2010/10/26ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL REGULAR ADJOURNED
MEETING OF OCTOBER 26, 2010
The regular City Council session of October 26, 2010 was called to order at 3:00 P.M. and
adjourned to 4:30 P.M. for lack of a quorum. The October 26, 2010 regular adjourned Council
meeting was called to order at 4:32 P.M. in the Chambers of Anaheim City Hall located at 200
South Anaheim Boulevard. A copy of the agenda was posted on October 22, 2010 on the kiosk
outside City Hall.
PRESENT: Mayor Curt Pringle and Council Members: Lord Galloway, Bob Hernandez, Lucille
Kring and Harry Sidhu.
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Tom Wood, City Attorney Cristina Talley, and City Clerk Linda
Andal
ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION: None
CLOSED SESSION:
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
(Subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9 of the Government Code)
Name of Case: Priceline.com, Inc., et al. v. City of Anaheim, et al.,
Orange County Superior Court, Case No. 30- 2009 - 00244120 and related cases.
At 5:08 P.M., Council returned from closed session.
Invocation: Pastor Mike Hammontre, Knott Avenue Christian Church
Flan Salute: Council Member Lord Galloway
Acceptance of Other Recognitions (To be presented at a later datek
Proclaiming Employees' Charities Week in Anaheim
Recognizing the honorees of the Filipino American Chamber of Commerce
of Orange County
Proclaiming November 6, 2010 as Scouting for Food Day
Allena Kaplan, Second Harvest Food Bank Ambassador of Orange County, announced the Boy
and Girl Scout organizations would act as food bank collectors on November 6 th and urged
residents to provide non - perishable foods for those who were at risk of going hungry each
month in Orange County.
At 5:15 P.M., the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency was called to order for a joint public
comment session with the Anaheim City Council.
ADDITIONS /DELETIONS TO THE AGENDAS: None
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 2 of 24
PUBLIC COMMENTS (all items except public hearings):
James Robert Reade reported several gang harassments occurring to law abiding residents in
the vicinities of Sycamore /East Street and Sage Park, complaining about lack of police support.
Janos Vohacs, taxi driver, explained that with the Hilton and Marriott hotels contracting on their
own for taxi services, other taxi drivers had limited access to the Convention Center. He
worried if Disneyland contracted for exclusive agreements, he and many other taxi drivers would
be significantly affected.
Mike Saulenas, resident, complained he was threatened with arrest when he requested
asbestos management plans from the Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD). He
explained his area of interest and expertise related to asbestos management which by law was
required to be made available to the public to view and that as a new resident in Anaheim; he
wished to become more informed.
Thomas Holguin, AUHSD, invited the community to attend the District's fall festival parade
highlighting the various events planned for October 30
Ken Chang stated he lived near Sycamore and East Street, and took exception to the earlier
complaint remarking that the Anaheim Police Department had been meeting regularly with
residents on various issues and through the neighborhood watch programs, they had been
aggressively proactive in creating a safer, cleaner neighborhood.
Mary Ann Kazelle, attorney representing A White & Yellow Cab, Inc., invited Council's attention
to problems with Anaheim taxicab operations. She explained Anaheim taxi cabs operated under
non - exclusive franchises, established ten years ago after studying the City's needs and to raise
the bar on taxi operations and to adequately service the entire City. Three non - exclusive
franchises were then awarded and until the beginning of this year when Hilton, followed by the
Marriott contracted for cab service, she noted the operations ran smoothly. She added that
Disney Resort was now in the process of selecting a single cab operator and there was concern
that the Convention Center would follow suit. She requested Council look into this and consider
adopting similar legislation as the City of Los Angeles to stop a de factor monopoly by one
company.
Belal Dalati, 832 N. West Street, thanked Council for having the vision to create the Platinum
Triangle, however, asking Council to consider the lack of adequate schools in that area.
JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY /CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS:
4. A joint public hearing to consider an Amended and Restated Disposition and
Development Agreement by and between the Agency and Zelman Anaheim, LLC,
regarding certain real property generally located at the northeast corner of Beach
AGR- 4633.A Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue establishing two development phases and provides for a
restructuring of the project economics.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 3 of 24
City Council Action:
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -173 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM approving an Amended and Restated Disposition and Development
Agreement with Zelman Anaheim, LLC and making certain findings in connection
therewith.
Executive Director Elisa Stipkovich remarked this hearing was to consider amending the original
Disposition and Development agreement (DDA) approved June 5, 2007 with the Zelman group.
The DDA was for a former landfill site at northeast corner of Lincoln and Beach Boulevard,
slated for a high quality 300,000 square foot retail center to include a home improvement center,
a grocery store, and a variety of other retail uses, including restaurants, a food court and a
public plaza. She stated the June 2007 DDA set the land purchase price at the fair market value
of $17.4 million and since that time, the economy had changed significantly and property values
and negotiated rents had decreased. At the request of the developer, staff was proposing to
revise the purchase price based on the current fair market price and to allow the project to be
developed in two phases, and she explained, those two changes required an amendment to the
DDA.
She reported the Agency had performed a new appraisal which netted a new market value of
$21 million, before adjustments for certain extraordinary costs associated with preparing the
former landfill site for development. The predevelopment costs, which included but not limited to
installation of a pile - supported foundation system for the home improvement and grocery
structures and vapor barriers under all buildings, were anticipated to cost $10.3 million,
reflecting a fair market price to the developer for the entire 25 acre site at $10.7 million. She
added the Agency would hold back a participating note which should ultimately net the City
about $18.4 million in future value.
The second amendment to the DDA would have the development occur in two phases. Since
the prospective tenant for the home improvement store was not ready to proceed at this time
and the other major tenant, WinCo Foods as well as other Westgate retail center tenants would
like to move forward with the development; staff recommended proceeding with Phase 1. This
phase would consist of approximately 60 percent of the total site, including the WinCo store,
and construction could begin as early as July 2011.
Ms. Stipkovich ended her presentation recommending the project be accomplished in two
phases and the land price be lowered. She added staff believed under those conditions, this
project could go forward.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing and receiving no comments, closed the hearing.
Council Member Sidhu moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -173 OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM approving an Amended and Restated Disposition and Development Agreement with
Zelman Anaheim, LLC and making certain findings in connection therewith, seconded by
Council Member Hernandez. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members:
Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 4 of 24
5. A joint public hearing to consider a Disposition and Development Agreement, in
substantial form, by and between the Agency and Lab Holding, LLC for certain real
property located at the northwest corner of Anaheim Boulevard and Santa Ana Street for
the Colony Marketplace, and a Disposition and Development Agreement, in substantial
form, by and between the Agency and Lab Holding, LLC, for certain real property located
along Center Street Promenade for the Center Street Promenade Retail Space.
City Council Action:
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -174 RESOLUTIONOF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
AGR- 6328.1 CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Disposition and Development Agreement (Colony
Marketplace) with Lab Holding, LLC and making certain findings in connection therewith.
AGR -6511 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -175 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Disposition and Development Agreement (Center
Street Promenade Retail Space) with Lab Holding, LLC and making certain findings in
connection therewith.
Executive Director Elisa Stipkovich reported there were two proposals before the Agency and
Council to approve Disposition and Development (DDA) agreements for the Colony Marketplace
and the Center Street Promenade retail space. Last July, the Agency entered into an exclusive
negotiation agreement with LAB Holding LLC to negotiate the terms for an operating agreement
and lease for the Colony Marketplace. While negotiating the Colony Marketplace transaction,
she remarked, staff and the developer expanded discussions to include the retail space on
Center Street Promenade which would provide LAB Holding with the ability to successfully
create and market a unique retail destination.
Colony Marketplace - She indicated the Colony Marketplace site included the Packing House
building, the Packard building and the vacant land around and between the two buildings and
would feature restaurants, unique retail, a food emporium and other related businesses. The
agreement contained three phases: the first phase was an operating agreement; the second
phase a subsequent lease period at either the developer's option or when the net operation
income exceeded $250,000; and the third phase contained a purchase option at a value of
$11.5 million in today's dollars which would escalate every year at three percent.
Center Street Promenade - Ms. Stipkovich explained the Center Street Promenade retail
consisted of 23,000 square feet, located in three Agency -owned downtown parking structures.
Because the property had certain physical constraints and needed renovation, the DDA
reflected the obligation of the developer to spend $500,000 on improvements and a resulting
site appraisal of $1,070,000. If approved, she noted, LAB Holding would purchase the retail and
the Agency would carry back a note at five percent interest to be paid off in 12 years.
Council Member Sidhu inquired if any of the retail spaces were leased and what were the
potential revenue stream figures. Ms. Stipkovich responded retail spaces were about 90
percent leased with a potential income stream of $200,000 a year, however, she added, many
were short-term, month -to -month tenants.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing and receiving no comments, closed the hearing. He
remarked on the success of LAB Holding ventures in Costa Mesa utilizing unique or historic
buildings and distinctive architecture to address and market retail and he looked forward to this
next step in revitalizing the downtown area.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 5 of 24
Council Member Galloway expressed her support as well for the LAB group in creating
excitement with this project and bringing back diversity to Anaheim's downtown.
Council Member Kring moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -174 OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM approving a Disposition and Development Agreement with LAB Holding, LLC and
making certain findings in connection therewith (Colony Marketplace); and to approve
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -175 OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Disposition and
Development Agreement with LAB Holding, LLC and making certain findings in connection
therewith (Center Street Promenade Retail Space); seconded by Council Member Sidhu. Roll
Call Vote: Ayes — 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and
Sidhu. Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
6. A joint public hearing to consider a Disposition and Development Agreement, in
substantial form, between the Agency and Southern California BIA Educational
Foundation for the construction of affordable for -sale housing units located at 428 S.
Melrose Street.
City Council Action:
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -176 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
AGR -6512 CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Disposition and Development Agreement (BIA/Anaheim
Green House) with Southern California BIA Educational Foundation and making certain
findings in connection therewith.
Director Elisa Stipkovich announced this was an opportunity for the City to be part of a unique
demonstration project. The Southern California Building Industry Association (BIA) Educational
Foundation, she stated, had submitted a proposal to the City to develop property for two
affordable single - family homes as a demonstration project for energy efficiency. She explained
the Agency owned a parcel approximately 7,000 square feet at 428 South Melrose Avenue and
was negotiating with BIA for purchase of that land, valued at $200,000, for the building of two
homes at BIA cost. BIA, utilizing volunteers, both professional architects and engineers as well
as members of the building industry, would build a demonstration project for two homes side by
side, however one would be built under current code and the other built to "net zero energy use"
standards to become a state -of- the -art home for energy efficiency. The BIA would have two
years to use this project as a demonstration to both builders and individuals in the building
industry as well as for educational purposes and at the end of that period, the homes would be
sold to moderate income families with the Agency contributing down payment assistance to
make that happen.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing.
Dave Bartlett, president of BIA/Orange County Chapter, remarked this project rested on the
platform of energy and water efficiency, resource conservation and technology and supporting
that platform were the concepts of education, demonstration, feasibility and affordable housing.
He added this was a real opportunity for the BIA and its members as well as the general public
and local officials to see the differences between a house built to current code and a net zero
energy home.
Kristine Thalman, BIA, remarked that at every turn in the project, BIA had been met with
enthusiasm. The partners involved provided either in -kind or professional services and involved
companies such as Fosco Engineering, Gobis Engineering, Danielli & Associates, Fidelity
National Title, SunTrek Solar Systems, OCB Reprographics, Studio 6 Architects, Lo Jolla
Pacific, Land Concern Landscape, Consol Energy System, Sweitzer and Associates, Brookfield
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 6 of 24
Homes, Simpson Strong, MWD and SOCAL GAS. Other institutional partnerships involved a
number of schools, colleges, educational programs and others. She noted the Orange County
Housing Trust was interested as well as the California Housing Foundation but that the most
important partnership was that of the City of Anaheim.
With no other comments offered, Mayor Pringle closed the hearing.
Council Member Galloway Sidhu moved to approve RESOLTION N0. 2010 -176 OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM approving a Disposition and Development Agreement with Southern California
BIA Educational Foundation and making certain findings in connection therewith (BIA/Anaheim
Green House), seconded by Agency Member Kring. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: Chairman Pringle
and Agency Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
CONSENT CALENDAR: Council Member Pringle removed Item No's. 9, 14, 25 and 34 for
further discussion. Council Member Kring removed Item No. 35. Council Member Kring moved
to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions and to adopt the balance of consent
calendar in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each
council member and as listed on the balance of the consent calendar, seconded by Council
Member Hernandez. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members: Galloway,
Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes — 0. Motion Carried
D117 7. Approve Investment Portfolio Report for September 2010.
8. Waive the sealed bid requirements of Council Policy 4.0 and authorize the Purchasing
Agent to execute the renewal of a two year master agreement with SmartSynch, Inc., in
D175 an amount not to exceed $112,500 per year, for electric meter satellite and cellular
communication services for the Public Utilities Department.
10. Accept the low bid, and approve an agreement with Mariposa Landscapes, Inc., in an
amount not to exceed $162,123, which includes a 20% contingency, for landscape
maintenance services for the Public Utilities Department for a one year period with up to
AGR -6513 four one -year renewal options and authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise the
renewal options, in accordance with Bid #7437.
11. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, California Professional Engineering,
Inc., in the amount of $88,148, for the Orange Avenue /Magnolia Avenue and Crescent
AGR -6514 Avenue /Euclid Street Traffic Signal Improvement project and authorize the Finance
Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
12. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, All American Asphalt, in the amount
of $699,418.75, for the Serrano Avenue Improvements project from Hidden Canyon
AGR -6515 Road to Canyon Rim Road and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow
Agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
13. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Tovey /Shultz Construction, Inc., in
the amount of $6,580,000, for the Historic Citrus Packing House Restoration, authorize
the Director of Public Works to execute contract change orders in a cumulative amount
AGR -6516 not to exceed 20% of the contract price, and authorize the Finance Director to execute
the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 7 of 24
15. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Metro Builders and Engineers
Group LTD, in the amount of $189,847.50, for the Downtown Anaheim Fountain project
AGR -6518 and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to
contract retentions.
16. Appoint the Purchasing Agent, Carole Ayuso as the Hearing Officer to hear and settle
City public contract code disputes and other construction - related disputes, appoint the
Audit Manager, Susan Grabemeyer- Grande as the alternate, and delegate the authority
to manage and oversee the hearing officer's duties and responsibilities to the Director of
Public Works, or her designee.
17. Approve two Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) with the Orange County
Transportation Authority (OCTA) for coordinating Brookhurst Street and Orangethorpe
AGR -6519 Avenue as part of OCTA's Traffic Light Synchronization Program and authorize the
AGR -6520 Director of Public Works to enter into future MOUs with OCTA and other participating
local agencies to implement the program.
18. Approve the Agreement for Acquisition of Real Property with Honorio and Esperanza
AGR -6521 Miguel, in the acquisition payment amount of $400,000, for property located at 1628
South Brookhurst Street for the Brookhurst Street Widening project from Ball Road to
Katella Avenue (R/W ACQ2009- 00349).
19. Approve the Agreement for Acquisition of Real Property with John V. Spielmann and
AGR -6522 Lisa A. Lijoi Spielmann, in the acquisition payment amount of $350,000, for property
located at 2181 West Forest Lane for the Brookhurst Street Widening project from Ball
Road to Katella Avenue (R/W ACQ2009- 00342).
20. Approve Amendment No. 2 to Cooperative Agreement No. C -9 -0306 with the Orange
AGR - 4183.1.2 County Transportation Authority extending the Renewed Measure M Go Local
Bus /Shuttle Service Planning through October 31, 2011.
21. Approve the First Amendment to Agreement with Kreuzer Consulting Group to increase
AGR - 5951.1 the contract amount by $94,431 for a total not -to- exceed amount of $560,000, for the
Brookhurst Street Widening project from Katella Avenue to Ball Road.
22. Approve the Fourth Amendment to Agreement with Overland, Pacific & Cutler, Inc., in an
amount not to exceed $150,000 per year, extending the term of the contract by a
AG R-4844.4 maximum of five years for relocation consulting services for the Department of Public
Works.
23. Approve the First Amendment to Agreement with Aramark Sports and Entertainment
Service, LLC, extending the term of the Concession Agreement through December 31,
AGR- 4965.A.1 2012 for the exclusive right to provide food and beverage service at the Grove of
Anaheim.
24. Approve and authorize the Executive Director of Community Development to execute
and administer a Commercial Lease, in substantial form, with the Anaheim
Redevelopment Agency for a five year lease for a portion of the Willdan Building located
AGR -6510 at 290 S. Anaheim Boulevard for the Workforce Development Division (Related to
Agency Item No. 01).
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 8 of 24
26. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -177 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
R100 THE CITY OF ANAHEIM finding that it is in the best interest of the City to authorize the
sale of city owned property, and authorize the City to enter into a purchase and sale
agreement with Taormina Family Property, LLC (ABA 2010 - 00190).
27. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -178 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the Director of Public Works to apply for STIP
R100 funding and execute a master agreement for state - funded transit projects and
associated program supplements on behalf of the City of Anaheim, if the City has the
opportunity to receive state funding in the future.
28. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -179 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM authorizing the Director of Public Works or designee to submit
R100 an application for Principal Forgiveness Funding (Funding) under the Clean Water State
Revolving Fund Program on behalf of the City of Anaheim to the State Water Resources
Control Board, and if awarded, authorizing the acceptance of such funding on behalf of
the City and amending the budget for fiscal year 2010/2011 accordingly.
29. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -180 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
P124 THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim
certain real properties or interests therein (City Deed Nos. 11381 and 11382).
30. RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -181 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
D154 THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2000R -123 for the purpose of
modifying those classifications designated as Administrative Management.
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -182 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2000R -124 for the purpose of
modifying those classifications designated as Middle Management.
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -183 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2000R -125 for the purpose of
modifying those classifications designated as Professional.
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -184 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Resolution No. 2000R -126 for the purpose of
modifying those classifications designated as Supervisory.
31. ORDINANCE NO. 6185 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM adding a new Section 1.12.120 of Chapter 1.12 of Title 1 of the Anaheim
M142 Municipal Code requiring the disclosure of certain information on the City's website to
further transparency in city government (Introduced at Council meeting of October 12,
2010, Item No. 17).
32. ORDINANCE NO. 6186 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (i) approving Development Agreement No. 2010 -00002 by
and between the City of Anaheim and The Irvine Land Company LLC and The Irvine
AGR -6523 Company LLC (ii) making certain findings related thereto, and (iii) authorizing the Mayor
to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City (Introduced at Council meeting
of October 12, 2010, Item No. 20).
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 9 of 24
33. ORDINANCE NO. 6187 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (i) approving Amendment No. 1 to Development
AGR- 3639.1 Agreement No. 2005 -00007 by and between the City of Anaheim and Macquarie
Platinum Katella Inc. (ii) making certain findings related thereto, and (iii) authorizing the
Mayor to execute said amendment for and on behalf of the City (Introduced at Council
meeting of October 12, 2010, Item No. 21).
36. Approve minutes of the Council meeting of October 12, 2010.
END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
9. Waive the sealed bid requirements of Council Policy 4.0 and approve the Second
Amendment to Agreement with ValleyCrest Golf Course Maintenance, Inc., in the
amount of $134,008.84 per month, extending services for up to three additional months
for golf course maintenance.
Community Services Director Terry Lowe reported the City was currently in the process of
looking for a new golf maintenance contract and was asking Council to extend the services of
the current provider for three additional months.
With information provided that the bids for the new contract had been received and analyzed,
Mayor Pringle recommended this item be continued until November 9 th or November 16 to
consider the new contract rather than extend the current vendor. Without any objection, this
item would be continued and return to Council on the 9 th or 16
14. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, C.C. Meyers, Inc., in the amount of
$16,007,494.22, for the Gene Autry Way (West) 1 -5 HOV Interchange and Highway
AGR -6517 Improvement Project, authorize an increase in the Department of Public Works'
expenditure and revenue appropriation by $19 million based on a recently received
Federal grant, and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement
pertaining to contract retentions.
Natalie Meeks, Public Works Director, announced this item would award a contract for a new
concrete bridge and roadway on Gene Autry Way providing a long- awaited continuous link
between the Resort on the west and the Stadium on the east. She reported it would offer
significant improvement in the traffic circulation in that area connecting the Platinum Triangle
and the Resort and would become a real asset to the community.
Mayor Pringle remarked CC Meyers was a statewide public works contractor with an office near
that location. He added the bids came in dramatically less than anticipated and this was an
opportune time to build this project and create about 600 jobs in the Anaheim workforce.
Council Member Hernandez moved to approve Item No. 14, seconded by Council Member
Kring. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members: Galloway, Hernandez,
Kring and Sidhu. Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
25. Authorize the City Manager to join the Association of California Cities - Orange County in
order to effectively collaborate with other Orange County cities to share ideas and
D116 address issues that are regional in nature.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 10 of 24
Mayor Pringle remarked that in the past, Anaheim had been a member with other cities in the
California League of Cities. This past year, the City chose not to continue its membership with
the League at the rate of $50,000, annually, and to participate on an as- needed basis. The
State league then told the City it could not be part of the local organization unless membership
to the statewide organization was joined as well. In the interim, he added, a local group of city
leaders were working to set up the Association of California Cities — Orange County, and at this
point, Council was being asked if they would participate in that new organization.
Council Member Sidhu moved to approve Item No. 25, seconded by Council Member Kring.
Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and
Sidhu. Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
34. Determine that the proposed ordinance constitute projects falling within the definition of
Categorical Exemptions, Section 15061 (b) (3), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines
and are, therefore, categorically exempt from environmental review.
ORDINANCE NO. 6188 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
M142 ANAHEIM repealing existing Chapters 15.02, 15.03 and 15.04 and adding a new
Chapter 15.03 to Title 15 of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to the California
Building Standards Code and repealing existing Chapter 16.08 and adding a new
Chapter 16.08 to Title 16 of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to the California Fire
Code with amendments.
Schedule a public hearing to be held on November 16, 2010 at 5:30 P.M. to consider
amendments to the 2010 Edition of the California Building Standards Codes.
Mayor Pringle pointed out laws prohibited cities from modifying what the state sets as a
minimum standard for building codes and the State Building Code Standards Commission was
restricted to maintain national minimum standards. He added he was opposed to the issue of
requiring sprinklers in all residential units, believing it added an unnecessary and costly item to
new homes. In answer to a question regarding this law applying to rehabilitation of homes,
Scott Fazekas, Building Official, stated sprinklers would be exempt to any additions to existing
residences that did not already have sprinklers including additions and alterations. The new
regulations did not apply if there was an existing residence with no fire sprinklers, however, if
property was completely demolished and cleared for new development that did not resemble the
original building, then the new code requirements would go into effect.
Council Member Hernandez pointed out the theory of lives saved by sprinklers throughout
residences was debatable and he felt it gave a false sense of security. Most deaths occur from
smoke inhalation and by the time a fire advanced to the point where it activated sprinklers, the
damage had already been done.
Council Member Hernandez then moved to approve Item No. 34 and introduce ORDINANCE
NO. 6188 OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM repealing existing Chapters 15.02, 15.03 and 15.04
and adding a new Chapter 15.03 to Title 15 of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to the
California Building Standards Code and repealing existing Chapter 16.08 and adding a new
Chapter 16.08 to Title 16 of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to the California Fire Code
with amendments, seconded by Council Member Sidhu. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: Mayor Pringle
and Council Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 11 of 24
35. ORDINANCE NO. 6189 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Subsection .050 of Section 7.52.050 of Chapter 7.52 to
M142 Title 7 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to shopping cart containment and
retrieval.
Sheri Vander Dussen, Director of Planning, reported the City originally adopted a shopping cart
ordinance in January of 2006 to reduce the number of abandoned shopping carts in the City.
The ordinance required stores using carts to develop and implement either a plan to retain the
carts on the property or a plan to retrieve the carts taken off their property within 24 hours.
Since the ordinance was implemented, she stated, the number of abandoned carts dropped 20
percent and staff found that containment plans were generally more effective at keeping
abandoned carts out of surrounding neighborhoods. In the case where a retrieval plan was not
working, the ordinance provided few options, the store's use of carts could be suspended or
they could be fined, which would prevent them from doing business.
Staff was proposing to amend the code to allow the City to require a store with an ineffective
retrieval plan to implement and develop a cart containment plan. This would apply when it was
found that stores for a period of at least two months had left more than 20 carts out in the
neighborhoods that the City's contractor has to pick up. She believed the change would reduce
the number of abandoned carts in the community without forcing the City to take drastic actions
against stores that failed to retrieve their carts in a timely fashion.
Council Member Kring supported this effort; emphasizing quality of life issues were important to
residents and moved to introduce ORDINANCE No. 6189 OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
amending Subsection .050 of Section 7.52.050 of Chapter 7.52 to Title 7 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code relating to shopping cart containment and retrieval, seconded by Council
Member Sidhu. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: Mayor Pringle and Council Members: Galloway,
Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
37. Consider an appointment to fill an unscheduled vacancy to the Community Services
Board, term ending June 30, 2012.
B105
APPOINTMENT: Earl Kelso (June 30, 2012)
(vacancy of Jerry Conrey)
Council Member Kring nominated Earl Kelso to the Community Services Board. With no other
nominations offered and no objections raised, Mr. Kelso was unanimously appointed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Ia
li AU01
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2010 -00239
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2010 -00091
AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 767A
VARIANCE NO. 2010 -04820
(DEV2010 -0 0067
OWNER: Krawiec, Martin Trust / Oliver G. Baker Trust, Pacific Sunset Estates, 1247
East Chapman Avenue, Fullerton, CA 92831
APPLICANT: Larry McDermott, 18075 La Ventana, Murrieta, CA 92562
LOCATION: 147 & 211 South Beach Boulevard
The applicant proposes to rezone this property to add the Mobile Home Park (MHP)
Overlay zone to its existing Transition (T) zone designation; amend the zoning code to
permit manufactured homes within the Mobile Home Park Overlay zone and modify the
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 12 of 24
definition of Mobile Home Park; amend a previously- approved conditional use permit to
add 14 manufactured homes to an existing mobile home park (for a total of 150 mobile
and manufactured homes); and allow a smaller front yard setback than permitted by
code.
Environmental Determination: A Negative Declaration has been determined to serve
as the appropriate environmental documentation for this project in accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Vote 7 -0: Approved Reclassification No. 2010 -00239 (Resolution No. 2010 -064);
Zoning Code Amendment No. 2010 - 00091; Conditional Use Permit No. 767A;
Variance No. 2010- 04820; (DEV2010- 00067)
(Planning Commission meeting of August 2, 2010; Appealed by property owner).
MOTION: S/K Determine that a Negative Declaration is the appropriate
environmental determination for this request.
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -185 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM finding and determining that the zoning map referred to in
Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code should be amended and that the boundaries of
certain zones should be changed (Reclassification No. 2010 - 00239; DEV2010- 00067).
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -186 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Variance No. 2010 -04820 and an amendment to
Conditional Use Permit No. 767 and amending conditions of approval of Resolution No.
1807- Series 1965 -66 (Tracking No. Conditional Use Permit No. 767A; DEV 2010-
00067)
ORDINANCE NO. 6190 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending various sections of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code
(Zoning Code Amendment No. 2010- 00091).
ORDINANCE NO. 6191 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 2010 - 00239) (DEV2010- 00067).
CJ Amstrup, Planning Services Manager, reported the applicant, the long -term leaseholder of
the properties, was proposing to merge a one acre parcel located on Beach Boulevard, south
of Lincoln Avenue, into an adjacent 13 -acre mobile home park and to also construct 14
manufactured homes on the one -acre parcel. The Planning Commission approved an
amendment to the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the existing mobile home park to allow the
additional units and a variance to reduce the front yard setback along Beach Boulevard. The
Commission also recommended Council rezone the one acre parcel from the Transition Zone
to the Transition Mobile Home Overlay Zone and approve a code amendment that would
permit manufactured homes within the overlay zone. He explained the Commission's actions
were then appealed by the property owner who spoke in opposition to this proposal stating the
leaseholder did not have the right to file these applications without his consent. He noted the
two parties were currently in litigation over the validity of the existing long -term lease, however,
the City Attorney's office reviewed this matter and was of the opinion at this time that the long-
term leaseholder did have the right to file the development applications.
Mr. Amstrup added this request to rezone the one -acre property created zoning consistency
between these two properties and set appropriate development standards for the mobile home
park expansion. The proposed homes were defined as manufactured homes by the State and
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 13 of 24
the proposed code amendment would clarify that manufactured homes were permitted within
the City's mobile home parks and staff believed manufactured homes and mobile homes were
both appropriate and compatible uses within the City's mobile home parks. He further added
the CUP for the existing mobile home park allowed up to 136 mobile homes on a 13 -acre site
and that this amendment would allow 150 units on 14 acres.
With regard to the variance request, Mr. Amstrup stated properties within the Transition Zone
were required to provide 25 foot wide landscaped front yard setback. The existing mobile
home park provided 20 foot wide landscaped setback adjacent to Beach Boulevard and the
applicant was proposing a front setback that would match the existing mobile home park,
creating a consistent appearance on Beach Boulevard. Staff was supportive of the requested
variance.
The one acre parcel contained two existing homes, one dating from the late 1800's. At the
Commission hearing, Mr. Amstrup explained, questions were raised about the historic
significance of the home and the property, however, this property was not included on the
recently approved list of historic and potentially historic properties. As a result, removal of this
structure would not be subject to the demolition review process in the citywide historic
preservation plan. Even though not required, he added, the applicant did agree to comply with
the demolition process for historic structures, including filing a 60 -day notice to demolish which
provided time for interested parties to negotiate the purchase or relocation of this structure. He
ended his presentation stating the proposed expansion of the mobile home park was well
designed, would be seamlessly integrated into the existing mobile home park and would be
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Staff recommended Council deny the appeal
and approve the project consistent with the Planning Commissions' recommendation.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing for comments.
Lawrence McDermott, applicant, explained he was the civil engineer that designed the project
and concurred fully with staff's recommendations.
With no other comments offered, the public hearing was closed.
Council Member Sidhu moved to determine that a Negative Declaration is the appropriate
environmental determination for this request; and to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -185 A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM finding and determining
that the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code should be amended
and that the boundaries of certain zones should be changed (Reclassification No. 2010 - 00239;
DEV2010- 00067); and to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -186 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Variance No. 2010 -04820 and an
amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 767 and amending conditions of approval of
Resolution No. 1807- Series 1965 -66 (Tracking No. Conditional Use Permit No. 767A; DEV
2010 - 00067); and to introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6190 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending various sections of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code (Zoning Code
Amendment No. 2010 - 00091); and to introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6191 AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code related to zoning (Reclassification No. 2010- 00239)(DEV2010- 00067);
seconded by Council Member Kring. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 5: Mayor Pringle and Council
Members: Galloway, Hernandez, Kring and Sidhu. Noes — 0. Motion Carried.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 14 of 24
Kv
C280
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2008 -00339
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2008 -00471
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2008-00074
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2008 -00222
MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2008 -00283
MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. 2008-00284
(DEV2010- 00045) THE REVISED PLATINUM TRIANGLE EXPANSION PROJECT
APPLICANT: City of Anaheim
LOCATION: The approximate 820 -acre Platinum Triangle is located generally east of
the Interstate 5 Freeway, west of the Santa Ana River channel and State Route 57,
south of the Southern California Edison easement and north of the Anaheim City limit.
The City of Anaheim (the "applicant ") requests to expand the boundaries of the
Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone and increase the permitted amount
of development within said overlay zone to up to 18,909 residential units; 4,909,682
square feet of commercial development; 14,340,522 square feet of office development;
and, 1,500,000 square feet of institutional development. The proposal includes
associated amendments to the General Plan, and the Platinum Triangle Master Land
Use Plan, including the Platinum Triangle Standardized Development Agreement, to
reflect the proposed changes to the PTMU Overlay Zone and upgrades to existing
infrastructure to serve the increased intensity of land uses.
Environmental Determination: Environmental Impact Report No. 2008 -00339 has
been prepared to evaluate and disclose potential environmental impacts of the
proposed project in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION:
Vote 4 -1 (Chairman Faessel and Commissioners Ament, Agarwal and Seymour voted
yes; Commissioner Ramirez voted no; Commissioners Persaud and Karaki absent):
Recommended certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 2008 -00339 and
approval of General Plan Amendment 2008 - 00471, Zoning Code Amendment No.
2008 - 00074, Reclassification No. 2008 - 00222, Miscellaneous Case No. 2008 -00283
and Miscellaneous Case No. 2008 -00284
(Planning Commission meeting of October 11, 2010)
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -187 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM certifying Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2008 -00339
and adopting findings of fact and statement of overriding considerations, Mitigation
Monitoring Program No. 106C and water supply assessment (MIS2008- 00284) for the
Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project.
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -188 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving General Plan Amendment No. 2008 -00471
pertaining to several elements of the Anaheim General Plan (Revised Platinum Triangle
Expansion Project).
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -189 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving an amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master
Land Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2008 - 00283; Revised Platinum Triangle
Expansion Project).
ORDINANCE NO. 6192 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM approving an amendment to Chapter 18.20 of Title 18 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code relating to zoning and development standards (Zoning Code
Amendment No. 2008 - 00074; Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project).
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 15 of 24
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -190 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Reclassification No. 2008 - 00222, unconditionally
(Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project).
ORDINANCE NO. 6193 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM amending the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 2008 - 00222; Revised Platinum Triangle
Expansion Project).
Sherri Vander Dussen, Planning Director, explained approval of this item would provide for
expansion to the Platinum Triangle.
BACKGROUND — The Platinum Triangle was an 820 acre area located between the 5
Freeway and the Santa Ana River. In 2004, Council approved the general plan update which
included a new vision for the Platinum Triangle, a vibrant, mixed use community where older,
light industrial buildings would be replaced by housing, restaurants, high rise office buildings
designed to complement existing sports and entertainment venues. It was determined to be
especially well suited for high density development because of the variety of public transit
serving the area, including Metrolink, Amtrak, OCTA bus lines, Anaheim Resort Transit and
planned future transit such as California High Speed Rail, Anaheim Rapid connection and bus
rapid transit. To implement the general plan's vision, Ms. Vander Dussen explained, Council
adopted the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP), which included planning
principles designed to balance and integrate uses and stimulate market driven and transit
oriented development. The design framework was developed to create a unique pedestrian
friendly environment while maintaining and enhancing connectivity to the Anaheim Resort and
providing for public improvements such as the recently constructed Magnolia Park. The MLUP
was intended to produce a new urban neighborhood in the heart of Orange County and
identified the location of land uses and densities throughout the Platinum Triangle.
She noted the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone (PTMUOZ) provided for
development standards for mixed use development. The overlay zone allowed property
owners the option of developing under these standards or continuing under the existing zoning.
The standard development agreement set the terms of development including participation in a
community facilities district (CFD) and time frames for completion of a project while
guaranteeing development rights for the duration of the agreement. The most significant
change including the general plan update was the introduction of a full range of residential uses
within the area, including everything from town homes to high rise towers. In keeping with the
urban vision, single family detached homes were not permitted. As with any other part of the
City, there were no requirements for affordable housing in the Platinum Triangle, although a full
range of affordable housing incentives, including density bonuses, and less restrictive
development standards were available for developers who chose to build affordable housing.
To date over 1,800 residential units and 38,000 square feet of commercial development has
been completed in the Platinum Triangle. Each development included exceptional amenities
including roof top decks, dog parks, exercise facilities, game and media rooms, ground floor
retail, restaurants, and convenient access to sports and entertainment venues.
This request, Ms. Vander Dussen explained, would increase the amount of development
permitted within the overlay zone to allow nearly 19,000 residential units, over 4.9 million
square feet of commercial development, more than 14 million square feet of office
development, and up to 1.5 million square feet of institutional development to accommodate
ARTIC. The proposal would also expand the boundaries of the mixed use general plan
designation and would reflect the location of a recently constructed park north of Katella and
identify parks required by approved development agreements. The proposal would also create
the ARTIC district, the Office District and also expand the existing Katella District to Lewis
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 16 of 24
Street and expand the Orangewood District south of Orangewood Avenue. To accommodate
the permitted development, she stated, the proposed project included infrastructure
improvements such as utility upgrades, bike and roadway improvements and a new fire station.
On October 11, 2010, the Planning Commission voted to recommend Council certification of
EIR and approval of the proposed project and a number of issues were raised during the
Commission's hearing as well as during the review period for the EIR and are listed below:
SCHOOLS: Ms. Vander Dussen remarked the development of the Platinum Triangle often
raised questions regarding the provisions of schools in this area. Planning and building
schools were the responsibility of the appropriate school district and State law stipulated school
impacts were mitigated by the collection of school impact fees established by the school
districts. She noted staff worked with the Anaheim City School District to find a location within
the Platinum Triangle that would meet the District's needs for future growth. She pointed out
the District's 2010 -2030 Facilities Master Plan anticipated between 1,000 and 3,000 students
would need to be accommodated within the Platinum Triangle, although currently there were
only 23 students enrolled from the units already constructed. She added this was a much
smaller pupil generation rate than used to meet EIR, but it would be too early to tell if the
current generation rate was representative of what would actually occur.
CHILD CARE FACILITIES: Similar to school facilities, Ms. Vander Dussen pointed out; the
increase to population due to the proposed project was anticipated to increase the demand for
child care facilities in the area. Child care facilities were typically privately owned and
operated, with the exception of certain after school programs run by the City in collaboration
with non - profit organizations on school sites. Child care facilities would be permitted in the
Platinum Triangle with the approval of a conditional use permit, but the provision of child care
facilities would not be required under the zoning standards and the city had no mandatory
childcare requirement in any of the City's zoning districts. She added staff was planning to
analyze and address the zoning code in the future to try to simplify the process for child care
facilities to locate within the City, but were not envisioning a mandatory requirement.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Relative to affordable housing, the Platinum Triangle was not
shown as a potential location for affordable housing within the City's housing element. At the
time the City was updating the housing element, the majority of the permitted housing in the
Platinum Triangle, was entitled through development agreements as the State would not allow
the City to include these properties even though the development agreements did not preclude
development of affordable housing and did not establish rent or sales prices. She noted the
proposed project would allow development of 8,643 dwelling units on sites currently not entitled
by development agreements. Any of these sites could be developed as affordable or market
rate housing and in addition, any of the sites with development agreements, could be
developed with affordable housing. Currently the City did not require affordable housing to be
developed in any zone within the City. She commented developers within the Platinum
Triangle would have the same opportunities available throughout the city to take advantage of
the City's many affordable housing incentives. Development of portions of the Platinum
Triangle in redevelopment areas would generate additional redevelopment funds, a portion of
which could be used by the Redevelopment Agency in the future for affordable housing
opportunities. Known as housing set -aside plans, these Redevelopment funds would be used
for a variety of affordable projects, programs and activities, including land acquisition,
construction of new affordable units, substantial rehabilitation, and first time home buyer
assistance. In addition, development of housing within the redevelopment area would require
50 percent of the total number of housing units produced to be affordable to very low, low and
moderate income households within at least 40 percent of those units available to very low
income households. The affordable units could be developed inside or outside of the project
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 17 of 24
area although affordable units built outside the project area were counted on a 2 to 1 basis
towards the Agency's affordable housing obligation. She went on to say housing was currently
not permitted on the Stadium District because of the lease agreement with the Angels, however
housing had been incorporated into the long range vision for development of the Stadium
District. If all of the 5,175 units proposed to be allocated to the Stadium District were to be
developed, the Agency would be required to develop 776 affordable units either inside the
Stadium District, in another project area or outside the project area. If this obligation were met
without site production, 1,552 units would need to be developed. To date, she emphasized,
the Agency exceeded its affordable housing obligation and had a surplus of 1,268 units which
demonstrated the City's commitment to using redevelopment funds for their intended purpose.
HOUSING PRICES AND SALARIES: Another comment received, said Ms. Vander Dussen,
indicated housing prices and salaries within the Platinum Triangle should be required to be
consistent — either the housing prices should be set based on area's salaries or job salaries
should be required to match the market rents in the area. A survey found that apartment rents
in the Platinum Triangle ranged from just over $1,000 for a studio to slightly over $3,000 for a
premium 3- bedroom, 3 -bath unit and these rents were generally affordable for employees
making an average salary of $61,000 within the Platinum Triangle and surrounding area. More
affordable housing could be found within a five mile radius of the Platinum Triangle and
included subsidized housing as well as market rents and sales prices that fell within the
affordability guidelines. She indicated there were ample opportunities for employees working in
the Platinum Triangle to live in close proximity to their jobs. In addition, the lower density
development found in surrounding areas could be more attractive to some households than the
higher density development planned for the Platinum Triangle. As previously mentioned, what
made this area especially suited for high density mixed use was the variety of transportation
options in the area; the excellent bus connectivity to all of the city's employment centers, and
train stations at both the Canyon and Platinum Triangle. Whether affordable housing was
located within the Platinum Triangle or surrounding areas, residents and employees,
regardless of income have opportunities to take transit, if they wish.
POPULATION: As mentioned by Ms. Vander Dussen, the EIR estimated the Platinum Triangle
would generate 1.5 persons per household. Concerns had been raised that this generation
rate was too low, however, Ms. Vander Dussen pointed out, this population generation rate
was based on similar development in San Diego, Irvine, San Francisco and Sacramento. It
was only used to predict the number of residents but not to assess environmental impacts. For
instance, the analyses for traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and noise were
conducted using traffic volumes projected by the Anaheim traffic area model. Housing factors
in this model, such as the number of residents and vacancy rates, were based on Orange
County projections and were provided by OCTA. Most likely the EIR overestimated project
impacts since the traffic model estimates 2.7 persons per unit instead of the lower rate typically
found in higher density development.
Ms. Vander Dussen ended her presentation explaining this proposal was similar to a proposal
processed in 2007 with the exception of reductions to the proposed amount of commercial and
office development and the addition of residential units within the ARTIC district. Following
Council's approval of that project, a law suit was filed challenging the adequacy of the project's
EIR. In October of 2008, Council repealed its approval of the previous project and initiated the
project before you tonight. The EIR was redone to insure it properly responded to all concerns
raised by the public and addressed all impacts of the proposed development. There were five
impact areas determined by the EIR to be significant and unavoidable including traffic, air
quality, noise and greenhouse gas emissions. The proposed justification for overriding these
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 18 of 24
impacts was that the proposed project would provide benefits of local and regional significance
which outweighed unavoidable environmental impacts.
This afternoon, she pointed out, a letter was received from the city of Orange and a response
memo had been provided to Council. The EIR did assure that appropriate mitigation would be
in place to mitigate impacts to infrastructure in the city of Orange. Development of the
Platinum Triangle would be properly mitigated through the city's participation with the city of
Orange in providing funds to mitigate Anaheim's fair share of transportation impacts in their
City.
For all the reasons identified and explained, staff recommended Council confirm the
recommendation of the Planning Commission and certify the EIR, approve the master land use
plan and overlay zone, zone reclassification and the water supply assessment.
Mayor Pringle opened the public hearing for comments.
Mitchell Caldwell, W. Broadway resident, pointed out existing low income housing sites on a
map versus opportunities identified for future low income housing sites. He stated Anaheim
had failed to equitably disperse low income housing throughout the City, perpetuating patterns
of segregation and poverty. He spoke in opposition to the project.
Craig Farrell, resident, supported Mr. Caldwell's statements.
Maurice Turner, resident, was a proponent of affordable housing for the Platinum Triangle
citing the need to spread low income housing throughout the City.
Sean S. of Lennar Development, spoke in support of the Platinum Triangle expansion and in
concurrence with the findings of the EIR. He added this was an opportunity to accommodate
California's projected growth of $6 million people in a centrally located, transit - served master
plan designed to provide density housing and employment around a diverse transit system.
Jose Moreno, along with other members of the Anaheim City School District Board, asked for
consideration in tabling this matter to consider the impacts of schools and how the District
could partner with the City to insure future schools for the Platinum Triangle. He added without
zoning for a school, the price of land would be much higher leaving the District to compete at
much higher land values and at the mercy of the market.
Tom Rizutti, Anaheim City School District, clarified comments made at the Planning
Commission hearing in October. The District commissioned a study recognizing that the
district -wide student generation rate might not apply to the type of development that was going
to occur in the Platinum Triangle and forwarded that information to City staff with the
representation that today's students did not represent an accurate generation rate.
Additionally, developer fees would not cover the cost of construction of a single school and the
Districts would prefer to have a school site identified to reduce future land costs. He added the
Districts were committed to providing schools for future residents and hoped to continue
meeting with City staff on this issue.
Esther Wallace, WAND, urged Council to delay action on this item and to reconsider the
Housing Element to include affordable housing in the Platinum Triangle. She added West
Anaheim was overrun with high density, low and very low housing offering historical
background on West Anaheim development. She questioned how much land costs would be
to add another story to accommodate affordable housing in the Platinum Triangle.
Robert Nothoff, OCCORD, remarked expansion of the Platinum Triangle would create a city
within a city and he believed good development should contain the following: create good jobs
with benefits that allowed workers to purchase homes and invest in the local economy; zoning
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 19 of 24
for schools when 19,000 new housing units were being built; parks and open space for
residents of an urban environment and affordable housing in line with the types of jobs being
created. He requested delay of this project and further study on these issues raised.
Conception Rodriguez, Hermosa Village, opposed expansion of the Platinum Triangle, citing
lack of schools, traffic, and air and water pollution.
Penny Campos, Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, expressed support for Platinum Triangle
expansion project. According to projections, she stated, the Triangle would provide over
27,000 jobs in the course of 20 years, opportunities for professional and technical employees
as well as trade and construction workers. The Chambers believes the project would address
jobs, workforce housing and transportation.
Kristine Thalman, BIA Chief Executive Officer, commended the City for expanding the Platinum
Triangle. She indicated the state issued population projections for southern California to 6
million people over the next 25 years and the Platinum Triangle epitomized how communities
could be creative and innovative in adding the area's future housing needs. She added this
project would put Anaheim in the forefront as a model on how to achieve these goals and take
into account the next generation of homebuyers, employers, and workers.
Kate Klimow, VP of Orange County Business Council /Government Affairs, supported this
project remarking it represented the business community working to enhance Orange County's
economic development and prosperity in order to preserve a high quality of life. The Platinum
Triangle expansion project also presented opportunities for the city to provide needed housing
in an area where there was high demand and strong job base. For decades, she added,
Orange County enjoyed being at the forefront of economic opportunity, but with the recession
driving unemployment rates to a historic high of over 10 percent, this project would help to
maintain and protect the county's economic vitality.
Paulina Alvarado, Ponderosa resident, remarked the policy created by Anaheim residents and
the Community Benefits Coalition and provided to the City earlier this year was an opportunity
to build a quality future for the Platinum Triangle. Their recommendations, she stated, would
have mitigated the environmental impacts and could have been a model development. She
urged Council to delay approval of the EIR until responsible development was implemented to
include good paying jobs, affordable housing, schools, and more parks.
Jose Montes, Hermosa Village resident, stated he was against this project as it did not contain
affordable housing and would cause traffic and other pollution problems.
Ms. Quintero, student, stated the community wanted equality and no discrimination for working
families. She asked Council to implement elements of responsible development which
included good paying jobs, affordable housing, parks, schools, and open space.
Maricel Ramirez, student, opposed the expansion of the Platinum Triangle asking the City to
meet and include residents as part of the decision making process.
Andrew Gojian, public school teacher, recommended this project be delayed until schools and
parks were included in the development.
Bob Linder, BRE Properties, remarked a housing shortage was projected for the future. No
new construction had been taking place in southern California, except for completion of
projects in the Platinum Triangle. BRE Properties completed a 320 unit project called Park
Meridian, the first lead gold certified project in Anaheim /OC and only the 6th in the State. He
added this project would not have been possible without the vision of this Mayor and Council to
create the Platinum Triangle. The mixed use, transit - oriented development played right into the
goals of sustainable communities and BRE was in the process of adding an additional 400
units next door, creating 85 construction jobs for the two years under construction and an
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 20 of 24
additional 15 -20 professional consulting and development design jobs during that same period
as well as 10 -15 full -time personnel on site. He added BRIE was a long -term holder of their
assets, and a California company who was committed to Anaheim and its future.
Ross Romero, Los Amigos, asked that this project be delayed until the lack of affordable
housing and schools be addressed.
Christopher Herring, CALTRANS, stated CALTRANS supported mixed -use development that
integrated housing, employment, commercial and recreational uses, with major public
transportation hubs and lines to foster a more efficient land use pattern. He added CALTRANS
and City staff worked closely in coordination on the Platinum Triangle DEIR and Traffic Impact
Analysis and concurred with the report's methodologies and analyses and continued to work in
partnership to develop a mitigation agreement outlining actions to reduce the impacts of the
state's transportation facilities to less than a significant level.
Jim Adams, LA/OC Building & Construction Trade Council, supported expansion of the
Platinum Triangle. With the infrastructure modifications, improvements, grade separations,
street, and sewer he was hopeful for the trade council members to get a share of the work. He
added it appeared the public sector was the only funding source for major projects with
transportation leading the way, and he was most concerned with getting projects moved
forward.
Jack Eidt, Wild Heritage Planners, was a proponent for smart growth and he felt this project
had some compelling elements but also contained lost opportunities in terms of walkability, a
significant lack of open space and the need to require green building standards as well as
encourage affordability.
Gail Anderson, West Broadway, spoke in opposition to the current EIR as it existed because it
did not contain the element of affordable housing. With the Platinum Triangle the City had a
planned development which could not only absorb some of the state's mandates of low income
house, but could offer local homes to working people who would be employed at the
businesses created in that area and she urged Council to take into consideration the needs of
the communities and balance affordable housing within the City.
Barbara Gonzalez, resident/realtor, addressed the need for schools and the percentages used
for the generation of student numbers. Families no longer moved every three to five years, and
stayed at home to raise families which meant there would be higher numbers of children than
anticipated. She encouraged the City to work together with the school district to find affordable
school sites whether it be in the Platinum Triangle or on the periphery.
Don Andrews, resident, asked Council to balance the construction of affordable housing by
refraining from adding another unit near or in West Anaheim and by adding a neighborhood
school to the Platinum Triangle area.
Ezequiel Gutierrez, Public Law Center, stating by adopting a neutral market driven approach to
development, the City was not meeting its affirmative duty under federal law. He added the
Platinum Triangle expansion ignored recommendations of the Regional Target Advisory
Committee (RTAC) formed by the Air Resources Board to advise them on technical issues in
meeting greenhouse gas emissions. RTAC, he stated, recommended the creation of a better
jobs /housing fit to reduce vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions. He disagreed
that traffic and greenhouse gas emissions could not be mitigated, stating the Transit Village Act
could provide the framework to accomplish some of those needs by providing incentives.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 21 of 24
Amin David, resident, requested Council and staff work with developers to create a community
benefits agreement addressing good quality jobs, affordable housing, child care, universal
design, and education.
Alim Bhuvani, resident/realtor, opposed the project with its lack of identified schools in the
Platinum Triangle.
David Diaz, CAND, requested this item be continued to a later date and the City Council listen
to the concerns raised by its residents. He alleged ulterior motives by outgoing elected officials
in moving this project forward today.
Ken Chen, resident, was concerned with the influx of affordable housing in one small
geographic area, stating the City had the resources and staff to work together to provide
affordable housing incentives for the Platinum Triangle.
Victor Real, resident, objected to the need to expand construction vertically in the Platinum
Triangle to accommodate the proposed expansion. Mayor Pringle pointed out the original
Platinum Triangle plan did not have every parcel in the area involved. He indicated three
stories of residential construction could be built out of wood, but once that height was
exceeded, it must be steel -based construction and the cost increased dramatically. Under this
expansion, he pointed out; there was the ability to build the planned 18,000 units with a wood -
based construction. Mr. Real recommended action on this project be delayed for further
review.
James Robert Reade, Golden Skies Mobile Home Park, remarked the 250 mobile homes
within the park were considered low income housing and were situated within two blocks of the
Platinum Triangle. He fully supported the vision and expansion of the Platinum Triangle.
Phyllis Mueller, S. Ohio, thanked Council for listening attentively to the 33 prior speakers. She
indicated it was clear to her that this EIR contained flaws and should not be approved at this
time.
Caesar Covarrubias, Kennedy Commission, remarked affordable housing should not be a
derogatory term as the properties already built in partnership with the City had enhanced
neighborhoods and brought about stabilization. With the Platinum Triangle, he added, the City
had the opportunity to work with developers and participate with the community in providing
needed and required amenities, including affordable housing.
Eric Altman, OCCORD, remarked on the broad and diverse group of people speaking in
alignment for the vision of the Platinum Triangle. With regard to the overriding statement, he
believed the significant and unavoidable impacts could be mitigated and were mitigated by the
alternative vision developed and submitted to the City through the efforts of several hundred
people in the community. He added that vision was not just endorsed by community leaders
but also by organizations, Child Care Connections, Local 4541, Unite Here, and others who
looked at that alternative plan and thought it should be taken into account during this
deliberation. He recommended delaying action and allowing the newly elected council to vote
on this project.
With no other comments offered, Mayor Pringle closed the public hearing.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 22 of 24
Mayor Pringle commented an issue regarding Anaheim's requirement for a regional housing
needs assessment (RHNA) requiring cities to file a plan with the state to build affordable
housing was discussed along with the fact there was no reference to affordable development in
the Platinum Triangle and he asked staff for clarification. Ms. Vander Dussen responded that
the issue was the Housing Element did not show the Platinum Triangle as a housing
opportunity site and the City was obligated (in order to get the Housing Element approved) to
demonstrate there was adequate land in the city that could be used to meet RHNA; she added
that if there were units developed then they could be counted. Staff then reviewed and
identified undeveloped and underdeveloped parcels in the remainder of the city to demonstrate
to the state there was adequate acreage available that could be developed for RHNA. He
asked if all of the Platinum Triangle was a potential housing site because it was built with high
density in an affordable range and would count against RHNA to the extent housing was built.
Ms. Vander Dussen stated it would count against the RHNA number, adding RHNA also
included market rate as well as affordable units and the City had to demonstrate they could
accommodate the entire allocation. She added those housing opportunities were just that, an
opportunity, and not a commitment to build.
Council Member Kring mentioned there were two developers looking to put affordable housing
in the Platinum Triangle. Ms. Vander Dussen stated the fact that the Triangle was not a
housing opportunity site in the general plan did not stop the City from subsidizing, encouraging
or incentivizing affordable housing there. Of more concern to Council Member Kring was the
fact there was potential significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality, noise, traffic and
greenhouse gas emissions, and added to that was the cost of staffing and equipment for a new
fire station. She added she would also like to see affordable housing in the Platinum Triangle
and was of the opinion, this project should be reviewed.
Council Member Galloway thanked the community and neighborhood groups who participated
in this hearing and offered their comments. She believed with the development of the Platinum
Triangle, Anaheim would be a model for an urbanized community and that any decisions made
now were profound and would set the tone for the future. She believed this city within a city
should be self- sustaining and not a burden to the rest of the City. She understood how
affordable housing was built and how developers, with incentives, could make that
development pencil out. Given that understanding, she was not satisfied that the land expense
would preclude affordable housing in the Platinum Triangle and she felt there should be
additional work to make that come about. Regarding schools, she felt the impact and need by
the children generated by the development was great and the answer would be resolved by
working together with the school districts and she would like more time to consider these
issues.
Council Member Hernandez discussed the need to move forward with this project pointing out
the City had done everything possible within the guidelines that were mandated by other
agencies.
Council Member Sidhu remarked he clearly heard that affordable housing should be distributed
throughout the City. He added if land in the Platinum Triangle could be available for the
Agency to purchase for affordable housing, he would work to accomplish that as well. He
would also work to identify school sites whether in the Triangle or on the outskirts to be
constructed with developer fees and he would sit down with the school districts to see how
future development and schools could be resolved.
Mayor Pringle remarked the Platinum Triangle was an area where there was an opportunity for
high density residential that would not impact existing single family homes. It started out with
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 23 of 24
some of the lowest property values in the city in terms of light industrial and had infrastructure
in place near the football stadium where 100,000 visitors could show up for a game. All other
infrastructure would be paid for by the new residents out of property taxes. This would be an
area, he pointed out, where density could be increased, adjacent to the City's infrastructure
near expanded transportation and with a good jobs /housing balance with the mixed
office /commercial and residential. Expanding the Platinum Triangle was a significant step in
planning for the future. It has been under consideration for the last two years and now was the
time to be ready for developers who wanted to grow this area and move forward. He added of
the units already built in the Triangle, they were over 90 percent occupied and two of the
properties sold for two of the highest property values in all of Orange County for rental units
over the last two months. To pay for city services such as police and fire, would be the
obligation of those new taxpayers in the Triangle. He added there would be a tremendous
increase in property values and with that an 18 to 20 percent increase in property tax and
those monies will fund police and fire services. He was a believer in affordable housing but not
a supporter of inclusionary zoning or punishing future Platinum Triangle homeowners by
putting an undue burden on cost of their housing. He supported using whatever incentives
were possible and creating and finding more affordable housing before the State raided
redevelopment funds again. He pointed out that the State had taken away $15 million in
Anaheim redevelopment funds this year, which would have gone toward affordable housing in
the City.
After 2.5 years of study and review and now that the market was better understood and
opportunities became clear, he was supportive of the Platinum Triangle expansion and moved
to approve the following: RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -187 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM certifying Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2008-
00339 and adopting findings of fact and statement of overriding considerations, Mitigation
Monitoring Program No. 106C and water supply assessment (MIS2008- 00284) for the Revised
Platinum Triangle Expansion Project; RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -188 A RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving General Plan Amendment No. 2008-
00471 pertaining to several elements of the Anaheim General Plan (Revised Platinum Triangle
Expansion Project); RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -189 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving an amendment to the Platinum Triangle Master Land
Use Plan (Miscellaneous Case No. 2008 - 00283; Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion
Project); and to introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6192 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ANAHEIM approving an amendment to Chapter 18.20 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code relating to zoning and development standards (Zoning Code Amendment No. 2008-
00074; Revised Platinum Triangle Expansion Project); and to approve RESOLUTION NO.
2010 -190 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
approving Reclassification No. 2008- 00222, unconditionally (Revised Platinum Triangle
Expansion Project); and to introduce ORDINANCE NO. 6193 AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the zoning map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 2008 - 00222; Revised Platinum Triangle
Expansion Project); seconded by Council Member Hernandez. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — 3: Mayor
Pringle and Council Members Hernandez and Sidhu. Noes — 2: Council Members Galloway
and Kring. Motion Carried.
Report on Closed Session Action: None
Council Communications:
Council Member Hernandez requested staff review and provide a status of the Chamber of
Commerce contract deliverables and the attendance record for the Planning Commission.
Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010
Page 24 of 24
Council Member Galloway recognized Public Works employee, Rowena Garcia.
Council Member Kring thanked Council assistant Vic Dominguez for starting the initial Veteran's
Day celebration last year and announced the 2 Annual Veteran's Day Celebration to be held
on November 10 at City Hall, at 11 a.m. She spoke of the dog park that would be included in
the Platinum Triangle and the recovery of an abandoned dog with the assistance of City
employee, Ben DePaul.
Mayor Pro Tern Sidhu spoke of his attendance to the dedication of the Pradera Affordable
Housing project with 146 units and the Integrity Cottage project for the disabled. He announced
the Fall Festival to be held on October 30 and encouraged everyone to vote on November 2nd
Mayor Pringle spoke of the grand opening of the Pradera Affordable Housing project and the
Integrity Cottage project both of which were 100 percent full. He also announced the upcoming
groundbreaking of the western half of the Gene Autry Way 1 -5 Interchange and Highway
improvement project. He added Mobility 21 (the region's largest transportation organization,
was meeting in Anaheim this weekend to talk about all the transportation infrastructure projects
happening in the region. Mayor Pringle also remarked that the last council meeting for himself
and two council members would be November 16, 2010 and added that closing remarks would
take place at that time.
Adjournment: With no other business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 10:04 p.m
Re ectf Ily submi ed,
Linda N. Andal, CMC
City Clerk