Loading...
1967-272RESOLUTION NO. 67R- 272 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH ANAHEIM ART ASSOCIATION FOR THE LEASING OF THE PREMISES AT 2660 WEST BROADWAY, ANAHEIM. WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim is the owner of a build- ing known as the Spencer House, located at 2660 West Broadway in the City of Anaheim, and desires to use the same for cultural and recreational purposes in conjunction with the activities of its Parks and Recreation Department and the activities of the Anaheim Art Association; and WHEREAS, Anaheim Art Assocation desires to have a non exclusive three -year lease of said premises in consideration of its performing certain services to be set forth in detail in a lease agreement between the parties; and WHEREAS, it is the mutual desire of the parties that the use of the leased premises be coordinated between said Association and the Parks and Recreation Department of the City to the end that there will be no conflict in scheduling events; and WHEREAS, a form of Lease Agreement to be made and entered into between the parties has this day been submitted to the City Council, which agreement the City Council finds would be for the benefit and in the best interest of the City and should be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Anaheim that the Lease Agreement this day submitted to the City Council to be made and entered into between the parties, providing for the leasing of the building known as the Spencer House, located at 2660 West Broadway, Anaheim, Califor- nia, by the City to Anaheim Art Association, for a period of three years from the date thereof, upon the terms and conditions therein set forth, be, and the same is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk be, and they are hereby authorized to execute said Lease Agree- ment for and on behalf of the City of Anaheim. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION is approved and signed by me this 16th day of May 1967. ATTEST: CITX CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AN oag 2 *red M/H '330 '61ooy STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM I, DENE M. WILLIAMS, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 67R -272 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of the City Council of the City of Anaheim, held on the 16th day of May, 1967, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Dutton, Krein, Schutte, Chandler, and Pebley NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the Mayor of the City of Anaheim approved and signed said Resolution No. 67R -272 on the 16th day of May, 1967. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Anaheim this 16th day of May, 1967. (SEAL) CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM I, DENE M. WILLIAMS, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 67R -272 duly passed and adopted by the Anaheim City Council on May 16, 1967. f Ca .+r 4 >e� Nis k id i sx oy�� gab Y �°-;4` 4�"i ,•�'._.a_E__. ia. Ski. 5_ lam. fs'i i+. Ldk3'' ^ir �S. 'T 21 ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 30, 2007 Page 15 Vander Dussen replied it would have the same dark green color. Mayor Pringle suggested making a distinction between the Platinum Triangle and the Resort area by adopting a different color scheme for light standards and newspaper racks. Ms. Vander Dussen responded the color scheme was consistent with the Resort since the landscaping along Katella was the same as the Resort and the street furniture would be handled in the same manner. Mayor Pringle then inquired if Market Street would have the same fixtures as the Resort; Ms. Vander Dussen replied the proposed standards for newspaper racks would only apply to racks installed on arterials, not on Market Street. Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak. Donna Kelly, representing Lennar Development, was available for questions. Council Member Sidhu remarked the Stadium Loft project was completed and occupancy had begun. He asked if their landscaping and street furniture design was compatible to what was proposed today. Linda Johnson, Planning Department, responded the street lights in front of the building along Katella and State College would be the same as that of all arterials. When the side street next to the Stadium Lofts building was developed as a connector street, it would have the new light standard proposed this evening; however, those improvements had not yet been installed. With no other comments offered, the public hearing was closed. Council Member Kring moved to approve Resolution No. 2007 -016 of the City of Anaheim approving Adjustment No. 1 to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case #2006- 00160)and to approve CEQA Previously- Certified Subsequent EIR No. 332 and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106A and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 138 and to approve Adjustment No. 1 to the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2006 00160); seconded by Council member Galloway. Roll Call vote: Ayes 5; Mayor Pringle, Council Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes 0. Motion Carried 36. ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 330 (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -05092 (TRACKING NO. CUP 2006 015176) FINAL ELEVATION PLAN REVIEW (TRACKING NO. CUP 2006 05178) OWNER: Robert H. Horn Trust, 935 Lotus Circle, San Dimas, CA 91773 AGENT: Scott Richards, SADI LLC, 5939 Monterey Road, Los Angeles, CA 90042 LOCATION: 111 -125 West Elm Street: Property is approximately 0.76acre, having a frontage of 210 feet on the north side of Elm Street and is located 167 feet west of the centerline of Anaheim Boulevard. Request to modify the "affordability" component, add a third incentive, and amend /delete conditions of approval pertaining to an affordability agreement and sewer improvements between the applicant and the City, for a previously- approved 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives for (a) minimum lot size, (b) minimum width of pedestrian access ways, and (c) required dedication and improvement. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 330 (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED) Approved CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -05092 Approved amendment FINAL ELEVATION PLAN REVIEW Approved final elevation plans, with stipulations made pertaining to the elevation renderings, Vote: 6 -0, Commissioner Flores absent. Appealed by Gary Squier. ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 30, 2007 Page 16 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 330. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 05092. MOTION: Approve the Final Elevation Plan Review. Item No. 36 was withdrawn by the appellant. 37. This is a public hearing to consider the request for a waiver or reduction of Public Safety Facilities, Vehicle, and Impact Fees for a 320 -unit apartment complex within the Platinum Triangle. CEQA DETERMINATION CEQA EXEMPTION 15061 (B) (3) GENERAL RULE CASE NO. DAG2005 -00001 (TRACKING NO. M1S2007- 00182) LOCATION: This irregularly- shaped, 14.46 -acre property has frontage of 585 feet on the north side of Katella Avenue, a maximum depth of 1300 feet, and is located 739 feet west of the centerline of State College Boulevard (1515 East Katella BRE Properties Stadium Park Residential). A request for a waiver or reduction of Public Safety Facilities, Vehicle, and Impact Fees for a 320 -unit apartment complex within the Platinum Triangle. Applicant has requested this item be continued to March 6, 2007. Item No. 37 was continued to March 6, 2007. Report on Closed Session Actions: None Council Communications: Council Member Hernandez invited all 2006 Eagle Badge recipients to be honored by Council at a future meeting. He also spoke of the opening of the final phase of Hermosa Village remarking at one time it was an area of high gang activity and was now relatively gang free. He was enthusiastic of the pre school program on site offered through a partnership with the management company and the Anaheim School District. Council Member Galloway reiterated the comments regarding the "Make Kindness Contagious" week proclamation and thanked Dr. Jaievsky for reminding the community of the importance of caring and providing for others. Council Member Kring reported Girl Scout cookie sales had begun and this year there was an option to have boxes sent to military personnel and /or the Second Harvest Food Bank. She also requested that the ordinance prepared by the City Attorney relating to keeping campaign contribution limits at $1,500 and eliminating the Consumer Price Index increase be agendized. In addition she requested the Planning Commission rejection of plans for low cost housing in the resort area, i.e. the general plan amendments proposed for the property at Katella and Haster be agendized for Council for a full hearing. After some discussion, it was determined Council would review all three actions related to that property the approval of the negative declaration, the denial of the general plan amendment and the specific plan amendment. Council Member Sidhu lauded the efforts of Cypress College and was looking forward to their Americana Banquet, commenting on how the program supported scholarships and other programs. He requested the City Manager purchase a table for Council Members to attend. After some discussion on this process, it was determined that any member of Council attending the Americana 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765 -5139 Fax: (714) 765 -5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: JANUARY 30, 2007 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -05092 (111 -125 WEST ELM STREET) ATTACHMENT (Y /N): YES ITEM 36 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council, by Resolution, uphold the Planning Commission's approval of final elevation plans and modifications to this conditional use permit for a previously- approved 52 -unit affordable apartment complex. DISCUSSION: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT On June 12, 2006, the Commission approved a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex, with a density bonus. This approval included a covenant requiring all of the units within the project to be affordable to Low Income Households for a period of fifty -five (55) years. On January 9, 2007, the Planning Commission approved the applicant's request to modify the affordability component of the project. This modification reduced the affordability from 100% for Low Income Households to require either 15% of the units to be provided for Very Low Income Households or 30% percent for Low Income Households. The Commission also deleted a condition to construct sewer improvements since this requirement is secured through an existing Cooperation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and the Public Works Department. Other actions included granting a third incentive pertaining to pedestrian access ways and approval of final elevation plans as more fully described in the Planning Commission staff report and attached minutes from the January 9, 2007 Commission meeting. The modification to the affordability component of the project was requested by the developer due to concerns raised by the lender in early December 2006, after an initial review of the draft affordability agreement between the developer and the Housing Authority. The lender's concerns relate to the underlying entitlement containing provisions requiring 100% affordability for the project, in excess of the requirements of State Law. The requested change to the affordability of the project would only be triggered if the lender had to foreclose on the property. If a foreclosure occurred, the affordability requirements would revert to minimum requirements specified by State Law and the modified conditional use permit. The Housing Authority would be reimbursed for any funds associated with the land acquisition. Even with the approved modifications to the conditional use permit, the developer would still be obligated to develop the site with 100% affordable units since the provisions of the affordability agreement with the Housing Authority require this level of affordability. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 2006 -05092 January 30, 2007 Page 2 of 2 An appeal was submitted by the developer, Gary Squier of Squier Properties, Inc., in opposition to the fifty -five year affordability requirement imposed on the project. Although the appeal letter is based on the affordability requirement, the applicant is actually requesting the appeal in order to set the item for a public hearing as soon as possible, in anticipation of any other potential appeals that would delay final approval of the project. The applicant has secured tax credits to facilitate development of this site and must obtain building permits by February 16, 2007. Since the modifications requested are in compliance with the density bonus provisions of the State Law (Government Code Section 65915) and the Zoning Code, and the project would remain 100% affordable through the Affordability Agreement, staff recommends the Council uphold the Commission's actions regarding the fifty -five (55) year affordability term, modifications to the conditional use permit, and the final elevation plans. IMPACT ON BUDGET: There is no impact on the General Fund. Respectfully submitted, Sheri Vander Dussen Planning Director Attachments: 1. PC Resolution 01/09/07 2. Excerpt Approval 01 /09/07 3. PC Minutes 01/09/07 4. PC Staff Report 01/09/07 5. PC Resolution 06/12/06 6. PC Staff Report 06/12/06 7. Letter of Request for Modifications 8. Appeal Letter 9. Location Map 10a. Exhibit 1 Site Plan 10b. Exhibit 2 Material Board 10c. Exhibit 3 Concept Elevations RESOLUTION NO. PC2007 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2006 -52 ADOPTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -05092 (111 -125 WEST ELM STREET) WHEREAS, on June 12, 2006, the Anaheim Planning Commission did, by Resolution No. PC 2006 -52, grant Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 -05092 to construct a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus (60 dwelling units per acre permitted; 68 dwelling units per acre proposed) and incentives for minimum lot size and dedication and improvement of right -of -way; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. PC 2006 -52, adopted in connection with subject conditional use permit, includes the following conditions of approval: "31. That the applicant shall agree to construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in accordance with a written "Affordability Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and Community Development Department, duly executed and acknowledged by the applicant and the City, and recorded against the subject property in the official records of Orange County, California. The Affordable Units shall be subject to the requirements of the Affordability Agreement for a period of fifty -five (55) years, beginning on the date a certificate of occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units. 33. That final building elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item." 37. That the developer shall submit public sewer improvement plans to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division and a bond shall be posted to guarantee that the existing six (6) inch VCP sewer in Elm Street west to Lemon Street and then south to Santa Ana Street is replaced with an eight (8) inch VCP sewer line (approximately 920 feet). The improvement shall be constructed prior to final building and zoning inspections." WHEREAS, the applicant has requested to modify the "affordability" component of the project, add a third incentive, and amend /delete conditions of approval pertaining to an affordability agreement and sewer improvements; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested review of final elevation plans for a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex; and WHEREAS, this property is currently developed with a historically significant single family home and detached garage, the underlying zoning is I (MU) (Industrial; Mixed Use Overlay); the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Mixed Use land uses; and this property is located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area; and is situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: THE SOUTHERLY 150 FEET OF THE ORIGINAL TOWN LOT 54, RECORDED IN BOOK 4, PAGES 629 -630 OF DEEDS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY THE EASTERLY RECTANGULAR ONE -HALF OF TOWN LOT 55 OF ANAHEIM, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 4 PAGES 629 AND 630 OF DEEDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY G: \GHM6C28AEIm St. Revised Reso.DOC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 8, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed request to construct a 44 -foot high, 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus (60 dwelling units per acre permitted; 68 dwelling units per acre proposed) and incentives is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.32.030.120 with the following incentives: (a) SECTION NO. 18.32.040 (b) SECTION NO. 18.32.080.030 (c) SECTION NO. 18.40.060 *Additional incentive. G: \GHM6C28AEIm St. Revised Reso.DOC Minimum lot size. Q acres required; 0.76 acre proposed). Minimum width of pedestrian accessways. (8 to 12 feet required; 5 to 10 feet proposed) Dedication and improvement of right -of -way. (0 -foot wide public right -of -way required; 55 feet proposed). 2. That at least either (a) fifteen percent (15 of the total number of units will be allocated for Very Low Income Households or (b) thirty percent (30 of the total number of units will be allocated for Lower Income Households (the "Affordable Units therefore, the project would be in compliance with the density bonus provisions of State Law (Government Code Section 65915). 3. That the density bonus and incentives pertaining to (a) minimum lot size, (b) dedication and improvement of right -of -way and (c) minimum width of pedestrian accessways are hereby approved because the applicant has submitted a density bonus application requesting a density bonus and incentives pursuant to State Law (Govt. Code Section 65915). State Law requires that three incentives be granted for projects that provide a minimum of at least fifteen percent (15 of the total number of units for Very Low Income Households or thirty percent (30 of the total number of units for Lower Income Households. In addition, in regards to incentive (b), the proposed street frontage adjacent to the project would be similar to the existing street width. 4. The additional incentive pertaining to minimum width of pedestrian access ways is hereby approved as State Law requires that three incentives be granted for projects that provide a minimum of at least thirty percent (30 of the total units for Lower Income Households or fifteen percent (15 of the total units for Very Low Income Households. The requested incentive has been reviewed and approved by the Fire Department for life /safety issues, and the project would be in compliance with the density bonus provision of State Law as indicated above. 5. That the request for modification to the affordability is hereby approved since the project would be in compliance with the density bonus provisions of State Law (Government Code Section 65915). 6. That the request for modification of Condition No. 31 pertaining to the affordability agreement is hereby approved since the modification would not change the intent or purpose of the condition. 7. That the request to delete Condition No. 37 pertaining to public sewer improvement plans associated with the project is hereby approved since the improvements referenced in the previous approval have been incorporated into and are subject to an existing Cooperation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and the Public Works Department. Additionally, these improvements would be complete by December, 2008, and coordinated with the completion of this project 8. That the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and maintains good overall project design. 9. That the project would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed because the site plan is well designed with adequate setbacks to the street and within the development. 10. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area. 11. That the granting of this conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, would not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 12. That modification to setback and height standards would be compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and that the modifications from the Code allowed under the Mixed Use Ordinance (Chapter 18.32), would achieve a good project designed to preserve and enhance the neighborhood. The applicant has demonstrated that the setback and height modifications are necessary to make the housing units economically feasible. 13. That the modifications would allow for a development that provides a unified street frontage similar to other residential development in the Downtown, exceeds the amount of recreational space required by code, and promotes compatibility with surrounding development that is currently under construction in a manner that would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed. 14. That commercial floor area would not be needed in conjunction with this residential project since the project is located on a local residential street with no commercial activity or attractions, and since the project would be located in close proximity to office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within Downtown Anaheim. 15. That indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That as demonstrated by the analysis included in the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330 EIR (Final EIR) and Addendum, the proposed project actions will not result in new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant impacts; and, therefore, no supplemental or subsequent environmental review is required. Therefore, the Planning Commission hereby determines that the previously certified Final EIR with the Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the proposed project actions in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 05092. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby amend the conditions of approval of Resolution No. PC2006 -52, relating to Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 05092, as follows: 1. That the City of Anaheim Sewer Impact Mitigation fee for the Old Town Basin 8 Area shall be paid. 2. That all existing driveway approaches on Elm Street shall be removed and replaced with curb, gutter, parkway landscaping and sidewalk. A Right -of -Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. G: \GHM6C28AEIm St. Revised Reso.DOC 3. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP. Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs. Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs, and Describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 4. That prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP. Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMPs. 5. That all driveways shall be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 6. That gates shall not be installed across the driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Services Division prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval in conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the sign and wall /fence locations. 8. That plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 402B, 436 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 9. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for storage uses. 10. That no compact parking spaces shall be permitted. 11. That an on -site trash truck turn around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 or an approved alternative, which shall be shown on plans as required by the Department of Public Works, Sanitation Division. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 12. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum 1- gallon size clinging vines planted on maximum 3 -foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. G: \GHM6C28AEIm St. Revised Reso.DOC 13. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. 14. That the locations for future above ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be subject to the review and approval of the appropriate City departments. 15. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. 16. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards Specifications. Any water service and /or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The owner /developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. 17. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the front setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division outside of the front setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and the Cross Connection Control Inspector. 18. That since this project has landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed and comply with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 19. That prior to submitting water improvement plans, the developer shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and approval. The plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on -site water system to meet the project's water demand and fire protection requirements. 20. That water improvement plans in areas not covered under the Cooperation Agreement between the City of Anaheim and the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division for approval and a performance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney shall be posted with the City of Anaheim. 21. That prior to rendering water service, the developer shall submit a set of improvement plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and approval in determining the conditions necessary for providing water service to the project. 22. That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the developer /owner shall submit to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall occur in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations. 23. That the property owner /developer shall install street lights on the public streets as required by the Electrical Engineering Division. A bond for the installation of the street lights shall be posted with the City of Anaheim. The street lights shall be installed prior to occupancy. 24. That the property owner /developer shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement to be determined as electrical design is completed. G: \GHM6C28AEIm St. Revised Reso.DOC 25. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape and /or hardscape screening of all pad mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 26. That the entire property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 27. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 28. That if required by the Urban Forestry Division of the Community Services Department, street trees shall be installed, by the property owner, within the public rights -of -way adjacent to Elm Street. The size, type and number of trees shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Urban Forestry Division of the Community Services Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 29. That all air conditioning apparatus and other roof and ground- mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent residential properties and the public right -of -way. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 30. That all dwelling units shall be assigned street addresses, and all public and private streets shall be assigned street names, by the Planning Department. 31. That the applicant shall agree to construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in accordance with a written "Density Bonus Housing Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and Housing Authority, duly executed and acknowledged by the applicant and the City, and recorded against the subject property in the official records of Orange County, California. The Affordable Units shall be subject to the requirements of the Density Bonus Housing Agreement for a period of fifty -five (55) years, beginning on the date a Certificate of Occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units. 32. That a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division and approved by the City Attorneys office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with an approved Water Quality Management Plan and maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. 33. That final building elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 34. That final landscape and fencing plans for the subject property shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. Said plans shall show minimum 24 -inch box size trees, shrubs, groundcover, and clinging vines to be planted in layers and shall also show decorative hardscape treatment within the central courtyard area. The landscape material selected shall be appropriate to the width of either the parkway or the planter area. Any decision made by the Planning and Community Development Departments regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission. All trees shall be properly and professionally maintained by the property owner to ensure mature, healthy growth. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 35. That the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 -05092 is hereby granted subject to the approval of, and finalization of, Reclassification No. 2006 00178, now pending. 36. That the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Department requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 1473 (to permit a motorcycle repair facility with outdoor storage with waivers of required screening of outdoor uses and minimum number of parking spaces). 37. Intentionally Deleted at the January 8, 2007, Commission meeting as requested. G: \GHM6C28AEIm St. Revised Reso.DOC 38. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 9, and as conditioned herein. 39. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition No. 3, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170. 40. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, and 37, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.04.60.190 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 41. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 4, 16, 23, 37, and 38, above mentioned, shall be complied with. 42. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of January 8, 2007. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 "Procedures" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION G: \GHM6C28AEIm St. Revised Reso.DOC CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on January 8, 2007, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2007. G: \GHM6C28AEIm St. Revised Reso.DOC SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION Is represented by this drawing are the exclusive property of withee malcolm architects, Ilp and shall not be reproduced in whole or in part without the express prior written permission of said architects, any unauthorized reuse of these plans other than for the project and It keynotes 1 1111111111111111=11 0 El FIRE DEPARTMENT "KNOX 500" GAS METERS TRANSFORMER ACCESSIBILITY RAMP (1 =13 MAX) LAUNDRY TRASH ROOM TOT LOT STORAGE TRELLIS ELEVATOR GARAGE RAMP OFFICE "CALL BOX" DIRECTORY PLANTER EXIT STAIRS COURTYARD ACCESS ADDRESS SIGN PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT WATER FOUNTAIN BARBECUE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT COURTYARDS AREA <SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS) SETBACK COMMUNITY CENTER PATIO AT PODIUM LAFD "KNOX 500" LOCATION AS PER FIRE DEPT. ON GROUND LEVEL LINE OF GARAGE STRUCTURE BELOW DESCRIPTION 5TRUGT. RETAINING WALL SEE 5TRUGT. DIGG5 ACCE56ABLE PATH OF TRAVEL H.G. ACCESSIBLE PATH OK TRAVEL 5000 PUBLIC STREET- DET. 16/48.09 3 -HOUR EXIT ENCLOSURE SHAFT WALL Is represented by this drawing are the exclusive property of withee malcolm architects, Ilp and shall not be reproduced in whole or in part without the express prior written permission of said architects, any unauthorized reuse of these plans other than for the project and It Added incentive. Chairman Eastman opened the public hearing. [DRAFT] JANUARY 8, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4a. ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 330 (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -05092 (TRACKING NO. CUP2006- 05176) 4c. FINAL ELEVATION PLAN REVIEW (TRACKING NO. CUP2006- 05178) Karaki/Velasquez Karaki Karaki/Velasquez Owner: Robert H. Horn Trust, 935 Lotus Circle, San Dimas, CA 91773 Agent: Scott Richards, SADI LLC, 5939 Monterey Road, Los Angeles, CA 90042 Location: 111 -125 West Elm Street: Property is approximately 0.76 acre, having a frontage of 210 feet on the north side of Elm Street and is located 167 feet west of the centerline of Anaheim Boulevard. Request to modify the "affordability" component, add a third incentive, and amend /delete conditions of approval pertaining to an affordability agreement and sewer improvements between the applicant and the City, for a previously- approved 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives for (a) minimum lot size, (b) minimum width of pedestrian accessways and (c) required dedication and improvement. Request to review final elevation plans for a previously- approved, 52 -unit, affordable apartment complex with density bonus and incentives. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. PC2007 -3 Applicant's Statement: Gary Squier, developer, was present to answer any questions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Approved Approved amendment Approved final elevation plans, with stipulations made pertaining to the elevation renderings. VOTE: 6 -0 Commissioner Flores absent Project Planner: ap ra mire z@ a n a h e im. n e t) John Ramirez, Associate Planner, introduced the item for a request to modify the "affordability" component, add a third incentive, and amend /delete conditions of approval pertaining to an affordability agreement and sewer improvements between the applicant and the City, for a previously- approved 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives for (a) minimum lot size, (b) minimum width of pedestrian accessways, and (c) required dedication and improvement. The request also included review of final elevation plans. Commissioner Karaki asked Mr. Squier, why he drastically changed the original elevations and can't he just modify the original elevations. 01 -08 -07 Page 1 [DRAFT] JANUARY 8, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Mr. Squier stated there were no substantial changes. The original design had many different styles of architecture that were very busy so they just brought it down to a simpler building. Changes were not due to cost savings, but recommendations from members of the community. Commissioner Karaki said the original elevations were approved and Commission likes to keep the original approved elevations without so many changes. Chairman Eastman stated she agreed with Commissioner Karaki. She stated she understood that they previously approved a concept rather than realistic drawings. The new drawings show a new longer roof line with a solid tile roof. The original elevation had a more interesting look with a smaller percentage of tile. Mr. Squier, Chairman Eastman and Commissioner Karaki discussed the roof materials and roof line. Commissioner Buffa didn't agree with the neighborhood comments and wanted to state for the record that they are an advisory body to the Commission and their input is generally enormously helpful, but in this situation they went too far. She'd like to see more than one color on the building and she'd like to see at least two architectural styles on the project. Commissioner Faessel and Public Works staff briefly discussed how much the City and developer are paying for sewer improvements. Commissioner Velasquez and Mr. Squier discussed payback of the $3.75 million loan from the City, tax credits, low income density bonus and incentives in building the project. She wanted to make sure that the lender was acceptable with 100% affordable housing. Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, stated he didn't feel the City had a great deal of exposure or chance of loss on this project. Mr. Ramirez confirmed approval of the project with stipulations that the elevations be returned to the original rendering as previously submitted, with specific attention to the roof line, using more than one color on the building, maintaining the combination of roof and architectural styles, and eliminating the Romanesque columns on certain balcony areas of the building. OPPOSITION: An e-mail was received expressing concerns of the subject request. Mark Gordon, Assistant City Attorney, presented the 22 -day appeal rights ending at 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, January 30, 2007. DISCUSSION TIME: 40 minutes (3:41 -4:21) 01 -08 -07 Page 2 4a. CEQA ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 330 (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) (Motion) 4b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -05092 (Resolution) (TRACKING NO. CUP2006- 05176) 4c. FINAL ELEVATION PLAN REVIEW (Motion) (TRACKING NO. CUP2006- 05178) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This 0.76 -acre parcel has a frontage of 210 feet on the north side of Elm Street, a maximum depth of 180 feet, and is located 167 feet west of the centerline of Anaheim Boulevard (111 125 West Elm Street). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests the following: (a) To modify the "affordability" component, add a third incentive, and amend /delete conditions of approval pertaining to an affordability agreement and sewer improvements for a previously- approved 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives for (a) minimum lot size, (b) minimum width of pedestrian access ways and (c) required dedication and improvement under Authority of Code Sections 18.32.030.120 and 18.60.190.030. (b) Review of final elevation plans for a previously- approved, 52 -unit, affordable apartment complex with density bonus and incentives. Added incentive. BACKGROUND: (3) The site consists of two properties. The 111 West Elm Street property is developed with industrial buildings and the 125 West Elm Street property is developed with a historically significant single family home and detached garage. The historic home is proposed to be relocated to an existing vacant property at Lemon Street and Water Street (owned by the Redevelopment Agency). Both properties are zoned I (MU) (Industrial; Mixed Use Overlay) zone and are located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area. The Anaheim General Plan designates the site for Mixed Use land uses. The properties to the north, east, and south (across Elm Street) are designated for Mixed Uses, and the properties to the west are designated for Medium Density Residential land uses. This property is located within the Anaheim Colony Historic District which was adopted by City Council on October 21, 1997, along with guidelines to ensure that infill development would be compatible with the District. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 -05092 (to construct a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus (60 dwelling units per acre permitted; 68 dwelling units per acre proposed) and incentives for minimum lot size and dedication and improvement of right -of -way was approved by the Planning Commission on June 12, 2006. Resolution No. PC2006 -52, approved in conjunction with this permit, includes the following conditions of approval: G: \GHM6C27C10807JPR Revised.DOC Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 8, 2007 Item No. 4 s rcu p2006 -05176 1 0807j p r (5) G: \GHM6C27C10807JPR Revised.DOC Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 8, 2007 Item No. 4 "31. That the applicant shall agree to construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in accordance with a written "Affordability Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and Community Development Department, duly executed and acknowledged by the applicant and the City, and recorded against the subject property in the official records of Orange County, California. The Affordable Units shall be subject to the requirements of the Affordability Agreement for a period of fifty -five (55) years, beginning on the date a certificate of occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units. 33. That final building elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item." 37. That the developer shall submit public sewer improvement plans to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division and a bond shall be posted to guarantee that the existing six (6) inch VCP sewer in Elm Street west to Lemon Street and then south to Santa Ana Street is replaced with an eight (8) inch VCP sewer line (approximately 920 feet). The improvement shall be constructed prior to final building and zoning inspections." DISCUSSION: The applicant is requesting to modify the "affordability" component of the project, add a third incentive, and amend /delete conditions of approval indicated above pertaining to an affordability agreement and sewer improvements. In addition to these requested modifications, the applicant is also requesting review of final elevation plans as required by the above referenced condition of approval no. 33. No changes to exhibits are proposed. (6) The applicant is requesting the entitlement be modified to require that at least either (a) fifteen percent (15 of the total number of units will be allocated for Very Low Income households or (b) thirty percent (30 of the total number of units will be allocated for Lower Income households as opposed to the current proposal of 100 of the units for Low Income Households. The request for this modification is strictly for financing purposes and lender obligations. The applicant intends to develop the project with 100 of the units for Low Income Households. Additionally, the Affordability Agreement with the Housing Authority would still require 100 of the units for Low Income Households. Since the modification requested with regard to the "affordability" component of the project is in compliance with the density bonus provisions of State Law (Government Code Section 65915), staff recommends approval of this modification as requested. The applicant is requesting modification of Condition No. 31, indicated above, to update the wording to be consistent with the documents required as part of this request. Since the modification to the condition (as indicated below in Bold) would not change the intent or purpose of the condition, staff recommends approval of the amended condition, to read as follows: "31. That the applicant shall agree to construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in accordance with a written "Density Bonus Housing Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and Community Development Department, duly executed and acknowledged by the applicant and the City, and recorded against the subject property in the official records of Orange County, California. The Affordable Units shall be subject to the requirements of the Density Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 8, 2007 Item No. 4 Bonus Housing Agreement for a period of fifty -five (55) years, beginning on the date a Certificate of Occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units." (8) The applicant is also requesting deletion of Condition No. 37, indicated above, pertaining to public sewer improvements associated with the project. The improvements referenced in the previous approval have been incorporated into and are subject to an existing Cooperation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and the Public Works Department.. These improvements will be completed by December, 2008, and coordinated with the completion of this project. Since the improvements are required under a separate agreement and the Public Works Department supports the modification, staff recommends deletion of the condition. The applicant has submitted the attached letter requesting a third incentive pursuant to State Law. Section 65915 (b) of the Government Code, in relevant part, requires that the City must approve a density bonus and incentives when an applicant agrees to provide specified levels of affordable housing. The applicant is entitled to receive three incentives or concessions for projects that include at least thirty percent (30 of the total units for Lower Income Households or fifteen percent (15 of the total units for Very Low Income Households (Government Code Section 65915). The City must grant the incentive or concession requested unless it makes the findings set forth in Section 65915(d)(1). Section 65915(1) defines a concession or incentive to mean any of the following: "(1) A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. (2) Approval of mixed use zoning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and if the commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses are compatible with the housing project and the existing or planned development in the area where the proposed housing project will be located. (3) Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the city, county, or city and county that result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. This subdivision does not limit or require the provision of direct financial incentives for the housing development, including the provision of publicly owned land, by the city, county, or city and county, or the waiver of fees or dedication requirements." A copy of Section 65915 is attached to this staff report. (10) The additional incentive (inadvertently not identified when the project was approved by Commission this past June) pertains to minimum width of pedestrian access ways. Code requires a minimum pedestrian access way width of 8 to 12 feet and access way widths from 5 to 10 feet are proposed. The applicant has submitted the attached updated density bonus application requesting this third incentive pursuant to State Law (Govt. Code Section 65915). State Law requires that three incentives be granted for projects that provide a minimum of at least thirty percent (30 of the total units for Lower Income Households or fifteen percent (15 of the total units for Very Low Income Households. Since the requested incentive has been reviewed and approved by the Fire Department for life /safety G: \GHM6C27C10807JPR Revised.DOC G: \GHM6C27C10807JPR Revised.DOC Original Rendering of Project as seen from Elm Street Proposed Elevation from Elm Street Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 8, 2007 Item No. 4 issues, and the project would meet the minimum affordability requirements of State Law, the project is eligible for the third incentive. (11) The original submittal (as seen above) indicated a 43.5 -foot high (above grade), 4 -story apartment complex with a Spanish architectural style. The architecture would include concrete "s" tile roofs, stucco finished exterior walls, arched treatment around the doorways and windows, wood balusters and wrought iron railings enclosing the balconies, and decorative attic vents. The permitted building height is determined by conditional use permit. Submitted plans indicate a 44 -foot high apartment complex. (12) The submitted refined elevation plans and material board further detail the use of varied roof lines, wrought iron "Juliet" balconies, enhanced foam surrounds, pre -cast columns, canvas awnings, as well as the use of heavy timber trellis work, and tile and wrought iron accents. Warm color tones and light sand finish textures, recessed windows, and archways commensurate with the character of Spanish style architecture would be incorporated on each elevation of the building. The enhanced product is a result of Community Development working with the local community to achieve a design that (13) The Anaheim General Plan contains a Community Design Element which is intended to provide a practical framework for specific design guidelines to ensure that design decisions in various parts of the City serve to implement the City's vision. One of the goals of this Element addresses multiple family residential developments and is implemented through the policies identified below: "GOAL 4.1: Multiple family housing is attractively designed and scaled to complement the neighborhood and provides visual interest through varied architectural detailing. Policies: G: \GHM6C27C10807JPR Revised.DOC Examples of architectural elements proposed Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 8, 2007 Item No. 4 complies with Historic Preservation guidelines and maintains the quality of construction demonstrated in other projects in the Downtown. Reduce the visual impact of large- scale, multiple family buildings by requiring articulated entry features, such as attractive porches, and detailed facade treatments, which create visual interest and give each unit more personalized design. Discourage visually monotonous, multiple family residences by incorporating different architectural styles, a variety of rooflines, wall articulation, balconies, window treatments, and varied colors and building materials on all elevations. Require appropriate setbacks and height limits to provide privacy where multiple family housing is developed adjacent to single family housing. Reduce the visual impact of parking areas by utilizing interior courtyard garages, parking structures, subterranean lots, or tuck under, alley loaded designs. Require minimum lot size criteria in the Zoning Code to encourage professional, responsible, on -site property management. Provide usable common open space amenities. Common open space should be centrally located and contain amenities such as seating, shade and play equipment. FINDINGS: Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 8, 2007 Item No. 4 Private open space may include courtyards, balconies, patios, terraces and enclosed play areas. Where a multiple -story apartment building abuts single -story development, provide for a gradual transition in height by reducing the height of the building adjacent to the smaller scale use. Provide convenient pedestrian access from multiple family development to nearby commercial centers, schools, and transit stops. Where possible, underground or screen utilities and utility equipment or locate and size them to be as inconspicuous as possible. The design goal is to encourage multiple family housing that retains a neighborhood feel and contributes to the character of the street environment and provides a quality residential environment that is safe and attractive." (14) Many design features intended to address the policies indicated above have been incorporated into the project, including articulated entry features, a variety of rooflines, wall articulation, balconies, window treatments, and reducing the visual impact of parking areas by utilizing interior courtyard garages, parking structures, and subterranean structures. As proposed, the project meets the intent of the Community Design Element and further implements the City's vision for multiple family residential development. Since the proposed elevations are consistent with the Community Design Element and further implement the City's vision for multiple family residential development, and are consistent with Historic Preservation guidelines, staff recommends approval of the final elevation plans, as proposed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (15) Staff has reviewed the request to modify the "affordability" component, add a third incentive, and amend /delete conditions of approval and for a review of final elevation plans and the previously- approved Addendum to EIR No. 330 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122, and finds there are no changes to the originally- approved permit and that will result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, staff recommends that the previously- approved Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Plan serve as the required environmental documentation for this request. (16) Before the Commission grants any major modification to a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: G: \GHM6C27C10807JPR Revised.DOC (a) That the modification of use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the modification will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; G: \GHM6C27C10807JPR Revised.DOC Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 8, 2007 Item No. 4 (c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the modified use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the modifications under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. (17) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (18) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission take the following actions as indicated in the attached resolution, including the findings and conditions contained therein: a. By motion, determine that the previously- approved addendum to EIR No. 330 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122 are adequate to serve as the appropriate environmental documentation for this request. b. By resolution, approve the amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 05092. c. By motion, approve the final elevation plans for the previously- approved affordable apartment complex (Tracking No. CUP2006- 05178). RESOLUTION NO. PC2006 -52 A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -05092 BE GRANTED (111 -125 WEST ELM STREET) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit to construct a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: THE SOUTHERLY 150 FEET OF THE ORIGINAL TOWN LOT 54, RECORDED IN BOOK 4, PAGES 629 -630 OF DEEDS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY THE EASTERLY RECTANGULAR ONE -HALF OF TOWN LOT 55 OF ANAHEIM, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 4 PAGES 629 AND 630 OF DEEDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on June 12, 2006 at 2:30 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed conditional use permit and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts: 1. That the proposed request to construct a 44 -foot high, 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus (60 dwelling units per acre permitted; 68 dwelling units per acre proposed) and incentives is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.32.030.120 with the following incentives: 2. That at least thirty (30) percent of the total units will be allocated for low income households; therefore, the project would be in compliance with the density bonus provisions of State Law (Government Code Section 65915). 3. That the density bonus and incentives pertaining to (a) minimum lot size and (b) dedication and improvement of right -of -way are hereby approved because the applicant has submitted a density bonus application requesting a density bonus and incentives pursuant to State Law (Govt. Code Section 65915). State Law requires that three incentives be granted for projects that provide a minimum of at least 30 percent of the total units for low income households. This project provides affordable units for low income households for 100 percent of its units. In addition, in regards to incentive (b), the proposed streets would connect to and be similar in width to the existing street grid. 4. That the proposed project is compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and maintains good overall project design. Cr \PC2006 -52 (a) SECTION NO. 18.32.040 Minimum lot size. (3 acres required; 0.76 acre proposed). (b) SECTION NO. 18.40.060 Dedication and improvement of right -of -way. (0 -foot wide public right -of -way required; 55 feet proposed). -1- PC2006 -52 5. That the project would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed because the site plan is well designed with adequate setbacks to the street and within the development. 6. That the size and shape of the site for the proposed use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area. 7. That the granting of this conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, would not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 8. That modification to setback and height standards would be compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and that the modifications from the Code allowed under the Mixed Use Ordinance (Chapter 18.32), would achieve a good project designed to preserve and enhance the neighborhood. The applicant has demonstrated that the setback and height modifications are necessary to make the housing units economically feasible. 9. That the modifications would allow for a development that provides a unified street frontage similar to other residential development in the Downtown, exceeds the amount of recreational space required by code, and promotes compatibility with surrounding development that is currently under construction in a manner that would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed. 10. That commercial floor area would not be needed in conjunction with this residential project since the project is located on a local residential street with no commercial activity or attractions, and since the project would be located in close proximity to office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within Downtown Anaheim. 11. That no one indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to the subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING: That as demonstrated by the analysis included in the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330 EIR (Final EIR) and Addendum, the proposed project actions will not result in new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant impacts; and, therefore, no supplemental or subsequent environmental review is required. Therefore, the Planning Commission hereby determines that the previously certified Final EIR with the Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the proposed project actions in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 05092. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby grant subject Petition for Conditional Use Permit, upon the following conditions which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the subject property in order to preserve the safety and general welfare of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim: 1. That the City of Anaheim Sewer Impact Mitigation fee for the Old Town Basin 8 Area shall be paid. 2. That all existing driveway approaches on Elm Street shall be removed and replaced with curb, gutter, parkway landscaping, and sidewalk. A Right -of -Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 3. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department Development Services Division for review and approval a Water Quality Management Plan that: Addresses Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. -2- PC2006 -52 Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP. Describes the long -term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs. Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs, and Describes the mechanism for funding the long -term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. 4. That prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: Demonstrate that all structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP. Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMPs. 5. That all driveways shall be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer in conformance with Engineering Standard No. 115. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 6. That gates shall not be installed across the driveway in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic in the adjacent public street. Installation of any gates shall conform to Engineering Standard Plan No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Services Division prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. That plans shall be submitted to the City Traffic and Transportation Manager for his review and approval in conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for the sign or wall /fence locations. 8. That plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 402B, 436 and 470 pertaining to parking standards and driveway locations. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with said plans. 9. That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for storage uses. 10. That no compact parking spaces shall be permitted. 11. That an on -site trash truck turn around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 or an approved alternative, which shall be shown on plans as required by the Department of Public Works, Sanitation Division. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 12. That trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. Said storage areas shall be designed, located and screened so as not to be readily identifiable from adjacent streets or highways. The walls of the storage areas shall be protected from graffiti opportunities by the use of plant materials such as minimum 1- gallon size clinging vines planted on maximum 3 -foot centers or tall shrubbery. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 13. That a plan sheet for solid waste storage and collection and a plan for recycling shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division for review and approval. -3- PC2006 -52 14. That the locations for future above ground utility devices including, but not limited to, electrical transformers, water backflow devices, gas, communications and cable devices, etc., shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. Plans shall also identify the specific screening treatments of each device (i.e. landscape screening, color of walls, materials, identifiers, access points, etc.) and shall be subject to the review and approval of the appropriate City departments. 15. That all requests for new water services or fire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonment of existing water services and fire lines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Anaheim Public Utilities Department. 16. That all existing water services and fire lines shall conform to current Water Services Standards Specifications. Any water service and /or fire line that does not meet current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The owner /developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to abandon any water service or fire line. 17. That all backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of the front setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall be brought up to current standards. Any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division outside of the front setback area in a manner fully screened from all public street and alleys. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross Connection Control Inspector. 18. That since this project has landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a separate irrigation meter shall be installed and comply with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10.19 of Anaheim Municipal Code. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 19. That prior to submitting water improvement plans, the developer shall submit a water system master plan, including a hydraulic distribution network analysis, for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on -site water system to meet the project's water demand and fire protection requirements. 20. That water improvement plans in areas not covered under the Cooperation Agreement between the City of Anaheim and the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency shall be submitted to the Water Engineering Division for approval and a performance bond in the amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by the City Attorney shall be posted with the City of Anaheim. 21. That prior to rendering water service, the developer shall submit a set of improvement plans for Public Utilities Water Engineering review and approval in determining the conditions necessary for providing water service to the project. 22. That prior to application for water meters, fire line or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the developer /owner shall submit to the Public Utilities Water Engineering Division an estimate of the maximum fire flow rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project. This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall occur in accordance with Rule No. 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates, Rules and Regulations. 23. That the property owner /developer shall install street lights on the public streets as required by the Electrical Engineering Division. A bond for the installation of the street lights shall be posted with the City of Anaheim. The street lights shall be installed prior to occupancy. 24. That the property owner /developer shall provide the City of Anaheim with a public utilities easement to be determined as electrical design is completed. -4- PC2006 -52 25. That any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the developer's expense. Landscape and /or hardscape screening of all pad mounted equipment shall be required and shall be shown on plans submitted for building permits. 26. That the entire property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 27. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and /or dead. 28. That if required by the Urban Forestry Division of the Community Services Department, street trees shall be installed, by the property owner, within the public rights -of -way adjacent to Elm Street. The size, type and number of trees shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Urban Forestry Division of the Community Services Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 29. That all air conditioning apparatus and other roof and ground- mounted equipment shall be properly shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent residential properties and the public right -of -way. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 30. That all dwelling units shall be assigned street addresses, and all public and private streets shall be assigned street names, by the Planning Department. 31. That the applicant shall agree to construct, operate and maintain the Affordable Units in accordance with a written "Affordability Agreement" between the applicant and the City, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and Community Development Department, duly executed and acknowledged by the applicant and the City, and recorded against the subject property in the official records of Orange County, California. The Affordable Units shall be subject to the requirements of the Affordability Agreement for a period of fifty -five (55) years, beginning on the date a certificate of occupancy is granted for the Affordable Units. 32. That a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division and approved by the City Attorneys office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with approved an Water Quality Management Plan and maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. 33. That final building elevation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval by the Planning Commission as a Reports and Recommendations item. 34. That final landscape and fencing plans for the subject property shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. Said plans shall show minimum 24 -inch box size trees, shrubs, groundcover, and clinging vines to be planted in layers and shall also show decorative hardscape treatment within the central courtyard area. The landscape material selected shall be appropriate to the width of either the parkway or the planter area. Any decision made by the Planning and Community Development Departments regarding said plan may be appealed to the Planning Commission. All trees shall be properly and professionally maintained by the property owner to ensure mature, healthy growth. Such information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 35. That the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 -05092 is hereby granted subject to the approval of, and finalization of, Reclassification No. 2006 00178, now pending. 36. That the property owner shall submit a letter to the Planning Department requesting termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 1473 (to permit a motorcycle repair facility with outdoor storage with waivers of required screening of outdoor uses and minimum number of parking spaces). 37. That the developer shall submit public sewer improvement plans to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division and a bond shall be posted to guarantee that the existing six (6) inch -5- PC2006 -52 VCP sewer in Elm Street west to Lemon Street and then south to Santa Ana Street is replaced with an eight (8) inch VCP sewer line (approximately 920 feet). The improvement shall be constructed prior to final building and zoning inspections. 38. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 9, and as conditioned herein. 39. That prior to issuance of a grading permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition No. 3, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170. 40. That prior to issuance of a building permit, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, and 37, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 41. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 4, 16, 23, 37, and 38, above mentioned, shall be complied with. 42. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or requirement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and void. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 15 days of the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or the revocation of the approval of this application. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of June 12, 2006. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60, "Zoning Provisions General" of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal. ATTEST: (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ELEANOR MORRIS) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY GAIL EASTMAN) CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -6- PC2006 -52 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM I, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Planning Commission held on June 12, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA, EASTMAN, FAESSEL, FLORES, KARAKI, ROMERO, VELASQUEZ NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 2006. (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ELEANOR MORRIS) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -7- PC2006 -52 5a. CEQA ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 330 (Motion) 5b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2006 -00178 (Resolution) 5c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006 -05092 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This 0.76 -acre parcel has a frontage of 210 feet on the north side of Elm Street, a maximum depth of 180 feet, and is located 167 feet west of the centerline of Anaheim Boulevard (111 125 West Elm Street). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of the following: Reclassification No. 2006 -00178 request to reclassify the subject property from the I (Industrial) zone to the I (MU) (Industrial; Mixed Use Overlay) zone, or less intense zone. Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 -05092 request to construct a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus (60 dwelling units per acre permitted; 68 dwelling units per acre proposed) and incentives under authority of Code Section 18.32.030.120 to include the following incentives: (a) SECTION NO. 18.32.040 Minimum lot size. Q acres required; 0.76 acres proposed). (b) SECTION NO. 18.40.060 BACKGROUND: (3) DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (5) SR CUP2006 05092ds Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Item No. 5 Dedication and improvement of right -of -way. (60- foot wide public right -of -way required; 55 feet proposed). The site consists of two properties. The 111 West Elm Street property is developed with industrial buildings and the 125 West Elm Street property is developed with a historically significant single family home and detached garage. The historic home is proposed to be relocated to an existing vacant property at Lemon Street and Water Street (owned by the Redevelopment Agency). Both properties are zoned I (Industrial) and are located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area. The Anaheim General Plan designates the site for Mixed Use land uses. The properties to the north, east, and south (across Elm Street) are designated for Mixed Uses, and the properties to the west are designated for Medium Density Residential land uses. (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 1473 (to permit a motorcycle repair facility with outdoor storage with waivers of required screening of outdoor uses and minimum number of parking spaces) was approved by the Planning Commission on June 10, 1974. This entitlement is no longer necessary and a condition of approval has been added to terminate this permit. The applicant proposes to reclassify the subject properties from the I zone to the I (MU) zone in conformance with the General Plan. The applicant also requests approval of a Page 1 Setbacks Zoning Proposed Required North (adjacent to an appliance store) CG 5 to 8 feet None East (adjacent to a commercial retail center) 1 3 feet to garage ramp, 12 to 16 feet to building None South (adjacent to Elm Street) 1,168 9 to 12 feet* 15 feet West (adjacent to a single family home) 1 9 to 27 feet* 87 feet (based on 2 times height of the structure) Plan No. of Units Project Living Area (s.f.) No. of Bedrooms/ Bathrooms A 0.76 acres 34 945 2 Bed 2 Bath B Required commercial floor area 12 1,168 2 Bed 2 Bath C 200 s.f. per unit (10,600 s.f. total) 6 1,327 3 Bed 2 Bath Development Standards Proposed Project MU Overlay Zone Standards Site Area 0.76 acres 3 acres Number of dwelling units /density 52 dwelling units 636 s.f. /unit (68 d.u. /acre) 45 units max. (60 d.u. /acre) Required commercial floor area None 0.1 FAR* Recreation /Leisure Area 283 s.f. per unit (14,741 s.f. total) 200 s.f. per unit (10,600 s.f. total) Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Item No. 5 conditional use permit to construct a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives. The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the following information on the proposed 6 -story (2 subterranean parking levels and 4 residential floors above the ground level) apartment complex: Modification to standards is allowed in order to promote increased pedestrian activity, provide for a unified street frontage, ensure privacy and light for residential uses, provide for public spaces and promote compatibility with existing development, as outlined in Chapter 18.32 of the Zoning Code. The applicant has requested density bonus incentives for lot size and right -of -way dedication pursuant to State Law (Govt. Code Section 65915). (6) The site plan further indicates that the project is designed with a podium style, 4 -story residential complex constructed over a 2 -level underground parking structure. The buildings will be separated by a main courtyard on the podium deck in the center of the complex. The plan indicates the following information pertaining to the proposed setbacks: Modification to standards is allowed in order to promote increased pedestrian activity, provide for a unified street frontage, ensure privacy and light for residential uses, provide for public spaces and promote compatibility with existing development, as outlined in Chapter 18.32 of the Zoning Code. Based on the underlying I zone requirements. (7) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 4) for the apartment units indicate a living room, dining room, kitchen, porch entry, bedrooms, bathrooms, and closets. The unit types are summarized as follows: Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Item No. 5 (8) Vehicular access would be provided by a driveway on Elm Street. Overall right -of -way width would be 55 feet for Elm Street; City standard Detail No. 160 -A requires a width of 60 feet. The site plan indicates 106 on -site parking spaces within the two underground parking levels. Code requires a total of 122 spaces (forty -six 2 bedroom units x 2.25 spaces /unit 104 spaces; six 3 bedroom units x 3 spaces /unit 18 spaces). The applicant has submitted the attached density bonus application requesting a parking incentive pursuant to State Law (Government Code Section 65915). State Law requires parking automatic incentives to be granted for projects that provide a minimum of ten percent of the project with affordable units. With respect to parking for affordable projects, Government Code Section 65915 requires 2 spaces for all 2 and 3 bedroom units within the project site. All apartment units within the development would be affordable for low income households; therefore, the project would qualify for the parking reduction permitted by State Law. Therefore, a total of 104 spaces are required for this project under this State Law provision. (10) A total of 14,741 square feet of recreational /leisure area would be provided via a combination of private patio and balcony areas and a common courtyard area. Code requires a total of 10,400 square feet which may be provided in any combination of private or common area. Rendering of apartment complex (11) Elevation drawings (Exhibit Nos. 5 -7) indicate a 43.5 -foot high (above grade), 4 -story apartment complex with a Spanish architectural style. The architecture would include concrete "s" tile roofs, stucco finished exterior walls, arched treatment around the doorways and windows, wood balusters and wrought iron railings enclosing the balconies, and decorative attic vents. The permitted building height is determined by conditional use permit. Submitted plans indicate a 44 -foot high apartment complex. (12) The conceptual landscape plan (Exhibit No. 9) indicates a mixture of 24- and 36 -inch box trees arranged within the landscaped setback along the street frontage and interior private Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Item No. 5 courtyard. Columnar trees and shrubbery would flank the apartment complex along the side yard areas. Code requires one 24 -inch box evergreen tree for every 20 feet of street frontage to be planted in the landscape setback adjacent to each public street. A layered landscaped theme is required to provide depth and variety within the landscaped setback. Code further requires that 50% of all shrubbery be a minimum of five gallon in size at the time of planting. In addition to the on -site landscaping provided, the applicant will be required to landscape the 5 -foot wide parkways that will be provided along the public street with a combination of trees and groundcover. The on -site property management would be responsible for maintaining the parkway landscaping. As a recommended condition of approval, the applicant would be required to submit final detailed landscape plans for staff review including detailed plans for the treatment of the podium deck. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (13) On June 7, 2004, the City Council certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 330 (hereinafter referred to as "the Final EIR for the Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code, adopted a Statement of Findings and Facts, and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring Program in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Final EIR addressed the environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with those activities that would be undertaken. The Mitigation Monitoring Program ensures compliance with the adopted mitigation measures. (14) CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines establish the type of environmental documentation which is required when changes to a project occur after an EIR is certified. Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines establishes the use of an Addendum as subsequent environmental documentation if some changes or additions to a Final EIR are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 requiring preparation of a supplemental or subsequent EIR have occurred. (15) In connection with the proposed project actions, an Addendum to the Final EIR has been prepared. The Addendum and its technical appendices have been provided to the Planning Commission and are available for review in the Planning Department. The Addendum analyzes the proposed project actions and updates the analyses to reflect current circumstances and technical changes associated with the proposed residential use of the subject property in order to determine whether any significant environmental impacts which were not identified in the Final EIR would result or whether previously identified significant impacts would be substantially more severe. The Addendum also includes minor modifications to the Final EIR as well as conditions and measures that are specific to the proposed project actions and implement certain mitigation measures set forth in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Final EIR. Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122 has been prepared to set forth all applicable mitigation measures for the residential development proposed in connection with Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 05092. (16) The Addendum identifies historical resources on the project site as defined in §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. In addition, based on the City's General Plan Land Use Element, the project area is located within the Anaheim Colony Historic District. As such, there is one existing single family home and garage in the project area which is identified on the Qualified Historic Structures list of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan (July 20, 1999). The Anaheim Redevelopment Agency proposes to relocate this structure to an existing vacant lot approximately one mile south of the subject site near the corner of Lemon Street and Water Street in accordance with Title 15 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; therefore, no significant impacts to cultural resources are anticipated which were not previously addressed in the General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Item No. 5 (17) The Addendum includes a soil, hazardous materials, and hydrology analysis. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Phase 11 Subsurface Exploration, Phase 111 Subsurface Investigation and supplemental Phase 111 Environmental Site Assessment were performed on the proposed project site. According to the Phase 1 performed for 125 West EIm Street, which is the single family residence and garage structure that will be relocated as part of the project, no significant environmental concern to the soil or groundwater was found, and no further investigation was warranted. Portions of the site addressed 107, 109, and 111 West EIm Street have been used for a variety of commercial and industrial purposes. The Phase 11 Subsurface Exploration was subsequently performed. Based on that investigation, two types of contaminants were found on -site. Tetrachloroethene (PCE) was found in the vicinity of the two USTs and in the northern portion of the site, and lead was found in two areas. It was concluded that the presence of the PCE and lead may have been caused by spilling contaminants and metal grinding associated with past site activities, and it was recommended that further investigation in the vicinity of the lead contaminated soil, in addition to a site -wide soil vapor survey to assess the PCE release. Additionally, it was noted that the USTs should be abandoned in accordance with regulatory agency requirements. A Remedial Action Plan was completed by Glenfos, Inc. to outline objectives for remediation of the proposed project site. These objectives include 1) removing the lead impacted soil, 2) removing the PCE vapors from the vadose zone, 3) removing the PCE from the groundwater, 4) monitoring and reporting the remediation progress to the Fire Department on a quarterly basis and 5) performing confirmatory sampling to verify soil, soil vapor and groundwater conditions after remediation actions are complete. The confirmatory assessment shall include a soil vapor survey and groundwater sampling to confirm that the VOC concentrations are below Orange County Health Care Agency and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) target levels. A closure report will be submitted to the Fire Department once it is confirmed that the concentrations impacting the soil and groundwater are below the regulatory agency's target levels. The report will include all sampling results, monitoring activities, and estimates of chemicals removed. Once closure of the site is obtained, Glenfos, Inc. will remove remediation equipment and properly abandon all on -site will and subsurface piping. It should be noted that the remediation for groundwater has not yet been determined. Should the groundwater require remediation, additional assessment may be necessary. Soil remediation will be complete before excavation for the basement parking structure is complete. It is anticipated that the soil vapor remediation system would need to remain in operation for a minimum of six months to rectify the problematic VOCs on -site. (18) As demonstrated by the analysis included in the Final EIR and Addendum, all environmental issues for the proposed project actions will not result in new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant impacts; and, therefore, no supplemental or subsequent environmental review is required. Staff review further indicates that the previously certified Final EIR, with the Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the proposed project actions. EVALUATION: (19) The Anaheim General Plan designates the property for Mixed Use land uses. The applicant proposes to construct a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives at a density of 68 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the type of housing envisioned for the downtown area. The proposed apartment complex will provide affordable housing in furtherance of the City's Housing Element and the Affirdable Housing Strategic Plan. Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Item No. 5 (20) The applicant requests a reclassification from the !zone to the I (MU) zone to construct a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives. The request for a residential project and reclassification to the I (MU) would be in consistent with the Mixed Use land use designation in the General Plan. The Redevelopment Agency has invested in new infrastructure, new housing developments, historic preservation projects, and urban office and commercial developments in the Downtown area. The proposed mixed use zoning classification for this area would complement and support the existing and proposed development in the downtown area, the goals and objectives of the Merged Redevelopment Project Area, and ongoing City programs identified in Anaheim's Housing Element. (21) The applicant has submitted the attached density bonus application requesting a density bonus and incentives pursuant to State Law. Section 65915 (b) of the Government Code, in relevant part, requires that the City must approve a density bonus and incentives when an applicant agrees to provide specified levels of affordable housing. The applicant is entitled to receive three incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 30 percent of the total units for lower income households. (Government Code Section 65915 (d) (2).) The City must grant the incentive or concession requested unless it makes the findings set forth in Section 65915(d)(1). Section 65915(1) defines a concession or incentive to mean any of the following: "(1) A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. (2) Approval of mixed use zoning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and if the commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses are compatible with the housing project and the existing or planned development in the area where the proposed housing project will be located. (3) Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the city, county, or city and county that result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions. This subdivision does not limit or require the provision of direct financial incentives for the housing development, including the provision of publicly owned land, by the city, county, or city and county, or the waiver of fees or dedication requirements." A copy of Section 65915 is attached to this staff report. (22) This request also includes a density bonus of 14% above the 60 dwelling units per acre permitted by the Mixed Use land use designation. The density bonus would result in an overall project density of 68 dwelling units per acre. State Law requires that a density bonus of 35% be granted for projects that provide a minimum of at least 30% of the total units for low income households. A density bonus of 35% would allow for a maximum of 81 d.u. /acre and 68 d.u. /acre is proposed. Since all the dwelling units within the complex will be allocated for low income residents, the project would exceed the minimum affordability requirements of State Density Bonus Law. (23) Incentive (a) pertains to minimum lot size. Code requires a minimum lot size of 3 acres and 0.76 acres is proposed. The applicant has submitted the attached density bonus application requesting a density bonus and incentives pursuant to State Law (Govt. Code Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Item No. 5 Section 65915). State Law requires that three incentives be granted for projects that provide a minimum of at least 30 percent of the total units for low income households; therefore, since all of the dwelling units within the complex will be allocated for low income residents, the project would be in compliance with the density bonus provision of State Law. (24) Incentive (b) pertains to dedication and improvement of right -of -way. Public Works Standard Detail No. 160 -A, pertaining to right -of -way design for a 2 -lane Interior (residential) street, requires a width of 60 feet. Plans indicate a 55 foot width for Elm Street. Since these proposed streets would be similar in width as the existing residential streets in the downtown area, Public Works Department staff supports the applicant's request for a 55 -foot wide right -of -way width to include a 36 -foot wide street, 5 -foot wide parkways, and 4 -foot wide sidewalks. The parkway and sidewalk improvements would be installed by the developer. (25) The applicant also requests a conditional use permit to construct a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus. Mixed use projects are permitted in the I (MU) zone, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section 18.32.040.0402. The project would provide residential uses in the downtown area as a means to create an active street life, enhance the vitality of businesses, and reduce the need for automobile travel in Downtown Anaheim. In addition, the project would provide additional housing options for residents who want to live near their workplace and /or near retail and other non residential uses. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this conditional use permit request. (26) The (MU) Overlay zone requires a minimum FAR of 0.1 (or 10% of floor area) for non- residential uses, or as determined by conditional use permit. Since the project is located on a local residential street with no commercial activity or attractions, and since the project would be located in close proximity to office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amentities within Downtown Anaheim, staff recommends approval of this residential project with no commercial floor area. (27) Modification to development standards are allowed in order to promote increased pedestrian activity, provide for a unified street frontage, ensure private and light for residential uses, provide for public spaces and promote compatibility with existing development as outlined in Code Section 18.32.070.020. As described above, incentives pertaining to street and minimum lot size are being requested. Staff believes the proposed project would be compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and that the modifications from the Code allowed under the Mixed Use Ordinance (Chapter 18.32), would achieve a good project designed to preserve and enhance the neighborhood. A setback modification is being requested; however, a substantial setback of 27 feet is proposed for the community center building along the west property line in order to provide an adequate privacy buffer for the adjacent to the neighboring single family home to the west. Moreover, the applicant has demonstrated that the setback modification would be necessary in this case to make the housing units economically feasible. Therefore, because the modifications would allow for a development that provides a unified street frontage similar to what is proposed in the Downtown, exceeds the amount of recreational space required by code, and promotes compatibility with surrounding development that is currently under construction in a manner that would not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed, staff recommends approval of the request, as conditioned. (28) This request is being processed under the City's new Affordable Housing Strategic Plan. The Plan seeks to expand the supply of rental housing affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households. The Plan identifies several incentives to be explored to Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission June 12, 2006 Item No. 5 encourage the development of new units. One of these incentives is expediting the review of applications for discretionary entitlements and plan check. FINDINGS: (29) Before the Commission grants any conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: (a) That the use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Zoning Code, or is an unlisted use as defined in Subsection .030 (Unlisted Uses Permitted) of Section 18.66.040 (Approval Authority); (b) That the use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located; (c) That the size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and (e) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. RECOMMENDATION: (30) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Planning Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the Addendum to EIR No. 330 and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 122 are adequate to serve as the appropriate environmental documentation for this request. (b) By resolution, approve Reclassification No. 2006 -00178 to reclassify the subject property from the I (Industrial) zone to the I (MU) (Industrial; Mixed Use Overlay) zone, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. (c) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 -05092 to construct a 52 -unit affordable apartment complex with a density bonus and incentives (a) minimum lot size, (b) dedication and improvement of right -of -way pursuant to Section 65915 of the Government Code, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 8 December 29, 2006 City of Anaheim Planning Department 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim. CAY2805 Attn: John Ramirez Subject: Request for modification of conditions of approval for Resolution No. PC2006-52 Dear Mr. Ramirez, SAD! L~ ~C~ 5939 Monterey Road Los Angeles, CA 9004 Phone: (323) 254-3338 Fax: (323) 254-3449 On June 12, 2006 the Planning Commission approved our request for a 52-unit affordable apartment complex. Since that time we have been working with Redevelopmerit Agency/Housing Authority staff to develop an Affordable Agreement for the construction of the project. am happy to inform you that the Housing Authority Governing Board approved the Affordahle Agreement on December 19, 2006. W ould like to request to modify several of the conditions of approval of Resolution No. PC2006-52 due to changes that have emerged since the Plarrning Commission approved our request in June of 2006. First, we request that at least either fifteen percent (1596) of the total number of units be allocated for Very Low Income Households or thirty percent (30%) of the total number of units be allocated for Lower Income Households as opposed to lOU% of the units for Low Income Households. We are requesting this modification strictly for financing purposes and obligations imposed by our lenders. We intend 0o develop a l0096 affordable p jcci for Low Income Households as stipulated in our recently approved agreement with the Anaheim Housing Authority. In addition, we also request the deletion of Condition No. 37, requiring sewer improvements as part of the project. During our negotiations with the Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority, we were informed that sewer improvements benefiting our project are scheduled to he completed by the Public Works Department prior to December, 2008.. These improvements are part of a Cooperation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and the City of Anaheim's Public Works Department. Also, we would like to request an additional incentive pertaining to minimum width of pedestrian access ways. Code requires a minimum pedestrian access way width of 8-12 feet, however we are proposing 5' 10 foot wide pedestrian access ways due to site lirnitations. The City's Fire Department has reviewed oiir proposal and has determined that it is in conformity with City Fire requirements. In advance, we would like to thank you for your consideration of the modifications listed above. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. I may be reached at (323) 254-3338. Sincerely, Aj 'thaiwala SADI Limited Liability Company DATE: PROJECT: LOCATION: 1/087o7 11101 AN -8 p 143i (0- /Z5 AlUest FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF: 1 /0,9/ NAME: 60-6 (e. MAILING ADDRESS (number /city /state /zip): +vo fi c er I13k.tccC C2.9 ced ccoc TELEPHONE (DAYTIME NO.): PLEASE SIGN W APPEAL IGN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISIOI TY ET AKA-11E111 TU`tc& 1C c oP 2... --Q 5 1 (11 (A) .P r 3fog7 ?o 3 BRIEF DESCRIPTION FOR APPEALING THE PROJECT: 1 ia Val d v-i ed- a i f 1 3 j (a Ca ,e_xe6c,o, 6 7v-or f f( y /1 5 -e C _e_a4 S a s 66 c S. I'' 1? C c/ S t v el-7 Yr DATE: 749 il© Item No. 4 SAj/ Ps 531' t Pr °1e0t A1Ph Red 0) RCU 2p00 -0 A jeM Zone' \ntenttO S= 49 CV. ET PL, nN LN GO G PPR MENPD S.FRUC -r TR pR0 C.G \O Sp\i PCp,NT 1_0 G DMU)p032 W 2. \G SC G G ODM p 10$ 0 D 0- A3yp000B FS FS GG coWil 6 gcv_ 130 1 2 P 9 40 -CUP 236 GO? 2g9 CP P 039 C'G 1 4 V r 1 N E CN NP .****(Se. Co r n ahellmnBivd' Ara) O PAW Rede�elOpment Area MGRj ARY RCCg40 01-4:9 CU 4 \1 N 9 3 .0 GN SER& CP X ISPg F p1 0° \.RCL2 610 Rv pR 20 3 0 4558 vPR PCPNT N VNC no) \5ix3 S CO? SN0P LL 3 R(GR to tto Rg S °per y P y 00 0` 8 c Conditional Use Permit No. 2006 -05092 TRACKING NO. CUP2006 -05176 Requested By: ROBERT H. HORN TRUST 111 and 125 West Elm Street Subject Property Date: January 8, 2007 Scale: 1" 200' Q.S. No. 84 10209 pue pep°. eyl sq. um.p. soy. suer! eseyl Ipso. peopNlneun /cue %lotopyo. pes nujetl vellum mod sseitlxe ell lnoaLM peg u! ,o eloym u! peonpoxlei eq lou Heys pue tlll 'sloeDlo,e uloolau eelLM to Apetlo.tl eLenloxe eql ae Bulmeip slgl XQ peluesexle, si O 9 9 MIN 99 9 0 0 E■ 9 9 09 9 E 4 j O G 0 w cc j H 3 2 4 \D >7 _J w ±f }<a