process and criteria used to determine that the 13 schools in Anaheim should be community schools. Mr. Schuster explained there is a number called the Unduplicated Pupil Count which are students that are second language learners, living below the poverty line, or that are in foster care and count as one. He further explained the State determined that if 80% of students fell into those categories, the school district was eligible to apply for the grant. He reported the Steering Committee evaluated each school to determine their needs and assets to determine if they were ready to put together a community school. He announced that Anaheim has the highest density of community school approval in the State. Council Member Valencia noted the State Legislature expanded the budget for this education so this program could trickle down into communities such as Anaheim. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 5 of 33 Council Member Faessel reported his attendance at the Sycamore Junior High School ribbon -cutting for the Community Schools Resource Center (CSRC) with Council Member Moreno and Mr. Vanderpool and thanked the school district for the invitation. He thanked everyone for their involvement. Council Member Moreno thanked the AUHSD Board for their involvement and asked that they extend the City's gratitude to the Board of Trustees. He reminded everyone that 10 years ago in July, the City rose as a community to protest officer -involved shootings. He noted a Youth Assessment Study conducted shortly thereafter showed that the City and its schools do relatively well when it relates to its young children but found the greatest need was with adolescents. He inquired if Mr. Hernandez could provide a brief overview of the needs and asset assessment and if the City could get a presentation on the results in the future. Mr. Hernandez reported the process began with an assessment of students' families, then a staff assessment, and then finally, with a needs and asset assessment. He explained the needs assessment is looking at the deficit of what students are needing and also at the strengths that help empower students. Council Member Moreno thanked the Board of Trustees for their leadership and vision and looked forward to the integrations and symbiotic work of the City, communities, neighborhoods, and educators. ACCEPTANCE OF OTHER RECOGNITIONS (To be presented at a later date): Recognizing October 2022, as Domestic Violence Awareness Month Ana Palacios, Women's Transitional Living Center (WTLC) Community Services Manager, thanked the City and their community partners for the recognition. She reported that WTLC has been serving survivors of domestic violence since 1976 and working to create safer and healthier communities. She encouraged City Council and residents to get involved in their awareness events and activities. She thanked the City for turning the lights purple to bring awareness to domestic violence. She encouraged residents to visit https://wtic.org/ for additional information. Recognizing October 2 - 8, 2022, as Public Power Week Tania Casteneda, Anaheim Public Utilities Community and Sustainability Manager, thanked City Council for the recognition. She advised that Public Power Week is a celebratory time to recognize the positive impact of 2,000 publically owned utilities across the nation that serve over 49,000,000 customers. She reported that Anaheim has the only city -owned electric utility in Orange County. She invited the community to the Public Power Week celebration event on Thursday, October 6 from 12:00 P.M. to 3:00 P.M. at the Downtown Anaheim Farmer's Market. At 5:55 P.M., Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil called to order the Successor Agency to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, Anaheim Housing Authority, and Anaheim Public Financing Authority (in joint session with the City Council). ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDAS: None PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items, except public hearing): City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that a total of four (4) public comments were received electronically prior to 5:00 P.M. related to City Council agenda items and matters within the jurisdiction of the City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 6 of 33 Anaheim City Council. [A final total of seven (7) public comments were received electronically, distributed to the City Council, and made part of the official record]. — See Appendix. Paul Hyek recommended that all businesses, schools, and shelters participate in the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program. He reported it could help teach everyone how to survive for 72 hours in the event of a disaster and noted it is offered by the Anaheim Fire Department. Mark Richard Daniels commended the Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD) and the Board of Trustees for their presentation. He noted they have gone into the 20th century like no other. He recalled times when the City and AUSHD were estranged and did not communicate but looked forward to this collaborative program. He encouraged the City to set aside funds for any future endeavors of AUHSD. He commended the transformation of the look and feel of the schools that have been brought up to date. He reported the election is fast approaching and he is unsure what the candidates are thinking but noted they could not disregard the past. Ashleigh Aitken urged City Council to support the resolution for community schools and complimented local AUHSD teachers, staff, family, and representatives that were in attendance. She reported she attended the opening of the Community School Resource Center and noted it brought energy to the community. She noted that being acknowledged by the State Superintendent is a great accomplishment for AUHSD and committed to being an educational partner. She reported she has been doing pro bono legal work for the veteran community and work on the cemetery issue. She advised Governor Newsom signed legislation moving the City one step closer to having a Veterans Cemetery and expressed excitement in seeing the project through. She encouraged City Council to approve the ocV!BE project which supports parks, open space, affordable housing, and venues for local artists. She expressed support for having the project union built by a local workforce that includes Anaheim's veterans and women. John Dunton referenced a recent homicide in which an Anaheim teenager was killed and as a result, lights were installed to light up the area. He recalled the tragic death of Ximena Meza at Brookhurst Community Park in 2014 and encouraged City Council to consider installing additional lights for safety. He reported the City Clerk and security staff have been very professional with the public. He advised Police Sergeant Brian Paqua has been very communicative with the community. He admonished Council Member Ma'ae for being on her phone the majority of the time during the AUHSD presentation. Marty Dutch explained she is a Philanthropic Consultant at First Foundation Bank in addition to having conducted pro bono work with over 160 local non -profits. She reported she has partnered with the Samueli Foundation Team in some capacity for the last 32 years. She advised she is the Board Chair of the Anaheim YMCA and provided an overview of the impact of the Samueli Foundation on the YMCA. She explained Victoria Torres, Director of Community Impact for Anaheim for the Samueli Foundation, conducted a true needs assessment of the YMCA. She reported they recently donated $200,000 to the YMCA for after -school programs. She expressed excitement that ocV!BE would help expand the partnership with the Samueli Foundation even further. George Searcy, Chief Impact Officer for Jamboree Housing, reported they have been working with the Samueli Foundation and the ocV!BE Team to create an affordable housing development and community services delivery system as an integral piece of the ocV!BE community. He advised the housing component is designed to serve low and very -low-income households in a setting that achieves the overall goal of inclusive access. He explained that this approach is in partnership with the ocV!BE team and builds on Jamboree Housing's experience in integrating affordable housing into a larger market rate and master developed communities. He advised the vision for the housing City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 7 of 33 community that Jamboree Housing is responsible for would function as an equal part of the neighborhood. He reported they offer excellent property management and would offer a high level of supportive services. He noted Jamboree's goal is to honor and reflect the value of the ocV!BE's design to make every component accessible and inclusive. Mike Robbins announced that five of the existing Council Members are crooks who broke Anaheim. He advised that residents continue to review Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil's numbers including the $65,000 he is receiving from the Shell Corporation, the highest -paid health benefits in Orange County, and money from his ex-wife. He expressed concern about the vote for ocV!BE in that the vote may not be legal and may be thrown out soon if approved. He hoped that a new City Council backs up a legitimate deal that is a benefit to the City. He recommended a recall vote for Council Member Faessel to reveal his corruption. He reported Council Member Moreno is in support of the ocV!BE so it must be a good deal and hoped it worked out. Jeanine Robbins addressed Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil's actions while in office, including actively blocking aid for those experiencing financial distress and suggesting prohibitions on any forms of rent control resulting in the death of senior citizens. She reported he fought against those employed in Anaheim to secure higher wages and has actively promoted special interests needs above all else. She reported Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil relies on monthly stipends from his ex-wife to avoid homelessness and financial insolvency. She reported Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil appears to have used his elected office for personal gain by securing a job with individuals who he had personally voted to financially benefit just a year before and provided an overview of their connections. She advised these new developments demonstrate that no elected official in Anaheim benefitted more from the work of the cabal than Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil. She noted he has demonstrated a level of duplicity that should bar him from all positions of public office. Manuel Ojeda, a representative for Ironworkers Local 416, provided an overview of a day in the life of a local ironworker. He reported they offer an apprenticeship school that is paid back by the Journeymen that provides a career for those who are not college -bound. He expressed support for the ocV!BE project and noted it would be a huge benefit for the City along with providing work for local tradespeople. He encouraged City Council to support the ocV!BE project and all union labor. Laura Garcia reported that she parked her vehicle in front of her home and a large branch fell from a tree and broke her windshield. She advised that she submitted a claim to the City, and it was denied. She requested assistance from City Council. Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil requested City Manager Jim Vanderpool assist Ms. Garcia by directing her to the correct department to investigate the matter. Mr. Vanderpool stated that Human Resources Director Linda Andal would speak with Ms. Garcia. Ben Hurst, Director of Operations for The Salvation Army, applauded the Samueli Family as community partners. He recalled being with them on January 31 when they all broke ground on the Center of Hope and where they presented a $1,000,000 gift to help eradicate homelessness and helped fund The Salvation Army's first Social Science Research and Development Facility. Mazatl Tepehyolotzin expressed support for ocV!BE but encouraged City Council not to forget the Tongva nation that was here before the colonists. He encouraged City Council to provide a land acknowledgment at the river. He reminded City Council this project would provide spiritual, educational, psychological, physical, and emotional benefits for the many indigenous people including the Mexican American Chicanos who are present along with the local workforce who would be working on the project. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 8 of 33 Tom Fielder encouraged City Council to take residents out of the cabal game and put an end to the grift. He recommended a Disneyland gate tax and encouraged residents to exercise their vote to remove those City Council members who were involved in trying to give away Anaheim's land. Kenneth Batiste applauded the presentation given by AUHSD and was happy to hear graduation rates had increased by over 20%. He noted there are no community schools proposed in District 6 because it is a part of the Orange Unified School District. He recommended that AUHSD provide a class on ethics and morals because the majority of the entire City Council is corrupt. He expressed support for ocV!BE and suggested that City Council mandate that 50% of the City's trade workforce should be local. He reported that $6,500,000 of COVID relief funds went to Visit Anaheim but the City refuses to vote for a gate tax at the Resort. He expressed support for the ongoing investigation and for Council Member Faessel and Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil to be incarcerated. Bryan Bohlken reported he lives at East Lark Ellen and expressed support for ocV!BE along with a majority of his neighbors and feels it would be a great addition to the neighborhood. He encouraged the City Council to pass the item. losefa Alufaituli, Executive Director and Co -Founder of CIELO, a non-profit that invests in underestimated entrepreneurs who live and operate their businesses out of local neighborhoods, reported the Samueli Foundation is a key partner in helping develop a vibrant, small business ecosystem in Anaheim and beyond for all entrepreneurs. He reported they are currently piloting a childcare business incubator to support the creation of in -home family childcare as a response to the childcare crisis. He reported there is only a licensed slot for 7% of the toddlers in Orange County. He advised they are participating in the groundwork the Samueli Foundation is laying with the City and the Anaheim Community Foundation (ACF) to establish a food business incubator focused on Anaheim residents. He reported they imagine a bridge to ocV!BE in both of these projects as there would be an opportunity to feature local chefs at the market hall and the need for childcare for the thousands of employees for the ocV!BE tenants. He reported that CIELO, in collaboration with the Samueli Foundation, is poised to develop a healthy neighborhood ecosystem. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Council Member Valencia reported his attendance at the groundbreaking ceremony for the Miraflores Affordable Housing Community in District 4. He also expressed his pride to participate in his alma mater Roosevelt Elementary School's Career and College Day. Council Member Faessel requested the meeting adjourn in memory of District 5 resident and former Anaheim Convention Center employee Leon Darrell Frerichs. He acknowledged a Nextdoor post by a Sycamore neighborhood mom where she shared that no friends attended her son's 12th birthday. Council Member Faessel expressed appreciation for neighbors' responses on Nextdoor and led the Council in wishing Mr. Seguviano a Happy Birthday. Council Member Diaz highlighted Happy Barber at 2711 W. Lincoln Ave., a Vietnamese -immigrant - owned small business. He reported on building efforts at Beach Blvd. and Lincoln Ave. and further announced that WSS recently opened at the northwest corner of Beach Blvd. and Lincoln Avenue. He encouraged residents to support Anaheim businesses to help transform Beach Blvd. He announced the Neighborhood Services Meeting for Districts 1 and 2 would be held on Thursday, October 6 at 7:00 P.M. at the Brookhurst Community Center. He also noted that October 5 is National Coffee with a Cop Day and residents could meet with the West Anaheim Community Policing Team from 7:30-8:30 at the 7-11 on the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Beach Blvd. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 9 of 33 Council Member Moreno thanked Kaboom!, the Anaheim Ducks, Holy Moly employees, and volunteers for building a new playground at Center Greens Park. He acknowledged the efforts of City staff in obtaining grants to help build out the entire park. He announced the rescheduled Community Resource Fair and neighborhood clean-up event in the Onondaga/Glen neighborhood on Saturday, October 1. Council Member Moreno referenced Project Labor Agreements at the Anaheim Union High School District, the City, the Anaheim Elementary School District, and potentially with the OC Vibe project and expressed appreciation for the focus on union labor and particularly local labor. He thanked Sandra Lozeau for quickly responding to emails regarding encampments and offering services to those experiencing homelessness while balancing the needs of residents. He announced that a requested discussion of street racing and street takeovers would be held at the October 4 City Council meeting. He thanked the Anaheim Public Utilities and Public Works departments for their efforts in the Northeast Colony Neighborhood project with new roads, gutters, pavement markings, lighting, and underground electrical. Council Member Ma'ae displayed photos and shared the various events and activities she attended over the past year since she was appointed as the District 2 City Council Member. She expressed gratitude for the responsibilities and opportunities she was provided, thanking staff, her colleagues, and her family for their support and assistance. She requested the meeting adjourn in memory of her friend, neighbor, and Army veteran Bryan Robert Gentile. CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE: City Manager Jim Vanderpool invited the public to the Anaheim Fire & Rescue Department's Wildfire Preparedness Fair at Fire Station No. 10 on Saturday, October 15, 10:00 A.M. — 2:00 P.M. where they can visit the goats, meet firefighters, learn more about the Know Your Way and paramedic programs, and lunch will be served. He noted that more information could be found at www.anaheim.net/fire and on the department's social media platforms. Mr. Vanderpool also announced that the Public Works Department was bringing forward over $1,000,000 of citywide concrete work to improve sidewalks, pathways, curbs, gutters, driveways, and in nine City parks. At 6:56 P.M., Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil recessed the Anaheim City Council, Anaheim Housing Authority, and Anaheim Public Financing Authority to consider the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency agenda. At 7:07 P.M. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil reconvened the Anaheim City Council. CONSENT CALENDAR: At 7:07 P.M., the Consent Calendar was considered with Council Member Ma'ae pulling Item No. 12 and Council Member Moreno pulling Item No. 20 for separate discussion and consideration. Council Member Diaz reported a recusal from Item No. 13 due to a conflict of real property interest as his residence is within 500 feet of the subject property. Prior to the final action of City Council on Agenda Item No. 07, City Clerk Theresa Bass reported, pursuant to Government Code Section 58953, that approval of Item No. 07 includes a salary adjustment for City Manager Jim Vanderpool to $314,897 annually, for City Attorney Robert Fabela to $297,789 annually, and for City Clerk Theresa Bass to $168,827 annually, with no change to existing executive level benefits. MOTION: Council Member Diaz moved to waive reading of all ordinances and resolutions and adopt the consent calendar in accordance with reports, certifications, and recommendations furnished each City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 10 of 33 City Council Member and as listed on the consent calendar, seconded by Council Member Ma'ae. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. B105 6. Receive and file minutes of the Library Board meeting of August 8, 2022. D154 7. Approve the compensation of council appointees pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(c)(3) and related personnel rules (City Manager, City Attorney, and City Clerk). Item No. 07 Prior to the final action of City Council, City Clerk Theresa Bass reported, pursuant to Government Code Section 58953, that approval of Item No. 07 includes a salary adjustment for City Manager Jim Vanderpool to $314, 897 annually, for City Attorney Robert Fabela to $297, 789 annually, and for City Clerk Theresa Bass to $168,827 annually, with no change to existing executive level benefits D159 8. Designate a one-story Spanish Colonial Revival style residence located at 2020 West Orange Avenue and a one-story Mid -Century Modern style residence located at 735 North Westwood Place as citywide "Historically Significant Structures." D180 9. Accept the bid of Stryker Sales Corporation, in the amount of $246,429.92 plus applicable tax, for the purchase of automated chest compression devices for use by the Anaheim Fire & Rescue Department, in accordance with Bid #9614. AGR-13769 10. Award the construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Towo Enterprise, Inc., in the amount of $995,330, for the Concrete Facilities Removal and Replacement Project - Citywide Phase 8; authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the contract and related documents and to take the necessary or advisable actions to implement and administer the contract; determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15301, Class 1, and 15302, Class 2, of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions. AGR-13770 11. Approve a License Agreement with the County of Orange Registrar of Voters for the installation, operation, and maintenance of an Official Ballot Drop Box at Boysen Park for a five year term (951 S. State College Blvd.). AGR- 13. Approve a Cooperation Agreement, in substantial form, with the Anaheim Housing Authority 13768.0.1 for the transfer of Permanent Local Housing Allocation funds, in the amount of $7,600,000, to assist with the acquisition of the Anaheim Lodge Motel located at 837 S. Beach Blvd.; and authorize the Director of Housing and Community Development, or designee, to execute and to administer the agreement (related to Housing Authority Agenda Item No. 3). Item No. 13 Council Member Diaz reported a recusal due to a conflict of real property interest as his residence is within 500 feet of the subject property. AGR-13771 14. Approve Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Agreements with the Orange County AGR-13772 Conservation Corps and Taller San Jose Hope Builders dba Hope Builders, in amounts not to exceed $342,774 and $228,517, respectively, both with terms beginning July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024, to assist local disadvantaged youth to prepare for joining the workforce; and authorize the Director of Housing and Community Development, or designee, to execute and administer the agreements. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 11 of 33 AGR-13773 15. Approve and authorize the Chief of Police, or designee, to execute the Sub -grantee AGR-13773.0.1 agreement with the City of Santa Ana, in the amount of $2,744,061, for reimbursement of AGR-13773.0.2 funds expended for the purchase of equipment, services, and training, and other required documents under the Fiscal Year 2021 Urban Area Security Initiative Grant, amend the Police Department's budget for Fiscal Year 2022/23 accordingly; and approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Santa Ana for the Urban Area Security Initiative. 16. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-091 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE AGR-3989.II.D CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the budget for Fiscal Year 2022-23 to incorporate grant funds transferred from the County of Orange to the City pursuant to the 2021 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, and authorizing the Chief of Police or his designee to execute any grant -related documents (grant funds allocated in the amount of $89,298; less 10% administrative fee, totaling $8,930, and a 3% National Incident -Based Reporting System fee, totaling $2,679 for a balance of $77,689). 17. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-092 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE AGR-13767.1 CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the execution and delivery by the City of a First Amendment to Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement with the Successor Agency to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency relating to the Anaheim Public Financing Authority (technical clean-up related to the expansion of the City Council) (related to Successor Agency Agenda Item No. 1). AGR-8297.1 18. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-093 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the execution and delivery by the City of a First Amendment to Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement with the Anaheim Housing Authority relating to the Anaheim Housing and Public Improvements Authority (technical clean-up related to the expansion of the City Council) (related to Housing Authority Agenda Item No. 4). D175 19. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-094 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Property Tax Exchange Agreement between the City of Anaheim and the City of Orange regarding the Santa Ana River Reorganization (Areas 1, 1a, 2, 3 and Remaining Areas) No. RO 20-06 and determining said actions are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities) [property tax in the amount of $63.48]. D154.5 21. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-096 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM establishing classification and rate of compensation for classification assigned to the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 47 - General Unit. M142 22• ORDINANCE NO. 6535 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Sections 1.11.050 (Email Retention) and 1.11.070 (Lobbyist Registration) of Chapter 1.11 (Sunshine Provisions) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to increase the email retention period for certain employees, to make certain violations of the City's lobbying provisions a misdemeanor, and to require that lobbyists certify their reports under penalty of perjury (introduced at the City Council meeting of September 13, 2022, Item No. 16). Determine that the above ordinance relates to organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment, and therefore is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378(b). City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 12 of 33 M142 23. ORDINANCE NO. 6536 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adding Chapter 12.30 to Title 12 of the Anaheim Municipal Code establishing pavement trench cut fee and based upon the finding and determination that said ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (introduced at the City Council meeting of September 13, 2022; Public Hearing Item No. 19). D114 24. Approve minutes of the City Council meeting of June 21, 2022. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR: AGR-3450.A 12. Approve an Amended and Restated License Agreement with Growth Opportunities through Athletics, Learning & Service (GOALS) for use of the Martin Recreation Center located at 1151 La Palma Parkway for the purpose of conducting sports, recreation, and social programs for underprivileged area youth for a five year term with five one-year optional renewals. DISCUSSION: Council Member Ma'ae reported she pulled the item to applaud the work of GOALS and noted it is critical that the City work with its non-profit partners to provide critical resources for its children. She looked forward to the revitalization of the area and looked forward to updates over the next few years. Council Member Diaz reported one of the big issues in society today is that both parents work, and the children have no support between school dismissal and the parents getting home. He advised this program offers an alternative to the children to keep them away from any bad influences. He expressed pride that the City could offer this at no cost. Council Member Faessel inquired if the Martin Recreation Center is likely to be included in a renovation project. Community Services Director Sjany Larson -Cash reported the City has been awarded some grants for development around La Palma Park. She explained one grant includes transforming the street and the parking lot into a more pedestrian -friendly space. She noted the other grant was received from Representative Lou Correa to add official soccer fields to that location. She reported there are plans to improve the remainder of the park that depend on future funding. She confirmed she has had active communication with Dave Wilk from GOALS to ensure he would be a part of the discussion about the building's future use. Council Member Moreno reported this program has been a blessing for so many families in his district and believed it would serve more than the reported 1,500 underprivileged area youths due to the ripple effect of the work. He noted one of the strengths of GOALS is the leadership development for service. He noted this, combined with Access California Services, is going to be a great synergy and support system for the community schools program. He thanked Mr. Wilk for all of his hard work. MOTION: Council Member Ma'ae moved to approve an Amended and Restated License Agreement with Growth Opportunities through Athletics, Learning & Service (GOALS) for use of the Martin Recreation Center located at 1151 La Palma Parkway for the purpose of conducting sports, recreation, and social programs for underprivileged area youth for a five year term with five one-year optional renewals, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 13 of 33 D116 20. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-095 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM supporting local public community schools. DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno commented that this is a transformative moment for the City and State if other districts follow suit. He inquired about the plans for the City's engagement and whether staff has been invited to be a part of any of the committees. City Manager Jim Vanderpool reported the City signed on for the effort in 2020 and the letter of support pledged that management staff would be part of the planning and any other relevant committees. He noted the City provided resources for Project Support Anaheim's Youth (SAY) and provided meeting and event space as needed. Council Member Moreno advised that many of the City's departments have already participated in Anaheim's Innovative Mentoring Experience (AIME) program. He expressed his excitement that the City is involved in deeper and collaborative conversations about strategically using resources. MOTION: Council Member Moreno moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2022-095 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM supporting local public community schools, seconded by Council Member Faessel. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: C410 25. ADDENDUM TO FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 339, MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN NOS. 106C AND 383 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO. 2020-00125 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA2020-00532) PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT (MIS2020-00739) RECLASSIFICATION (RCL2020-00333) ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS (ZCA2020-00174) SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICTS AMENDMENTS AMENDED AND RESTATED FACILITY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS FOR THE HONDA CENTER AND ARTIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DAG2020-00004) MASTER SITE PLAN (MIS2020-00751) FINAL SITE PLANS (FSP2020-00004; FSP2020-00005; FSP2020-00006; FSP2020-00007; FSP2020-00008) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT (CUP2010-05492) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM NO. 19153) STREET NAME CHANGE ISSUANCE OF LEASE REVENUE BONDS BY THE ANAHEIM PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY OWNERS: Michael Schulman, Anaheim Real Estate Partners, LLC, 2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 230, Corona Del Mar, CA 92625; City of Anaheim, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805; Orange County Flood Control District, 601 North Ross Street, Santa Ana, CA 92701 APPLICANT: Brian Myers, Anaheim Real Estate Partners, LLC, 2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 230, Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 14 of 33 AGENT: Christine Saunders, Sagecrest Plan ning+Environmental, 27128 Paseo Espada, Suite 1524, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 LOCATION: The approximately 100-acre ocV!be project site is generally bounded by State Route 57 (SR-57) to the west (excluding the parcel at the southwest corner of Katella Avenue and Douglass Road), the Santa Ana River to the east, the confluence of the SR-57 and Santa Ana River to the south, and the Southern California Edison easement to the north. Off -site improvement areas include the State Route (SR-57) northbound Katella Avenue off -ramp and intersection, SR-57 souhbound Ball Road off -ramp and intersection, and dedication and improvements to River Road. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of the proposed ocV!BE project (DEV2020- 00125) consisting of the following: 1,922,776 square feet (s.f.) of commercial uses including entertainment and commercial indoor and outdoor recreation venues (including new indoor and outdoor live performance theaters, bars and nightclubs, bowling lanes, dancing venues, an amphitheater and outdoor seasonal events), retail, and restaurant uses including the existing Honda Center; 961,055 s.f. of office uses including the existing Arena Corporate Center; 250,000 s.f. of institutional uses including the existing Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC); 1,500 residential dwelling units including 195 affordable dwelling units proposed in connection with a Density Bonus request; parks and open space including a new public park (Meadow Park); parking areas; pedestrian bridges crossing Katella Avenue and Douglass Road; and, changes to the roadway network (including a new public street between Katella Avenue and Ball Road proposed to be named River Road, the abandonment of Douglass Road between Katella Avenue and Cerritos Avenue and new private streets). Following are the proposed applications associated with this request: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA2020-00532): The applicant requests to amend the General Plan Land Use, Circulation and Green Elements to change the designation of parcels located north of Katella Avenue from Office -Low (approximately 31 acres) and Open Space (approximately 8 acres) to Mixed -Use Urban Core; modify the total amount of development permitted in the Platinum Triangle to increase the amount of residential development to 17,840 dwelling units, increase the amount of commercial development to 6,195,019 s.f., decrease the amount of office development to 11,659,338 s.f. and decrease the amount of institutional development to 250,000 s.f.; remove a portion of Douglass Road between Katella Avenue and Cerritos Avenue; add a new street named River Road between Katella Avenue and Ball Road (this includes Phoenix Club Drive south of Ball Road which is proposed to be renamed River Road); add a new approximately 4-acre Public Park (Meadow Park); amend the Bicycle Master Plan to reflect bicycle facility changes associated with the proposed removal and addition of streets; and, revise maps, figures, text, and tables throughout the General Plan to reflect these changes. PLATINUM TRIANGLE MASTER LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT (PTMLUP) (MIS2020- 00739): The applicant requests to amend the PTMLUP to rename the ARTIC District to the Transit District; expand the boundaries of the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone by approximately 8 acres, change boundaries of the ARTIC (Transit), Katella Sub -Area D, Office and Arena Districts; modify the permitted amount of development within the PTMU Overlay Zone to up to 17,840 residential dwelling units, 6,195,019 s.f. of commercial development, 11,659,338 s.f. of office development and 250,000 s.f. of institutional development; add a new appendix for the ocV!BE Sign and Identity Program; and, revise figures, text, and tables throughout the PTMLUP associated with this request. RECLASSIFICATION (RCL2020-00333): The applicant proposes to reclassify parcels to apply the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone to the existing C-G (General Commercial) Zone on approximately 8 acres, within the proposed Arena District north of Katella Avenue. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 15 of 33 ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS (ZCA2020-00174): The applicant requests modifications to Chapter 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone); Chapter 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations); Chapter 18.40 (General Development Standards); Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) and, Chapter 18.62 (Administrative Reviews). The proposed amendments are to amend use classifications, District names, development intensities, development standards, and procedures to allow development within the Arena and Transit Districts in the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone. SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICTS AMENDMENTS: The applicant requests to amend Chapters 4.04.400 (ARTIC Special Sign District), 4.04.401 (Arena/Stadium Special Sign District) and 4.08.020 (Advertising Signs Along Freeways) and to add Chapter 4.04.402 (Arena Special Sign District) of Title 4 (Business Regulation) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to reflect proposed on- and off -site advertising signs for the ocV!be project and to adopt Coordinated Sign Programs for each Special Sign District. AMENDED AND RESTATED FACILITY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS: The applicant requests approval of the Honda Center Amended and Restated Facility Management Agreement between the City as owner and Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (AAM) as manager; and, the Amended and Restated Facility Management Agreement between the City as owner and ATCM, LLC (an affiliate of AAM and controlled by H&S Ventures, LLC) as manager, for the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) as guaranteed by AAM pursuant to a Guaranty of Payment and Performance in favor of the City. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DAG2020-00004): The applicant requests a development agreement between the City of Anaheim and Anaheim Real Estate Partners, LLC which includes approval of a Master Site Plan (MIS2020-00751), an exchange of land between the City of Anaheim and Anaheim Real Estate Partners, LLC to adjust boundaries, the commitment to provide various public benefits including construction of two parks, and reconfigure parcels to facilitate development pursuant to the Master Site Plan, and a request for Density Bonus and Development Incentives pursuant to Chapter 18.52 (Housing Incentives) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. FINAL SITE PLAN (FSP2020-00004): The applicant requests approval of a final site plan, which encompasses approximately 10.23 acres north of Katella Avenue in the Arena District, Sub -Area B, to construct two six -level parking structures (Parking Decks B and C) with 4,538 parking spaces and a 12,885 s.f., three-story security hub for police and security office space. FINAL SITE PLAN (FSP2020-00005): The applicant requests approval of a final site plan, which encompasses approximately 5.93 acres north of Katella Avenue in the Arena District, Sub -Area B, to construct 221,413 s.f. of commercial uses including an indoor live performance theater and outdoor entertainment areas; retail, and indoor and outdoor restaurant space; 154,605 s.f. of office uses; a private Urban Park (plaza); and, an outdoor Paseo (pedestrian corridor) adjacent to the Urban Park and Honda Center. FINAL SITE PLAN (FSP2020-00006): The applicant requests approval of a final site plan, which encompasses approximately 1.64 acres north of Katella Avenue in the Arena District, Sub -Area C, to construct 33,830 s.f. of commercial uses including a new lobby entrance to the west side of the Honda Center, retail shops, and, restaurants with indoor and outdoor dining areas. FINAL SITE PLAN (FSP2020-00007): The applicant requests approval of a final site plan, which encompasses approximately 2.93 acres north of Katella Avenue, east of the Honda Center, and adjacent to the new public road (River Road) in the Arena District, Sub -Area C, to construct a five -level parking structure (Parking Deck D) with 1,190 parking spaces. FINAL SITE PLAN (FSP2020-00008): The applicant requests approval of a final site plan, which encompasses approximately 7.77 acres within the Southern California Edison easement, adjacent to Phoenix Club Drive (to be renamed River Road) in the Arena District, City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 16 of 33 Sub -Area A, to construct a surface parking lot with approximately 938 employee parking spaces. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP2010-05492) AMENDMENT: The applicant requests an amendment to the conditional use permit relating to parking and circulation for ARTIC. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: A request to permit the following conditionally permitted uses within the ocV!BE project including Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing, Alcoholic Beverage Sales -Off -Sale and On -Sale, Bars and Nightclubs, Entertainment Venues, Recreation Commercial -Outdoor and -Indoor, Retail Sales -Outdoor, and Wine Bar. MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: A request to permit the ocV!BE Coordinated Sign Program, Murals, and Valet Parking. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM NO. 19153): The applicant requests approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 19153, which encompasses approximately 63 acres north of Katella Avenue in the Arena District, to subdivide existing lots into 16 numbered lots (including two air -space lots) for the purpose of commercial development and seven lettered lots for private streets (Douglass Road, Stanley Cup Way, and Cerritos Avenue) including landscape areas, and to dedicate public streets right-of-way (Katella Avenue and River Road). STREET NAME CHANGE: A request to rename Phoenix Club Drive between Ball Road and the proposed extension of Cerritos Avenue. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City Council will consider whether Addendum No. 11 to Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339 (FSEIR No. 339), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMP) No. 106C and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan No. 383 (MMP No. 383), together with other previously approved environmental documents for development in the Platinum Triangle area, is the appropriate environmental documentation for the project. ISSUANCE OF LEASE REVENUE BONDS BY THE ANAHEIM PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY: In accordance with Government Code Section 6586.5, the City Council will consider the possible execution, sale and delivery of lease revenue bonds by the Anaheim Public Financing Authority in order to finance certain public capital improvements of the City, including, but not limited to, parking facilities, display and signage equipment, facilities for safety services, park and plaza improvements, public access and right of ways, public roads, landscaping, rail crossings, electric grid upgrades, utilities, traffic signals and other public improvements necessary for the development currently known as "ocV!BE." ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Recommended City Council approval of the project and approved Resolution Nos. PC2022-079, PC2022-080, PC2022-081 (as amended), PC2022-082. VOTE: 5-0 (Vice Chairperson Kring and Commissioners Heywood, Mouawad, Perez, and White voted yes. Commissioners Vadodaria and Meeks absent.) (Planning Commission meeting of August 29, 2022). A. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-097 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting Addendum No. 11 to the previously -certified AGR-13774 Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report AGR-1464.V.A No. 339 (Addendum No. 11) and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 383 (MMP No. 383), and AGR-11312.A determining that said Addendum No. 11 and MMP No. 383, together with other previously- AGR-13775 approved environmental documents for development in the Platinum Triangle serve as the appropriate environmental documentation for the OC Vibe Mixed -Use Project DEV2020- 00125 (General Plan Amendment (GPA2020-00532); PTMLUP Amendment (MIS2020- 000739); Reclassification (RCL2020-00333); Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA2020-00174); Special Sign Districts Amendments; Development Agreement (DAG2020-00004) including a Master Site Plan (MMIS2020-00751), Density Bonus and Development Incentives and Deviation from Engineering Standard Details; Final Site Plans (FSP2020-00004, 2020-00005, City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 17 of 33 2020-00006, 2020-00007, and 2020-00008); Conditional Use Permit No. 2010-05492 Amendment; Conditional Use Permit; Minor Conditional Use Permit; Tentative Tract Map No. 19153 including Street Name Change; collectively, the "Proposed Project) (OC Vibe Mixed - Use Project DEV 2020-00125). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-098 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the General Plan of the City of Anaheim (General Plan Amendment No. 2020-00532) (DEV2020-00125) RESOLUTION NO. 2022-099 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, and making findings in connection therewith (Miscellaneous Case No. 2020-00739) (DEV2020-00125). ORDINANCE NO. 6537 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Zoning Map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to Zoning (Reclassification No. 2020-00333) (DEV2020-00125) [reclassifying a portion of the Project Site from the "C-G" General Commercial zone to apply the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay zone]. ORDINANCE NO. 6538 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Chapters 18.20 (Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone); 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations); 18.40 (General Development Standards); 18.60 (Procedures); 18.62 (Administrative Reviews); of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Zoning Code Amendment No. 2020-00174) (DEV2020-00125). ORDINANCE NO. 6539 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the Development Agreement No. 2020-00004 by and between the City of Anaheim and Anaheim Real Estate Partners, LLC, and authorizing the Mayor Pro Tern to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City (DEV2020-00125). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-100 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Final Site Plan No. 2020-00004 of the Master Site Plan approved in connection with Development Agreement No. 2020-00004 (Final Site Plan No. 2020-00004) (DEV2020-00125). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-101 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Final Site Plan No. 2020-00005 of the Master Site Plan approved in connection with Development Agreement No. 2020-00004 (Final Site Plan No. 2020-00005) (DEV2020-00125). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-102 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Final Site Plan No. 2020-00006 of the Master Site Plan approved in connection with Development Agreement No. 2020-00004 (Final Site Plan No. 2020-00006) (DEV2020-00125). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-103 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Final Site Plan No. 2020-00007 of the Master Site Plan approved in connection with Development Agreement No. 2020-00004 (Final Site Plan No. 2020-00007) (DEV2020-00125). City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 18 of 33 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-104 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Final Site Plan No. 2020-00008 of the Master Site Plan approved in connection with Development Agreement No. 2020-00004 (Final Site Plan No. 2020-00008) (DEV2020-00125). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-105 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving an Amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 2010-05492, and making certain findings in connection therewith (DEV2020-00125) (2626 East Katella Avenue). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-106 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Conditional Use Permit relating to sales of alcoholic beverages, entertainment venues, recreation commercial uses, and retail sales, and making certain findings in connection therewith (DEV2020-00125). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-107 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Minor Conditional Use Permit for the OC Vibe Coordinated Sign Program, murals and valet parking, and making certain findings in connection therewith (DEV2020-00125). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-108 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Tentative Tract Map No. 19153 (DEV2020-00125). ORDINANCE NO. 6540 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM adding Section 4.04.402 (Arena Special Sign District) to Chapter 4.04 (Outdoor Advertising Signs and Structures — General) of Title 4 (Business Regulation) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. ORDINANCE NO. 6541 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Section 4.04.400 (ARTIC Special Sign District) of Chapter 4.04 (Outdoor Advertising Signs and Structures — General) of Title 4 (Business Regulation) of the Anaheim Municipal Code. ORDINANCE NO. 6542 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Section 4.04.401 (Arena/Stadium Special Sign District) of Chapter 4.04 (Outdoor Advertising Signs and Structures — General) of Title 4 (Business Regulation) of the Anaheim Municipal Code and determining that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) and 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and because it is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines. ORDINANCE NO. 6543 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Section 4.08.020 (Advertising Signs Along Freeways — Restricted) of the Anaheim Municipal Code for consistency with the Special Sign Districts established by Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 4.04.400 (Transit Special Sign District), 4.04.401 (Stadium Special Sign District) and 4.04.402 (Arena Special Sign District). RESOLUTION NO. 2022-109 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM changing the name of Phoenix Club Drive to River Road (DEV2020- 00125). City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 19 of 33 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-110 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM declaring a portion of City -owned property "exempt" surplus lands pursuant to Government Code Section 54221(f)(1)(C) (portions of APN Nos. 253-521-34, 232- 072-06, and 232-072-07). Approve the Honda Center Amended and Restated Facility Management Agreement dated July 1, 2022 with Anaheim Arena Management, LLC for the management and operation of the Honda Center facility for a base term through 2053 with four five-year extensions, including that the National Hockey League hockey team shall be called the Anaheim Ducks with a term concurrent with the Facility Management Agreement and two new sources of financing including Taxable Lease Revenue Bonds and Arena Special Sign District revenue to, amongst other items, fund improvements at Honda Center as listed in the Development Agreement. Approve the Amended and Restated Facility Management Agreement for the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) dated July 1, 2022 with ATCM, LLC for management and operation of the ARTIC Site for a term through 2053 with four five-year extensions. Approve the District Sign Agreement with Anaheim Arena Management, LLC for District Sign Revenues. B. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-111 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE AGR-13776 CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the execution and delivery by the City of a Site Lease, a AGR- Ground Lease, a Lease Agreement, a First Amendment to Lease Agreement, a Master 13776.0.1 Indenture, a Fixed Rate Supplemental Indenture, a Variable Rate Supplemental Indenture, a AGR- Bond Purchase Contract, a Revolving Bond Purchase Agreement, an Accounts Agreement, a 13776.0.2 Recognition and Acknowledgement Agreement and a Continuing Disclosure Agreement in AGR- connection with the issuance of Anaheim Public Financing Authority Lease Revenue Bonds 13776.0.2.1 (Anaheim Arena Improvement Project), approving the issuance of the Lease Revenue Bonds AGR- in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $400,000,000, authorizing the distribution 13776.0.3 of a Preliminary Official Statement and an Official Statement and authorizing the execution of AGR- necessary documents and certificates and related actions (related to Public Financing 13776.0.4 Authority Agenda Item No. 26). AGR 13776.0.5 Planning and Building Director Ted White reported the item is the consideration of the ocV!BE AGR- Project. He noted the Planning Commission recommended approval by a 5-0 vote on August 29, 13776.0.6 2022. He provided a brief overview of the project which covers 100 acres and includes the Honda AGR- Center, the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC), the Arena Corporate 13776.0.7 Center office buildings, as well as other office and industrial buildings and surface parking lots. He AGR- advised the property is bounded by the 57 Freeway to the west, the Santa Ana River to the east, the 13776.0.8 City of Orange to the east, and the Southern California Edison easement to the north. He noted the AGR- project site does not include the Ayres Hotel. He advised the project site is located within the 13776.0.9 Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan that lays out the goals and policies for the area and acts as AGR- a blueprint for development. He reported the area has various property zoning restrictions and is in 13776.0.10 the ARTIC and Arena Districts of the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone. AGR- 13776.0.11 Mr. White reported the applicant proposes to develop the ocV!BE Project as a world -class, mixed -use lifestyle and residential neighborhood. He advised the project includes an approximately 5,700-seat live performance theater, 1,500 residential apartment units, including 195 affordable units, two (2) hotels with a total of 550 rooms, an approximately four (4) acre public park, private parks and open space, office buildings, restaurants, and entertainment venues, and an approximately 6,000 seat City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 20 of 33 outdoor amphitheater. He provided details of each of the area's potential uses. He reported the project includes over 11,000 parking spaces, including 3,300 spaces dedicated to the two hotels, residential uses, and ARTIC. He advised that more than 8,000 shared public parking spaces would be available in four (4) parking structures and a surface lot for employees. Mr. White reported that a Shared Parking Analysis was prepared to determine the appropriate number of parking spaces given the unique characteristics of the project. He advised the analysis concluded that there would be a peak parking demand of 5,061 spaces on a typical non-event weekday and up to 8,144 on a peak event weekday, including employee parking. He explained this would be satisfied by a shared parking supply of 8,212 spaces. He advised the Honda Center and the proposed concert hall, amphitheaters, and club venues would be limited to a total capacity of 25,000 customers unless otherwise approved by the City. He reported the project would have a Parking Management Plan during major events and would include relocating employee parking when necessary to accommodate parking demand. He noted parking for the two hotels, residences, and ARTIC would remain separate. Mr. White reported a 4-acre park called Meadow Park is proposed in the transit district where the current ARTIC parking lot exists. He advised it would have three (3) main lawns and would have meandering pathways to connect visitors to ARTIC, the Santa Ana River Trail, and the Honda Center. He stated that it would be a publicly owned and privately maintained park. He reported other public spaces would be privately -owned but publically available. He advised that construction would take place in five (5) phases over 10 years with demolition phased to minimize disruption. He provided an overview of each phase in detail. Mr. White reported many amendments to the regulatory framework documents are required for the project. He advised General Plan Amendments include changes to the Land Use Element, Circulation Element, Green Element, and Bicycle Master Plan. He advised changes to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan include modifying and renaming district boundaries, creating "sub -areas" consistent with the Project Master Site Plan, updating permitted development intensities, and adding ocV!BE Sign and Identity Program as Appendix. He advised changes to the Zoning Map include applying the PTMU Overlay Zone to the portions of the project site. Lastly, he advised there is a request to rename Phoenix Club Drive to River Road at the time of construction of the new road. Mr. White reported the project also requires changes to the Zoning Code and includes updating existing PTMU Overlay Zone District Names and Boundaries, modifying permitted land uses, developing special event permits, creating public convenience or necessity procedures, and allowing an administrative review of parking requirements for hotels with dedicated rideshare parking and loading areas. He noted that the Resort Area also includes similar provisions. Mr. White reported the Zoning Code requires a Development Agreement (DA) that has a term of 20 years. He reported public benefits with the DA include affordable housing, public infrastructure improvements, ongoing maintenance obligations of public and private facilities, $5,000,000 Offsite Park Contribution Fee, construction and maintenance of a 4-acre public park and approximately 4.7- acre private park, approximately $80,000,000 in Development Impact Fees, City revenue from Sales, Property, and Transient Occupancy Taxes, and production of housing in furtherance of the City's Housing Element goals. He advised the DA would require the developer to provide improvements to the Honda Center, construction of parking structures, and privately built and maintained roadway connections. He noted the developer is obligated to provide improvements to ARTIC including relocated surface parking, a publicly accessible parking garage and pedestrian bridge, a relocated passenger drop-off and bus shuttle turn -around area, and a dedicated public pedestrian enhanced walkway leading from ARTIC to the Honda Center. He advised the applicant requests approval of a City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 21 of 33 Master Site Plan that outlines the proposed development for the project site, reflects the major components outlined in the staff report, and is implemented through final site plans. Mr. White reported a significant project component is the provision of affordable housing using housing incentives as provided by state law and the City's Zoning Code including a project density bonus. He advised the applicant proposes to provide 5% of the base units to be affordable to very - low -income households authorizing the applicant to increase the project density up to a maximum of 20%, which would allow up to 1,541 units. He advised the applicant and City have executed a Housing Incentives Memorandum that specifies a total of 195 affordable housing units to be developed as part of the project, including 65 very low-income, 65 low-income, and 65 moderate - income units with 35 moderate -income units to be constructed in Phase 2, and the remainder of the units to be constructed in Phase 3. He reported the memorandum also provides for an option to build all or a portion of the affordable housing off -site, within a'/ mile of the project boundary and within or adjacent to the Platinum Triangle. He advised the applicant would be obligated to increase the number of affordable housing units to be constructed from 195 units to 225 units if an off -site location is provided and requires City approval of a General Plan Amendment, PTMU amendment, or reclassification to a residential zone. He noted the 225 units would include 65 very -low income units, 80 low-income units, and 80 moderate income units. Mr. White reported the project requires an ARTIC Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment to reflect the updated project design and provision of parking spaces. He advised the CUP was approved in 2012 to construct ARTIC, which includes a 68,000-square-foot transit building and 456 surface parking spaces. He noted that, in addition, 221 spaces for ARTIC are located south of the railroad corridor and 405 are located west of the 57 Freeway. He reported the City is obligated by an agreement with Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) to provide no fewer than 900 surface parking spaces for ARTIC. He advised that the applicant requests to replace the parking lot north of ARTIC with Meadow Park and an amphitheater and provided an overview of proposed changes. He advised interim parking plans to maintain the minimum number of parking spaces during project construction have been developed to provide for the ongoing operation and contractual agreements with OCTA. Mr. White reported the request also includes a CUP for project land uses for various uses within the project. He advised uses include Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing, Alcoholic Beverage Sales -Off - Sale and On -Sale, Bars and Nightclubs, Entertainment Venues, Recreation Commercial -Outdoor and -Indoor, Retail Sales -Outdoor, and Wine Bar. He noted Conditions of Approval have been incorporated to ensure final details including ensuring that security and operation plans are submitted for Police and Planning Department review before the commencement of businesses serving alcohol. Mr. White reported the applicant requests a minor CUP to permit the ocV!BE Coordinated Sign Program, Murals, and Valet Parking as part of project parking operations. He provided a brief overview of the types of signage for the project. He explained the advertising signs visible to the public right of way are included in the Master Site Plan Exhibits but would be considered as part of the Arena Special Sign District and Transit Sign District. Mr. White reported a Tentative Tract Map is proposed for the project encompassing 63 acres north of Katella Avenue and would subdivide the property into 23 lots for commercial development, private streets, and landscape areas. He explained the purpose of the map was to reconfigure parcels to facilitate development. He reported the applicant and the City propose a minor land exchange. He advised the City would receive 119,180 square feet of land and the applicant would receive 109,050 square feet of land to facilitate the Honda Center expansion and development south of Katella Avenue. He advised the Surplus Land Act requires a city to declare "exempt surplus land" when City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 22 of 33 surplus land is to be exchanged for another property necessary for the City's use. He noted this act would fulfill surplus land requirements. Mr. White reported the applicant requests approval of five Final Site Plans to implement the Master Site Plan and for development which includes Parking Decks B and C, an indoor live performance theater and outdoor entertainment areas, retail and indoor and outdoor restaurant space, a private Urban Park, over 30,000 square feet of commercial uses including a new entrance to the west side of Honda Center, retail shops, and restaurants with indoor and outdoor dining areas, Parking Deck D, and a surface parking lot with approximately 938 employee parking spaces. Mr. White reported the proposed Project Sign Program requires revisions to the Special Sign Districts that allow for offsite advertising under the State's Outdoor Advertising Act. He explained this proposal splits the Arena/Stadium Special Sign District into the Arena Special Sign District and the Stadium Special Sign District. He noted no changes are proposed to the Stadium Special Sign District. He advised the Arena Special Sign District would include two (2) Digital Spectaculars, one (1) parking garage wall -mounted Digital Sign, and 16 wall -mounted Static Advertising Signs around the periphery of the project site. He advised that the reported amendments to the ARTIC Special Sign District include renaming to the Transit Special Sign District, one (1) Digital Spectacular, and six (6) wall - mounted Static Advertising Signs. Mr. White reported the project also includes amendments to the Honda Center and ARTIC Facility Management Agreements (FMA). He advised the Honda Center FMA extends the term of the FMA through 2053 and provides for four, five-year extensions. He noted that the amended FMA also includes two (2) new sources of financing including Taxable Lease Revenue Bonds and Arena Special Sign District revenue. He reported it increases the Excess Commercial General Liability insurance coverage to $70,000,000. He reported the ARTIC FMA extends the terms through 2053 and provides for four, five-year extensions, permits additional outdoor advertising signs and applies revenues to fund ARTIC improvements, and establishes a capital reserve account to be funded with excess net revenues of up to $150,000 per year. Mr. White reported an Addendum to the previously certified Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 339 has been prepared to determine whether any significant environmental impacts which were not identified in the previously approved CEQA documents would result or whether previously identified significant impacts would be substantially more severe. He reported the Addendum concludes that the proposed project would not result in significant new or more severe impacts and/or the requirement for additional mitigation measures. He noted, as a result, the project does not require the preparation of a subsequent EIR or supplemental EIR. Lastly, he advised that Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan No. 383 has been created to mitigate the impacts of the Proposed Project and includes all applicable mitigation measures from Mitigation Monitoring Program 106C and previously approved CEQA documents. Mr. White reported that late this afternoon, UNITE HERE submitted a written public comment and he noted that staff does not agree with their assertions that additional environmental analysis is required. He advised they expressed concern with inconsistency with the Housing Element, CEQA, energy impacts, greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Mr. White reported the City retained Economic and Planning Systems (EPS) along with Victus Advisors to prepare a Financial Feasibility and Fiscal Benefit Assessment. He advised the assessment identified the proposed sign program as an integral part of the value of the project and a necessary component to its financial feasibility and notes the value of seeking state/federal grant funding, the potential use of local Anaheim Tourism Improvement District (ATID) revenues, and the City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 23 of 33 use of park impact fees from residential development within the project, to help defray the costs of public facilities south of Katella Avenue. He advised EPS also estimated annual fiscal revenues to the City of $1,400,000 in sales taxes, $3,000,000 in property taxes, and $4,800,000 in transient occupancy taxes (TOT), for a total annual revenue of $9,200,000. He noted the project would also yield an additional $1,140,000 from the sign revenue starting in Year 11. Finance Director Debbie Moreno reported that Item 25-B and Item 26 relate to the issuance of Lease Revenue Bonds by the Anaheim Public Financing Authority to finance certain public improvements for the proposed project. She advised the proceeds of the bonds are expected to be applied to finance the costs of Parking Decks B, C, and/or D. She noted that this finance structure has been used by the City and the Authority for prior financings including the Taxable Lease Revenue Bonds 2003 Series A, which were issued to refinance the costs of certain improvements to the Honda Center. Ms. Moreno reported the bonds would be payable from rental payments under a lease agreement; however, all lease payments would only be payable from revenues generated by the Honda Center and other sources are included in the definition of "Gross Revenues" under the Amended and Restated Facility Management Agreement and not from the City's General Fund. She reported the bonds are proposed to be issued in two series — a variable rate series and a fixed rate series. The aggregate maximum principal amount of the bonds, if approved, may not exceed $400,000,000. She provided a brief overview of the details of the variable and fixed rate series. Mr. White reported the proposed project would result in a mixed -use development that embraces the vision of the Platinum Triangle and compliments the existing sports and entertainment venues. He stated that staff recommends approval of the project. He thanked all the City staff and consultants who worked incredibly hard to get this project to this moment. DISCUSSION: Council Member Ma'ae thanked City staff for their hard work on the presentation and the project. Council Member Moreno echoed Council Member Ma'ae's comments and thanked staff for the presentation. He requested additional clarification of the changes to the Honda Center and ARTIC FMAs. Steve Mattas, Senior Principal of Meyers Nave, explained that both the Honda Center and ARTIC FMAs are largely the same agreements except for the extension of the terms to 2053 and the additional four, five-year extensions. He clarified additional changes to the Honda Center FMA including two new sources of financing including Taxable Lease Revenue Bonds and Arena Special Sign District revenue and an increase to the Excess Commercial General Liability insurance coverage to $70,000,000. He clarified that this insurance is paid for by the project. Council Member Moreno inquired if any of the revenue thresholds change for the City. Mr. Mattas explained they do not change, and the bonds would need to be repaid through the gross revenue. He summarized that some new debts are being incurred for public improvements but the City's revenue remains the same. Council Member Moreno inquired if there is a City subsidy for this project and if there is any change to the formula that determines the City's revenue from the FMAs. Ms. Moreno confirmed the formulas have not changed and noted the City has not yet shared in revenue from the Honda Center, but this puts the City in a better position once shared revenues begin. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 24 of 33 Council Member Moreno inquired if 100% of the TOT from the new revenues would go towards the City's General Fund. Ms. Moreno confirmed the City would receive 100% of the revenue but if the Resort Bonds issued in 1996 are still outstanding and the City is subject to Lease Payment Measurement Revenues (LPMR), then an amount equal to 20% would be remanded to the Trustee until the bonds are paid off. Council Member Moreno inquired if other revenues from sales and property tax would go directly to the General Fund. Ms. Moreno confirmed this is correct and would be similar to any other business doing business in the City. Council Member Moreno inquired how the bonds are repaid from the revenues remaining after TOT is paid. Mr. Mattas explained the remaining funds would go into the FMA waterfall formula. He noted TOT does not flow through the waterfall and goes directly to the City. Council Member Moreno noted the California Density Bonus Law states that new developments would no longer be required to have parking if they are near transit and inquired if there are any implications of that new law on this project. Mr. Mattas clarified the project does include parking and did not take advantage of the reduction in parking as per the State's Density Bonus Law. Council Member Moreno inquired if more affordable housing could be gained by the developer taking advantage of the reduced parking requirements. Mr. White recommended Council Member Moreno defer the question to the applicant but noted it is a vested entitlement that the City is getting from the Development Agreement. He confirmed the bill intends to make building affordable housing more affordable for developers. Council Member Moreno inquired if removing the parking requirements would provide additional affordability for building affordable housing. Mr. White commented that he feels the City's parking code is too high and he has been approached by developers seeking a parking variance. He believes that overall there is a greater interest in the number of units than there is in reducing parking spaces. He explained many developers still want to provide a significant amount of parking spaces based on the market demands. Council Member Moreno inquired if there was any displacement of residents or businesses if the project is approved. Mr. White confirmed there is no displacement of residential units but there are a few small businesses that would be transitioning once their leases expire but no concerns have been raised to staff. He noted this is a multi -year project and most businesses would have ample opportunity to relocate. Council Member Moreno expressed support for the sustainability of the project and requested it is highlighted as a public benefit for future projects. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired if the Lease Revenue Bonds are repaid by the project revenues themselves by the project proponent with the City receiving all the tax revenue as entitled. Ms. Moreno confirmed that was correct. Council Member Valencia expressed excitement to see the project come to the City. He inquired if the project impacts public safety resources and, if so, if there is a mitigation plan. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 25 of 33 City Manager Jim Vanderpool reported the City would have several years to dig into public safety resources but agreed that it needs to be addressed. He noted the revenues obtained from the project would provide the City with the resources to address the public safety impact of the project effectively. Council Member Valencia noted that he is not a fan of the aesthetics of the signs and inquired if there were any changes made to City codes that allow for the project signage. Mr. White confirmed some things are being changed but nothing is being changed from prohibited to permitted. He advised that in 2017 City Council approved the Arena/Stadium Special Sign District, which was to take advantage of State law for certain types of uses for stadiums, arenas, and transit facilities to generate revenue income. He explained today's action breaks the Sign District into two (2) separate pieces to allow for more detail in the plans. He confirmed throughout the rest of the City billboards are prohibited and would continue to be so. Council Member Valencia inquired if the City has any latitude on what is broadcasted and marketed on those billboards. Mr. Mattas confirmed there are limitations on what can be placed on the outdoor advertising signs and they are limited to advertising businesses and events in the area. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil inquired if any member of the dais needed to report ex-parte communication with the applicant. All members of City Council, except Council Member Ma'ae, reported ex-parte communication with the applicant. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil opened the public hearing. Dan Young, Executive Director of ocV!BE, provided a brief overview of the vision of the project including challenges with the street system, infrastructure changes, traffic flows, and community needs. He reported the project is the product of four years of work. He shared that they have had an extraordinarily positive and professional experience with City staff, who are experts at what they do and defend the interests of the community very well. He thanked Mr. Vanderpool and the staff for the quality job they have done to shape the project. Mr. Young reported this multi -billion -dollar investment would result in a 100-acre campus with 1,000,000 square feet of office space, 1,500 residential units, and 30,000 seats of live entertainment, surround by 30 restaurants and two (2) hotels. He noted that what makes the Master Plan unique is the area is linked by a series of free and publically accessible parks, paseos, bridges, and plazas. Mr. Young reported the project would provide approximately $10,000,000 per year to the General Fund and confirmed no General Fund subsidies have been requested for the project. He noted the City and its restaurants and hotels would benefit through the conventions he believes ocV!BE would attract through marketing. He reported the project incorporates affordable housing and has provided incentives to increase the commitment to affordable housing. Mr. Young expressed appreciation for the comments received about ocV!BE's community outreach process and noted their goal was to go well beyond mere transparency and actively engage with the community, which has helped shape and change the project. He noted the tagline for ocV!BE is "exclusively for everyone" and would leverage technology to provide the best experience for visitors. He noted that another mission of the project was to bring the diverse communities of Orange County together on the campus to celebrate, art, food, music, and culture. Mr. Young reported the Samueli Foundation is a long supporter of non -profits in Anaheim. He advised the project would provide many ways to expand its partnership with the community and link them to City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 26 of 33 community needs. He noted a sign of ocV!BE's commitment to the community was by keeping the name Anaheim in the Anaheim Ducks and declaring that the team would stay in Anaheim for the long term. He advised it was done without regulation or negotiation. He reported the parking lot at the Honda Center was turned into a large-scale food distribution center during the worst of the pandemic and would continue to build on its record of giving in Anaheim. He acknowledged the attendance of ocV!BE's construction partners at the meeting, many of which are Anaheim residents who will enjoy the benefits of working on the project, and thanked them for their support. He noted ocV!BE believes in civic rejuvenation by partnering businesses with local government, non -profits, philanthropy, and labor. Mr. Young reported the project is ambitious regarding open space and sustainability and advised they plan to explore every possible technology, including solar and participation in the City's Green Power Program, to deliver a state-of-the-art sustainable community that exceeds regulatory standards. He advised there are 20 acres of parks and open spaces and believes it meets the City's vision of the Platinum Triangle as a community gathering space. Mr. Young advised ocV!BE desires to build this new master -planned community as a viable enterprise that can be a platform for civic rejuvenation in Anaheim and a fun place for many years to come. He encouraged City Council to approve the project. Brian Myers, Senior Director of Entitlement, expressed pride regarding their work with the community and noted it was a remarkable effort. He noted this has truly been a public -private partnership built on trust. He expressed appreciation for the professionalism of City staff who met with them regularly to get the project moving forward. He expressed pride for being able to represent the Samueli Family this evening and for their influence on the project. Mr. Myers addressed previous questions regarding affordable housing and parking that were posed earlier. He reported a provision in the State's Density Bonus Law provided for an exemption on parking, which they have taken advantage of to create more expensive podium parking. He explained the way they were able to bring podium parking back into the feasibility and provide affordable housing was the parking reduction. He noted they have purchased new properties, such as Phoenix Club and the Ball Road Basin, and intend to develop those properties with some residential units, including affordable housing, and would look to take advantage of some of the state standards at that time. William T. Ward, resident, reported that he has been a Union Carpenter for 13 years and is currently working in the Packing House District and has worked on several schools, Anaheim Convention Center expansion, as well as an extensive amount of work at Disneyland. He expressed support for the ocV!BE project that would allow him to be closer to home and spend his money in the community. Ernesto Medrano, Los Angeles and Orange County Building Trades Council, expressed support for the project and the activation of the Platinum Triangle that would be a huge economic and job generator for the City including over 10,000 construction jobs. He reported the LA/OC Building Council has been negotiating with ocV!BE to ensure a skilled and trained workforce on the project and noted they were close to completion. He encouraged City Council to approve the project so the skilled tradespeople of Anaheim could get to work. Bridget McConaughy, UNITE HERE Local 11, encouraged City Council to oppose the project. She questioned why the project swaps valuable land to provide parking that serves the applicant's commercial needs. She noted the project rezones 10 acres of City -owned property from Public Space to General Commercial to provide employee parking. She advised it is unclear why the City could not City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 27 of 33 provide both employee parking as well as housing onsite with underground grading for the parking garages and believed this could help the City better achieve its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) goals. She expressed concern that the area has not produced the housing units the City expected. She expressed concern that the City has allowed a private amphitheater within Meadow Park that would be allowed to be closed off at least 25 days per year for performances. She reported the addendums for greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) lack substantial analysis and ignore the fact that the project would severely impact the area's local service population, likely forcing employees into longer commutes. John DeCleene, resident, reported he could bike to work if the project was approved and expressed support for the project. He also noted that he is a proud IBEW union member and this project would provide local and great -paying jobs for residents. John Hanna, Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters, thanked the Samueli family for bringing this project to fruition. He thanked the development team for not requesting General Fund subsidies and for developing affordable housing without regulation or negotiation required. He noted this is the true display of a public -private partnership. Randy Wetmur, Ironworkers Local 416, noted another speaker was not able to attend because he had to get up at 2:00 A.M. to work a job in San Diego. He encouraged City Council to approve the project. David Peterson, IBEW, reported he is a second -year apprentice, expressed support for the ocV!BE project, and noted it would not only provide work for the union trades but for other residents of Anaheim. Wes Jones expressed support for the project, especially the affordable housing component, but expressed concern regarding the funding. He expressed concern regarding the issuing of bonds. He inquired about the vacancy rate of the units that have already been built in the Platinum Triangle and noted that City Council could not approve the project without knowing those numbers. Doug Mangione, IBEW, expressed support for the project and noted anyone working on the project would be proud to be involved. He thanked the development and construction teams for putting this amazing project together. Mazatl Tepehyolotzin encouraged City Council to support the removal of the name Colonists as the mascot for Anaheim High School. He noted national sports teams have moved to remove similar names that represent long-time negative representations of oppression, racism, and equality. He expressed support for the ocV!BE project. German Villa, resident, expressed support for the ocV!BE project that would allow him to work closer to home. He reported he worked on the ARTIC project and knows firsthand how beneficial it would be for his family. Luis Aleman, Orange County Labor Federation, expressed support for the ocV!BE project that includes affordable housing units and will be built by a skilled and trained workforce. He encouraged City Council to approve the project to support local skilled labor. Tony De Trinidad, Business Development Representative at the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, expressed support for the project on behalf of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 28 of 33 Mike Robbins reported the City is $2 billion in debt and noted the pay -to -play politics have buried Anaheim. He expressed concern regarding public safety resources and advised the City is already short 108 fire emergency personnel and 158 police officers. He encouraged City Council to consider taxing the tourists to pay for the additional public safety resources. He noted there would also need to be additional security personnel for these locations. Mr. Myers responded to the previous speaker from UNITE HERE and explained that the employee parking lot is currently leased from the City and its use is restricted by Southern California Edison. He advised that it is not suitable for anyone to build affordable housing in that location. He reported the project has taken on an enormous burden of managing, paying for, maintaining, and doing preserve replacement for all of the parks in the project including the City -owned park, the bike trails, and the public right of way related to those bike trails. He reported there is less than a 5% vacancy rate in the Platinum Triangle that is surveyed monthly. City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that a total of four (4) public comments were received electronically prior to 7:00 P.M. related to Public Hearing Item No. 25. [A final total of four (4) public comments were received electronically, distributed to the City Council, and made part of the official record]. — See Appendix. Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil closed the public hearing. DISCUSSION: Council Member Valencia inquired about long-term jobs and industries that the City could expect with this potential project. Mr. Myers reported they identified two areas of job production for the long-term that include 3,000 service jobs for food and entertainment and an additional 5,000 jobs for employers who are tenants of the buildings and expect that to be at all levels of income. He noted the hopes are not only to have local hires but to have local job training so residents could train through this system towards higher paying jobs. Council Member Valencia referenced the earlier comments from Mr. Medrano that the Los Angeles and Orange County Building Trades Council were negotiating in good faith. He inquired if Mr. Myers could confirm for the record that good faith negations have been taking place. Mr. Myers confirmed good -faith negotiations are taking place, there are a few items that would need to be resolved, but he felt it would be done in short order. He reported they have been working on negotiations for several months. Council Member Valencia inquired about immediately breaking ground and continuing the development regardless of the state of the economy. Mr. Myers explained they advanced plans and construction drawings because they want to start construction by January 2023. He advised they are committed to breaking ground almost immediately. He advised they are looking for a build -out in the 7- to 10-year range. Council Member Valencia expressed support for the community and economic benefits along with the jobs for the local workforce jobs this would provide to residents. He noted that he was impressed by the commitment to break ground immediately and also impressed by the commitment to continuing the project despite changes to the economy. He explained that commitment would allow the local workforce to continue working on the project independent of economic changes. He expressed support for the Anaheim Ducks keeping its hometown name and noted it is a clear representation of their pride in representing Anaheim. He expressed support for the project. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 29 of 33 Council Member Diaz requested clarification that the developer is requesting a $400,000,000 bond from J.P. Morgan and inquired if the City is liable for its repayment. Ms. Moreno confirmed the City would not be liable. Council Member Diaz recalled that during his campaign he highlighted the fact that Anaheim needs to diversify its economy and this project exemplifies that need. He expressed excitement for the project and noted it would be the gateway for Anaheim. He commended the developer for looking into every aspect of the project and for addressing every single issue. He thanked the development team for addressing each of his questions and concerns. He noted this is a partnership with the City and everyone would benefit. He expressed strong support for the project. Council Member Faessel thanked Mr. Meyer and Mr. Young for arranging the project so the Santa Ana River is not in the back. He hopes the Santa Ana River will look as it does in the renderings. He reported he has been engaged with this project for the last 4 years as it is located in his district. He thanked the development team for their community outreach. He reported he was on the General Planning Advisory Committee and this comes close to the model that was originally envisioned for the Platinum Triangle. Council Member Faessel inquired if the issuance of the bonds will increase the City's debt. Ms. Moreno explained the bonds would be reported similar to the existing debt on the Honda Center as conduit financing disclosed in the City's financial statements, but it is not the City's debt and therefore does not show up on the rest of the financial statements. She invited Brian Forbath with Stradling, Yocca, Carlson, & Rauth to provide a brief overview of the default process. Mr. Forbath explained that in the event of a default on the repayment of the bond, the FMA should have a default clause that allows the City to replace the Operator if they were unable to provide sufficient revenues. He confirmed there is no obligation of the City's General Fund to guarantee repayment. He also noted there are many additional reserves and revenues built into the system that protects the Honda Center from operating. Council Member Faessel noted there is a resolution to approve a street name change to rename Phoenix Club Drive to River Road. He inquired whether the language could be changed to leave as a name change in the future. Mr. Young explained that the timing of the street name change is important. He encouraged City Council to approve the name change to River Road for the sake of approval but noted it is the City's responsibility to rename the road. Council Member Faessel inquired if passing the resolution locks the City into keeping the name River Road. City Attorney Robert Fabela explained it locks the City into River Road unless further action is taken by City Council to rename it. MOTION: Council Member Faessel moved to approve Item 25-A, seconded by Council Member Diaz. DISCUSSION: Council Member Ma'ae expressed her support for the project and for the construction and long-term jobs that this project would bring to the City. She commended the development team for their community outreach. She agreed that all types of housing are needed in Anaheim. She noted that public -private partnerships build the best relationships. She thanked the Samueli family and Foundation for their approach to change and expressed support for the project. Council Member Moreno commented that Mr. Hanna's word to him is gold. He recalled an instance when Dreamer students in Anaheim had lost their battle and Mr. Hanna was right there to support them. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 30 of 33 Council Member Moreno expressed appreciation that a Community Workforce Agreement is being negotiated for trade workers but inquired about the approach for permanent employees. He inquired about a percentage breakdown of the income of the workforce. Mr. Young advised it was too early to provide that type of information but noted there is no question that every income range possible would be on that site. He reported they are talking to technology companies and there may be an opportunity to build Anaheim as the next tech hub of Orange County. He reported they have always paid a competitive wage and do regular surveys of surrounding employers. He explained Anaheim is a competitive market and they always look to exceed those wages. He explained their commitment to their employees is to support education and promotion opportunities and advised the vast majority would be able to rent or buy at market rate. Council Member Moreno inquired how many of those workers would be janitorial or hospitality staff. Mr. Young explained it would not be many but hesitated to provide a concrete number. He explained the apartments would probably employ more people than the concert hall. Council Member Moreno explained there is no denying that 98% of the City's children qualify for reduced lunch. He is thinking of those who are just a step before being homeless. He hoped the outcomes of investments could be worked on with the City and other non -profits. Mr. Young advised there is not a definitive program in place since it does not open for two (2) years but explained their philosophy is the commitment to helping people progress through jobs, keeping employees for the long term, and ensuring an inclusive and diverse workforce. He reported he grew up in Santa Ana and noted he is deeply committed to the success of the progress and the philosophy he just referenced. Council Member Moreno thanked Mr. Young for reaffirming their philosophy and noted it is very important for their residents. He reported meeting with an official from ocV!BE and advised them not to engage in the politics of the City and to engage with the professionals. He thanked Mr. Young for doing both. Council Member Moreno inquired about public safety resources and if the anticipated $10,000,000 in revenues would be enough to offset the additional needed resources. Mr. Vanderpool noted that the conversation is premature at this juncture, but staff would work with both the Police and Fire Departments and the employee groups to ensure a solution is developed for the safety of visitors and residents. Council Member Moreno inquired if staff is anticipating public safety agreements such as those that are in place for the Resort and the Honda Center. Mr. Mattas explained the Development Agreement does provide for a reimbursement provision for traffic management. Mr. Vanderpool advised those discussions would be on the table with the developer in the future. Council Member Moreno reported that 66% of the General Fund goes towards funding public safety so they would need to address the additional needs introduced by this project. Council Member Moreno inquired if there was contemplation to increase affordable housing. Mr. Young clarified they do not have the desire to offer any more affordable housing than what is on the table with this current project. He explained his job is to ensure the financial viability of the project. He City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 31 of 33 reported interest rates have doubled, they have gone through a pandemic, and are facing supply chain issues. He clarified they would like to have conversations with the City about affordable housing when they discuss the properties they have purchased for future development and look to get creative. Council Member Moreno referenced the recently canceled Angel Stadium deal where funds were pledged to help obtain additional State funds for affordable housing. He inquired if ocV!BE would be open to discussion on that topic. Mr. Young agreed they would be open to discussing that for future phases. He clarified the cost of providing affordable housing is costing the project $45,000,000. Council Member Moreno thanked ocV!BE for bringing many people together who do not normally agree and uniting them. Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil expressed support for the project and thanked the Samueli Foundation for its ongoing commitment and investment in Anaheim. He expressed excitement for what this would bring to the City. MOTION: Council Member Faessel moved to approve Item 25-A including 13 resolutions introducing seven (7) ordinances, and three (3) agreements, seconded by Council Member Diaz. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tern O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried; ordinances introduced. B. RESOLUTION NO. 2022-111 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the execution and delivery by the City of a Site Lease, a Ground Lease, a Lease Agreement, a First Amendment to Lease Agreement, a Master Indenture, a Fixed Rate Supplemental Indenture, a Variable Rate Supplemental Indenture, a Bond Purchase Contract, a Revolving Bond Purchase Agreement, an Accounts Agreement, a Recognition and Acknowledgement Agreement and a Continuing Disclosure Agreement in connection with the issuance of Anaheim Public Financing Authority Lease Revenue Bonds (Anaheim Arena Improvement Project), approving the issuance of the Lease Revenue Bonds in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $400,000,000, authorizing the distribution of a Preliminary Official Statement and an Official Statement and authorizing the execution of necessary documents and certificates and related actions (related to Public Financing Authority Agenda Item No. 26). MOTION: Council Member Faessel moved to approve Item No. 25-B, seconded by Council Member Ma'ae. DISCUSSION: Council Member Moreno inquired if the bonds would be used to build the parking structures, to which Ms. Moreno confirmed that was the intention. Council Member Moreno inquired if parking would be free to the public. Mr. Myers reported there would be no gate fee, but a parking fee would be embedded in the ticket for an entertainment event. Council Member Moreno inquired if there would be a time limit to the free parking. Mr. Myers explained the strategy is driven more by the customer experience than anything else because they do not want a queue to get into events. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 32 of 33 Council Member Moreno inquired if the parking structures are publically financed, privately built, and owned by the City. Mr. Mattas clarified Parking Deck D would be owned by the City and Parking Decks B and C would be in the lease -lease back arrangement. He clarified the parking structures are publically financed, privately built, and owned by the City. MOTION: Council Member Faessel moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2022-111 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the execution and delivery by the City of a Site Lease, a Ground Lease, a Lease Agreement, a First Amendment to Lease Agreement, a Master Indenture, a Fixed Rate Supplemental Indenture, a Variable Rate Supplemental Indenture, a Bond Purchase Contract, a Revolving Bond Purchase Agreement, an Accounts Agreement, a Recognition and Acknowledgement Agreement and a Continuing Disclosure Agreement in connection with the issuance of Anaheim Public Financing Authority Lease Revenue Bonds (Anaheim Arena Improvement Project), approving the issuance of the Lease Revenue Bonds in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $400,000,000, authorizing the distribution of a Preliminary Official Statement and an Official Statement and authorizing the execution of necessary documents and certificates and related actions, seconded by Council Member Ma'ae. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES — 6 (Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil and Council Members Diaz, Ma'ae, Moreno, Valencia, and Faessel); NOES — 0. Motion carried. At 9:56 P.M. Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil recessed the Anaheim City Council and reconvened the Anaheim Public Financing Authority. Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil reconvened the Anaheim City Council at 9:57 P.M REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS: None PUBLIC COMMENTS (non-aaenda items): None COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS: Council Member Faessel shared that he had an interesting and fun opportunity to join 34 St. Boniface Class of 1954 and 1955 students with his brother, David, and at the request of four -time author and former Anaheim Public Utilities employee Mike Pincho. He reported his attendance at the kick-off event/BBQ for the Sycamore Junior High School Public Safety Academy, the Boys and Girls Club Gala at Angel Stadium, and the Caterina's Club fundraiser. Council Member Moreno invited all to visit Muzeo's upcoming Houdini Unchained exhibit from October 8 through January 22, including lectures and events, as well as the current 58th Annual Anaheim Arts Association Juried Art Show through the end of October, encouraging the public to visit www.muzeo.ora for more information. Council Member Ma'ae addressed recent efforts by City staff to cleanup sites and provide services to the homeless but noted that staff has encountered issues working with Caltrans for access to the sites, She stated that she would be contacting State elected representatives to request that they communicate to Caltrans to be more responsive and encouraged her colleagues to do the same. COUNCIL AGENDA SETTING: Council Member Moreno clarified that the agenda request regarding street racing should also include street takeovers, as they are becoming a great problem as well. City Council Minutes of September 27, 2022 Page 33 of 33 Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil requested an agenda item to recognize November as Family Court Awareness Month. ADJOURNMENT: At 10:05 P.M., with no further business to conduct, Mayor Pro Tem O'Neil adjourned the City Council in memory of Leon Darrell Frerichs and Bryan Robert Gentile. Respectfully submitted, *sa ss, CMC City Clerk Jennifer L. Hall From: Mariaisabelle Garcia <mariaisabelleg@ken nedycommission.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 3:24 PM To: City Clerk Cc: rudibeb Brad West; Daisy Cruz; Cesar C Subject: [EXTERNAL] Kennedy Commission public comment 9/27/22 Attachments: KC letter Anaheim Lodge Motel Aquisition 9.27.22.doc Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Hello, please see attached Kennedy Commissions public comment regarding city council agenda item 3 on 09/27/22. Blessings, Marialsabelle Garcia Kennedy Commission Community Organizer mariai sab elleg gkennedycommission. org September 27, 2022 Mayor Pro Tem Trevor O'Neil Councilmembers Housing Authority City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 www.kennedycommission.org 17701 Cowan Ave., Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 (949) 250-0909 Re: Item 3. A RESOLUTION OF THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY approving the acquisition of the Anaheim Lodge Motel located at 837 S. Beach Boulevard Dear Mayor Pro Tem Trevor O'Neil and Councilmembers: The Kennedy Commission (the Commission) is a broad coalition of residents and community organizations that advocates for the production of homes affordable for families earning less than $27,000 annually in Orange County. Formed in 2001, the Commission has been successful in partnering and working with jurisdictions in Orange County to create effective policies that have led to the production of new homes affordable to low income working families. We submit public comments in support the Anaheim Housing Authority and the City of Anaheim in the acquisition of the Anaheim Lodge (Motel) for the creation of affordable housing for Extremely Low and Very Low Income. The acquisition and use of public lands needs to address the acute housing needs of low-income families struggling with the lack of affordable housing options. We urge the Agency and the City to clarify the purpose of the acquisition, the item states the purpose as "creating a mixed -use development inclusive of varying affordable housing opportunities utilizing Permanent Local Housing Allocation and/or Low Moderate Income Housing Asset funds". The City and Agency goal in using the local housing funds should be to leverage additional state and federal housing resources and create deeper affordability for the housing needs of lower income working families. In the acquisition of this property, the agency and city need to prioritize the creation of housing units that are 100% affordable to low, very low, and extremely low families. As highlighted in the City of Anaheim's latest Housing Element Annual Progress Report that was submitted to the California Housing and Community Development', the city has a deficit of affordable housing production. The report points out that the city has approved and permitted over 8,719 housing units during the current Housing Element period and only 369 (remaining RHNA for lower income is 1,794) have been in the affordability level of low and very low households. The vast majority of the housing units, 8,350, have been approved at moderate and above moderate -income levels (RHNA in above moderate has been exceeded by over 300%). With the current lack of affordable housing for low-income working families, it is imperative that the City of Anaheim prioritize affordable housing on this development. Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to further conversations regarding the use of agency owned to increase affordable housing opportunities for the lower income families in Anaheim. Very truly yours, ,µ Cesar Covarrubias Executive Director CC: California Department of Housing and Community Development, Division of Housing Policy Development 1 City of Anaheim, Housing Element Annual Progress Report, June 2022 Public Comment From: kathy tran Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2022 6:01 PM To: Public Comment; Theresa Bass; kathy tran; Council Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Regarding item #3 and #13 on agenda meeting September 27, 2022 Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Dear Mayor Pro Tern and City Council Members, Back on April 12, 2022, my neighbors and I stood in front of you to ask for the approval to request the Anaheim Lodge motel to construct an 8-foot-high block wall which abuts the residential properties along the western property line (Hayward. There were six Ayes and one abstention (Council Diaz). " We get the wall.... We get the wall....; We finally LEGALLY get the wall! An 8-foot block wall is legally recorded in Resolution No 2022-035 and DEV 2022-00007. That is exactly what I shouted out to all my neighbors, specially who live directly behind this motel and have been negatively impacted for decades. As of today, the City plans to acquire the Anaheim Lodge under Anaheim's Housing Authority. While I am 100% supportive of the city's efforts to purchase this dilapidated property, there is still active open code case (COD2022-02383) that has not been resolved- which is the requirement to build an 8-foot block wall along the western property line. Even though the Mayor and Councils Members approved for this block wall six months ago, there is still NO Wall. There is no evidence that the property owners have made any attempt to comply with the requirement that has been set forth by this city and supported by this council. The CUP of the Anaheim Lodge motel transfers with the land, therefore, the Anaheim Housing Authority should be fully responsible to build an 8-foot block wall as required under the terms of the CUP. If the purchase of this property was a private transaction, wouldn't the city require the new buyer to abide by the terms of the CUP? If the Mayor Pro Tern and Council Members desire to approve item 3 and 13 on the agenda, then the city carries the full responsibility to comply with the current CUP to build an 8-foot block wall as approved " Yes" 6-0 on April 12, 2022. Allow me to back track and share with you the history of the wall. On, September 21,1981, the Anaheim City Planning Commission granted the property 837 S Beach Blvd to re-classify from the Residential/ Agricultural Zone to a Commercial Zone upon the conditions which to be a prerequisite to preserve the safety and general welfare of the residents of the City. According to Resolution No. PC81-200, item #6 stated: " that a 6-foot-high masonry block wall shall be constructed (from the highest point of grade) along the west property line." For some reason, the City staffs had approved the incorrect height which only 4.5-foot-high masonry wall from the highest point of grade instead of the 6-foot requirement per Resolution No. PC 81-200 and has allowed the property to operate out of compliance since. Due to that critical mistake, the safety and the quality of our life of those of us that reside near the Anaheim Lodge has deteriorated. I brought our complaints regarding trespassing, burglaries, invasion of privacy and unsafe in our own backyard to the city back in 2010. I've had meetings with all City Officials and multiple City Department heads, pleading for help and nothing changed until April 12, 2022. I understand that the City has taken a huge step forward to protect us by approving an 8 foot block wall, there are three (3) options that this council can consider prior to deciding to acquire the Anaheim Lodge motel: 1) Enforce the Anaheim Lodge motel owner to comply to the Open Active Code case prior to the sale of the property. The current Anaheim Lodge owner brought this property in July 24, 2014 in the amount $2,780,00 dollars and now he plans to sale for $7,600,000 dollars. With the earning profit of $4,820,000 in the past 8 years, i believe he can afford to build the wall. 2) The City can suggest the Anaheim Housing Authority should subtract/deduct the cost to build an 8-foot block wall off the final sales price, therefore the new owner, Anaheim Housing Authority can use that fund to build the wall. 3) The City funds to build the wall as required under the CUP. If the City can waive a quarter of a million dollars of TOT tax owed by Cover Wagon Motel, then the City can afford to build this 8- foot block wall, which has been voted on and promised to us, the residents in West Anaheim. This year marks a 13-year battle of fighting the city and the Anaheim Lodge of the wall issue. This error was caused by a member of city staff back in 1981. And in 2014, when the property changed to N new owner, Mr. Mahendra Ahir, the City staffs recognized the violation of the height of the wall, but again decided not to enforce a interpretation of the CUP's block wall height requirement. I am extremely tired, and I hope the Mayor Pro Tern and Council Members will honor your vote from April 12, 2022 and continue support our request to provide an 8-foot block wall Via those three options above. Making the decision to approve the acquisition of the Anaheim Lodge Motel will strongly reflect your leadership, your integrity, your commitment, your honesty, your courage, and your confidence to stand up for the right of your constituents. However, the wall is an equally important issue. If history is any indication, the purchase of this motel will not solve the problems along the Boulevard overnight. One only needs to look at the purchases of the Lyndy's motel or Americana Motel or Silver Moon to see that the renovation of these locations will takes YEARS. Am I expected to continually endure the ramifications of the crime along Beach Blvd. merely because the city will now own the property? Please consider and accept my request to help improve the safety and quality of life for the residents who live directly behind this motel. Thank you. Sincerely, Kathy Tran Resident who lives directly behind the Anaheim Lodge motel. Public Comment From: kathy tran Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2022 8:56 PM To: Public Comment Cc: Council Subject: [EXTERNAL] Regarding the language of Resolution documents for item # 3 and # 13 City Councils Agenda September 27, 2022. Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Dear May Pro Tern and Councils Members, Again, there is nothing in the Resolution documentation mentioned about Anaheim Authority intends to acquire the Anaheim Lodge motel in the amount of $7,600,000 for the purpose of creating a mixed- uses development inclusive of affordable housing opportunities in alignment with the Beach Blvd Specific Plan. We would like to request for staff to adopt a very specific language " in alignment with The Beach Blvd Specific Plan" added to Resolution documentation, please. Resolution document is legal document, therefore it must be present and written in specific details matters. We just want to make sure the new owner should follow the Beach Blvd Specific Plans. Thank you. Kathy Tran. Sent from my iPhone Public Comment From: Tracy Urueta Sent: Monday, September 26, 2022 11:55 AM To: Public Comment Cc: Council Subject: [EXTERNAL] Council Meeting for September 27, Agenda Items 3 & 13 Attachments: 20220925_184214jpg; 20220925_184301 jpg; 20220925_184459jpg; 20220925_ 184203jpg Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Dear Mayor Pro -Tern and City Council Members, I wish to address a couple of concerns, in reference to item numbers 3 and 13 on this current agenda, an ongoing issue for our neighborhood that we have been living with for years. This has not been addressed by various City of Anaheim Departments for said years, although they were all aware of it. I believe it would be a good thing to for the city to acquire the Anaheim Lodge Motel property, located at 837 S. Beach Boulevard, for revitalization of this corridor and to move forward with plans for housing. However, unless the CUP for said property is at least adhered to, I cannot see quality of life improving for those who reside in the Twila Reid neighborhood, directly adjacent (over the wall) to this motel, and frankly, all the other remaining motels along that stretch, either. For years The City of Anaheim has acknowledged that this retaining block wall is not up to code and should be addressed, by building another wall on the property(ies) of said motels, which would not only bring it up to code, but would also be adhering to the CUP attached to each property of respective motel. This City Council, and City Staff as well, have the chance to do the right thing for constituents/surrounding neighbors of this neighborhood. It appeared they were doing the right thing by voting "YES" on April 12, 2022 for the enforcement of this 8 foot block to be built. So, what is happening to this block wall our neighborhood was promised? The sale of the Anaheim Lodge Motel property I want to address with you in this respect. What happens to this wall? Does it now slip through another crack? I need to give you a picture of what life is like for the neighbors who live on the other side of this 4.5 foot wall. It's not safe for them. Throughout the years many have trespassed in their yards. Alcohol bottles, needles, and other trash are routinely tossed into their yards. Homeowners/residents cannot enjoy their backyards, the way they should be able to. One house (behind the Covered Wagon) is for sale and just sits. Those homes are much harder to sell to perspective buyers, because of this living condition. One neighbor had to erect a net along the walls, covering his backyard, so he can protect his yard and have a garden without debris coming in from the other side of the wall. This has been an ongoing issue for this neighborhood for years. And, the city continues to ignore it... So, when those homes along Hayward Street (adjacent to motels) sell for a lot less, because of these safety and quality of life issues, guess who else suffers? Everybody in the neighborhood. These homes are our comparables. NOBODY in this neighborhood wins I'm sure you wouldn't like to be plagued with these issues where you live. So, now you have the chance to do the right thing and make sure that either this current property owner of the Anaheim Lodge Motel builds this wall, OR The City of Anaheim builds in the process of this acquisition/sale of said property. Also, it is also a concern that language should be added to the resolution to make sure any product that Anaheim Housing Authority plan for will be in alignment with the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan. I am attaching pictures of the houses along this street and how their living condition looks living adjacent to those motels. Cypress trees have been planted in between in some spots and you can still see some windows through them and it doesn't stop people from throwing stuff into the yards. Also, the Covered Wagon property had an eyesore of a broken window, that has been broken for at least two years. That motel is directly adjacent to the house that just sits on the market. :-( Thank you for your consideration regarding these matters. Sincerely, Tracy Urueta, Ooo*o r�+ Irk �i4fffiV� iif t�tr�l i w� I P, l • �" � i �' Alt • s ��)y,'. y •" ate+ t i / { ., '' �•k 7 / OT ram• ` � _ ' i0 qw, .V Ilk •� Iy> >. � - � � • 't •ice '. \�'�'i�y t le _� �, �� _ 1 �.. � . �.� `'�� a �, . "� ll/�V � r jjj ` � �� , 1� .• i •"1'�po�i - ^ ^��r - `'� 'chi+. / ', 1+1A, 1�f�, • ' ems"* ► � • �Q. ,i � it . y v 10 �s. � ' �., i�� ~ � � z � Cam`, �� +� ,'�� ^�yf • Public Comment From: jordan@gideonlaw.net Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 2:54 PM To: Public Comment; City Clerk Cc: danielle.wilson@uniteherel 1.org; 'Bridget McConaughy'; gk@gideonlaw.net Subject: [EXTERNAL] Items 25-A, 25-B & 26 City Council (9/27/22): OCvibe Project Approvals. Attachments: 2022.09.27_Council Comments_OC Vibe.pdf Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Dear Honorable City Council: On behalf of UNITE HERE Local 11, please see attached comments on the above -referenced items regarding the OCvibe project approvals. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any issues retrieving. City Clerk, please confirm receipt of this message including attachment —many thanks. Very truly yours, Jordan R. Sisson, Attorney Law Office of Gideon Kracov 801 S. Grand Ave., 11th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Direct: 951-542-2735 Fax:213-623-7755 jordan@gideonlaw. net www.gideonlaw.net PRIVILFGM) AND CONf^ID E VFIAL: This c➢cctron.ic niessa.ge contains inforrna.tion. frown the Law Office of Gideon. Kracov and is attorney work product confidcnliaor privileged. 'Fhe inforrna.tion. is intended so➢e➢y for the use of the in.dividua. (s)or en.tity(ic s) named above. If you have received this transmission in. error, p) ease destroy the origin.a➢ transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in. any manner. GKLAW LAND WE, ENVIRONMENTAL & 1V11UNICIPAL ILAwYERS September 27, 2022 VIA EMAIL: City Council, City of Anaheim (publiccomment@anaheim.net) c/o City Clerk's Office (cityclerk@anaheim.net) 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Jordan R. Sisson 801 South Grand Avenue, 11 th Floor Los Angeles, Caliiorma 90017 Direct: (951) 542-2735 Fax:(213) 623-7755 E-mail: Jordan@gideontaw.net w ww.gideonlaw.net RE: Items 25-A, 25-13 & 26 City Council Hearing September 27, 2022; 100-Acre OCvibe Project Approvals Dear Honorable City Council: On behalf of UNITE HERE Local 11 ("Local 11"), this office respectfully provides the following comments, to the City of Anaheim ("Anaheim") concerning the proposed development of 1,500 residential dwelling units, 1,922,766 square feet ("sf') of commercial, 961,055 sf office, and 250,000 sf institutional uses, and other onsite/offsite improvements ("Project" or "OC Vibe") on roughly 101 acres within the City's Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan ("PTMLUP") and Platinum Triangle Mixed Use ("PTMU") Overlay Zone. In furtherance of the Project, Anaheim Real Estate Partners ("AREP" or "Applicant") is seeking various land use permits ("Entitlements")2 and a Development Agreement (No. DAG2020-00004) ("DA") pursuant to the Anaheim Municipal Code ("AMC" or "Code"). With regard to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"),3 the City is considering the adoption of Addendum No. 11 ("Addendum" or "Add 11") to the 2010 Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 339 ("FSEIR No, 339").4 In short, the Addendum and Project Entitlements' findings do not adequately address and analyze inconsistencies with the City's draft housing element and housing goals, such as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") affordable housing obligations. Furthermore, Local 11 questions the analysis of the Project's new, potentially significant impacts on energy use, vehicle miles traveled ("VINT"), and greenhouse gas emissions ("GHG"). The City has the discretion to seek more public benefits. Additional affordable and market -rate housing should be required. For the reasons discussed herein, Local 11 respectfully asks that the City not grant the Entitlements, DA, and Addendum (collectively "Project Approvals") at this time and also that it recirculate a CEQA-compliant environmental review. ' Herein, page citations are either the stated pagination (i.e., "p. #") or PDF-page location (i.e., "PDF p. #"). z Including but not limited to: 1) General Plan Amendment (GPA2020-00532); 2) Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan Amendment (MIS2020-00739); 3) Reclassification (RCL2020-00333); 4) Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA2020-00174); 5) Special Sign District Amendments and Coordinated Sign Programs; 6) Final Site Plan (FSP2020-00004 through-00008), 7) Conditional Use Permit (CUP2010-05492) Amendment and alcohol related Conditional Use Permit; 8) Minor Conditional Use Permit; 9) Tentative Tract Map (TTM No. 19153). (See Add 11, pp. 1-2, 42-45.) 3 including "CEQA Guidelines" codified at 14 Cal. Code. Regs. § 15000 et seq. 4 Inclusive of all associated appendices ("APP-##") retrieved From City -controlled website. (See https:// ww►na.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/45716/Addendum-No-11-and-Appendices-List?bidid). Items 25 & 26 RE:100-.Acre Xvibe Project Approvals September 27, 2022 Page 2of10 I. LOCAL 11'S STANDING Local 11 represents more than 25,000 workers employed in hotels, restaurants, airports, sports arenas, and convention centers throughout Southern California and Phoenix —including thousands ofinembers who live andfor work in the City. The union has a First Amendment right to petition public officials in connection with matters of public concern, including compliance with applicable zoning rules and CEQA, just as developers, other community organizations, and individual residents do. Protecting its members' interest in the environment, including advocating for the environmental sustainability of development projects and ensuring the availability of housing and hotels (in compliance with state and local rules), is part of Local 11's core function. Recognizing unions' interest and union members' interest in these issues, California courts have consistently upheld unions' standing to litigate land use and environmental claims. (See Bakersfield Citizens v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.AppAth 1184, 1198.) Furthermore, Local 11 has public interest standing to challenge the Project Approvals given the City's public duty to comply with applicable zoning and CEQA laws, which Local 11 seeks to enforce. (See e.g., Rialto Citizens for Responsible Growth v City of Rialto (2012) 208 Cal.AppAth 899, 914-916, n.6; La Mirada Avenue Neighborhood Assn. of Hollywood v. City of Los Angeles (2018) 22 Cal.App.5th 1149, 1158-1159; Weiss v. City of Los Angeles (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 194, 205-206; Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach (2011) 52 CalAth 155, 166, 169-170.) 11. BACKGROUND ON STANDARD OF REVIEW A. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT CEQA's PURPOSE:. CEQA has two primary purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers and the public about the potentially significant environmental effects of a project. (See CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(1).) To this end, public agencies must ensure that their analysis "stay[s] in step with evolving scientific knowledge and state regulatory schemes." (Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Assn. of Governments (2017) 3 Cal.5th 497,504 ("Cleveland II"}. Hence, an analysis that "understates the severity of a project's impacts impedes meaningful public discussion and skews the decisionmaker's perspective concerning the environmental consequences of the project, the necessity for mitigation measures, and the appropriateness of project approval." (Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Assn. of Governments (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 413, 444 ("Cleveland III'); see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564 (quoting Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Ca1.3d 376, 392.) Second, CEQA requires public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage by requiring the implementation of "environmentally superior" alternatives and all feasible mitigation measures. (CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(2) & (3); see also Citizens of Goleta Valley, supra, at p. 564.) If a project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the project only if it finds that it has "eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible" and that any significant unavoidable effects on the environment are "acceptable due to overriding concerns." (Pub. Res. Code § 21081; see also Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A) & (B).) STANDARD OF REVIEW FOR ADDENDUM REVIEW: Generally, CEQA requires additional CEQA documentation to a previously prepared EIR when there are either: (1) substantial changes to a project; (2) circumstances involving the project that result in new or more severe significant impacts; or (3) substantial new information showing either new or more severe significant effects Items 25 & 26 RE: 100-.Acre Xvibe Project Approvals September 27, 2022 Page 3of10 not previously disclosed, or new feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that would substantially reduce significant impacts. (See e.g., CEQA Guidelines §§ 15162(a) [subsequent EIRs], 15163(a) [supplemental EIRs], 15164(a) [EIR addendums]; see e.g., See Ventura Foothill Neighbors v. County of Ventura (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th 429,436 (increase in project height from original CEQA document required new CEQA review].) SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE: Under CEQA, substantial evidence includes facts, a reasonable assumption predicated upon fact, or expert opinion supported by fact; not argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, clearly inaccurate or erroneous evidence, or evidence of social or economic impacts that do not contribute to, or are not caused by, physical impacts on the environment. (See e.g., Pub. Res. Code §§ 21080(e), 21082.2(c); CEQA Guidelines §§ 15064Co(5), 15384.) Courts will not blindly trust bare conclusions, bald assertions, and conclusony comments without the "disclosure of the 'analytic route the ... agency traveled from evidence to action."' (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn, supra, 47 Cal.3d at pp. 404-405 [quoting Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Community v. CountyofLosAngeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506, 515]; Cleveland III, 17 Cal.App.5th at p. 441 [agency "obliged to disclose what it reasonably can ... [or] substantial evidence showing it could not do so."].) B. LAND USE, PLANNING, AND ZONING LAW GENERAL PLANS: The California Supreme Court has described general plans as a `constitution' located at the top of the hierarchy of local government law regulating land use (De Vita v. County of Napa (1995) 9 Ca1.4th 763, 773); as a 'contract' between neighbors to forgo certain property rights with the assurance that reciprocal enforcement will be mutually beneficial and enhance the total community welfare (Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506, 517-518), or as a'yardstick' where one can take an individual parcel and check it against the plan to know which uses would be permissible (Orange Citizens for Parks & Recreation v. Superior Court (2016) 2 Cal.51h 216, 159). AGENCY DEFERENCE: While planning agencies enjoy some discretion in interpreting their zoning laws, "deference has limits," and courts are not bound by unreasonable interpretations contrary to the plain language of regulations and statutes. (Orange Citizens, 2 Cal.5th at 146, 156- 157 [rejecting attempts to "downplay the facial inconsistency," court held city abused its discretion finding residential project consistent with general plan designation where "no reasonable person could conclude that the Property could be developed without a general plan amendment"j; see also Stolman v. City of Los Angeles (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 916, 928-930 [vacating variance based on zoning administrator's interpretation contradicted by the plain language of the municipal code].) GENERAL FLAN CONSISTENCY: To be compatible with an applicable general plan and its elements, a proposed project must be "'in agreement or harmony with the terms of the applicable plan ...." (San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City & County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.41h 656, 678 [internal citations omitted]; see also Friends of Lagoon Valley v. City of Vacaville (2007) 154 Ca1.App.41h 807, 817 [a "project is consistent with the general plan if, considering all its aspects, it will further the objectives and policies ... and not obstruct their attainment" (Emphasis added)].). Items 25 & 26 RE: 100-Acre GCvibe Project Approvals September 27, 2022 Page 4of10 III. SPECIFIC ISSUES & COMMENTS WITH PROJECT/ADDENDUM A. POTENTIAL LAND USE INCONSISTENCY WITH THE CITY'S DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT SHOULD BE DISCLOSED AND ANALYZED Proper disclosure of land use inconsistencies is required under CEQA. (See e.g., CEQA Guidelines § 15125(d); Pfeiffer v. City of Sunnyvale City Council (2011) 200 Cal.AppAth 1552, 1566; Friends of the Eel River v. Sonoma County Water Agency (2003) 108 CaI.AppAth 859, 881.) There does not need to be a direct conflict to trigger this requirement; even if a project is "incompatible" with the "goals and policies" of a land use plan, the EIR must assess the divergence between the project and the plan, and mitigate any adverse effects of the inconsistencies. (See Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Bd. Of Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal.AppAth 342, 378-79; see also Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903 [holding under CEQA that a significant impact exists where project conflicts with local land use policies].) Local 11 questions why this Project swaps valuable public land to provide parking that serves the Applicant's commercial needs. The Project proposes to rezone roughly 10 acres of City -owned property from ©pen Space to General Commercial in order to provide 1,113 spaces of employee surface parking (i.e., Arena District Sub Area A). (Add 11, pp. 16, 29, 38, 55, 67-71.) Furthermore, the Project includes an exchange of land between the City and the Applicant and related parties.5 As shown in the below figure on the next page, the City would receive 119,180 sf of land located at the northeast corner of Honda Center to be developed as a City -owned public parking structure (green) in exchange for 109,050 sf of land located primarily west of Honda Center and south of 1Catella Avenue, to facilitate Honda Center expansion improvements (see blue). Local 11 questions whether onsite housing would be a superior use of this land in light of the City's desperate need for housing (discussed below) and where land costs are claimed to be a significant burden to producing affordable housing according to the City's Draft Sixth Cycle: 2021-2029 Housing Element ("Draft Housing Element"). (See Draft Housing Element,6 PDF pp. 58-59.) It is unclear why commercial parking cannot be co -located on Applicant`s land used for said commercial uses (e.g., adjacent to and or below -ground in various parking levels). Nor is it clear why City -owned property could not co -locate parking in addition to other uses, like more housing (e.g., variety of below -grade and above -grade parking with high -density housing on upper floors). City -land could provide adequate parking (including spaces for workers of the Project Site) and co -locate other uses, such as housing. Failure to maximize this City -owned land seems inconsistent with the City's General Plan Land Use Element.? The Addendum, does not disclose or address this inconsistency with applicable City General Plan goals and policies. s See City (9/27/22) Item 25-A Staff Report, p. 5, https://Iocal.anaheini.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/ 35024/35054/35057/35213/35442/Staff Report35442.pdf; see also Staff Report, Item 25-A, Attachment 25, PDF p. 5, https.-//local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/35024/35054/35057/35213/35468/ 25.Resolution - Land Disposition3S468.pdf. 6 https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/44687/june-2022_HCD-All-Sections. See e.g., Land Use Element (May 2004) PDF pp. LU-42 - LU-47 (Goal 2.1 Continue to provide a variety of quality housing opportunities to address the City's diverse housing needs [including policies 1 through 5], Goal 3.2 Maximize development opportunities along transportation routes [including policies 1 and 3], Goal 5.1 Create and enhance dynamic, identifiable places for the benefit of Anaheim residents, employees and visitors [including policies 2, 4], GOAL 6.1:Enhance the quality of life and economic vitality in Anaheim through strategic infill development and revitalization of existing development [including policies 2], among others.), https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/9522/E-Land-Use-Element?bidld=. Items 25 & 26 RE: 100-Acre Xvibe Project Approvals September 27, 2022 Page 5of10 City of Anaheim Property 109,050S.F. Z_P�_ AREP Property 119,16D&r. N.r.s. Local 11 questions whether additional housing, rather than parking or massive increases in commercial uses [discussed infra], would be a superior use in this Project area —especially in light of the City's current RHNA obligation of 17,453 housing units over the 8-year planning period. As shown in the excerpt below on the following page, the City has a 17,453 RHNA obligation, including over 6,000 units for low-income, very law -income, or extremely Iow-income residents, (See Draft Housing Element, PDF pp. 7,221 [Tbl. 3-53, see excerpt below on following page].) The Platinum Triangle has been identified as one of three primary areas to meet the City's RHNA housing obligations that will benefit from reduced VMTs due to co -locating jobs and housing opportunities. (Id,, at PDF pp. +64, 157, 200, 225.) While the area has been planned for 17,501 dwelling units with 12,642 already entitled (i.e., 72%), only 5,232 units (i.e., 30%) have been built since 2004 (id., at pp. 250.) It seems that the area is simply not producing the housing units the City hoped for and, thus, the City needs to take further action to ensure a "Dynamic mix of uses and high -density urban housing." (Land Use Element, p. LU-58.) By proposing 1,284 dwelling units on roughly 107 acres for the combined Arena and Transit areas (i.e.,12 units/acre) (Add 11, Tbl. 3-5), the Project is well below the 100 and 60 du/acre intended for Mixed -Use High and Urban Core under the Land Use Plan (p. LU-15). This seems inconsistent with Land Use Element Goal 15.1, specifically policy 3, to "[e]ncourage mixed -use projects integrating retail, office and higher density residential land uses." (Id., at p. LU-59.) So too, this seems inconsistent with Goal 7.12, particularly policy 3 "Promote new residential development within Downtown, The Platinum Triangle, and other mixed -use districts, in accordance with the Land Use Plan." (Land Use Element, p. LU-48.) The Addendum does not disclose or address this inconsistency with applicable City General Plan housing goals and policies. err ern,.,. ! Items 25 & 26 RE: 100-Acre Xvibe Project Approvals September 27, 2022 Page 6 of 10 Extremely Low (30%or less) Very Low (31 to 50%): Low (51 to 80%) Moderate (81%to 120%) Above Moderate (Ovef 120%) Total Table 3-53, Housing Needs for 2021.2029 1.884 108% 1.983 10.8% 2,397 13.7% 2,94s 16 9% 8,344 472% 17,03 illillf Note 1: Pursuant to AS 2614. local jurisdictions are also required to project the housing needs of izmmmaiy kx"rtcome households (0-30% AMI). in astmating the numbar of axtrQmaly low�incamlt households, a jurisdiction can use SO% of the vary lour -income allocation or apportion the Vary lore -income figure based on Census data. Additionally, the Project may induce greater onsite demand for workforce housing. Here, the Project would amend the PTMU by removing roughly 1.388 and 1.25 million sf of office and institutional uses (respectively) to add 339 dwelling units and approximately 1.412 million square Feet of commercial uses (see Add 11, pp 40 [Tbl. 3-4, see figure below]), which is primarily targeted towards entertainment and hospitality uses, such as: 230,909 sf with 14,413 seats of entertainment uses; 202,293 sf of restaurant and outdoor dining; and 550 rooms in two hotels. (Id., at pp. 34-35, 55.)s According to Addendum 11, the Project will slightly increase the residential population (i.e., up 832) but significantly reduce employees (down 3,336) in the area, purportedly improving the jobs/Housing ratio from 2.19 to 2.00, (See Add 11, p. 223.) However, the shift from Office/Institutional uses to the proposed commercial uses may shift the type of employment opportunities in the area that may be from generally higher -paying jobs (e.g., office workers, government employees, etc.) to lower -paying jobs (e.g., restaurant workers, service employees, etc.). Lower -paying jobs will also likely increase the demand for affordable housing, which the City lacks. Table 3-4 Platinum Triangle Development Intensities (Existing and Pro posed Cumulative Change General Plan Land Emoting PTIALUP Net Cha-.ge Rn Arena IN et Change in Resuhi" from yew PTMLUP Tota€ I Use Totals Uivirkt Transa District €codified Project +ii-1 with Modified Proiect Mixed Use Urban Core Resider ual 17.501 DU 869 DU (520 DU) 339 DU 17,840 DU Commercial 4,782.24.3 SF 1,4D4.89$ SF 7,678 SF 1,412 T76 SF 6,195 019 SF office 9.180,747 SF 861,055 SF (2.250.Ca SF) (1,388.945 SF) 7,791,802 SF n ruhoraf 1.500.00D SF 0 SF (1 250,01K SF) (1.250.000 SF) 250,000 SF Office -High and Low 4.309,486 SF (44 t,950 SF) 0 (441.960 SFj 3.867.536 SF 'The prooned PTMLUP residenibal PainOW den44Y tM is 17.840 Wills- Howem, WilllariN 216 dwabng units are Mowed by density bonus. "iherelare, acVIBE proposes to consbW i,500 dwelling urvts (1,2844 dwefnq ores aioW by Perwded density Plus 216 dwelling units allowed try density Aoms e Third, it is unclear whether the Project is above the required 03S floor -area -ratio ("FAR") threshold. It is not explained what square footage of development was considered in the Addendum's FAR, such as the more than 1 million square footage of "other uses" including parks, open space, residential amenities, and 11,289- stall parking spread through a Variety of parking decks and surface lots. (Add 11, pp, 34-37.) Nor is it explained whether the FAR calculations included all Project areas, such as the additional 10 acres of City - owned property rezoned from Open Space to General Commercial to place a parking lot. Items 25 & 26 RE: 100-Acre OCvibe Project Approvals September 27, 2022 Page 7of10 Furthermore, the CiU has historically underproduced homes as compared to Orange Counv. (See Draft Housing Element, 9 PDF p. 46 [Tbl. 2-29, see figure below]). Notwithstanding the City's median home value (i.e., $846,355) being roughly 11 percent below the Orange County average (i.e., $950,000) (id., at PDF p. 52), the City's medium income level (i.e., $71,763) is more than 20% below the County average (i.e., $90,234) (id., at PDF p. 25). To the extent the Project increases the demand for affordable housing —without providing commensurate onsite housing —the Project may exacerbate the City's lack of housing, which may acutely impact those severely burdened by increased housing costs, such as renters. (ld., at PDF pp. 26, 29, 32). This seems to be inconsistent with Land Use Element Goal 7.1, "Address the jobs -housing relationship by developing housing near job centers and transportation facilities[;]" including (but not limited to) policy 1, "Address the jobs -housing balance through the development of housing in proximity to local job centers." (Land Use Element, p. LU-48.) Here, the Project may decrease the employees and residents (collectively "service population") of the area near transit. In sum, the Project seems out of balance and more onsite housing is needed. Buena Park Table 2-29: 2040 23.895 Housing Unit Growth Trends 2015 2019 24,007 24,578 Percent to e 0.5% Pement 2019 2.4% Cypress 16,335 16,109 16,256 -1.4% 0.9% Placentia 16,679 16,553 16,964 -0.8% 2.5% Santa Ana 77,796 77,192 79,024 -0.9% 2.4% Stanton 12,111 11,972 11,640 -1.1% -2.8% Fullerton 47,956 47,319 48,120 -1.3% 17-76 Anaheim 10,050 104,812 106,708 -8.2% i.e% Orange (City) 44,217 44,229 44,664 00% 10% Yorba Linda 21,665 22.592 23,452 4.3% 3.8% Garden Grove 47,454 48,385 49,061 10% 1.4% County of Orange 1 1,042,254 1 1,O64,642 1 1,100,449 2.1% 3.4% Source: 2015-2019 Frvr-Yfor arrertCon Community Survey fdl.S. Census $unouJ.. Thus, more immediate action addressing affordable housing onsite seems warranted. While the Project may include 195 affordable units, no extremely low-income units are provided. (See Add 11, p. 36.) This is troubling because while the City seems to be on track to meet its above -moderate - income goals over the 8-year Housing Element planning period (i.e., roughly 73% of the 8,344-unit goal are already in the City's pipeline), it is far behind on meeting its 9,109 units goal of affordable housing (i.e., 425 units in City's pipeline or roughly 9% of goal). (See Draft. Housing Element, at PDF p. 310 [Tbl. 13-1, see excerpt below on following page].) Furthermore, the Development Agreement (DA) allows the Applicant to remove all affordable housing obligations to an "offsite location" (i.e., during phase 2 and 3) and after 100 percent of the commercial uses during phase 1 is completed. (See DA,10 pp. 42-43; Add 11, pp. 53.) The City should not risk the delay of housing units being constructed onsite while commercial development proceeds. Local 11 questions the City allowing commercial development without adequate assurance and a timing plan that commensurate housing actually be constructed. So too, we question the wisdom of allowing the Applicant to 9 https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/44687/June-2022_HCD-All-Sections. "I https://Iocal.analieim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/35024/35054/3SO57/3S213/3S489/ 10a.%2©Draft%20Deve lopment%20Agreement%20(DAG2020-00004)35489.pdf. Items 25 & 26 RE: 100-Acre Xvibe Project Approvals September 27, 2022 Page 8of10 relegate affordable housing offsite rather than ensuring the site is truly a mixed-income/mixed-use site. Also, by not providing any extremely low-income units, the Project seems inconsistent with Land Use Element Goal 7.1, policy 2 to "[d]evelop housing that addresses the need of the City's diverse employment base." And by excluding extremely low-income populations and leaving the possibility of all affordable housing obligations to be provided offsite, the City is disincentivizing those populations who may be more likely to use transit. Finally, we note the Addendum's land use consistency impact analysis is completely silent as to whether any CiU opera space requirements are being satisfied. (See Add 11, pp. 192-195.) B. GREATER CEQAANALYSIS AND MITIGATION SHOULD BE REQUIRED FOR POTENTIAL ENERGY IMPACTS The Addendum's CEQA analysis related to energy impacts is flawed. The Addendum claims there would be no new energy impacts since the adoption of the SFEIR 399. (Add 11, pp. 129-138.) While it is anticipated the Project will install solar panels (id., at p. 132), this measure is not specific enough, there are no clear performance standards, and solar may not necessarily be required under the cited Anaheim Public Utility Plan or other City GHG Reduction Plan. (Id., at 132.) To the extent the Project lacks enforceable performance standards for solar panels and use of renewable energy —mitigation that is much more feasible today than in years past —this may indicate a new significant impact on energy. Under CEQA, the lead agency needs to consider the project's energy consumption. [Pub. Res. Code § 21100(b)(3).) In addition to examining whether there is a "wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources," lead agencies must investigate whether any renewable energy features could be incorporated into the project. (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.2(b); League to Save Lake Tahoe v. County of Placer (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 63, 167-168 [duty to investigate renewable energy option is required as part of determining whether project impacts on energy resources are significant].] A project's compliance with building codes may not be enough where they do not address many considerations under Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines, like "whether a building should be constructed at all, how large it should be, where it should be located, whether it should incorporate renewable energy resources, or anything else external to the building's envelope ... [,] energy impacts for a project intended to transform agricultural land into a regional commercial shopping center." (California Clean Energy Committee v. City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 211.) Here, the Addendum seems to rely substantially on state energy efficiency standards (Cal. Code Regs Title 24) (commonly referred to as "Title 24"), but this does not answer whether the Project is leaving feasible options to incorporate solar off the table. Local 11 questions the City's failure to consider additional mitigation measures, such as specific solar energy generation commitments on site. All this seems inconsistent with the General Plan's Green Element's green development practices (i.e., incorporate renewable resources like solar), Goals 15.2 and 17.1 (i.e., encourage design that reduces energy costs), and policy 1 (i.e., encourage solar). (See Green Element," p. G-27 - G-30.) 11 https.//www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/9521/F-Green-Element?bidId=. Items 25 & 26 RE., 100-Acre CCvibe Project Approvals September 27, 2022 Page 9ofI0 C. MORE CEQA ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION SHOULD BE REQUIRED FOR POTENTIAL VMT/GHG IMPACTS First, the Addendum claims the Project would not have a more significant GHG impact as compared to the project under the SFEIR 399. (Add 11, pp. 1SO-1S1.) It relies largely on regulatory treasures adopted by the state independent of the Project. So too, it cites compliance with the City's GHG Reduction Plan —but fails to identify specific requirements of that Plan that are mandatary for the Proiect.17 The Addendum relies merely on pre-existing mitigation measures under the SFEIR. (Add 11, pp. 153-162.) Also, the Addendum may have improperly screened the Project out from a VMT analysis relying on the Site's location within a Transit Priority Area (`"TPA"). (Add 11, pp. 239, 244-250, ADD 11, APP-K,13 PDF pp. 14, 63, 1063-1065.) While the City's VMT guidelines state that projects located within a TPA "may" be presumed to be less than significant, it does not state that the presumption is irrebuttable.14 It seems the Addendum ignores the fact that the Project would serve primarily entertainment and regional visitors (which is not local serving)15 while reducing the area's Iocal service population (i.e., total residents and employees served in the area). Employees working at the new entertainment uses may likely be forced into longer commutes generating more VMTs. In sum, Local 11 questions the City's use of the TPA exemption from conducting a Project - specific VMT analysis and the Addendum's reliance on outdated VMT and GHG reduction measures. The GHG and VMT analysis should be updated to ensure all feasible additional mitigation measures and strategies available can be incorporated, such as those urged by California Air Pollution Control Officers Association ("CAPCOA"), the State Office of Policy and Research ("OPR"), Southern California Association of Government ("SCAG"), California Air Resources Board ("CARB").16 This would be in keeping with the City's Green Element goals of reducing emissions (Goal 8.1), reducing single -occupancy vehicle trips (Goal 9.1), and improving public transit ridership efficiency (Goal 10.1). (See Green Element, p. G-18 - G-21.) 12 City's GHG Reduction Plan makes no mention of its adoption pursuant to a CEQA review and/or other hallmarks of a qualified climate action plan ("CAP"), such as: i) inventorying existing and future GHG emissions within the City from all relevant sources; ii) establishing a numeric limit of total GHG emission for the City; iii) identifying specific mitigation measures with performance standards that can be implemented on a project -by -project basis that would achieve the City limit; iv) creating a monitoring program to ensure the CAP's efficacy for the City to reach its limit. (Compare Anaheim Public Utilities (May 2020) GHG Reduction Plan (https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/7987/Greenhouse-Gas-Reduction-Plan?bidId=) with CEQA Guidelines § 15183.5(b)(1).) 13 https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/45711/CEQA-ExhibitAllApp-K-Traffic-Study. 14 City Uun. 2020) TIA Guidelines for CEQA, p. 6, https://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/View/32774/ City-of-Anaheim-TIA-Guidelines-far-CEQA-Analysis-62020. 15 Ibid., p. 7 16 See e.g., CAPCOA (August 2010) Quantifying GHG Measures, http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default- source/cega/handbook/capcoa-quantifying-greenhouse-gas-litigation-measures.pdf, CAPCOA (Dec. 2021) Handbook for Analyzing GHG Emission Reductions, https://www.airquality.org/C€imateChange/Documents/ Final%20Handbook_A8434.pdf, OPR (Dec. 2018) Technical Advisory, http://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122- 743_Technical Advisory.pdf, CARB 2017 Scoping Plan, Appendix B-Local Action, pp. 7-9, https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/app-b-local action_final.pdf, SCAG (Dec. 2019) Final Program EIR, pp. 2.0-18 - 2.0-71 (see "project -level mitigation measures" for air quality, GHG, and transportation impacts), https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/fpeir_connectsocal_complete.pdf7l6O7981618. Items 25 & 26 RE: 100-Acre Xvibe Project Approvals September 27, 2022 Page 10 of 10 D. THE CITY SHOULD USE ITS DISCRETION To PRIORITIZE AND INCREASE HousING The City has the discretion to reject the Project Approvals without more public benefits. Here the Project is seeking numerous discretionary entitlements, such as General Plan Amendment, Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan Amendment, and a Zoning Code Amendment. (Add 11, pp.1-2, 42-45; see also AMC §§ 18.20.010 et seq., 18.68 et seq., 18.76 et seq.; Cal. Gov. Code § 65864 et seq.; Yost v. Thomas (1984) 36 Cal.3d 561, 570; Arnel Dev. Co. v. City of Costa Mesa (1980) 28 cal. 3d 511, 519 n. 8.) These are legislative in nature, and the City has the discretion to seek more public benefits. It would seem that the City places great weight on impact Lees and purported millions of dollars in economic impact. (DA, p. 5.) Yet, impact fees are to mitigate negative impacts to the City incurred because of the Project— with a nexus to all negative impacts required. More affordable and market -rate housing should be considered. So too, it is unclear the degree one publicly owned park and one privately owned park compensate for the loss of 10 acres of open space and the Applicant's existing open space obligations (previously noted). Local 11 questions whether the City has truly garnered the benefit of the bargain i kv�KINIIl IXI 1#101 In sum, the Addendum and Project Entitlements' findings do not adequately address and analyze inconsistencies with the City's Draft housing element and housing goals. Furthermore, Local 11 questions the analysis of the Project's new, potentially significant impacts on energy use, VMT, and GHG. The City has the discretion to reject the Project Entitlements to seek more public benefits. Additional affordable and market -rate housing should be required. Local 11 reserves the right to supplement this appeal justification at future hearings and proceedings for this Project. (See Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Peninsula Water Management Dist (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1120 [CEQ!A litigation not limited only to claims made during EIR comment period].) Thank you for consideration of these comments. We ask that this letter is placed in the administrative record for the Project. Sincerely, zk Jord . R. Sisson Attorney for Local-1� Public Comment From: Liz White Sent: Monday, September 26, 2022 12:30 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] OcV!BE Project Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Dear Anaheim City Counsil Members, My name is Elizabeth White and I reside in the Sunkist Gardens Mobile Homes, just around the corner from the Honda Center. I am unable to attend tonight's meeting, as I am working. I have lived in the area the last 12 years and look forward to the new project of the OcV!BE to come! So many job opportunities, new restaurants, live entertainment, a nature park to relax and meditate, a new experience in life. I do hope you approve this exciting addition to Anaheim. The OcV!BE team was kind enough to come to our park and explain the project, and I was thrilled to have information to see and that I can pass on to others. Thank you for the opportunity to submit my recommendation that the OcV!BE move in the direction of GO.... Best Regards, Elizabeth White, Jennifer L. Hall From: Mariaisabelle Garcia <mariaisabelleg@ken nedycommission.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 5:25 PM To: City Clerk Cc: Daisy Cruz; Brad West; Cesar C; Rudibel Barbosa Subject: [EXTERNAL] Kennedy Commission public comment 9/27/22 Attachments: KC letter Anaheim oc v1 be 9.27.22.doc Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Hello, please see attached Kennedy Commissions' public comment regarding city council agenda item 25 on 09/27/22. Blessings, Marialsabelle Garcia Kennedy Commission Community Organizer mariai sab elleg gkennedycommission. org September 27, 2022 Mayor Pro Tem Trevor O'Neil Councilmembers Housing Authority City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: Item 25. OC VIBE project Dear Mayor Pro Tem Trevor O'Neil and Councilmembers: www.kennedycommission.org 17701 Cowan Ave., Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 (949) 250-0909 The Kennedy Commission (the Commission) is a broad coalition of residents and community organizations that advocate for the production of homes affordable for families earning less than $27,000 annually in Orange County. Formed in 2001, the Commission has successfully partnered and worked with Orange County jurisdictions to create effective policies that have led to the production of new affordable homes and increased investment to improve the quality of life for low-income families. We submit public comments in response to item 425: The ocV!BE project. The ocV!BE project proposes a large-scale development that will increase office space, entertainment venues, hotels, and housing options in the Anaheim Platinum Triangle area. This proposal provides additional community benefits. For example, the development proposes to provide affordable housing in these categories: 5% Extremely Low, 5% Low, and 5% Moderately affordable. The City of Anaheim is facilitating the ocV!BE development by: • Increasing the residential capacity permitted in the platinum triangle. • Issuance of lease revenue bonds by the Anaheim Public Financing Authority. • Attaining additional density incentives through the density bonus law. The Samueli family, the Samueli foundation, and the development team should be commended for approaching this development not only as an economic opportunity, but also as an opportunity to address critical community needs in The City of Anaheim. This is critically important due to the deep need for affordable housing and lack thereof in the Platinum Triangle area. The Commission is generally supportive of this project with the following recommended changes. The ocV!BE project will create a significant number of service sector and low-income job opportunities that will further exacerbate the need for affordable housing options to house this increased workforce. We recommend that the development prioritize housing for Extremely Low and Very Low -Income families, since the wages earned in these emerging jobs would not permit working families to afford rents in the moderate or above moderate -income categories. In addition, we recommend that the development maximize the ability to create more affordable units than proposed by working with nonprofit developers to leverage the land and opportunity sites with additional state and federal housing funds. This will help facilitate developments that are 100% affordable at lower income categories and increase the affordable units beyond the proposed total units. As highlighted in the City of Anaheim's latest Housing Element Annual Progress Report that was submitted to the California Housing and Community Development', the city has a deficit of affordable housing production. The report points out that the city has approved and permitted over 8,719 housing units during the current Housing Element period and only 369 (remaining RHNA for lower income is 1,794) have been in the affordability level of low and very low households. The vast majority of the housing units, 8,350, have been approved at moderate and above moderate -income levels (RHNA in above moderate has been exceeded by over 300%). Since the city has approved approximately over 13,000 housing developments in the Platinum Triangle area, and none are affordable, it is imperative that The City of Anaheim prioritize affordable housing in this development. Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to further conversations regarding the use of agency owned to increase affordable housing opportunities for the lower income families in Anaheim. 1 City of Anaheim, Housing Element Annual Progress Report, June 2022 Very truly yours, Cesar Covarrubias Executive Director CC: California Department of Housing and Community Development, Division of Housing Policy Development 9/27/22, 6:31 PM Mail - Public Comment - Outlook [EXTERNAL] Item 25 - OCBC Support Jennifer (Ward) Bullard <jbullard@ocbc.org> Tue 9/27/2022 6:25 PM To: Public Comment <publiccomment@anaheim.net> Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Good Evening Anaheim City Council, On behalf of the Orange County Business Council (OCBC), I would like to express our strong support for Public Hearing Item 25 on tonight's City Council Agenda and encourage the Council to approve this project. OCBC's four pillars are economic development, workforce, housing and infrastructure because these are critical to Orange County businesses' success and critical to maintaining our high quality of life. The proposed ocV!BE project is the epitome of an exemplary development that incorporates each of these four pillars. With its 195 affordable housing units, restaurants, entertainment, transit -oriented development and transportation improvements, and significant employment opportunities, ocV!BE offers Anaheim and all of Orange County a huge opportunity for economic development and community prosperity. The Orange County Business Council is pleased to support this project. Thank you, Jennifer Buflard Sr. Vice President of Advocacy and Government Affairs Orange County Business Council 2 Park Plaza, Suite 100 1 Irvine, CA 92614 949.794.7215 1 jward@ocbc.org https://outlook.office365.com/mail/publiccomment@anaheim.net/deeplink?Print 1/1 9/27/22, 6:31 PM Mail - Public Comment - Outlook [EXTERNAL] Bobby Olea Tue 9/27/2022 6:09 PM To: Public Comment <publiccomment@anaheim.net> Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Hello council members. Thevor I am asking for your resignation. And you should withdraw from the election you're very corrupt. You are mea I A I gotnd very cruell. you just as bad as our former mayor harry sidhu. The city needs a fresh from you. I would like to meet u in person to express my concerns thank you Bobby olea. You are a rude person Sent from my iPhone https://outlook.office365.com/mail/publiccomment@anaheim.net/deeplink?Print 1/1 Jennifer L. Hall From: Bobby Olea Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 8:39 PM To: Public Comment Subject: [EXTERNAL] Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. City Council the library need more hours the kids need Saturday hours again please consider it. Thank you. Sent from my iPhone