The URL can be used to link to this page

PC 2006/01/23 (2)Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Monday, January 23, 2006 Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard. Anaheim. California Chairman: Gail Eastman Chairman Pro - Tempore: Cecilia Flores Commissioners: Kelly Buffa, Joseph Karaki, Ed Perez, Panky Romero, Pat Velasquez . Call To Order Preliminary Plan Review 11:00 A.M. • Staff update to Commission on various City developments and issues (As requested by Planning Commission) • Preliminary Plan Review for items on the January 23, 2006 agenda Recess To Afternoon Public Hearing Session • Reconvene To Public Hearing 2:30 P.M. For record keeping purposes, if you wish to make a statement regarding any item on the agenda, please complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to the secretary. Pledge Of Allegiance Public Comments Consent Calendar Public Hearing Items . Adjournment You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e -mail address: plan ningcommission(Wanaheim.net H: \docs \clerical \agendas \012306.doc (01/23/06) Page 1 Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 2:30 P.M. Items Of Public Interest: Presentation of a plaque accepted by Commissioner Panky Romero on behalf of David Romero in acknowledgement of his 2'/: years of service on the Planning Commission. Public Comments: This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items. Consent Calendar: The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless members of the Planning Commission, staff or the public request the item to be discussed and /or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 7A. General Plan Conformity No. 2005.00047 Agent: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805 Community Development Department request for Planning Commission determination of conformance with the Anaheim General Plan for the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan. General Plan Conformity Resolution No. 7B. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of December 12, 2005. (Motion) Continued from the January 9, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. 7C. Receiving and approving the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of January 9, 2006 (Motion) Project Planner. (dsee @anaheim.net) H: \docs \clerical \agendas \012306.doc (01/23/06) Page 2 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006.05031 Owner: Mark Ghassemi, 301 East Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92805 Agent: Patrick Anderson, 16022 Aria Circle, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Location: 301 East Ball Road: Property is approximately 0.93 -acre, having a frontage of 150 feet on the north side of Ball Road and is located 333 feet east of the centerline of Technology Drive (011in International, Inc.). Request to permit and retain an existing outdoor storage area and to install an overhead crane to load trucks with slab materials in conjunction with an existing wholesale building material (stone) distribution business with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Continued from the October 31, November 14, December 12, 2005, and Project Planner: January 9, 2006, Planning Commission meetings. (ioramirez0anaheim.netl Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 3a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION —CLASS 1 AND 15 Request a 3b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16958 Continuance to February 6, 2006 Owner: Anaheim Hotel Partnership, LCP, 777 Convention Way, Suite 110, Anaheim, CA 92802 Agent: Kelly Carlyle, Psomas, 3187 Red Hill, Suite 250, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Location: 777 Convention Way: Property is approximately 8.5 acres, located at the northwest corner of Hotel Way and Convention Way (Anaheim Hilton). Request to establish a 1 -lot, airspace hotel subdivision for investment purposes. Project Planner. ( skimOanaheim.netl Continued from the December 12, 2005, and January 9, 2006, Planning Commission meetings. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \012306.doc (01/23/06) Page 3 4a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 4b. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04655 4c. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005 -157 Owner: Gary Calkins Trust, 6263 East Trail Drive, Anaheim, CA 92807 Agent: Steve Ellis, 4742 Yorba Lane, Yorba Linda, CA 92886 Location: 6263 East Trail Drive: Property is approximately 32 acres having a frontage of 47 feet at the terminus of Trail Drive and is located 145 feet west of the centerline of Whitestone Drive. Variance No. 2005 -04655 — Request waivers of (a) maximum structural height, (b) maximum retaining wall height and (c) lot frontage on a public or private street to construct a single - family residence. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -157 — To establish a 2 -lot, 2 -unit detached single - family residential subdivision. Continued from the January 9, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. Variance Resolution No. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \012306.doc Request a Continuance to February 6, 2006 Project Planner. ( a va zuuez(&anaheim. net) (01/23/06) Page 4 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 6b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00169 *Advertised with Tracking No. RCL2005 -00173 Owner: Kenneth Thompson, 711 East South Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 CP /HERS Anaheim LP, 335 Madison Avenue, #7, New York, New York, 10017 Raymond Siegele, 500 South Atchison Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 Charles Atwood, 534 South Atchison Street, Anaheim, CA 92805 Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805 Voit Anaheim Business, 21530 Oxnard Street, #B, Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Agent: Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, 201 South Anaheim Boulevard, Suite 1003, Anaheim, CA 92805 Location: Portion A: The property is approximately 242 acres and is located at the southeast corner of Santa Ana Street and Olive Street (516 East Santa Ana Street and 500 -610 South Olive Street — Kwikset and APW sites). Portion B: The property is approximately 16.7 acres, having frontages of 455 feet on the north side of South Street and the south side of Santa Ana Street (525 - 727 East South Street and 500 - 558 South Atchison Street). City- initiated request to reclassify Portion A from the I (Industrial) zone to Project Planner. the RM -3 (Multiple Family Residential) zone, and Portion B from the I ( dsee(6anahelm.neB (Industrial) zone to the RM -4 (Multiple Family Residential) zone or less intense zone. Reclassification Resolution No. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \012306.doc (01/23/06) Page 5 6a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION — CLASS 1 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005.05056 Owner: Dae Won Hong, 1808 Calavera Place, Fullerton, CA 92833 Agent: Josephina Escalante, 221 South Magnolia Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92804 Location: 221 South Magnolia Avenue, Suite G: Property is approximately 0.94 -acre, located at the northwest corner of Broadway and Magnolia Avenue (Rancho Meat Market). Request to expand an existing legal nonconforming convenience market Project Planner. into an adjacent tenant space. tinixon0anaheim.netl Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 7a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 125 (PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED) 7b. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2004.00002 (Tracking No. DAG2005- 00010) 7c. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16618 Owner: CREA Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC, 9381 Judicial Drive, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92121 Agent: David Slaughter, Fuscoe, Engineering, 16795 Von Karmen, Irvine, CA 92606 Eric L. Heffner, Nexus Properties, Inc., 9381 Judicial Drive, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92121 Location: 1801 East Katella Avenue: Property is approximately 6.3 acres and is located at the northwest corner of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard (Stadium Lofts - Anaheim). Development Agreement No. 2005 -00002 — Request to amend a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC to allow residential condominiums. Tentative Tract Map No. 16618 — Request to establish a 1 -lot, 390 unit Project Planner: residential mixed use condominium subdivision.* tiaramirezOananelm.neo Development Agreement Resolution No. * Advertised as residential condominium subdivision. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \012306.doc (01/23/06) Page 6 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005-05049 Owner: Investment Fremont, 175 North Riverview Drive, Anaheim, CA 92808 Agent: Jay Malloy, 8200 East Crystal Drive, Anaheim, CA 92807 Location: 5635 East La Palma Avenue: Property is approximately acres, having a frontage of 275 feet on the north side of La Palma Avenue and is located 296 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway (Cinema City Theatres). Request to permit storage of vehicles within an existing parking structure for an off -site automotive dealership with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 9b. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04675 Owner: The Shops at Stadium Towers, Therese Hotvedt, 1100 Newport Center Drive, Suite 150, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Agent: Peter Louis/John Hill, 3195 -B Airport Loop Drive, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Location: 2410 - 2420 East Katella Avenue: Property is approximately 2.4 acres, having a frontage of 600 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue and is located 37 feet east of the centerline of Howell Avenue (Stadium Towers Plaza). Request waivers of (a) minimum number of parking spaces, (b) permitted number of tenants on a monument sign, (c) maximum number of monument signs, (d) maximum height of monument sign, (e) permitted number of wall signs, (f) permitted location of wall signs, and (g) maximum height of letters /logos on wall signs to waive minimum number of parking spaces and permitted signs. Variance Resolution No. Project Planner. ( dhernckO anaheim. nett Request for continuance to February 6, 2006 Project Planner. ( avazouez0anaheim. neo Adjourn To Monday, February 6, 2006, at 1:00 P.M. for Preliminary Plan Review. H: \docs \clerical \agendas \012306.doc (01/23/06) Page 7 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at; 4:00 p.m. January 19, 2006 (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND ,/~ COnUNCI/L~D4ISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: ~ AD IL/ ~ l ' l~~ If ycu challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in a written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. RIGHTS OF APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use Permits and Variances will be final 22 days after Planning Commission action and any action regarding Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 days after Planning Commission action unless a timely appeal is filed during that time. This appeal shall be made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied by an appeal fee in an amount determined by the City Clerk. The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for public hearing before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified by the City Clerk of said hearing. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department, (714) 765-5139. Notification no later than 10:00 a.m. on the Friday before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. Recorded decision information is available 24 hours a day by calling the Planning Department's Automated Tele hone S stem at 714-765-5139. H:\dots\clerical\agendas\012306.doc (01123/06) Page 8 SCHEDULE 2006 February 6 February 22 (Wed) March 6 March 20 April 3 April 17 May 1 May 15 May 31 (Wed) June 12 June 26 July 10 July 24 August 7 August 21 September 6 (Wed) September 18 October 2 October 16 October 30 November 13 November 27 December 11 I I December 27 (Wed) I H: \docs \clerical \agendas \012306.doc (01/23/06) Page 9 ITEM NO. 1 -A we= D General Plan Conformity No. 2005 -00047 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Scale: Graphic Requested By: ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Q.S. No. City -wide A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN FOR THE AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN- City-wide 2151 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 1 -A fiC_\ a. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY NO. 2005 -00047 - REQUEST TO DETERMINE CONFORMANCE WITH THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN (Resolution) REQUEST: (1) The Community Development Department has submitted the attached memorandum requesting that the Planning Commission find that the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency's (ARA) proposal to amend and restate the existing Redevelopment Plan is in conformance with the Anaheim General Plan, and further recommend to the ARA and City Council approval of the proposed Amendments- BACKGROUND (2) On May 24, 2004, the City Council adopted Amendments to the Redevelopment Plans to merge the Alpha Project, River Valley Project, Plaza Project, West Anaheim Project, Commercial /Industrial Project and the Stadium Project areas into one "Merged Project Area ". On December 20, 2005, the ARA accepted an Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan that included the proposed Amendments. The Amendments will extend the time limits on plan effectiveness and the repayment of indebtednesstreceipt of tax increment revenues by 10 years in order to eliminate existing blighting conditions and increase and improve affordable housing opportunities. As part of the ARA's action on December 20, it further authorized the transmittal of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan in draft form to the Planning Commission for their report and recommendations. (3) The Amendments propose no changes to land use designations of properties within the Merged Project Area, nor any changes pertaining to circulation systems, public facilities, proposed projects and programs, boundaries of the project areas, and development standards. (4) Section 33346 of the Health and Safety Code requires that prior to a joint ARA and City Council public hearing on the proposed Amendments to the Redevelopment Plan, that the ARA submit the proposed Amendments to the Planning Commission for its review, report, and recommendation relative to the conformance with the City's General Plan. A draft resolution is attached for the Commission's review. The Commission's action would be a recommendation to the ARA and City Council on the proposed Amendments- RECOMMENDATION (5) Staff recommends that the Commission, by the attached resolution, find that the proposed Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan conforms to the Anaheim General Plan and recommend approval of the proposed Amendments to the ARA and City Council. Sr- GPC2005- 00047ds Page 1 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2006 - * ** RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF THE ANAHEIM MERGED PROJECT AREA THROUGH AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUENT EXISTING REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE ALPHA, RIVER VALLEY, PLAZA, COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL AND A PORTION OF THE WEST ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS CONFORMS TO THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN AND MAKING A RECOMMENDATION ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WHEREAS, on July 19, 1973, by Ordinance No. 3190, the City Council of the City of Anaheim ( "City Council ") approved and adopted a redevelopment plan for the Alpha Redevelopment Project ( "Alpha Project ") and subsequently amended the redevelopment plan eight times to modify land uses, amend relocation policies, establish a tax increment limit, establish time limits in compliance with Assembly Bill 1290 ( "AB 1290 "), Senate Bill 1045 ( "SB 1045 "), and Senate Bill 1096 ( "SB 1096 "), and merge with the existing redevelopment project areas in the City of Anaheim ( "City "); and WHEREAS, on November 29, 1983, by Ordinance No. 4463, the City Council adopted a redevelopment plan for the River Valley Redevelopment Project ( "River Valley Project ") and subsequently amended the redevelopment plan six times to modify land uses, establish time limits in compliance with AB 1290 and SB 1096, and merge with the existing redevelopment project areas in the City; and WHEREAS, on June 12, 1990, by Ordinance No. 5136, the City Council adopted a redevelopment plan for the Plaza Redevelopment Project ( "Plaza Project ") and subsequently amended the redevelopment plan three times to establish time limits in compliance with AB 1290 and SB 1045, and merge with the existing redevelopment project areas in the City; and WHEREAS, on December 7, 1993, by Ordinance No. 5412, the City Council adopted a redevelopment plan for the Brookhurst Commercial Corridor Redevelopment Project ( "Brookhurst Area ") and subsequently amended the redevelopment plan three times to add territory to the project area, including renaming the project area the West Anaheim Commercial Corridor Redevelopment Project ( "West Anaheim Project'), and establish time limits in compliance with AB 1290 and SB 1045, and merge with the existing redevelopment project areas in the City; and WHEREAS, on December 21, 1993, by Ordinance No. 5415, the City Council adopted a redevelopment plan for the Commercial /Industrial Redevelopment Project ( "Commercial/ Industrial Project ") and subsequently amended the redevelopment plan three times to establish time limits in compliance with AB 1290 and SB 1045, and merge with the existing redevelopment project areas in the City; and WHEREAS, on August 9, 1994, by Ordinance No. 5442, the City Council adopted a redevelopment plan for the Stadium Redevelopment Project ( "Stadium Project ") and subsequently amended the redevelopment plan two times to establish time limits in compliance with SB 1096 and merge with the existing redevelopment project areas in the City; and WHEREAS, on May 24, 2004, by Ordinance Nos. 5913, 5914, 5915, 5916, 5917 and 5918, the City Council adopted the amendments to the Redevelopment Plans to merge ( "Merged Plans ") the Alpha Project, River Valley Project, Plaza Project, West Anaheim Project, Commercial /Industrial Project and the Stadium Project areas ( "Merged Project Area "); and WHEREAS, the "Affected Plans" for the Merged Project Area consist of the Redevelopment Plans, as amended, prepared for the Alpha Project, River Valley Project, Plaza Project, Commercial /Industrial Project, and the Brookhurst Area of the West Anaheim Project; and WHEREAS, the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency ( "Agency ") is vested with the responsibility to carry out the Merged Plans, inclusive of the Affected Plans; and CR \PC2006 -0 -1- PC2006- WHEREAS, the Agency desires to amend the Affected Plans ( "Amendments ") as consolidated in the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan for the Anaheim Merged Redevelopment Project ( "Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan ") in accordance with Section 33333.10(a)(1) and (2) of the Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.; "CRU) to extend the time limits on plan effectiveness and the repayment of indebtedness /receipt of tax increment revenues by 10 years in order to eliminate existing blighting conditions and increase and improve affordable housing opportunities; and WHEREAS, in accordance with CRL Section 33333.11(f), no later than 120 days prior to holding a joint public hearing on the proposed Amendments, the Agency shall send the proposed Amendments to the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim ( "Planning Commission ") for its report and recommendation concerning the proposed Amendments and their conformity to the City's General Plan and pursuant to such review may recommend to the Agency for or against the approval of the proposed Amendments; and WHEREAS, the proposed Amendments propose no changes to land use designations of properties within the Merged Project Area, as designated herein, and land use designations contained in the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan are the same as those land use designations contained in the adopted land use map of the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed Amendments propose no changes to existing development standards for properties located within the Merged Project Area, and development standards applicable to the Merged Project Area, as enforced by the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan, are the same as the development standards contained in the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, on December 20, 2005, the Agency, by Resolution No. ARA2005 -06, accepted the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan, inclusive of the proposed Amendments, and authorized the transmittal of the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan in draft form to the Planning Commission for their report and recommendations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission members have received the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan in draft form prepared for the proposed Amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby find and determine as follows: The Planning Commission having reviewed the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan, inclusive of the proposed Amendments in draft form, hereby finds and determines that the proposed Amendments are consistent with the City's General Plan because they do not make changes to land uses permitted in the Merged Project Area, or other general controls and limitations, and the land use designations, circulation systems, public facilities, proposed projects and programs, and development standards, and all other contents of the proposed Amendments are in conformity with the City's General Plan. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the approval of the proposed Amendments by the Agency and the City Council. 3. The Planning Commission hereby authorizes and directs the officers, employees, staff, consultants and attorneys for the Planning Commission to take any action that may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of this resolution or which are appropriate or desirable in the circumstances. In the event that prior to the adoption of the proposed Amendments, the Agency or City Council desires to make any minor, or technical or clarifying changes to the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan as it relates to the proposed Amendments, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that any such minor, technical or clarifying changes need not be referred to it for further report and recommendations- -2- PC2006- 4. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that this resolution shall constitute the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission to the Agency and the City Council concerning the proposed Amendments. 5. The Planning Commission hereby authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Planning Commission to transmit a copy of this resolution to the Agency and the City Council. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of January 23, 2006. 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. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) 1, 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 23, 2006, 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 , 2006. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2006- Attachment - R &R 1 -A MEMORANDUM CITY OF ANAHEIM Community Development Department DATE: January 19, 2006 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Elisa Stipkovich, Executive Director SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT OF THE ANAHEIM MERGED PROJECT AREA THROUGH AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUENT EXISTING REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE ALPHA, RIVER VALLEY, PLAZA, COMMERCIAL /INDUSTRIAL AND A PORTION OF THE WEST ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS CONFORM TO THE ANAHEIM GENERAL PLAN AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL Background The City of Anaheim has one redevelopment project area, the Anaheim Merged Redevelopment Project Area. The Merged Project Area was previously composed of six (6) separate redevelopment project areas adopted over the past 30 years. As authorized by SB 211, the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency now desires to amend the redevelopment plans for the purpose of extending the time limit of effectiveness and the time limit to repay debt /collect tax increment for an additional 10 years for affected Redevelopment Plans included in the Anaheim Merged Redevelopment Project Area. The proposed Amendments do not change any of the financial limits of the Redevelopment Plans for the respective projects that comprise the Merged Project Area. The proposed Amendments do not grant additional eminent domain authority or add territory to the affected Redevelopment Plans. Extending the life of the affected Redevelopment Plans will assist in the attainment of the goals and objectives set forth by the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, specifically the Affordable Housing Strategy, because 30 percent of the tax increment generated in the Merged Project Area would be deposited in the Agency's Housing Fund and subsequently used for increasing, improving and preserving the supply of housing at affordable housing costs to persons and families of moderate, low, very low or extremely low income. F'.DOCS \DEVSVCS \MEMOS \SRM6110A lan Am nd Ping DOC The proposed Amendment proposes no changes to land use designations of properties within the Merged Project Area. The Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan land uses will track and be consistent with those identified in the General Plan as it exists and as it may be amended from time to time. California Community Redevelopment Law Section 33333.11(f) requires that prior to a joint public hearing on the proposed amendments, the Agency submit the proposed Amendments to the Planning Commission for its review, report, and recommendation. In addition, the Planning Commission must find that the proposed Amendments conform to the City of Anaheim's General Plan. Subsequent to your review, the Planning Commission may recommend the approval of the proposed Amendments by the Agency and City Council. By adopting the attached resolution, the Planning Commission finds and determines that the proposed Amendments are consistent with the City's General Plan and recommends approval of the proposed Amendments of the Anaheim Merged Project Area. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (714) 765- 4332. c. Brad L. Hobson Sergio M. Ramirez Attachment F'.DOCS \DEVSVCS \MEMOS \SRM6110A lan Am nd Ping DOC ITEM NO. 1 -A Ky r RCt- ga3 VPR SOIL) 6p 6 pU �G VPR 12na aUU aDU O a UU aUU Co P4E O`\FT RM" 6 64" RG 58- RGGUp 4EN" APA 5690 �1 99 459 52-534 1 RGO v cp, ER 52-53.11 AA 5 { vPR? �404aAl) GAUF�GHOO�s c194 "9 -0g1�1 p R p 2o ��gq �c�P 92 66 Al OUP ia� VAR 233 USER " S2 04659 53" W jl2 " RG1. 52 EGNNIGAI ON o E ERHPE ply 418 pggil p1P c0 g U BRO SOA00- x 1_ A cMOSOR" K T 90 4m 3 c ER } T 5 "53p 0 2 191 ?20 0 3 ��g55 9 in RCL52 -53 -11 RCL 52 -53 -11 I CUP4024 Z$o3 -02 O rvm uo� UP 200 -0503 CUP 1222 - p m CUP 3963 iP �NJP 28 o9 = N� RCL 52-53-11 AjQ > (RCL55- 56 -20I (CUOLIN25) w CUP 3430 p AUTO o PGN w 1NMK B ELL 2 993 BELL — COMPANY INTERNATIONA SHOPS 59OE O\SY UU INC o! �— 333' --►1f 150 i BALL ROAD 1 1 RCL 2000 -00023 RCL 66 -67 -14 /Res. M1' to RCL 54 -5542 SABC Overlay Zone) r- RCL 66-67-14 RCL 66 y 6� 9 55- RCL 5 SG1y 777 T RCL 5556 -19 R CL RCL 54 RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 55 -56 -19 McPEEK DODGE G -55 -42 SMALL IND. RCL 54 -55-42 () \IPRA62ODGE D Z FIRMS SMAL J McPEEK ��A SABC Gwlay Zone RC`6 R v P v PR 1 362 000- 3 pvedaYl RCL 54 -55-42 SMALL IND ^9 RCt- of \Wren tto SA FIRMS _,.� F556. lRes _. F r,.42 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05031 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: MARK GHASSEMI Q -S- No- 95 REQUEST TO PERMIT AND RETAIN AN EXISTING OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA AND TO INSTALL AN OVERHEAD CRANE TO LOAD TRUCKS WITH SLAB MATERIALS IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING WHOLESALE BUILDING MATERIAL (STONE) DISTRIBUTION BUSINESS WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES- 301 East Ball Road - 011in International, Inc- 2034 Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05031 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: MARK GHASSEMI Q.S. No. 95 REQUEST TO PERMIT AND RETAIN AN EXISTING OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA AND TO INSTALL AN OVERHEAD CRANE TO LOAD TRUCKS WITH SLAB MATERIALS IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN EXISTING WHOLESALE BUILDING MATERIAL (STONE) DISTRIBUTION BUSINESS WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 301 East Ball Road - 011in International, Inc. 2034(2006 -1 -18) Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 2 2a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 2b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) 2c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05031 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 0.93 -acre property has a frontage of 150 feet on the north side of Ball Road, a maximum depth of 295 feet, and is located 333 feet east of the centerline of Technology Drive (301 East Ball Road - 011in International, Inc.) REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section No. 18.10.030.010 to permit and retain an existing outdoor storage area and to install an overhead crane to load trucks with slab material in conjunction with an existing wholesale building material (stone) distribution business with waiver of the following: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces (34 required; 21 proposed and recommended by the City's Independant Parking and Traffic Consultant) BACKGROUND: (3) This item was continued from the October 31, November 14, December 12, 2005, and the January 9, 2006, Commission meetings to allow the applicant time to complete revisions to the submitted parking study and plans. (4) This property is developed with three concrete tilt -up buildings and is zoned I (Industrial). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property and all surrounding properties for General Commercial land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (5) Conditional Use Permit No. 1222 (to permit an automobile frame and body repair shop in the M -1 zone) was approved by the Commission on February 22, 1971. This business is no longer in operation and staff has included a condition of approval requiring that this entitlement be terminated. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: (6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates the existing outdoor storage /parking area ( "T" shaped) is located on the central portion of the property. The overhead bridge crane would be installed along the rear portion of the parking area that runs parallel to Ball Road (the cross -bar of the "T" shape). The existing parking area would be re- striped to accommodate revised storage and circulation due to the new bridge crane. The revised outdoor storage area would be located at the rear of the property behind Buildings 1 and 2. The site plan further proposes a path of travel for large delivery vehicles entering on the adjacent property to east, on which the property owner has a lease for access, parking, storage and offices- SR-CUP 05031 PC 012306 Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 2 (7) Vehicular access to the site would be provided via one (1) driveway from Ball Road (two other existing driveways to the east and west of the middle driveway would be removed). Large vehicle access for delivery of materials would be from an existing 25 -foot access gate at the northeast portion of the property. Large delivery trucks would enter the adjacent property via an existing 55 -foot wide driveway and circulate through the gate and under the bridge crane for unloading. A large truck vehicle template is reflected on the site plan, demonstrating adequate maneuverability for access to and within the site for material delivery. The site plan also indicates a total of 21 parking spaces available on site. Code requires 34 spaces based on the following: Use Area (s.f.) Code Required Parkin (per 1 s.f. Parking Required Office 700 1.55* 1.1 Warehouse 16 1.55 25 OutdoorStora a 8,185 0.4 3 Showroom 1 2.5 4.5 Building Total 8,185 Outdoor 18,683 Indoor 34 First 10 percent of office area is parked at the industrial ratio. (8) The enlarged site plan /floor plan and enlarged overhead crane plan (Exhibit Nos. 2 and 3) indicate three existing buildings utilized for warehouse, office, and showroom purposes. The plan also reflects a proposed top riding double girder bridge crane located at the northerly portion of the existing parking area (cross -bar of the "T")_ The crane would contain two sliding crane arms for material loading /unloading. The crane would cover about 10,653 square feet of area. Access for sanitation, emergency, delivery, and employee vehicles would be maintained underneath and around the bridge crane and the proposed outdoor storage and staging areas. The existing wrought iron gate along the front of the buildings 1 and 2 would be relocated to the rear of the buildings to screen and secure materials, and separate storage and unloading from customer parking areas (only employees would park underneath the crane). This gate would remain open during business hours, except during the unloading of delivery vehicles. The floor plan further reflects primary entrances on Ball Road for Buildings 1 and 2, with windows and secondary entrances opening to the parking area. Large roll up doors open to the north adjacent to the proposed outdoor storage areas. Building 3 contains both large roll up doors and small man -doors on the south elevation facing the proposed outdoor storage areas and proposed bridge crane location. (9) Elevation plans and the overhead crane plan (Exhibit No. 3) indicate a 24 -foot high bridge crane located behind the existing tilt up buildings at the front of the property (Buildings 1 and 2). Photographs indicate three, 18 -20 foot high concrete tilt up buildings, two of which have primary entrances on Ball Road, and windows on south, west, and east elevations. Building 3, at the rear of the site, is not easily visible from Ball Road. The columns of the crane would be painted "Battle Gray" and the overhead arms would be painted yellow (for safety reasons as indicated by the applicant). The applicant has indicated that there would be a canopy over the crane to protect the materials from weather and sunlight; however, no information has been provided to staff regarding the height, color, or material of the canopy. Based upon the visual appearance of the existing canopies (as well as their visibility from Ball Road), and the tendency for this type of structure to be an on -going maintenance issue (as demonstrated by the existing canopies depicted in the photograph below), staff has included a condition of approval prohibiting the installation of the canopy on the bridge crane. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 2 (10) The enlarged site plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates five -foot wide planters would be installed along the front of Buildings 1 and 2, facing Ball Road. No information regarding the size, type, or location of plant material was included. Eight (8) trees are required by Code (150 feet x 1 tree /20 ft. of street frontage = 8 trees) within the property frontage along Ball Road. Staff has included a condition of approval requiring a detailed landscape plan for these areas and a minimum of eight, 24 -inch box evergreen trees as required by Code. (11) No sign plans were submitted with this request and no changes to existing signage are proposed. Staff inspections and photographs indicate existing wall signage and a legal non- conforming pole sign advertising the existing business on site. Building permit records indicate that the freestanding sign was approved in 1964. Canopies to be f removed OL S - M X!L{.1 MIM 4 . Product currently being stored in parking area View of property from the south (from Ball Road) (12) The submitted letter of operation and parking letter indicate the operator is a natural stone importer and wholesaler (marble, granite, travertine, etc.). The hours of operation are Monday- Friday from 8:30 am to 5 pm and Saturdays from 9 am to 2 pm. The letter indicates there are 17 employees (including 2 managers, 5 field salespersons, 3 office staff, and 7 warehouse employees) and that office staff and warehouse employees are on site during busines hours and the managers and sales staff are in and out of the office and operate mostly in the field. The letter of operation further indicates the crane would reduce delivery and unloading time from 1 to 3 hours to 30 minutes to 1 '% hours, eliminating the need to store the containers on site. The only materials proposed in the outdoor area are stone slabs. No processing of materials occurs on site. The new crane would be used to load and unload slabs and pallets of tile to and from the trucks and containers, in a safer more efficient manner. The crane would allow slab material stored in the yard to be stored more densely and efficiently by eliminating forklift travel between each row of slabs. The applicant further indicates the crane operation would facilitate the removal of excess materials from being stored between the front two buildings (as seen in the photo above), and make required parking available to customers. Additionally, the applicant has indicated the existing canopies would be removed (also as seen in the photo above), Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (13) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Planning Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- EVALUATION (14) The construction of a bridge crane in conjunction with the establishment of an outdoor storage yard is permitted in the I zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (15) Code Section 18.38200 pertaining to outdoor storage includes the following stipulations: "010 Screening. The storage area shall be surrounded on all sides by a substantial solid and opaque fence or wall at least six (6) feet in height as set forth in Section 18.46.110 (Screening, Fences, Walls and Hedges), unless otherwise specified in the underlying zone or unless a higher fence is required or approved by the City. All stored equipment or material shall be located below the fence height. The wall or fence shall be kept in a clean, neat and painted condition, free of graffiti. The design and the materials used for the fence or wall shall comply with the provision of Section 18.40.150 (Structural Setbacks and Yards) of Chapter 18.40 (General Development Standards) unless provided otherwise in this section.' The outdoor storage area and bridge crane would be screened by the existing 18- 20 foot high buildings at the front of the property, and a six foot high wrought iron fence /gate. Staff has included a condition of approval limiting the height of the storage to the height of the fence and further requiring that screening mesh be installed on the gate and maintained in good condition. Staff has also included a condition of approval in the attached draft resolution requiring the refurbishment of the fencing and slats on the east and west boundaries of the storage areas. The center portion of the bridge crane would be visible from between the buildings to Ball Road and can not be practically screened given its height and location, therefore, staff has included a condition of approval requiring it to be painted to match the buildings, or a non - reflective color (light blue, gray, or off - white). 020 Location. Outdoor storage shall not be located in any required setback area. It shall be confined to the rear of the main structure(s) or the rear two-thirds of the site, whichever is the more restrictive except as may be permitted under conditional use permit for Outdoor Storage Yards. When it is located adjacent to residential zones, it shall be at least fifteen (15) feet from the property line." The outdoor storage and bridge crane are not within any setback areas and are at the rear portion of the property behind the existing buildings. There are no residential zones abutting this site. "030 Gates. All gates for access to the property shall swing inwardly or slide sideways. The gates shall be kept closed when not in use except that the gate may be kept open during business hours if the interior or contents of the storage yard cannot be seen from non - industrial areas or public streets. The gates shall be subject to approval by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager." Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 2 Access to the outdoor storage portion of the property would be through gates that slide inward or slide sideways. The gates would be locked and secure except during business hours and during loading /unloading of materials. ".040 Surface Conditions. The storage area shall be properly graded and a layer of gravel at least one -inch thick or a layer of concrete or approved asphalt material or similar substance shall be placed over the entire surface or as approved by City staff. Additional limitations may be imposed if vehicles such as trucks or forklifts are regularly used in this area." The surface of the entire storage area consists of asphalt. A recommended condition of approval included in the draft resolution requires continued maintenance of the surface areas. ".050 Maintenance. The storage area shall be kept free and clear of weeds and debris of all kinds, both inside and outside the fence or wall. Any graffiti shall be removed within forty -eight hours of occurrence." Staff has recommended the standard maintenance conditions pertaining to outdoor storage in the attached resolution. ".060 Height of Storage. All outdoor storage shall be below the height of the enclosing fence or wall." The applicant will be responsible for ensuring that the height of the outdoor storage does not exceed the height of the perimeter fencing as required by Code. ".070 Vehicles. All vehicles shall be parked or stored in an orderly manner." The applicant has indicated that all vehicles would be parked within designated spaces and no storage would be within these spaces. ".080 Liquids. All gasoline, oil or otherliquids shall be drained and removed from any unregistered vehicle located in the storage area." No storage of vehicles is proposed. ".090 Salvage Yard. No storage shall take place in such a fashion that it constitutes a junkyard or salvage yard unless a junkyard or salvage yard has been approved as a use on the parcel." This request for outdoor storage is exclusively for the storage of stone slabs. No other equipment or materials would be stored in outdoor areas and no junkyard or salvage operations would be conducted on the property. Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 2 Access Gate Truck Path of Travel View of large truck access on adjacent property (16) During staffs evaluation of the project, specific concerns pertaining to product delivery were presented to the owner. As a result of these discussions, the owner indicated that delivery access could be facilitated through a gate opening to the adjacent property to the east. The owner has an existing lease on this property (until July 14, 2010) for access, storage (indoor and outdoor), office space, and parking spaces. The applicant submitted a site plan with the proposed truck access /path of travel template. As part of this review, the City's Independent Parking and Traffic Consultant confirmed the proposed truck access /path of travel would work given the constraints (location of buildings /parking, driveway width, and gate location) of both properties. Only a small portion of parking on the adjacent property would be re- striped to accommodate the truck access. Additionally, the installation of the crane would address several Code violations pertaining to the property related to outdoor storage (screening, visibility, location within parking and access areas, etc.) that have been an on -going challenge of the property owner. Since access to the bridge crane is reliant on the existing lease agreement held by the property owner on the adjacent parcel, staff has included a condition of approval requiring that this permit only be in effect provided the owner can demonstrate the right to access the site from the adjacent property to the east (either in form of a lease agreement or access easement recorded on the property). Because the proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Code, eliminating several Code violations as identified above, and because the site and area are zoned Industrial, staff is supportive of the request to construct a bridge crane and establish an outdoor storage yard in conjunction with an existing natural stone import and wholesale business, subject to the recommended conditions of approval. (17) The requested waiver pertains to minimum number of parking spaces. Code requires 34 spaces based on the information contained in paragraph no. (7) of this report and the site plan indicates a total of 21 spaces available on -site. The applicant has submitted a parking study, prepared by Kunzman Associates, dated January 9, 2006, to substantiate the requested waiver. The City's Independent Parking and Traffic Consultant has reviewed the study and has determined that there would be sufficient parking for this proposed land use. Page 6 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 2 (18) Based on the City's Independent Parking and Traffic Consultant's approval, the parking study further demonstrates the following findings to substantiate the requested waiver of minimum number of parking spaces: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. "Based on the survey conducted at the site, peak demand for the site is 19 spaces. The site would provide a total of 21 spaces on site, with additional available parking (an additional 26 spaces) on the adjacent property to the east. This combined parking supply contains a sufficient parking surplus demonstrating that the parking supply would be sufficient to meet the needs of the proposed project." (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. "Based on the survey conducted at the site, peak demand for the site is 19 spaces. The site would provide a total of 21 spaces on site, with additional available parking (an additional 26 spaces) on the adjacent property to the east. There would be a 10% surplus (2 spaces) provided on site, with additional overflow parking on an adjacent property (as indicated in the owner's lease agreement). This combined parking supply would not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use." (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. "The proposed on -site parking will not create a demand or competition upon adjacent private property, as the total parking supply of 47 spaces (on and off site) is more than double the number of parking spaces needed by this project at peak demand (19 spaces)." (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use. "The proposed on -site parking will not increase traffic congestion, noise, air pollution or traffic circulation conflicts within the off - street parking area provided. As demonstrated on the attached site plan, proposed storage and vehicular access would not conflict with off street parking areas." (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. "The use of the adjacent property would facilitate access to the site for large delivery vehicles. As indicated on the site plan and in the attached parking study, this request would not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use." Page 7 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 2 FINDINGS: (19) Section 18.42.110 of the parking ordinance sets forth the following findings, which are required to be made before a parking waiver is approved by the Planning Commission. (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use; and (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use; and (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with Section 18.42.050.030 of this Code); and (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use; and (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this Section by the Planning Commission, the granting of any such waiver shall be deemed contingent upon operation of such use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of the use as contained in the parking demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of said assumptions as contained in the parking demand study shall be deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject said waiver to termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of this Code. (20) 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 does 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 is adequate to allow the full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety; (d) That the traffic generated by the use does not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and Page 8 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 2 (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 (21) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the 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, aoorove a Negative Declaration for the project. (b) By motion, aoorove the waiver pertaining to minimum number of parking spaces based on the findings outlined in the parking study approved by the City's Traffic Consultant. (c) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05031 to permit and retain an existing outdoor storage area and to install an overhead crane to load trucks with slab material in conjunction with an existing wholesale building material (stone) distribution business by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 9 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2006 -*'" A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05031 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: THAT PORTION OF LOT 25 OF THE ANAHEIM EXTENSION, AS PER MAP OF SURVEY MADE BY WILLIAM HAMEL AND FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, A COPY OF WHICH IS SHOWN IN BOOK 3, PAGE 163 AND FOLLOWING ENTITLED "LOS ANGELES COUNTY MAPS ", RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 25 WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY'S RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE SOUTH 89 53' 45" WEST 297.00 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF LOT 25 TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 0 06' 15" WEST 348.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74 30' 00" WEST 155.58 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0 06'15" EAST 307.35 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 25; THENCE NORTH 89 53'45" EAST 150.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING EXCEPT THE SOUTHERLY 50.00 FEET THEREOF LYING WITHIN BALL ROAD. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 23, 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 that said public hearing was continued from the October 31, November 14, December 12, 2005, and January 9, 2006, Planning Commission meetings; 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 use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.10.030.040 to permit and retain an existing outdoor storage area and to install an overhead crane to load trucks with slab material in conjunction with an existing wholesale building material (stone) distribution business with waiver of following: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces (34 required; 21 proposed and recommended by the City recommended by the City's Independent Parking and Traffic Consultant) 2. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use, because based on the survey conducted at the site, peak demand for the site is 19 spaces. The site would provide a total of 21 spaces, with additional available parking (an additional 26 spaces) on the adjacent properly to the east. This combined parking supply contains a sufficient parking surplus demonstrating that the parking supply would be sufficient to meet the needs of the proposed project. Cr\PC2006 -0 -1- PC2006- 3. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. Based on the survey conducted at the site, peak demand for the site is 19 spaces and the site would provide a total of 21 spaces, with additional available parking (an additional 26 spaces) on the adjacent property to the east. There would be a 10% surplus (2 spaces) provided on site, with additional overflow parking on an adjacent property (as indicated in the owner's lease agreement). This combined parking supply would not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. 4. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The proposed on -site parking will not create a demand or competition upon adjacent private property, as the total parking supply of 47 spaces (on and off site) is more than double the number of parking spaces needed by this project at peak demand (19 spaces). 5. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use. The proposed on -site parking will not increase traffic congestion, noise, air pollution ortraffic circulation conflicts within the off - street parking area provided. As demonstrated on the attached site plan, proposed storage and vehicular access would not conflict with off street parking areas. 6. That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The use of the adjacent property would facilitate access to the site for large delivery vehicles. As indicated on the site plan and in the attached parking study, this request would not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. 7. That the use does not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located as the surrounding land uses are developed with similar industrial land uses; 8. That the size and shape of the site in conjunction with secured agreements for access, parking, storage, and office area on the adjacent property, is adequate to allow the full development of the use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety as indicated on the attached site plan and as conditioned as the proposed storage areas would comply with all the provisions of the Code; 9. That the traffic generated by the use does not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and 10. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 11. 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 the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit and retain an existing outdoor storage area and to install an overhead crane to load trucks with slab materials in conjunction with an existing wholesale building material (stone) distribution business with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- -2- PC2006- 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 property owner shall submit a request to terminate Conditional Use Permit No. 1222 (to permit an automobile frame and body repair shop in the M -1 zone) to the Planning Department, Planning Services Division, as this business is no longer in operation. 2. That the height of the material stored on -site shall not exceed the screening fence. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Planning Department, Planning Services Division for review and approval. 3. That the easterly and westerly driveways shall be removed and replaced with curb, gutter, and sidewalk. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 4. That all fences and gates on -site shall be refurbished, including the installation of screening mesh on the relocated wrought iron gate, and the installation PVC or vinyl slats on the fence at the east and west boundaries of the storage areas. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. 5. That the bridge crane shall be painted to match the buildings or painted a non - reflective color (light blue, gray, or off - white) to minimize its appearance from Ball Road. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 6. That the gates on -site shall be open and unlocked during business hours, except during the loading /unloading of product delivery vehicles. 7. That this permit shall only be in effect provided the owner can demonstrate the right to access the site from the adjacent property to the east, either in the form of a lease agreement or access easement recorded on both properties. If the mechanism for access changes (from lease to easement) the property owner shall submit a copy of the recorded agreement/easement for review and approval by the Planning Department, Planning Services Division and City Attorney's Office. 8. That landscape plans shall be submitted to the Planning Services Division for review and approval. The landscape plans shall reflect the following: • The installation of two, five -foot wide planters along the entire lengths of Buildings 1 and 2. • The installation of eight, 24 -inch box sized, evergreen trees and associated groundcover /shrubbery in the landscape setback on Ball Road. • The installation of permanent and automatic irrigation as required by Code. 9. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion through the provision of regular landscaping and fence maintenance, asphalt repair, removal of trash and debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 10. That no barbed wire or razor wire shall be visible in any direction to any non - industrially zoned property or the public right -of -way. 11. That the bridge crane shall not contain advertising visible off-site- 12 That no required parking area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage use. 13. That any loading and unloading of equipment shall occur on -site only, and shall not take place in any required parking area or within the public right-of-way- -3- PC2006- 14. That 4 -foot high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of Building 3 in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from the view of the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department approval 15. That the granting of the parking waiver is contingent upon operation of the use in conformance with the assumptions and /or conclusions relating to the operation and intensity of use as contained in the parking demand study that formed the basis for approval of said waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of said assumptions and /or conclusions, as contained in the parking demand study, shall be deemed a violation of the expressed conditions imposed upon said waiver which shall subject this variance to termination or modification pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.60.190 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 16. That no washing of vehicles or equipment shall occur on the property 17. That clear unobstructed access to all parts of the property shall be provided at all times as determined by the Anaheim Fire Department. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 18. That the outdoor storage shall be limited to stone slabs as indicated in the submitted letter of operation. No other outdoor storage shall be permitted. 19. That the existing canopies shall be removed, 20. That the proposed canopy reflected on submitted plans shall be removed, and at no such time shall a canopy or any proposed shade structure be allowed to be attached to the bridge crane for the purposes of covering or enclosing the outdoor storage areas. Such information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits- 21 - That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and as conditioned herein. 22. That prior to issuance of a building permit, prior to the commencement of the activity authorized by this resolution or within one (1) year from the date of this resolution whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 14, 17 and 20, above - mentioned, shall be completed. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 23. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 19 and 21, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 24. 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 -4- PC2006- 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 23, 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. CHAIRMAN. ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) 1, 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 23, 2006, 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 , 2006. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -5- PC2006- Attachment - Item No. 2 January 9, 2006 Mr. Mark Ghassemi OLLIN INTERNATIONAL, INC. 301 E. Ball Road Anaheim, CA 92805 Dear Mr. Ghassemi: INTRODUCTION The firm of Kunzman Associates is pleased to submit this parking analysis for the 011in International Outdoor Storage and Overhead Crane project in the City of Anaheim. The project site is located at 301 E. Ball Road (see Figure 1). Kunzman Associates has been asked to conduct a parking analysis for the existing portion of the project to determine if adequate parking spaces will be provided for the expanded project site. The project site currently provides a total of 9 on -site parking spaces. However, employees are currently parking off -site (i.e. at the adjacent market and across Ball Road). Figure 2 illustrates the expanded project site plan. This report summarizes our methodology, analysis and findings. We trust that the findings, which are summarized in the front of the report, will be of immediate as well as continuing value to you and the City of Anaheim in evaluating the proposed development. Although this is a technical report, every effort has been made to write the report clearly and concisely. To assist the reader with those terms unique to transportation engineering, a glossary of terms is provided within Appendix A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 011in International, Inc. Is a natural stone importer and wholesaler of natural stones (marble, granite, travertine, etc.) The project is located at 301 E. Ball Road in Anaheim, California and the hours of operation are Monday- Friday from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM and Saturdays from 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM. At this location, wholesale is sold to other natural stone suppliers, contractors, designers, etc. Wholesalers either bring their customers directly or send them to the project location, so that they can select and tag their material, The project site has three buildings (one is where the showroom, offices and a tile warehouse are located). The second building is used strictly as a slab warehouse and the third one has two offices, the lunch room and the rest of the building is used for warehousing of tiles. At this location, the approximately 17 employees includ 2 managers, 5 field salespersons, 3 office staff, and 7 warehouse employees. The office staff and warehouse employees are on site during the hours of operation. The managers are in and out of the office and the Country making large deals, and the sales staff operates mostly in the field. Currently, the product arrives at the warehouse in containers, delivered by large trucks. The trucks arrive at the site between the hours of 2 to 3 PM, leave the containers behind, take away an empty container (if there's one). It takes approximately 1 -3 hours for our warehouse employees to empty the container, which is done using forklifts (outfitted with "forks" or a "boom" depending on the material) behind the relocated gate. The slabs, which are large pieces of stone measuring approximately 50 square feet each, and packed in bundles of 8 -10 slabs, are stored in one of the warehouses and in the slab yard. The project stores the tiles (which came packed in crates) in the warehouses, sorted depending on type of material. The only material proposed to store outdoors is stone slabs. 011in only sells full slabs (meaning, material is not cut to sell partial slabs) and tiles. The material is almost always loaded by forklift into the customer's truck (that has to be outfitted with an A -frame in the case of slabs). Tiles are loaded depending on the square footage, either by forklift (if it's a full crate) or by hand, if it's a small quantity. The new crane will be used to load and unload slabs and pallets of tile to and from the trucks and containers, in a safer more efficient manner. First, the crane will allow slab material stored in the yard to be stored more densely. Currently, there needs to be an aisle wide enough for a forklift to travel between each row of slabs. The crane will allow material to be picked from the middle with aisles only wide enough for human travel. Not only will this more intense storage of material allow the removal of excess materials from being stored currently between the front two buildings, and open up the proper customer parking required, but it will also allow for a safer environment where human and forklift traffic are not sharing the same path. Second, the time it will take to unload a container will be reduced from 1 to 3 hours down to 30 minutes to 1 1 /2 hours, so a driver can wait and a container will never have to be left behind. All materials stored indoors will now be brought by forklift to and from the crane for loading and unloading. The crane is not intended to squeeze more product onto a site that is currently "bursting at the seams ", but to help a very busy, thriving company perform in a safer, more efficient manner. The gate will be relocated to the rear of the front two buildings (see Figure 3) and the warehouse and office employees, whose car will not move all day, will be designated parking spaces behind the gate in the yard. The front 11 parking spaces will be 2 reserved for customer vehicles, therefore keeping them separated from the loading operations. The gate is open during the day. As shown on Figure 3, the center driveway will remain, and the east and west driveways will be removed. FINDINGS The project site is located at 301 E. Ball Road in the City of Anaheim. 2. The project is an existing natural stone importer and wholesaler, which will be expanded to have an additional 8,185 square feet of outdoor storage and an overhead crane. 3. The project site currently provides a total of 39 on -site striped parking spaces. However, stone material occupies some of the parking spaces today, and some employees are currently parking off -site. 4. Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, the 8,185 square feet of outdoor storage and overhead crane use at .4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area requires 3 parking spaces (8,185 x (.4/1,000)). 5. Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, the 16,183 square feet of warehouse use at 1.55 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area requires 25 parking spaces (16,183 x (1.55/1,000)). 6. Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, the 1,800 square feet of showroom use at 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area requires 5 parking spaces (1,800 x (2.511,000)). 7. Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, the 700 square feet of office use at 1.55 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area requires 1 parking spaces (700 x (1.55/1,000)). 8. The cumulative parking requirement for the project is 34 parking spaces. 9. Based upon the parking counts and accounting for off-site employees parking, the maximum number of occupied parking spaces including employees, is 17 parked vehicles on a Friday from 1:45 PM to 2:00 PM (see Table 1). 10. Based upon the parking counts and accounting for off -site employees parking, the maximum number of occupied parking spaces including employees, is 19 parked vehicles on a Saturday from 12:15 PM to 12:30 PM (see Table 2). 11. The project is proposed to provide a total of 21 parking spaces. 12. With 21 parking spaces, the parking supply meets the parking demand by 10 percent (see Table 3). The 21 parking spaces will allow for all employee parking 3 on -site and provide sufficient additional parking for customers, vendors, and other persons who would go there but not be employed there. A 10 percent overage is recommended to assure there is adequate parking. 13. An additional 26 parking spaces and truck access is provided by the adjacent property to the east along Ball Road (see Appendix C). 14. It is Kunzman Associates recommendation that the City find the parking supply is adequate. PARKING CODE The City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements are included within Appendix B. The project is an existing natural stone importer and wholesaler that will be expanded to have a 8,185 square foot of outdoor storage and overhead crane. The site currently has 5,000 square feet of warehouse in building 1. In building 2 the site has 1,800 square feet of showroom, 2,500 square feet of warehouse, and 700 square feet of office. in building 3 the site has 8,683 square feet of warehouse. Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, a total of ;q parking spaces for each 1,000 square feet of floor area are required for the outdoor storage and overhead crane use. Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, the 8,185 square feet of outdoor storage and overhead crane use at .4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area requires 3 parking spaces (8,185 x (.4/1,000)). Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, a total of 1.55 parking spaces for each 1,000 square feet of floor area are required for the warehouse use. Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, the 16,183 square feet of warehouse use at 1.55 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area requires 25 parking spaces (16,183 x (1.55/1,000)). Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, a total of 2,5 parking spaces for each 1,000 square feet of floor area are required for the showroom use. Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, the 1,800 square feet of showroom use at 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area requires 5 parking spaces (1,800 x (2.5/1,000)). Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, a total of 10parking spaces for each 1,000 square feet of floor area are required for the office use. Based upon the City of Anaheim Parking Code requirements, the 700 square feet of office use at¢,%spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area requires 1 parking spaces (700 x (1.55/1,000)). The cumulative parking requirement for the project is 34 parking spaces. I3 PARKING SURVEY To quantify the existing parking demand for the project site, a parking survey was conducted on a Friday and a Saturday. The peak periods for parking at the project site was determined to be 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM on a Friday and 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM on a Saturday. The existing parking demand was determined by surveying the existing facility at 15- minute intervals on Friday (June 24, 2005), and Saturday (June 25, 2005). In addition, the employees parking off -site was accounted for in the parking surveys by adjusting the counts for a total of 10 employee parked vehicles. The existing parking surveys are shown in Tables 1 and 2. The maximum number of occupied parking spaces is 17 parked vehicles on a Friday from 1:45 PM to 2:00 PM (see Table 1) and 19 parked vehicles on a Saturday from 12:15 PM to 12:30 PM (see Table 2). VARIANCE FROM PROVISIONS OF ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE The City of Anaheim variance shall be granted upon a finding by the Zoning Administrator, Hearing Office, Planning Commission or City Council that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist. "The variance, under the conditions imposed if any, will not cause fewer off- street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use." As shown in Tables 3 and 4, the maximum parking demands on an average day is less than that of the proposed amount of on -site parking stalls. "The variance, under the conditions imposed if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the Immediate vicinity of the proposed use." The proposed on -site parking is adequate to accommodate the expected parking demand. "The variance, under the conditions imposed if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with subsection 18.42.050.030 (Non - Residential Uses - Exception)." The project site will provide adequate on -site parking spaces for all of its uses. "The variance, under the conditions imposed if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use." It is not anticipated that the project site will increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking area. "The variance, under the conditions imposed if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public street in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use." Ball Road is currently six lanes divided and is restricted from on- street parking adjacent to the project site. The project access to Ball Road has one full access driveway. CONCLUSIONS Sufficient future on -site parking is provided by the project based upon the parking survey analysis. Based upon the parking counts, the maximum number of occupied parking spaces is 17 parked vehicles on a Friday 1:45 PM to 2:00 PM (see Table 1) and 19 parked vehicles on a Saturday from 12:15 PM to 12:30 PM (see Table 2). The project is proposed to provide a total of 21 parking spaces. It is Kunzman Associates recommendation that the City find the parking supply is adequate. It has been a pleasure to serve your needs on this project. Should you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES QA Carl Ballard Senior Associate QP ppES O S1pN� y W 3 No. T 005 Z d * ; HAFF% * OFCA1 KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES William Kunzman, P.E. Principal Professional Registration Expiration Date 3 -31 -2006 #3327 11 Table 1 Friday (June 24, 2005) Parking Counts Time Period Number of Parked Vehicles 8:30 AM to 8:45 AM 11 8:45 AM to 9:00 AM 12 9:00 AMto9:15AM 13 9:15 AM to 9:30 AM 13 9:30 AM to 9:45 AM 10 9:45 AM to 10:00 AM 11 10:00 AM to 10:15 AM 13 10: 15 AM to 10:30 AM 14 10:30 AM to 10:45 AM 14 10:45 AM to 11:00 AM 12 11:00 AMto11:15AM 9 11:15 AM to 11:30 AM 10 11:30 AM to 11:45 AM 13 11:45 AM to 12:00 NOON 14 12:00 PMto12:15PM 15 12:15 PM to 12:30 PM 13 12:30 PM to 12:45 PM 15 12:45 PM to 1:00 PM 15 1:00 PMto1:15PM 15 1:15 PM to 1:30 PM 15 1:30 PM to 1:45 PM 15 1:45 PM to 2:00 PM 17 2:00 PM to 2:15 PM 16 2:15 PM to 2:30 PM 13 2:30 PM to 2:45 PM 11 2:45 PM to 3:00 PM 11 3:00 PMto3:15PM 13 3:15 PM to 3:30 PM 14 3:30 PM to 3:45 PM 12 3:45 PM to 4:00 PM 13 4:00 PMto4:15PM 14 4:15 PM to 4:30 PM 12 4:30 PM to 4:45 PM 13 4:45 PM to 5:00 PM 15 = Mawmum number of occupied parking spaces. Table 2 Saturday (June 25, 2005) Parking Counts . Time Period Number of Parked Vehicles 9:00 AMto9:15AM 9 9:15 AM to 9:30 AM 11 9:30 AM to 9:45 AM 13 9:45 AM to 10:00 AM 18 10:00 AM to 10:15 AM 18 10:15 AM to 10:30 AM 18 10:30 AM to 10:45 AM 14 10:45 AM to 11:00 AM 15 11:00 AMto11:15AM 17 11:15 AM to 11:30 AM 15 11:30 AM to 11:45 AM 16 11:45 AM to 12:00 NOON 16 12:00 PMto12:15PM 16 12:15 PM to 12:30 PM 19 12:30 PM to 12:45 PM 14 12:45 PM to 1:00 PM 15 1:OO PIA to1:15PM 15 1:15 PM to 1:30 PM 16 1:30 PM to 1:45 PM 15 1:45 PM to 2:00 PM 15 = Maximum number of occupied perking spaces. Table 3 Maximum Expected Peak Parking Demand Land Use Required Parking Spaces' Maximum observed vehicles surveyed 19 10% Overage Factor 2 Total Maximum Parking Demand 21 ' See Appendix B. 10 Figure 2 Site Plan A -1 15' g ' n BUILDIN63 �,, B 6B39F 144'-0' f ri TT r T'1'1 I ipi i i i l �O - I /1 rli j t � I M� I BED61 "° BLD02 -i ' 9,0009F_ 6,0009E ; + .r OO a i i - _ f N -f va' -T ]T -GAY ss•_ BALL ROAD KunzTwn Associates 3327/2 Figure 3 Site Plan A -2 � s a U3 y ^c s 555 2 � �1 p 81KP TIN BIACK OUT L]UBTINO N6 SILE P NGbBI t ►RKINo pm 3K PLAN 7 0 0 p ® Eli § � �. =.:. y BLACK TE1p6 m l m II \BLACK OI�r pp6 § KING Bf1EP J IPpRKIN=01TFP y 1 +r- � — i if I I — u a 3 X I G 4 — .a ■ a r i l I z a ° l i e, m p Al J i Kunz man Associates 3327/3 12 ITEM NO. 2 OCCin Internationaf,, Inc. 301 E. Ball Road • Anaheim, CA 92805 Telephone 714 -535 -0800 • Fax 714 -535 -8085 • e -mail ollinintl @aol.com November 15, 2005 011in International, Inc. Is a natural stone importer and wholesaler of natural stones (marble, granite, travertine, etc.) We are located at 301 E. Ball Rd in Anaheim, California and the hours of operation are Monday- Friday from 830 am to 500 pm and Saturdays from 9am -2pm. At this location we sale wholesale to other natural stone suppliers, contractors, designers, etc. Wholesalers either bring their customers directly or send them to our location, so that they can select and tag their material. We have three buildings (one is where the showroom, offices and a tile warehouse are located). The second building is used strictly as a slab warehouse and the third one has two offices, the lunch room and the rest of the building is used for warehouse of tiles. At this location we have approximately 17 employees (including 2 managers, 5 field salespersons, 3 office staff, and 7 warehouse employees). The office staff and warehouse employees are on site durring the hours of operation. The managers are in and out of the office and the country making large deals, and the sales staff operates mostly in the field. Currently, the product arrives at our warehouse in containers, delivered by large trucks. The trucks leave the containers behind, take away an empty container (if there's one). It takes approximately 1 -3 hours for our warehouse employees to empty the container, using forklifts (outfitted with "forks" or a "boom" depending on the material). The slabs, which are large pieces of stone measuring approximately 50 square feet each, and packed in bundles of 8 -10 slabs, are stored in one of the warehouses and in our slab yard. We store the tiles (which came packed in crates) in the warehouses, sorted depending on type of material. The only material we are proposing to store outdoors are stone slabs. We only sell full slabs (meaning, we don't cut material to sell partial slabs) and tiles. The material is almost always loaded by forklift into the customer's truck (that has to be outfitted with an A -frame in the case of slabs). Tiles are loaded depending on the square footage, either by forklift (if it's a full crate) or by hand, if it's a small quantity. The new crane will be used to load and unload slabs and pallets of tile to and from the trucks and containers, in a safer more efficient manner. First, the crane will allow slab material stored in the yard to be stored more densely. Currently there needs to be an OCCin Internationaf, Inc. cr 301 E. Ball Road • Anaheim, CA 92805 Telephone 714 -535 -0800 • Fax 714 -535 -8085 • e -mail ollinintl @aol.com aisle wide enough for a forklift to travel between each row of slabs. The crane will allow material to be picked from the middle with aisles only wide enough for human travel. Not only will this more intense storage of material allow the removal of excess materials from being stored currently between the front two buildings, and open up the proper customer parking required, but it will also allow for a safer environment where human and forklift traffic are not sharing the same path. Second, the time it will take to unload a container will be reduced from 1 to 3 hours down to 30 minutes to 1 '/2 hours, so a driver can wait and a container will never have to be left behind. All materials stored indoors will now be brought by forklift to and from the crane for loading and unloading. The crane is not intended to squeeze more product onto a site that is currently "bursting at the seams ", but to help a very busy, thriving company perform in a safer, more efficient manner. The gate will be relocated to the rear of the front two buildings and the warehouse and office employees, whose car will not move all day, will be designated parking spaces behind the gate in the yard. The front 11 stalls will be reserved for customer vehicles, therefore keeping them separated from the loading operations. ITEM NO. 1 -A KATELLA AVENUE Tentative Tract Map No. 16958 Subject Property Date January 23, 2006 Scale Graphic Requested By ANAHEIM HOTEL PARTNERSHIP, LCP Q.S. No. 77 REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT. AIRSPACE HOTEL SUBDIVISION FOR INVESTMENT PURPOSES. 777 Convention Way 2080 I \ I JOLLVROGER RCL 66d]d1 I") al _ NN aEST_ I^ vna ]3ios 1 1 1 CHEVRON I II j SP 92 -2 55. 4 I 1 RCL 666781 (64) l CUP359 VAR 1278 JOLLY ROGER ARAB EIM CONVENTION / f 1 INN CENTER / ] I I PORTOEINOINN YONVENTON CENTER II HOTEL PARKING 1 I I 1 I I SP 92-2 RCL71743N1 1 ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER j SP 92 RICE 6 (44) 6 CUP UP 39 3965 CUP VAR 3697 3891 / SP 962 VAR 2965 S p / rrrd 16958 > VAR 2962 CUP 3113 Q COAST ANAHEIM Q CUP 2288 HOTEL / CUP 213 o H EIM CONVENTION � IIAHEIM HILTON W CENTER &TOWERS LU J W ~ � O O CVERI %NO STAGE REST. m // 1 I O L� �I CONVENTION WAY / i i SP 92 2 SP 92 RE PR (PUBLIC RECREATION) / SP 92 RCL 66& 1 CH 110 R2) RCL 80.81 -40 / RCL (22) 61 VAR R 2668 26685 T-CU 22001 P2001 -04445 VAR 2381 5 / GIP 2001-04329 USE / CUP4065 CLARION RION HOTEL CUP 2245 UP 1834 UP865 / VAR 200304551 VAR 2005-04656 / RG 666781 (/8) VAR 2003-04551 (CU 22002 -04639) (VAR 111172)) SP92-2 VACANT j ANAHEIM MARRIOTT RCL 6667 -61 (N) F / HOTEL CUP WAS � PANS VAR607 -------------- ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE ANAHIEM RESORT A ANT Tentative Tract Map No. 16958 Subject Property Date January 23, 2006 Scale Graphic Requested By ANAHEIM HOTEL PARTNERSHIP, LCP Q.S. No. 77 REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT. AIRSPACE HOTEL SUBDIVISION FOR INVESTMENT PURPOSES. 777 Convention Way 2080 I Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 3 3a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION — CLASS 1 AND 15 (Motion for continuance) 3b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16958 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This approximate 8.5 acre property is located at the northwest corner of Hotel Way and Convention Way with frontages of 606 feet on the north side of Convention Way and 680 feet on the west side of Hotel Way (777 Convention Way — Anaheim Hilton). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests to establish a 1 -lot, airspace hotel subdivision for investment purposes- BACKGROUND (3) This item was continued from the December 12, 2005, and January 9, 2006, Commission meetings for the applicant to provide staff with further information regarding the proposed tentative map. (4) This property is currently developed with a 15 story, 1,572 -room, Anaheim Hilton hotel and is zoned SP92 -2 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan). The Anaheim General Plan designates the property for Commercial Recreation land uses. (5) The applicant, Anaheim Hotel Partnership LCP, requests a continuance to the February 6, 2006, Commission meeting to provide staff with further information regarding the proposed tentative map- RECOMMENDATION (6) That the Planning Commission, by motion, continue this request to the February 6, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. Page 1 Attachment - Item No. 3 ANAHEIM HOTEL PARTNERSHIP 777 West Convention Way, Suite 100, Anaheim, California 92802 Phone: 714/740 -4700 Fax: 7141740 -4711 January 12, 2006 Susan Kim Associate Planner CITY OF ANAHEIM Planning Department 200 South Anaheim Blvd Anaheim, California 92805 RE: REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE —TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 16958 Dear: �S I am writing this letter on behalf of Anaheim Hotel Partnership, dba: Hilton Anaheim and Anvesco, the applicants, to request a continuance on the matter of the hearing for the above captioned Tentative Tract Map 16958, presently scheduled to be heard at the Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for January 23, 2006. In order to allow additional time for clarification of the mechanism of approval, pursuant to conversations with members of City Staff and Planning Staff, it is respectfully requested that the hearing of this matter be continued from January 23, 2006 to the Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for February 6, 2006. Your assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated. You may reach me at 714/740 -4714 should you have any questions or require additional assistance. Sincerely, ANAHEIM HOTEL PARTNERSHIP, DBA: HILTON ANAHEIM J �9 ' RICHARD R. POPE, Vice President Administration & Special Projects cc: Stan Castleton John Erskine, Esq. Kelly C. Carlyle ITEM NO. 1 -A Z -V A Q T A RH -2 U \ O� RCL 72 -73 -51 ADJ RCL 72 -73 -07 RCL 72-73-51 RH 2 QP\ RCL 72-73-47 \ y�RO PRg�R��J RS-2 DU EACH RH -2 RCL 72 -73 -51 RCL 72 -73A7 O c RH -2 RCL 72 -73 -51 RCL 72 -73-47 /3> VAR 4366 RH2 \ RCL 72 -73 -51 (24 W p \ \ RCL 72 -73-47 \ \ o \ \ \ \ RH -2 / TPM 2005 -157 \ / TPM 97 -212 RH 2 VAR 2005 -04655 RCL 72 -73 -51 (17) RCL 72 -73 -51 VAR 3699 RCL 72 -73-47 RCL 72 -73-47 (VAR 4330) Q VACANT y p" I5 �O / Ig I j RRRCL2- -73 -51 (17) ,R' \ Variance No. 2005 -04655 Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -157 RH RCL 72 -7 VAR'. RCL 72 0 I r 'WA 0 w VAI z 0 U) w F 3 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: GARY CALKINS TRUST Q.S. No. 197 REQUESTS WAIVERS OF: (A) MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL HEIGHT (B) MAXIMUM RETAINING WALL HEIGHT (C) LOT FRONTAGE ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE. TO ESTABLISH A 2 -LOT, 2 -UNIT DETACHED SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. 6263 East Trail Drive 2114 "I RCL 72 -73 -47 RH -2 ,�I o 1 RCL 72 -73 -51 w 1 1 __\ Z 1 RCL 72-73-47 ,Z I 1 I RH -2 1 1 ;Z; 1 DU I VAR4321 1 RH -2 1 DU EACH a RCL 72 -73 -51 1 1 RH 1 \ ari 79-73 -A7 f , -2 ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (SC) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE , Variance No. 2005 -04655 Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 -157 RH RCL 72 -7 VAR'. RCL 72 0 I r 'WA 0 w VAI z 0 U) w F 3 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: GARY CALKINS TRUST Q.S. No. 197 REQUESTS WAIVERS OF: (A) MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL HEIGHT (B) MAXIMUM RETAINING WALL HEIGHT (C) LOT FRONTAGE ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE. TO ESTABLISH A 2 -LOT, 2 -UNIT DETACHED SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. 6263 East Trail Drive 2114 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 4 4a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion for continuance) 4b. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04655 4c. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2005 -157 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 3.2 -acre property has a frontage of 47 feet at the terminus of Trail Drive, a maximum depth of 737 feet and is located 145 feet west of the centerline of Whitestone Drive (6263 East Trail Drive). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of the following: Variance No. 2005 -04655 — Request waivers of (a) maximum structural height, (b) maximum retaining wall height and (c) lot frontage on a public or private street to construct a single - family residence. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2005 - 157 —To establish a 2 -lot, 2 -unit detached single - family residential subdivision- BACKGROUND (3) This property is developed with a single - family residence and is zoned RH -2 (SC) (Single - Family, Hillside Residential; Scenic Corridor Overlay). The property is designated for Estate Density Residential land uses in the Anaheim General Plan. The General Plan designates properties abutting the site to the north, east and south for Estate Density Residential land uses and the properties to the west for Low Density Residential land uses. (4) This item was continued from the January 9, 2006, Commission meeting in order to comply with the review period requirements for the Mitigated Negative Declaration associated with this request. The applicant, Steve Ellis, has submitted the attached e-mail dated January 13, 2006, requesting a further continuance to the February 6, 2006, meeting in order to revise plans associated with site grading and retaining walls- RECOMMENDATION (5) That the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the February 6, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. Page 1 file:/// H/ CASESNarianceNAR2005- 04655/RE %2OTrai1 %2ODrive.htm From: Steve Ellis [steve@fuscoe.com] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:46 AM Attachment -Item No. 4 To: Amy Vazquez Subject: RE: Trail Drive Amy - Thank you for meeting with us yesterday to discuss some the city's concerns. We will revisit our plans and address your concerns to the greatest extent possible. With that in mind, I'd like to request a continuance of the January 23rd meeting to the first Planning Commission meeting in February. I trust this is acceptable to you and your staff. If you could follow up with me as to the time and date of that meeting in February, I'd appreciate it. Thanks for all your help on this project. Steve file: / //H /CASESNarianceNAR2005- 04655 /RE %2OTrai1 %2ODrive.html /13/20062:47:41 AM ITEM NO. 1 -i E\y` � J GAF 46] VP ce p 1W 1 seMRMSp NV �F� nnn E\Mn p0 .gAsVO \ 169 0.c` P �PW 1 REED ��eb W PSER 5�� v 99 +ce acN 0.c3�1N0 FPM3 Pa t}10� 8 \ 169 a� vaR 3�0 vpR < � p0 p B \ND. F \WV 4w vN 4244 ""A G \ NOOs" ,' 0 F@ 0 6,0 \ RO V __ �,�w�RRO VPFl92< 3 OPN 50N tNO�M P^ 3 NVP0.424Q �pME V PR gB �� O N J Ro26 EwmcM p0� �p90�P ^� p90 Ee a en EE BP / Few "v°ea "I VPP FRM NV �F� nnn E\Mn p0 .gAsVO \ 169 0.c` P �PW 1 REED ��eb W PSER 5�� v 99 +ce acN 0.c3�1N0 FPM3 Pa t}10� 8 \ 169 a� vaR 3�0 vpR < � p0 p B \ND. F \WV 4w vN 4244 ""A G \ NOOs" ,' 0 F@ 0 6,0 \ RO V 0,63 0.0849 06AOA69 µC'\.'� 3 OPN 50N tNO�M P^ 3 NVP0.424Q �pME V PR gB �� O p0� �p90�P P OFN��F \0.NS � y3 9TH` 0. C oc o E R' o Ep� S pU1H G F 1 'v V ol Rie �u a` N Reclassification No. 2005 -00169 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Requested By: KENNETH THOMPSON, CP /HERS ANAHEIM LP, Scale: Graphic RAYMOND SIEGELE, CHARLES ATWOOD Q-S. No. 84, 94 VOIT ANAHEIM BUSINESS, ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RCL2005 -00169 - REQUEST TO RECLASSIFY PORTION A FROM THE I (INDUSTRIAL) ZONE TO THE RM -3 (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE, AND PORTION B FROM THE 1 (INDUSTRIAL) ZONE TO THE RMA (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE OR A LESS INTENSE ZONE. Portion A: 516 East Santa Ana Street and 500 -610 South Olive Street - Kwikset and APW sites Portion B: 525 -727 East South Street and 500 -558 South Atchison Street z l Date ofAerial Photo: May 2002 Reclassification No. 2005 -00169 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Requested By: KENNETH THOMPSON, CP /HERS ANAHEIM LP, Scale: Graphic RAYMOND SIEGELE, CHARLES ATWOOD Q.S. No. 84, 94 VOIT ANAHEIM BUSINESS, ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RCL2005 -00169 - REQUEST TO RECLASSIFY PORTION A FROM THE I (INDUSTRIAL) ZONE TO THE RM -3 (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE, AND PORTION B FROM THE I (INDUSTRIAL) ZONE TO THE RM-4 (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE OR A LESS INTENSE ZONE. Portion A: 516 East Santa Ana Street and 500 -610 South Olive Street - Kwikset and APW sites Portion B: 525 -727 East South Street and 500 -558 South Atchison Street 2134 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 5 5a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 5b. RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 - 00169* (Resolution) * Advertised with Tracking No. RCL2005 -00173 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) Portion A: This 242 -acre area is located at the southeast corner of Santa Ana Street and Olive Street with frontages of 660 feet on the south side of Santa Ana Street and 1,600 feet on the east side of Olive Street (516 East Santa Ana Street and 500 — 610 South Olive Street - Kwikset and APW sites). Portion B: This 16.7 -acre area has frontages of 455 feet on the north side of South Street and the south side of Santa Ana Street, and a maximum depth of 1,600 feet (525 — 727 East South Street and 500 — 558 South Atchison Street). REQUEST: (2) This is a City- initiated (Community Development Department) request for approval of a reclassification of these properties as follows: (a) Portion A —from I (Industrial) to RM -3 (Multiple - Family Residential) zone or less intense zone. (b) Portion B — from I (Industrial) to RM -4 (Multiple - Family Residential) zone or less intense zone- BACKGROUND (3) These properties are currently developed with various industrial uses, are currently zoned I (Industrial), and are designated for Low - Medium Density and Medium Density Residential land uses by the Anaheim General Plan. These properties are further designated as Housing Opportunity sites in the City's adopted Housing Element and are also located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area. The General Plan designates the surrounding properties to the north for Low and Medium Density Residential land uses, to the south for Low and Medium Density Residential and School land uses, to the east for Medium Density Residential land uses, and to the west for Low and Low - Medium Density Residential land uses. (4) On November 14, 2005, the Planning Commission approved the initiation of reclassification proceedings to rezone a 40 -acre area within the existing industrial area south of Downtown Anaheim from the I zone to the RM -3 and RM -4 zones, or less intense zones. DISCUSSION: (5) This reclassification request to rezone the properties from the I zone to the RM -3 and RM -4 zones would be consistent with the land use designations of Low - Medium and Medium Density Residential land uses. This reclassification would permit planned development consisting of an apartment complex and attached single family homes consistent with applicable development standards and subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Approval of a tentative tract map would also be needed for the attached condominiums. This reclassification would be compatible with the multiple - family (RM-4) zoning of the properties to the north and south, and the single family (RS -3) zoning to the west. The railroad tracks serve as a separation of the proposed residential zone to the I zone properties to the east. SR- RCL2005- 00173ds Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 5 (6) Even though the proposed RM -3 and RM -4 zoning does not exactly correspond with the Medium and Low - Medium Density Residential land use designation boundaries identified in the General Plan, the overall number of units permitted within these zones for the project site would comply with the maximum densities permitted in the General Plan. More specifically, the General Plan indicates 2045 . acres for each of the land use designations, which would permit up to 1,104 housing units. Conversely, the proposed RM -3 zoning (242 acres) would permit up to 435 units, the proposed RM -4 zoning (16.7 acres) would permit up to 601 units, for a total of 1,036 units and the number of units proposed for future development is 674. Since the proposed land uses and densities for the project site as a whole complies with the density and land uses permitted for the land use designations on the entire site, a General Plan Amendment is not being requested in conjunction with the reclassification request. (7) The attached memorandum from the Community Development Department dated December 20, 2005, indicates a reclassification is being requested from the I Zone to the RM -3 and RM4 zones to allow the development of an "affordable" multiple - family residential housing project at a density of up to 36 dwelling units to the acre. The Redevelopment Agency is currently in negotiations with several housing developers to build a combination for -sale and rental multiple - family housing project on a portion of the site, a percentage of which would be designated as "affordable" units by agreement with the Community Development Department. (8) The submitted site plan indicates a conceptual layout of the project site. The plan shows three new public streets (Water Street, Melrose Street, and Kroeger Street), two parks, 474 attached condominiums, and 200 apartment units. More detailed architectural plans will be presented to the Commission at a later date in conjunction with conditional use permit and tentative tract map applications. (9) The requested reclassification would facilitate the replacement of incompatible blighted industrial properties with new residential development in an area containing other residential uses. 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 RM -3 and RM-4 zoning classifications 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. Community Development Department staff has been working closely with the developers on specific site design issues and architectural plans which would be presented to the Commission at a later public hearing. (10) Commission should note that the proposed RM -3 and RM -4 zoning would permit the construction of residential units in close proximity to existing railroad tracks. Prior to the issuance of building permits for any units proposed to be built within this proximity, the developer would need to submit a sound study as described under Section 18.40.90 of the Zoning Code. (11) The project site contains parcels identified as a portion of Site No. 25 of the Central Anaheim Area within the Housing Element with a density range of up to 45 units per acre. Based on this density, the subject 41 -acre site could accommodate a maximum of 1,845 units; however, a total of 674 units are planned. Thus, the proposed reclassification from an industrial to multiple - family residential zone would result in an increase in the City's housing stock and would be consistent with the Housing Element. Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (12) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department). Based on City staff review of the proposed project, staff recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. RECOMMENDATION: (13) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the 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, approve a Negative Declaration for the project. (b) By resolution, approve Reclassification No. 2005 -00169 to reclassify Portion A from the I zone to the RM -3 zone and Portion B from the I zone to the RM4 zone by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. Page 3 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2006 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2005 -00169 BE GRANTED, UNCONDITIONALLY WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified petition for Reclassification for real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows: PARCEL 1 - SANTA ANA AND OLIVE STREET PROPERTY: THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING THAT PORTION OF BLOCK "A ", OLIVE STREET, SANTA ANA STREET, KROEGER STREET, WATER STREET, AND WATER ALLEY, ALL AS SHOWN ON THE RE- SUBDIVISION OF THEODORE REISER'S SUBDIVISION OF VINEYARD LOT G -2, FILED IN BOOK 1, PAGES 10 AND 11 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, TOGETHER WITH PARCEL 1 , PARCEL 2, SOUTH STREET, AND OLIVE STREET, ALL AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 85 -364, FILED IN BOOK 210, PAGES 37 AND 38 OF PARCEL MAPS, BOTH IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF OLIVE STREET WITH SANTA ANA STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 85 -364; THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID SANTA ANA STREET NORTH 74 18'42" EAST 689.76 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 15 32' 33" EAST 1652.62 FEET TO A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF SOUTH STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP, SAID POINT DISTANT THEREON NORTH 74° 23' 25" EAST 689.76 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF OLIVE STREET WITH SOUTH STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SOUTH STREET SOUTH 74 23' 25" WEST 689.76 FEET TO SAID CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF OLIVE STREET WITH SOUTH STREET; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF OLIVE STREET NORTH 15 32'33" WEST 1651.67 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2 - SANTA ANA AND OLIVE STREET PROPERTY THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING THAT PORTION OF BLOCK "C ", BLOCK "D ", SANTA ANA STREET, KROEGER STREET, ORANGE STREET, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAILROAD, AND THOSE UNNAMED ALLEYS WITHIN BLOCK "C ", ALL AS SHOWN ON THE RE- SUBDIVISION OF THEODORE REISER'S SUBDIVISION OF VINEYARD LOT G -2, FILED IN BOOK 1, PAGES 10 AND 11 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, TOGETHER WITH PARCEL 1, PARCEL 2, PARCEL 3, SOUTH STREET AND ATCHISON STREET, ALL AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 85 -364, FILED IN BOOK 210, PAGES 37 AND 38 OF PARCEL MAPS, BOTH IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF OLIVE STREET WITH SANTA MA STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 85 -364, THENCE ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID SANTA MA STREET NORTH 74 18'42" EAST 689.76 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 15 32' 33" EAST 1652.62 FEET TO A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF SOUTH STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP, SAID POINT BEING DISTANT THEREON NORTH 74 23' 25" EAST 689.76 FEET FROM THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF OLIVE STREET WITH SOUTH STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SOUTH STREET NORTH 74 23' 25" EAST 462.86 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF ORANGE STREET (FORMERLY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAILROAD) AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP AND REISER'S SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION, SAID WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE AND ITS NORTHERLY PROLONGATION NORTH 15 30'55" WEST 165326 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SANTA ANA STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF SANTA ANA STREET SOUTH 74 18'42 WEST 463.65 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CR \PC2006 -0 -1- PC2006- WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 23, 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 "Procedures ", to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed reclassification 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 petitioner proposes reclassification of Portion A from the I (Industrial) zone to the RM -3 (Multiple Family Residential) zone, and Portion B from the I (Industrial) zone to the RM-4 (Multiple Family Residential) zone. 2. That the Anaheim General Plan designates the properties for Low - Medium and Medium Density Residential land uses; and the proposed reclassification would be consistent with the General Plan and implement the goals and policies contained in the Housing Element. 3. That the proposed reclassification of subject property is necessary and /or desirable for the orderly and proper development of the community. 4. That the proposed reclassification of subject property does properly relate to the zones and their permitted uses locally established in close proximity to subject property and to the zones and their permitted uses generally established throughout the community. 5. That * ** indicated their presence at said public hearing in opposition; and that no correspondence was received in opposition to subject petition. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING That the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to reclassify Portion A from the I (Industrial) zone to the RM -3 (Multiple Family Residential) zone, and Portion B from the I (Industrial) zone to the RM-4 (Multiple Family Residential) zone; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby approve the subject Petition for Reclassification to authorize an amendment to the Zoning Map of the Anaheim Municipal Code to exclude the above - described Portion A from the I (Industrial) zone and to incorporate said described property into the RM -3 (Multiple Family Residential) zone and Portion B from the I (Industrial) zone and to incorporate said described property into the RM -4 (Multiple Family Residential) zone unconditionally. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution shall not constitute a rezoning of, or a commitment by the City to rezone, the subject property; any such rezoning shall require an ordinance of the City Council, which shall be a legislative act, which may be approved or denied by the City Council at its sole discretion. 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- -2- PC2006- THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of January 23, 2006. 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. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION I_ \1111Ix.9i SENIOR SECRETARY, 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 23, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 2006. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2006- ��rrlr ia+,p;� \o , R •,��\\� A'OCO� j'e City of Anaheim Attachment - Item No. 5 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Elisa Stipkovich, Executive Director To: David See, S i or Planner From: Abel Avalos roject Manager Date: December 20, 2005 RE: Application for Reclassification Attached please find our Application for Reclassification of the 44 -acre site bordered by Santa Ana Boulevard, Olive Street, South Street and Orange Street. Included in the packet is the Environmental Information Form and attachments providing further clarification and additional information. Since the site includes numerous parcels, the three copies of the title reports have been organized in the same order as listed on the attachment. Subsequent to preparation of this application, we discovered two small parcels on the site that were previously used as water pumps. We will be supplementing the application with title reports for these two parcels in addition to one of the Atchison parcels. Please let me know if you need any additional information or clarification. F: \DOCS \HCOSING \MEMOS\SPM5C20A clarification of Aplic. for Redass.DOC ITEM NO. 1 -A RM-4 RM-4 R -71- 4 RCLR20022 24 DU VAR 2009 RCL 60 -61 -54 VAR CUP 242 APTS. o VAR 2774 18 DU APTS. VAR 2682 West Anaheim RCL 6 M 24 DU CONDOMINIUMS CommercialFConidors 64 DU RM-4 0 RCL 67 -68-10 U "P RM-4 TS. RCL 68 -69-61 120 DU m CUP 1076 VAR 2079 FVAR295 N APARTMENTS 108 DU W Z W C G RCL 57-56 -21 C - SHOPS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 RM-4 RCL 58-59- Q GG RM-4 RCL 67 -68-24 UP 2005 -0500 5 RCL 57 -58-21 RCL 71 -72 -37 VAR 1916 CUP 3201 co Q CUP 2394 RCL 69 -70 -03 APTS. VAR 3979 CUP 3100 N J UTO REPAI RCL 57 -58-21 69 DU VAR 478 SMALL Q Z GG RCL64 -6610 CUP 1297 VAR 2105 COMM. Q TOWNHOMES SHOPS ONVENIENC ONVENIENC 30 DU Q STORE I �*-150'� BROADWAY C -G RCL 64-65-12 1 DU EACH RCL 64- N_ ` RCL 56 -57 -90 T U 00-04 277 0 N� a CUP 1672 PCN 97-06 PIZZAHUT S.S.B � U Cn POODMART C -G RCL 56 -57 -17 y `- V W HOLIDAY HEALTH SPA g �. E L O SKYWOOD PL C -G ry� 2 RC.L62 -63-26 O CUP 1316 Y VAR 5 RS -2 MAGNOLIA- B RCL 28 I 1 DU EACH ; ROWLAND 1 DU EACH AVENUE Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05056 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: DAE WON HONG Q.S. No. 20 REQUEST TO EXPAND AN EXISTING LEGAL NONCONFORMING CONVENIENCE MARKET INTO AN ADJACENT TENANT SPACE. 221 South Magnolia Avenue, Suite G — Rancho Meat Market 2132 Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05056 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Scale: 1"=200' Requested By: DAE WON HONG Q.S. No. 20 REQUEST TO EXPAND AN EXISTING LEGAL NONCONFORMING CONVENIENCE MARKET INTO AN ADJACENT TENANT SPACE. 221 South Magnolia Avenue, Suite G — Rancho Meat Market 2132 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 6 6a. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - CLASS 1 (Motion) 6b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05056 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This rectangularly- shaped 0.94 -acre property is located at the northwest corner of Broadway and Magnolia Avenue, having frontages of 288 feet on the west side of Magnolia Avenue and 150 feet on the north side of Broadway (221 South Magnolia Avenue, Suite G — Rancho Meat Market). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit under authority of Code Section 18.08.030.040.0402 to expand an existing legal nonconforming convenience market into an adjacent tenant space- BACKGROUND (3) This property is currently developed with an existing convenience market and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Anaheim General Plan designates this property and properties to the south for Low - Medium Density Residential land uses. Adjacent properties to the north and west are designated for Medium Density Residential land uses, and to the east for Corridor Residential land uses. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) Conditional Use Permit No. 3201 (to permit a convenience market in an existing retail center) was approved by the Planning Commission on October 9, 1989 (Suites A, B, and C). (5) Variance No. 3979 (to waive the minimum number of parking spaces to establish a 1,000 square foot donut shop within an existing retail center) was approved by the Zoning Administrator on August 10, 1989. (6) Conditional Use Permit No. 3100 (to permit a 9 -unit, 12,420 square foot commercial retail center) was approved by the Planning Commission on December 5, 1988. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL (7) The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to expand an existing legal nonconforming convenience market into an adjacent tenant space. The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates an eight (8) unit retail building. The proposed market would utilize two (2) tenant spaces for a total of 2,655 square feet. (8) The floor plan (Exhibit No. 2) indicates the convenience market would consist of a kitchen, walk -in freezer, cooler, sales area, and one (1) restroom. (9) Vehicular access to the site is provided via single driveways from Magnolia Avenue and Broadway. The site plan indicates a total of 69 parking spaces available for this commercial retail center. Code required 81 parking spaces based on the previous parking waiver approved under Variance No. 3979. The tenant space proposed for the market expansion sr -C UP2005- 05056] kn .doc Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 6 was previously occupied by another retail use with the same parking requirement. Therefore, even though the site has fewer parking spaces than required by Code, this expansion does not increase the parking requirements for the center. (10) The applicant has submitted a letter of operation indicating the market would continue to operate as a small retail market selling fresh produce market and delicatessen meats and specialized prepared foods. There would be no seats for food consumption on the premises. The current hours of operation for the market are 7 a.m. to 9 p.m., Monday through Sunday, with a total of 2 employees per shift. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (11) Staff has determined that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation. View of Cema Market from Magnolia Avenue EVALUATION: (12) The sale of produce, general household goods, non - alcoholic beverages, and prepared meats with a floor area of less than 15,000 square feet is permitted within the C -G zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (13) A site inspection indicates the property is adequately maintained; however, staff observed unpermitted banners, vending machines and a pay phone in front of the unit which were sr -C UP2005- 05056] kn.d m Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 6 unsightly. Banners are permitted subject to a special event permit and staff has added a condition of approval to move the pay phone and vending machines away from public view. Code permits vending machines as accessory uses provided they are screened from public right-of-ways- (14) Staff believes that the proposed convenience market expansion complies with the intent of the code and is consistent with the other tenant spaces. The expansion of the existing use would not have an adverse affect on adjoining land uses. Staff has included standard conditions of approval pertaining to convenience markets related to site maintenance, seating limitations and window signage limitations. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this conditional use permit subject to the findings and conditions of approval contained in the attached resolution- FINDINGS (15) Before the Planning 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 (16) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion, determine that the project is categorically exempt under Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines. (b) By resolution, approve the applicants request to permit the expansion of an existing convenience market into an adjacent tenant space, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions of approval contained therein. sr -C UP2005- 05056] kn .doc Page 3 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2006 - * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05056 BE GRANTED WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 249, PAGES 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 23, 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 expansion of an existing legally non - conforming convenience market into an adjacent tenant space is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.08.030.040.0402. 2. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the expansion of an existing legal nonconforming convenience market into an adjacent tenant space will not have a negative impact on the surrounding area; 3. 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 nor to the health and safety as the proposed expansion of the existing legal nonconforming convenience market into an adjacent tenant space would comply with all provisions of the Zoning Code and would not require any waivers for development; and 4. That the traffic generated by the proposed expansion of a convenience market will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the site contains adequate circulation and parking for customer vehicles entirely on the property. 5. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not, under the conditions imposed, be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6. 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 The Planning Commission concurs with staff's determination that the proposed project falls within the definition of Categorical Exemptions, Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities), as defined in the State CEQA Guidelines and is, therefore, exempt from the requirement to prepare additional environmental documentation. Cr\PC2006 -0 -1- PC2006- 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 health and safety of the Citizens of the City of Anaheim 1 - That this establishment shall be operated as a convenience store as defined in Section 18.36.040.030 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 2. That no outdoor vending machines shall be permitted on the property that is visible to the public right- of-way- 3- That all fixtures, displays, merchandise and other materials in excess of three feet in height shall be setback a minimum of three (3) feet from all window areas. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 4. That signs on the inside of the subject tenant space windows shall obscure no more than ten percent (10 %) of the total transparent area of any window surface. No signs shall be allowed on the outside of any windows. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 5. That no roof - mounted balloons or other inflatable devices shall be permitted on the property. 6. That there shall be no outdoor storage permitted on the premises. 7. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located outside the building. 8. That the trash enclosure shall be refurbished and the latch on the trash enclosure gates replaced. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Streets and Sanitation Division approval. 9. That all trash generated from the commercial retail center shall be properly contained in trash bins located within approved trash enclosures. 10. That roof - mounted equipment shall be screened from view in accordance wit the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.38.170 pertaining to the C -G (General Commercial) Zone. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 11. That the property shall be permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by the provision of regular landscaping maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 12. That the parking lot shall be maintained in good condition free of trash and debris. 13. That four (4) foot high street address numbers shall be displayed on the roof of the main building in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible to adjacent streets or properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted to the Police Department, Community Services Division, for review and approval. 14. That subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2, and as conditioned herein. 15. 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. 3, 4, 8, 10, and 13 above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code- -2- PC2006- 16. That prior to final building and zoning inspections, Condition Nos. 2, 7 and 14, above mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 17. 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 of findings as to compliance 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 23, 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. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) 1, 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 23, 2006, 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 , 2006. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2006- CEMA MARKET JOSEFINA ESCALANTE 221 S. MAGNOLIA ANAHEIM, CA 92806 (714 828 -2445 November, 11, 2005 City of Anaheim Building Division RE: Conditional use application. Item No. 6 Cema Market retail store sales produce, groceries, and non - alcoholic beverages. In the future it will sale meat and prepared food such as Camitas, Barbacoa, Menudo and other Mexican Foods. Thank you, very much for your concern i OSEFINA ESCALANTE ITEM NO. 1 -A RCL99 0015 RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res oft t to SE) 1 6 r (Res. of nt. to SE) CL 860611134 RCL 66-67-14 RCL596023 G� RCL UP2843 RCL 99-00-1 RCL 55569 DRIVE -THRU RCL 88 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) SMALL IND. FIRMS ( es. of Int. to SE RCL 5556 -19 RCL 58 -80 -23 RCL 5455 -42 ML CUP 2627 CUP 3516 SMALL IND MALL IND. FIRM RCL 66 -67 -14 FIRMS 60 -61 -113 RCL 59 -60 -23 TILE I (PTMU) COMPANY RCL 2004 -00129 RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) I (PTMU) RCL 55-56-19 RCL 99-00-15 RCL 5455 -42 ( es. of Int. to SE I (PTMU) RCL 55-56-19 RCL 99-00-15 RCL 5455 -42 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 5556 -19 1 (PTMU) RCL 5455 -42 RCL 99-00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) WRIGHT CIRCLE 0 (PTMU) I (PTMU) RCL 5556 -19 TPM NO. 87 -155 RCL 004 -00129 CL 54-55-42 RCL88 -0015 (Res. of Int to SE) RCL 99 -00 -15 RCL 80 -81 -17 (Res of Int to SE) RCL 88 -87 -14 RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 54-55-42 6061 -113 o1 (PTMU) RCL58 -57 -83 RCL 5556 -19 I (PTMU) Q CUP 3957 RCL 2004 -00120 VAR 3775 1 (PTMU) TT M 16618 > TOWN PLACE CUP 3406 BALLY FITNESS DAG 2005-00001 RCL99 -00 -15 RCL99 -00 -15 LU SUITES CUP 690 DAG 2005 -00002 (Res. of Int. to SE) (Res. of Int. to SE) J VAR 2765 DAG 2005 -00003 RCL 5556 -19 RCL 66 -67 -14 - - - - - -- - - - -- —� SMALL IND. RCL 54-55-42 RCL 55-56-19 Q ---- - - - - -- FIRMS RCL 54-55-42 ED T -CUP 2004 -04939 ` � CUP 2004 - 04906 CUP 3386 Lu BANK CUP 2862 VAR 4129 (D 01(PTMU) PARKING CUP 1427 LU DAG 2005 -00010 J I (PTMU) DAG 2004 -00002 J 0 F (PTMU) RCL 88 -00 -15 STADIUM LOFTS Q RCL9091 -17 (Res. of Int to SE) MIXED USE C.7 RCL 6667 -14 RCL 88 -87 -14 RESIDENTIAL RCL 5657 -83 T-CUP 200064260 0F(PTMU) RCL55 -542 CONDOMINIUM LU CUP4141 REST. RCL 54 -5542 H CUP 3057 CUP 1427 Q CUP 3406 BANK CUP 690 _ (Q TPM NO 97 -155 (CUP3356T) REST j 455' KATELLA AVENUE PTMU) I I RCLA400 -15 (P TM U) I ('TMUJ (Res oflnt mSE) U) RCL 8900 -15 666) -14 RCL B &00 -15 RCL 6667 I (PTMU) CU P 2002 - 04544 (Res. of In[ to SE7 841 u=2eaa (Res. of l nt to SEJ LfPS U=uee RCL 8687 - cUP383 RCL99 -00 -15 CUP 2946 RCL 8487 -14 CUP137 HRU C=j RCL 5aeo T. (Res of Int to SE) CUP2134 RCL5657 83 SsRes of IUentt RCL 87 -88 -14 CUP 1879 CUP 1652 RCL5657 Pof191nF I CUT44( S IITIMU) (Res of Indent to CO) CUP 1842 1 1 CUP 447 S VAR246 RCL66 -67 -14 CUP1587 VAR2618 RCL88 0015 CUP1319 G. MOTEL (Res. of n[ RCL 565753 ADJ 2003 -00236 to SE7 C Mo1E7 S 0 F FTMU) W P 2005 0 IND. FIRMS _ U ) 1 TTM 16825 DAG 2005 -0 FSP 200501 CL930 (PTM S s oflntm SE) GPA 20050 I (PTMU) RCL9 &0 CL863722 MIS2005 -01 -00.15 (Res. o Int m SE) RCL 88 Fl to RCL666714 EGA 2005 -0 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 88 -87 -14 RCL56 PC 565793 RCL58 -57 -83 ry ionmc (1IF -71 00, 793 T- CUP205001 CUP 2005 -04975 RC ALL PROPERTIES IN THE PTMU PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE OVERLAY ZONE Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 EM Subject Property TRACKING NO. DAG2005 -00010 Date: January 23, 2006 Tentative Tract Map No. 16618 Scale: Graphic Requested By. CREA /NEXUS ANAHEIM CORNERS, LLC Q.S. No. 107 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2004 -00002 — REQUEST TO AMEND A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND CREA /NEXUS ANAHEIM CORNERS, LLC TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16618 — REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 390 UNIT RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION. 1801 E. Katella Avenue — Stadium Lofts - Anaheim 2133 q f �1 {. J I r Date of Aerial Photo: May 2002 Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 Subject Property TRACKING NO. DAG2005 -00010 Date: January 23, 2006 Tentative Tract Map No. 16618 Scale: Graphic Requested By: CREA /NEXUS ANAHEIM CORNERS, LLC Q.S. No. 107 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2004 -00002 — REQUEST TO AMEND A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND CREA /NEXUS ANAHEIM CORNERS, LLC TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16618 — REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A 1 -LOT, 390 UNIT RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION. 1801 E. Katella Avenue — Stadium Lofts - Anaheim 2133 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 7 7a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 125 (PREVIOUSLY - APPROVED) (Motion) 7b. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2004 -00002 (Resolution) (TRACKING NO. DAG2005- 00010) 7c. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16618 (Motion) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION (1) This rectangularly- shaped, approximate 6.3 -acre property is located at the northwest corner of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard with frontages of 580 feet on the west side of State College Boulevard and 455 feet on the north side of Katella Avenue (1801 East Katella Avenue — Stadium Lofts - Anaheim). REQUEST: (2) The petitioner requests approval of the following: Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 - request to amend a previously- approved Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC, to allow residential condominiums in a mixed use development. Tentative Tract Map No. 16618 - to establish a 1 -lot, 390 -unit airspace attached residential mixed use condominium subdivision. BACKGROUND: (3) This property is currently under construction for 390 dwelling units and associated commercial tenant space and parking structure. The Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element Map designates this property for Mixed Uses and the property is zoned I (PTMU) Overlay (Industrial, Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay). The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan (PTMLUP) further indicates that the subject property is located in the Katella District of the PTMU Overlay. (4) As set forth in Section 18 of the Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC., either party may initiate an amendment to this Development Agreement provided the procedure for amendment to the Development Agreement is the same as the procedure for entering the Development Agreement, and that the amendment includes consent of both parties. The Planning Commission's role is to look at the land use aspects of the proposed amendment specifically, whether the amendment to the Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and is compatible with the development of the surrounding area. The City Council will consider whether to approve the requested amendment to the Agreement. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (5) Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04906 - (to modify required setbacks and to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in a proposed restaurant within a proposed high- density urban mixed -use center with 390 apartment dwelling units located above retail and restaurant uses, and a clubhouse and leasing office surrounding a 5 -level parking structure with waiver of minimum dimension of patio and balcony areas and required building treatment adjacent to streets) was approved by the Commission on November 15, 2004, and subsequently approved by the City Council on November 16, 2004. SR012306 -1R DAG04 -02 Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 7 (6) Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 —(to provide for the development of Stadium Lofts - Anaheim between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC) was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission to the City Council on November 15, 2004, and approved by the City Council on November 16, 2004. PROPOSAL: (7) Holly Sandler, on behalf of CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC, has submitted the attached letter requesting the amendment to the Development Agreement. The letter indicates that at the time of the previous approval (November, 2004), the real- estate market favored a rental product, whereas currently, the market favors ownership units. The requested amendment to the Development agreement is in conjunction with a request to establish a 1 -lot, 393 -unit airspace attached residential mixed use condominium subdivision for the previously - approved apartment building. The 4 -story, wrapped deck residential /commercial mixed -use project is under construction, with 390 apartment units above and around the clubhouse, retail and restaurant uses. As provided in the originally approved Final Site Plan (which has also been amended to include the Tentative Tract Map exhibit), the site encompasses 7,839 square feet of restaurant space, 2,820 square feet of retail space, and 6,297 square feet of clubhouse /leasing area on the first floor adjacent to Katella Avenue. No structural or physical changes are proposed to the development. The amendment is to solely provide for the establishment of airspace ownership. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16618 DISCUSSION (8) The tentative tract map indicates the subdivision would consist of a 1 -lot, 393 -unit airspace attached residential mixed use condominium subdivision. R n YF vw"� r a i E-A nYl��n'wrTl.nlT'pe�iAi '� 1' � ! IrtP�6 yli � _. View of site from the southeast. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2004 -00002 DISCUSSION: (9) Pursuant to the Procedures Resolution and Section 18 of the approved Development Agreement, the Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation to the City Council relative to the proposed Agreement and /or any subsequent amendments to such agreement. The Planning Commission must determine whether the proposed Agreement is: Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 7 (a) Consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; (b) Compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district; (c) Compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area; and (d) Is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Anaheim. (10) The proposed amendment to the Development agreement includes changing the word "apartments" to the word "condominiums" in Recital "H ", Section 1.18 of "Definitions" for the permitted type of building on site, and within Exhibit "B ", the Final Site Plan. Further, the Final Site Plan Exhibits would reflect the insertion of the tentative tract map as an attachment to the Final Site Plan. Section 13 of the Development Agreement and Exhibit "E" pertaining to Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations has been modified to accommodate requirements and obligations pertinent to the establishment of an airspace subdivision (common area maintenance and Home Owners Association (HOA) obligations), as well as provide more specific wording to identify items related to areas and facilities to be maintained by the HOA. (11) Staff has reviewed the proposed amendments to the Development Agreement and finds that the amended Agreement has been prepared in conformance with the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement approved per Resolution No. 2004- 179. Further, the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the amended Development Agreement since the project will result in the construction of 390 residential units, 2,820 square feet of retail use and 7,839 square feet of restaurant use, as originally approved. The proposed amendment and tentative tract map would maintain consistency with goals and policies of the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation for The Platinum Triangle, The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and Zoning Overlay, and would be consistent with the following recently approved projects in this zoning district: • Platinum Triangle Condominiums at 1331 East Katella Avenue - TTM 16832 • Stadium Park Residential at 1515 East Katella Avenue - TTM 16831 • Platinum Centre Condominiums at 1818 South State College- TTM 16825 • Anaheim Stadium Condominiums at 2100 East Katella-TTM 16800 Because the requested map and amendment are (a) consistent with the General Plan, (b) compatible with the uses authorized under the zoning and the four (4) recently approved projects in the applicable zoning district, (c) compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area and (d) would not result in any physical or structural alterations to the project, staff recommends approval of the tentative tract map and amendment to the Development Agreement as requested by the applicant. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (12) Staff has reviewed the Initial Study for the amendment to the Stadium Lofts - Anaheim project, a copy of which has been provided to the Planning Commission and is available for review in the Planning Department, and recommends that the previously- approved Mitigated Negative Declaration serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the previously- approved Mitigated Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 7 the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that with the incorporation of mitigation measures set forth in Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 125 the project will have a significant effect on the environment- FINDINGS (13) "The State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code, Section 66473.5) makes it mandatory to include in all motions approving, or recommending approval of a tract map, a specific finding that the proposed Subdivision together with its design and improvement is consistent with the City's General Plan. Further, the law requires that the Commission make any of the following findings when denying or recommending denial of a tract map: 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision." RECOMMENDATION: (14) 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 and the findings included in the attached resolutions, the Planning Commission take the following actions: (a) By motion recommend that the City Council, as lead agency for Tentative Tract Map No. 16618 and the requested amendment to Development Agreement No- 2004-00002, (the "Proposed Actions "), based upon its independent review and analysis of the Initial Study prepared for the Proposed Actions, determine the previously- approved Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Actions, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 125, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for the Proposed Actions and satisfies all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared. Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 7 (b) By resolution approve amendment to Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC, to allow residential condominiums in a mixed use development amendment by adopting the recommendation to City Council in the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained therein. (c) By motion, approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16618, to establish a 1 -lot, 393 -unit airspace attached residential mixed use condominium subdivision. Page 5 [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2006 - "" A RESOLUTION OF THE OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2004 -00002 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND CREA/NEXUS ANAHEIM CORNERS, LLC. AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATED THERETO (1801 E. KATELLAAVENUE) WHEREAS, Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7 (commencing with Section 65864) of the Government Code of the State of California (hereinafter the "Statute ") authorizes a city to enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of the property as provided in said Statute; and WHEREAS, upon request of an applicant, cities are required to establish procedures and requirements by resolution or ordinance for the consideration of development agreements; and WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim (hereinafter the "City ") heretofore on November 23, 1982, enacted Ordinance No. 4377 (hereinafter the "Enabling Ordinance ") which makes the City subject to the Statute; and WHEREAS, pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65865 of the Statute, the City heretofore on November 23, 1982, adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (hereinafter the "Procedures Resolution ") establishing procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application by the City; and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim ( "General Plan Amendment "), and certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ( "FEIR No. 330 "), in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General Plan Amendment, amendment of the City's zoning code, and a series of related actions; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment sets forth a vision for development of Mixed Uses, Office High, Office Low, Industrial and Institutional land uses within an approximately 820 -acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north ( "hereinafter referred to as The Platinum Triangle "); and WHEREAS, in order to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, on August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -177, approving The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, setting forth the new vision for The Platinum Triangle; and WHEREAS, to further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle and pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 18.76 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, on August 24, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5378 amending Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to establish zoning and development standards for the Platinum Triangle Mixed - Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (the "PTMU Overlay Zone ") and Ordinance No. 5936, amending the zoning map to reclassify approximately three hundred and seventy -five acres within The Platinum Triangle into the PTMU Overlay Zone as depicted in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to provide opportunities for high quality well- designed development projects that could be stand -alone projects or that combine residential with non - residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area; and WHEREAS, the PTMU Overlay Zone requires an approved Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement between the property owner and the City of Anaheim to implement all Cr1PC2006 -1- PC2006- development in the Katella, Gene Autry and Gateway Districts of the PTMU Overlay Zone, except as otherwise exempt under the Code; and WHEREAS, when a Final Site Plan application includes a request for a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit, the PTMU Overlay Zone requires the Variance and /or Conditional Use Permit applications to be processed concurrently with the Development; and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -179, approving the form of the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle PTMU Overlay Zone WHEREAS, in connection with adoption of The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone, and the form of the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle, the City Council by motion, as lead agency for the proposed actions, determined that FEIR No. 330 and the associated Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, were in compliance with CEQA and the state and City CEQA guidelines and were adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for said actions based upon findings set forth in said motion; and WHEREAS, on November 15, 2004, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 by and between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC, in conjunction with the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04906 (to modify required setbacks and to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in a proposed 7,839 square foot restaurant within the Stadium Lofts — Anaheim (a proposed high - density urban mixed -use center with 390 apartment dwelling units located above 2,820 square feet of retail use, 7,839 square feet of restaurant use, and 6,297 square feet of clubhouse and leasing office surrounding a 5 -level parking structure) with waivers of minimum dimension and area of patios /balconies and required building treatment adjacent to streets); and WHEREAS, on November 16, 2004, the City Council did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, 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 Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit No. 2004- 04906 and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the City Council concurred with the decision of the Planning Commission and approved Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 by and between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC, by adopting Resolution No. 2004 -232 for the Conditional Use Permit and Ordinance No. 5952 for the Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, on December 18, 2005, pursuant to the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance, and the Procedures Resolution (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Development Agreement Law "), CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC. ( "Applicant'), submitted an application to the Planning Department to amend Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 (the "Application "), to allow residential condominiums, and to establish a 1 -lot, 390 unit residential mixed use condominium subdivision; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement pertains to approximately 6284 acres of real property in the City of Anaheim, owned in fee by the Applicant, commonly known as 1801 East Katella Avenue (the 'Property "), which is located in The Platinum Triangle and zoned PTMU Overlay ( Katella District), and more particularly shown and described on Exhibit "A ", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, Applicant desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement by developing a mixed use project consisting of 390 dwelling units, 2,820 square feet of retail, 7,839 square feet of restaurant, 6,297 square feet of clubhouse /leasing and an 845 space parking structure, as more particularly set forth in Final Site Plan No. 2004 -00005 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04906 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the 'Project'); and -2- PC2006- WHEREAS, the Planning Director approved the requested amendment to Final Site Plan No. 2004 -00005 to provide for the development of the Stadium Lofts — Anaheim project, contingent upon the approval of this amendment to Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 by the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on January 23, 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 "Procedures" to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed amendment and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has demonstrated that the Project meets the eligibility requirements of the Procedures Resolution to enter into the Development Agreement by showing that, upon completion, the Project will result in the construction of 390 condominiums, 2,820 square feet of retail, 7,839 square feet of restaurant, 6,297 square feet of clubhouse /leasing and an 845 space parking structure; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of and based upon all of the evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine that the Development Agreement meets the following standards set forth in the Procedures Resolution: That the amended Agreement has been prepared in conformance with the form of the standardized Platinum Triangle Development Agreement approved per Resolution No. 2004 -179. Further, the applicant has demonstrated eligibility to enter into the amended Development Agreement since the project will result in the construction of 390 residential units, 2,820 square feet of retail use and 7,839 square feet of restaurant use, as originally approved. The proposed amendment and tentative tract map would maintain consistency with goals and policies of the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation for The Platinum Triangle and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, and would be consistent with the following recently approved projects in this zoning district: • Platinum Triangle Condominiums at 1331 East Katella Avenue - TTM 16832 • Stadium Park Residential at 1515 East Katella Avenue - TTM 16831 • Platinum Centre Condominiums at 1818 South State College- TTM 16825 • Anaheim Stadium Condominiums at 2100 East Katella- TTM 16800 2. That the amendment proposed is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district in that the Project is in compliance with the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements as set forth in Final Site Plan No. 2004 -00005 as amended, which has been approved by the Planning Director, as there are no physical or structural changes to the building and it will be constructed as originally approved. 3. That the requested amendment and map are compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area in that it is in conformance with and implements The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements. 4. That the Project is not otherwise detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 5. That the amendment to the Development Agreement constitutes a lawful, present exercise of the City's police power and authority under the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution. 6. That the Development Agreement is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with its charter powers and the requirements of Section 65867 of the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution- -3- PC2006- 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 the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to amend a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC to allow residential mixed use condominiums and does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 125 previously- approved in connection with Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04906 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection for this request upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon the aforesaid findings and determinations, the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed amendment to Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 to allow residential condominiums, and to establish a 1 -lot, 390 unit residential mixed use condominium subdivision. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of January 23, 2006. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION r_\n1C&Ii SENIOR SECRETARY, 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 City Planning Commission held on January 23, 2006, 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 1 2006- SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2006- City of Anaheim PLANNING ®EPARTMEN7' =~ "` ' January 23, 2006 v`~~ ', , p CREA Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC 9381 Judicial Drive, Suite 190 San Diego, CA 92121. Following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Anaheim Planning Commission meeting of January 23, 2006. 7a. CEQA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN NO. 125 (PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED). 7b. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2004-00002 (Tracking No. DAG2005-OOD10) 7c. TENTATIVE TRACT AAAP NO. 16618 Owner: CREA Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC, 9381 Judicial Drive, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92121 Agent: David Slaughter,. Fuscoe, Engineering, 16795 Von Karmen, Irvine, CA 92606 Eric L. Heffner, Nexus Properties, Inc., 9381 Judicial Drive, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92121 Location: 1801 E. Katella Avenue: Property is approximately 6.3 acres and is located at the northwest corner of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard (Stadium Lofts -Anaheim), .Development Aoreement No. 2005-00002 -Request to amend a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC to allow residential condominiums. Tentative Tract Mao No. 16618 -Request to establish a 1-lot, 390-unit residential mixed use condominium subdivision. ACTION: Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to amend a Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC, to allow residential mixed use condominiums and does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and .Mitigation Monitoring Plan tJo. 125 (Previously Approved) in connection with Development Agreement No. 2004-00002 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04906 is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation in connection with this request upon finding that the dedlaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. Commissioner XXX offered a motion, seconded by Commissioner XXX and MOTION CARRIED, that the Anaheim Planning Commission does hereby determine that the proposed tentative map, including its design and improvements, is consistent with the Anaheim General Plan, and does therefore approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16618, to establish a 1-lot, 390 unit residential mixed use condominium subdivision subject to the following conditions: 200 South Anaheim Boulevard P:0. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92003 www.anaheim.net TEL (714) 7fi5-5139 1. That a maintenance covenant shall be submitted to the Subdivision Section and approved by the City Attorney's Office. The covenant shall include provisions for maintenance of private facilities, including compliance with approved Water Quality Management Plan, and a maintenance exhibit. The covenant shall be recorded concurrently with the final map, including regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris, and removal of graffiti within twenty -four (24) hours from time of occurrence. 2. That the legal property owner shall furnish a Subdivision Agreement to the City of Anaheim, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney's Office, agreeing to complete the public improvements required as conditions of the map at the legal property owner's expense. Said agreement shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Anaheim and shall than be recorded concurrently with the final map. All public improvements shall be constructed within one year of recordation of the final map. 3. That prior to final map, the applicant shall pay the net difference between the assessment of apartments and condominiums of the traffic and transportation fee, Supplemental Platinum Triangle Project area fee, park in lieu fee, and any other applicable impactor development fee. 4. That prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: (i) Demonstrate that all structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. (ii) Demonstrate that the applicant is prepared to implement all non - structural BMP's described in the Project WQMP. (iii) Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available onsite. (iv) Submit for review and approval by the City an Operation and Maintenance Plan for all structural BMP's. 5. That approval of this parcel map is granted subject to the approval of the amendment to Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 (Tracking No. DAG2005- 00010), now pending. 6. That prior to final parcel map approval, Condition Nos. 1, 2, and 3 above - mentioned, shall be complied with. 7. 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. Sincerely, Eleanor Morris, Senior Secretary Anaheim Planning Commission TTM16618_Excerpt rJ l hare December 16, 2005 A S S O C I ^"r E S ENTITLEMENTS • PERMITS • PROJECT MANAGEMENT City of Anaheim Mr. John Ramirez Planning Department 200 South Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: Wlhndstar Communities — "Stadium Lofts" Attachment - Item No. 7 Request for modification to Development Agreement DAG- 2004 -00002 1801 East Katella Avenue Dear John: The Development Agreement referenced above was approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in November 2004. At the time the market seemed to favor for -rent projects, such as the 390 apartments /mixed -use project approved. However, it has been our recent experience that the market will in fact favor for -sale projects like the Stadium Lofts project that is currently under construction. Windstar Communities currently has an application for a tentative tract map to enable the conversion of the apartments to for -sale condominiums. As a result, we respectfully request that the Development Agreement be modified to reflect the changes in project type. Enclosed is a copy of the approved Development Agreement identifying the changes from "apartment" (red /strikeout) to "condominium" requested. Thank you in advance for your consideration of the modifications proposed to the existing Development Agreement. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office at (714) 245 -9760, extension 14 or via email at hollv(i?ilhare.com Sincerely, XoCCy San Aer Holly A. Sandler The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and padectedfrom disclosure. Tf the reader ofthis message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that arty' dissemination, distribution or coppngofthis communication is strictly prohibited Tfyou have recenedthis communication in error, please notify as immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer Orange County Office: Inland Empire Office: 1450 North Tustin Avenue, Suite 105. 250 E. Rincon Street. Suite 108 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Corona, CA 92879 714.245.9760- office office - 951 -549 -8080 714.245.9761- fax fax - 951 -549 -8081 www.jlhare.coni Attachment - Item No. 7 RESOLUTION NO. PC2004 -141 A RESOLUTION OF THE OF ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2004 -00002 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND CREA/NEXUS ANAHEIM CORNERS, LLC. AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATED THERETO WHEREAS, Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7 (commencing with Section 65864) of the Government Code of the State of California (hereinafter the "Statute ") authorizes a city to enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of the property as provided in said Statute; and WHEREAS, upon request of an applicant, cities are required to establish procedures and requirements by resolution or ordinance for the consideration of development agreements; and WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim (hereinafter the "City ") heretofore on November 23, 1982, enacted Ordinance No. 4377 (hereinafter the "Enabling Ordinance ") which makes the City subject to the Statute; and WHEREAS, pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65865 of the Statute, the City heretofore on November 23, 1982, adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (hereinafter the "Procedures Resolution ") establishing procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application by the City; and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim ( "General Plan Amendment "), and certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ( "FEIR No. 330 "), in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General Plan Amendment, amendment of the City's zoning code, and a series of related actions; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment sets forth a vision for development of Mixed Uses, Office High, Office Low, Industrial and Institutional land uses within an approximately 820 -acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north ( "hereinafter referred to as The Platinum Triangle "); and WHEREAS, in order to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, on August 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -177, approving The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, setting forth the new vision for The Platinum Triangle; and WHEREAS, to further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle and pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 18.76 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, on August 24, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5378 amending Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to establish zoning and development standards for the Platinum Triangle Mixed - Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (the "PTMU Overlay Zone ") and Ordinance No. 5936, amending the zoning map to reclassify approximately three hundred and seventy -five acres within The Platinum Triangle into the PTMU Overlay Zone as depicted in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to provide opportunities for high quality well- designed development projects that could be stand -alone projects or that combine residential with non - residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area; and WHEREAS, the PTMU Overlay Zone requires an approved Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement between the property owner and the City of Anaheim to implement all development in the Katella, Gene Autry and Gateway Districts of the PTMU Overlay Zone, except as otherwise exempt under the Code; and Cr1PC2004 -141 -1- PC2004 -141 WHEREAS, when a Final Site Plan application includes a request for a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit, the PTMU Overlay Zone requires the Variance and /or Conditional Use Permit applications to be processed concurrently with the Development; and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -179, approving the form of the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle PTMU Overlay Zone WHEREAS, in connection with adoption of The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, the PTMU Overlay Zone, and the form of the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle, the City Council by motion, as lead agency for the proposed actions, determined that FEIR No. 330 and the associated Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, were in compliance with CEQA and the state and City CEQA guidelines and were adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for said actions based upon findings set forth in said motion; and WHEREAS, on October 4, 2004, pursuant to the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance, and the Procedures Resolution (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Development Agreement Law "), CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC. ( "Applicant'), submitted an application to the Planning Department for approval of Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 (the "Application "), which included a proposed development agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "Development Agreement') prepared in conformance with the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle to vest certain project entitlements and address the implementation of the Stadium Lofts - Anaheim project; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement pertains to approximately 6284 acres of real property in the City of Anaheim, owned in fee by the Applicant, commonly known as 1801 East Katella Avenue (the 'Property "), which is located in The Platinum Triangle and zoned PTMU Overlay ( Katella District), and more particularly shown and described on Exhibit "K, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, Applicant desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement by developing a mixed use project consisting of 390 apartments, 2,820 square feet of retail, 7,839 square feet of restaurant, 6,297 square feet of clubhouse /leasing and an 845 space parking structure, as more particularly set forth in Final Site Plan No. 2004 -00005 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04906 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the 'Project'); and WHEREAS, on October 14, 2004, the Planning Director approved Final Site Plan No- 2004-00005 to provide for the development of the Stadium Lofts — Anaheim project, contingent upon the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04906 and Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 by the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on November 15, 2004, at 2:00 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 Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04906 and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has demonstrated that the Project meets the eligibility requirements of the Procedures Resolution to enter into the Development Agreement by showing that, upon completion, the Project will result in the construction of 390 apartments, 2,820 square feet of retail, 7,839 square feet of restaurant, 6,297 square feet of clubhouse /leasing and an 845 space parking structure; and WHEREAS, said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of and based upon all of the evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does find and determine that the Development Agreement meets the following standards set forth in the Procedures Resolution -2- PC2004 -141 1. That the Project is consistent with the City's existing General Plan in that it is in conformance with the General Plan Mixed Use land use designation and with the goals, policies and objectives for The Platinum Triangle as set forth in the General Plan. 2. That the Project is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district in that the Project is in compliance with the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements as set forth in Final Site Plan No. 2004 - 00005, which has been approved by the Planning Director, and Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 - 04906, which has been approved by the Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. PC2004 -140 adopted on November 15, 2004. 3. That the Project is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area in that it is in conformance with and implements The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone requirements. 4. That the Project is not otherwise detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 5. That the Development Agreement constitutes a lawful, present exercise of the City's police power and authority under the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution. 6. That the Development Agreement is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with its charter powers and the requirements of Section 65867 of the Statute, the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution. 7. 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 the Anaheim City Planning Commission has reviewed the Development Agreement in conjunction with the proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 - 04906; and did find and determine, by motion, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA'), based upon its independent review and consideration of an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for the Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing, that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with the Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Proposed Development Agreement and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 125 are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement or Conditional Use Permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon the aforesaid findings and determinations, the Anaheim City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council the approval of the Application and the Development Agreement. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of November 15, 2004. (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY GAIL EASTMAN) CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLER) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2004 -141 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Pat Chandler, Senior Secretary of the Anaheim Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim City Planning Commission held on November 15, 2004, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BUFFA, EASTMAN, FLORES, O'CONNELL, ROMERO, VANDERBILT- LINARES VELASQUEZ NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of , 2004. (ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PAT CHANDLER) SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -4- PC2004 -141 I IMNIU MA RESOLUTION NO. 2004 - 232 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004- 04906. WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim did receive an application Cot a conditional use permit with a waiver of certain provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in a proposed 7,839 square foot restaurant within the Stadium Lofts - Anaheim (a proposed high - density urban mixed -use center with 390 apartment dwelling units located above 2,820 square feet of retail use. 7,839 square feet of restaurant use. and 6,297 square feet of clubhouse and leasing office surrounding a 5 -level parking structure) upon certain real property located within the City of Anaheim. County of Orange, State of California, legally described as: PARCEL A: PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 85- -214, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 208, PAGES 1I AND 12 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL B: PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 85 -214, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 208, PAGES I1 AND 12 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA. PARCEL C: PARCEL I AS SHOWN ON A MAP IN BOOK 57, PAGE I OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY: and WHEREAS. the City Planning Commission did hold a public hearing upon said application at the City Hall in the City of Anaheim. notices of which public hearing were duly eivco as rcquirul by law and the provisions of Title 19, Chapter 1803 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. and WHEREAS. said Commission, after due inspection, investigation and studies made be itself and in its behalf and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said hearing. did adopt its Resolution No. PC2004 -140 granting Conditional Use Permit No. 2004-04906, and WHEREAS. thereafter, within the time prescribed by law, an interested party or the Cnv Council, on its own motion, caused the review of said Planning Commission action at a duly noticed public hearing: and WHEREAS. at the time and place fixed for said public hearing, the City Council did duly hold and conduct such hearing and did give all persons interested therein an opportunity to be heard and did receive evidence and reports: and WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after careful consideration of the recontmcndations of the Cily Planning Commission and all evidence and reports offered at said hearin„ that. I. The propoacd uee is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Anaheim Municipal Code_ 2- That the proposed 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 as the proposed project i, compatible with existing and surrounding land uses and that the minor deviations from the Code would Still achieve a project with architecturally enhanced elevations and recreational /leisure amenities for residents in the project_ and further provide a project that is compatible and consistent with the General Plan Mixed -Use land use designation and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. 3 That the s77e and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the lull development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to health and safety. 4. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area as the proposed project has been analyzed in a Traflic Impact Study dated September 28, 2004, reviewed and approved by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and that the required infrastructure improvements along the adjacent streets will be constructed in connection with the prolecl. 5. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not he detrimental to the health and safety of the chizem of the Cite of Anaheim. AND WHEREAS, the Citv Council does further find, after careful consideration of the action of the City Planning Commission and all evidence and reports offered at said public hearing before the City Council regarding said requested waiver(s), that all of The conditions set frnth in Section 18.03.040 of the Anaheim '.Municipal Code are present and that said waivcr(s) should be granted. for the following reasons: I. That the hclou- mentioned waivers pertaining to (a) minimum dimension and area of patios /halconies and (h) requited building treatment adjacent to State College Boulevard and the Connector street arc hcmhy granted on the basis that there arc special circumstances applicable to the propertN° such as its location and unique characteristics resulting from ultimate m_hl -of=way improvements that will alter the topography and surrounding State College Elide, and and Wright Circle street grades and unique circumstances pertaining to the intended „se of the Connector sheet mainly for vehicular access "ith limited pedestrian orientation due to wrrounding land uses. Submitted plans indicate enhanced landscaping and amenities in recreational /leisure areas in excess of Code requirements and further that all proposed patios /balconies accommodate seating for passive outdoor relaxation. _. That because of these special circumstances, strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the property of privileges that will be enjoyed by other properties in the viciniy within the Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone as the majority of properties in The Platinum 7tiangle will not be affected by the proposed grade separation ultimate right- of-way improvements along State College Boulevard and Wright Circle. NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Anaheim that, for the reasons hereinabove staled, Conditional Use Permit No. 2004 -04906 be, and the same is heretty, granted permitting sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises armunlption in a proposed 7,839 square fooi restaurant within the Stadium Lofts - Anaheim (a proposed high- density urban mixed -use center with 390 apartment dwelling units located above '_.820 square feel of retail use, 7.839 sgUaDC feet of restaurant use, and 6,297 square foci of cluhhouse and leasing office surrounding a 5 -level parking structure) on the hereinabove descrihed real property with a waiver of the following provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Codc: to SECTION NOS. 1820) 10.02Q0204.01 AND 1820 110.020.0 202.02 Minimum dimension and area of patios /balconies. (Minimum dimension area required for patios is 8 -foot and 100 and s.f., and 7 -foot and 70 s.f. for balconies; minimum dimension and area proposed is 3 -toot, 8- inches and 39 square foot for patios /balconies) (b) SECTION NOS. 18 20.140.110.1 102.0'_ AND 18.22140.1 10.1103.02 suh)ect to the tollowing conditions Required building treatment adjacent to streets. (18 -inch above- grade residential entries adjacent to State College Blvd_ and the Connector street required; at grade entries proposed) 1. That this Conditional Use Permit is It subject to adoption of Development Agrcemem No 200440002, now pending 2. That the legal property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate tothe City of Anaheim an casement for a domccric above- ground water meter in addition to providing a 5 -foot mldc clearance around the water meter pad and a 10 -foot wide access casement along the water lux Irom the street to the water meter pad for maintenance. .. That a private water system with separate water service for fire protection and domesdc water shall he provided. 4. That all backflow equipment shall he located above ground outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened front all public streets and alleys. Any backflow assemblies currently installed in a vault shall he brought up to current standards. Any other hiss water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division in either underground vaults or outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys. Said information shall he specifically shown on plans submitted for approval by the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. s That all existing water services shall conform to current Water Utility Standards. Any existing wafer services that are not approved by the Utility for continued use shall be upgraded to current standards_ or abandoned by the property owner /developer. If the existing ,ervices are no loner needed. they shall be abandoned by the property owner /developer. 6_ That all requests for new water services or Tire lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonments of existing water services and fire Tines, shall be coordinated through the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department. That prior to submitting the water improvcmcnl plans, the property no. net shall submit a water sy, tem master plan. including a hydraulic distribution network analysis_ to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Utilities Department for rcview and approval. The master plan shall demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed on -site water ,system to meet the projects water demands and fire protection requirements. 8_ That prior to application for water meters. fire lines or submitting the water improvement plans for approval, the property owner /developer shall submit to the Water Engineering Division of the Public Llilities Department, an estimate of the maximum fire flow rote and maximum day and peak now water demands for the project. This information will be u,ed to determine the adequacy of the exist'mg water system to provide the estimated water demands- Anv off -site water system improvements required to serve the project shall be done in accordance with Rule No 15A.6 of the Water Utility Rates. Rules, and Regulations. 9. That individual water scn ice and/or fire line connccuons shall be required for .sell parcel and /or residential and commercial unit per Rule 18 of the City_ of Anaheim's Water Rates_ Rules and Regulations. 10. That because this p cilect has a landscaping area exceeding 2,500 square feet, a ,epwate irrigation meter .shall he installed in compliance with City Ordinance No. 5349 and Chapter 10_ I9 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, Said information shall be specifically shown on p1:ut, wbmittecl for building permits, rhat signs shall be posted indicating no on- street parking shall be allowed on the 4 - adjacent streets except where designated turn -out areas are provided for loading and unloading. Such signs shall be shown on plans submitted for the review and approval of the City fraf is and Transportation Manager, I ?. That trash storage areas and trash chutes shall he provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the Public Works Department. Streets and Sanitation Division and in accordance with exhibits approved in conjunction with this Conditional Use Permit, on file with the Planning Department_ Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for huilding permits. 13. That the legal property owner shall provide the City of Anaheim with an easement lot electrical service lines to he determined as electrical design is completed. Said casement shall be submitted to the City of Anaheim prior to connection of electrical service. 14. Thal an on -site Irish truck luro- around area shall be provided per Engineering Standard Detail No. 476 and maintained to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Streets and Sanitation Division, Said turn - around aca shall be specifically shown on plans suhmitted for building permits. I5. That the proposed development shall operate in accordance with the written solid waste management plan signed on October 16, 2004, by the project applicant, Windstar Communities, ]tic. Modifications to the solid waste management plan shall only occur if mmol.ally agreed upon by both the property owner and the City of Anaheim Director of Public \k orks 16. - that any required relocation of City electrical facilities shall be at the property o" net /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. 17. That dosed circuit television (CCTV) security cameras shall be installed to mornim the parking structure and the mailroom on the second level of the parking structure to the .uostaction of the Anaheim Police Department. CCTV cameras shall he strategically located throughout the parking structure, CoveBng all areas, especially all pedestrian and vehicular access points. Said information shall be sped5cally shown on plans submitted for building permits. 1 s. That an address monument and/or complex map shall be positioned to be readable it the mzun vehicular or pedestrian asses points without causing vehicular snicking and shall be illmuinated during hours of darkness Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits_ 19. That each individual huilding and unit shall be clearly marked with its appropriate bulldiug number and address. These numbers shall be positioned so they arc easily viewed from , 0111c Lila, and pedesnian pathways throughout the complcs. Main building numbers shall be a minimum of 13 inches in height. Main holding numbers and address numbers shall be illuminated during hours of darkness. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans suhmitted for building permits. 20. That 4 -fool high address numbers shall be displayed on the roof in a contrasting color to the roof material. The numbers shall not be visible from view of the street or adjacent properties. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for Police Department. Communitv Services Division approval. 2L That pedestrian and vehicular access control shall be required to prevent unwanted entry. A digital keypad entry system shall be included to facilitate quick response by emergency personnel. The system's entry code shall he provided to the Anaheim Police Department Communications Bureau and the Anaheim Fire Department. 22. That adequate lighting on all levels of the parking structure, including circulation areas. aisles, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on of ahout the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, properly, and vehicles on -site. Said information shall he specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 23. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the legal owner of the subject property shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim a public utility and sidewalk easement 3 feet in width immediately adjacent to the west property line for placement of street lights, stop signs. Gs hydrants, etc, so as not to encroach onto the public sidewalk along the Connector street. 24. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, a cash payment shall be made to the City of Anahcim I'or the future construction of one -half of the Connector street hetwcen Karelia Avenue and Wright Circle to the standards required in The Platinum Triangle Masier Land Use Plan. The amount of the cash payment is set forth in Exhibit "G ", Connector Street Cost Estimate of Development Agreement No DAG2004-00002. 2�. That prior to the first final building and zoning inspection, the interim noraoxements for the Connector sheet between Katella Avenue and Wright Circle shall be complete and the pavement shall be repaired and resurfaced to provide a minimum pavement life of ion-vears to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 20. That prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner shall provide an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City of Anaheim for the future Connector street bets +eon KalelLi Avenue and Wrisht Cireic, as shown on the approved site plan. The City may dcfor acceptance of said offer up to the time that additional dedication and improvements are provided to meet the minimum standards for a Connector street as provided in the Platinum "lrianglc A9aster Land Use Plan. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the City Fn= occr and Cit) Atlorney shall approve and the propei owner shall record a maintenance covenant providing for the continued operation and maintenance of the street as a private street until such time as the City accepts the offer of dedication. 27. That prior to issuance of the first building permit.the legal property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate an easement to the City of Anaheim for road, public utilities and other public purposes 72 -feet from the centerline of State College Boulevard; 72 -feet from the ,en IcrIme of Katella Avenue and 38 -feet froru the centerline of Wright Circle; and 28 -feet for the Connector Street between Katella Avenue and Wright Circle. is shown on exhibits approved in conjunction with this Conditional Use Permit, on file In the Planning Department. 28. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the legal property owner shall submit imerim improvement plans for the Connector street to the Development Services Division of the Pabbc Works Department for review and approval. The Connector street improvements shall be developed in accordance with the approved plans prior to final building and coning inspections. 29. "Chat prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the legal property owner shall f inalizc the abandonment of the existing public utilities easement (ARA2004- 000098) to the oalislaction of the Development Services Division of the Public Works Department. 30. That Street and Supplemental Lanes Intersection improvements including street m idening. sidewalk and parkway landscaping and irrigation shall be constructed along State ( ollcge Boulevard (future 6 Lane Ma)or, no hike lane- future 60 -foot half width with an additional supple menud right turn lane, resulting in a 72 -foot wide half width) and Katella AICnaC 18 Lane Major, 72 -foot half width) in conformance with Public Works Standard Detail 160-A. Supplemental Lanes Detail 164 -A (3 Ihru lanes, dual lefts, one right) and The Platinum l mangle Mister Land Use Plan. The existing curb along State College Boulevard north of supplemental lane (43 -feet front the street cemcrhnel may remain during the interim condition until the future railroad grade separation is constructed. Wright Circle shall also be improved per approved plans. Parkway landscaping along all streets shall be installed and maintained by the property owner with irrigation connected to the on -silt system. An improvement bond in a form mseplahle to the City Attornec shall be posted pror to the issuance of the first buildinc permit and street improvements shall he complete prior in the first final building and zoning inspection. 3 I . that the legal property owner shall obtain a right -ot -way construction permit at the Puhbc Work. - hngineerinst counter for all work within the public right -of -way. All improvements Must be complete and accepted by the field Lneineer prior to the first final handing and zonmg inspection. .Ant existing improvements (Jumaged prior to or during construction at the tine must he repaired prior to clearance for certificate for occupancy. That prior to in,uaocc of the first building permit, a lot line adjustment plat shall be suhmitled to the Subdivision Section (Development Services Division) of the Public Works Department and approved by the Citv Engineer and then recorded in the Office of the Oranec Count, Recorder to combine the three existing 10[a such that any new building lies completely within one ( I ) parcel. 33. That the portions of the retaining wall adjacent to Wright Circle and State College Boulcvanl that will be visible f the rights- of-way upon completion of right -of -way improvements for the railroad grade separation, shall be constructed of decorative split face brick or other decorative brick as approved by the Plantilne Services Division of the Planning Department_ Said information Shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 34. That ongoing during project operation, the property ownerldeveloper shall ensure that the business operator of the subject restaurant shall continuously adhere to the following conditions. as required by the Police Department: a. That the estahl Ishntent shall be operated as a 'Bona Fide Public Eating Place" as defined by Section 23038 of the California. Business and Professions Code. b. That there shall be no hat or lounge maintained on the property unless licensed by .Alcoholic Bevcraee Control and approved by the City of Anaheim. c That food service with a full meal shall be available from opening time until either 10:00 p.m. or closing time, whichever occur, first, on each day of operation. d. That there .hall be no pool tables maintained upon the premises at any time. C, That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premises (bar) type license nor shall the establishment he operated as a public premise as defined in Section 23039 of the California Business and Professions Code. t That the sales of a]cohoIic beverages shall not exceed 40 of the gross sales of all retail sales durin_ any' three (3) month period. The business operator shall maintain 3 eeOrdI on it quarterly baste indicating the separate amounts of sales of alcoholic beverages and other items. 'These records shall be made available, xrhicct to audit and, when requested. inspection by anv City of Anaheim official during reasonable business hours. That there shall he no live entertainment. amplified music or dancing permitted on the premises at anv time v, ithout issuance of proper permits as required by the Anaheim Municipal Code. it That sales of alcoholic bca�era_ for consumption off the premises shall be piohibited. I . That there shall be no c%terior advenisine of any kind or type, including 8 advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcohol beverages. j- Thal the activities occurring in conjunction with the operation of this establishment shall not cause noise disturbance to on -site residents or off -site nearby residents. L That the business operator shall comply with Section 24200.5 of the Business and professions Code so as not to employ or permit any persons to solicit or encourage others, directly or indirectly, to buy them drinks in the licensed premises under any commission, percentage, salary, or other profit - sharing plan, scheme or conspiracy. I_ That all doors serving subject restaurant shall conform to the requirements of the uniform Fire Code and shall be kept closed and unlocked at all times during hours of operation except for i neress/cgress_ to permit deliveries and in cases of emergency. m. That the portion of this permit regarding the sales of alcohol shall expire five years from the date of approval unless it valid license has been issued by the California Department of Alcoholic Reverage Control. n. That the outdoor dining area shall be completely enclosed by decorative fencing, complementary to the design of the building or other such permanent structure as approved by the City, at ]cast fortv (40) inches in height, into which entry is only possible from the interior of the business. Emergency exits required by the Uniform Fire Codc shall he maintained, bur not utilized by patronslempdoyees other than in an emergency. Said information shall he specifically shown on plans submitted for hurtful permits. o. 'That there shall be no direct pedestrian access to the outdoor dining area from outside the building. All access to this area shail be solely through the restaurant. p. vo admission (cc. cover Charge. advance prepavmenl for meals, or similar fee shall be imposed upon patrons as it condition of envy to the promises. q. I hat the subject alcoholic beverage license shall not he exchanged for a public premise (han type license nor shall the estahnourent be operated as a public premise as defined in Section 23039 of the Business and Professions Code. I . that at all limes that entertainment nr dancing is permitted. security measures shall be proaitled to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unluwfu] conduct on the pan of employees or patrons, and promote the safe and orderlc assemhIN and movement of persons and vehicles, and to prevent 9 - disturbance to the nelghhorhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the promises. That there shall be no public telephones on the premises located within the view of any right- of-way. That anv and all sectuiv officers provided shall comply with all State and Local ordinances regulating their services, including, without limitation, Chapter 11.5 of Division 3 of the California Business and Profession Code. (Section 4.16.070 Anaheim Municipal Code) 35. That french doors acceptable m the Planning Services Division shall be provided on all patio (ground -floor) doors. Said information shall he specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 36. That all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground mounted equipment shall he properly shielded from view. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. IT That all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be Why screened by architectural devices and /or appropriate building materials. Said information shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. 38_ That the tubular steel fence to be constructed on top of the retaining wall adjacent m State College Boulevard and Wright Circle, shall not exceed three (3) feet in height as measured from the top of the retaining wall. Clinging vines shall be planted on maximum 5 -foot centers, irrigated and maintained. adjacent to said fence and wall. Said information shall he specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 39. That the property shall he permanently maintained in an orderly fashion by providing regular landscape maintenance, removal of trash or debris. and removal of graffiti within twemv -four f -41 hours from tune of occurrence. 40. That any tree planted on -site shall be replaced in a ninety manner in the event that i1 is removed. damaged. diseased and /or dead. 41. That the property owneodcveloper shall no responsible for compliance with all mhlgation measures within the assigned time frames and any direct costs associated with the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program No 125 as established by the City of Anaheim and as required by Section 21081.6 (if the Public Resources Code to ensure implementation of those .identified mineation measures. 42. That sienage krr suhjcct facility shall he limited to that shown on the approved Conditional Cse Permit exhibits submittal by the project applicant, on file in the Planning - 10 - Department. Anv additional sib age shall be subject to approval by the Planning Director. 47. That gates shall not he installed across an driveway or private street in a manner which Into, adversely affect vehicular traIicon the adjacent public street. Installation of any Late, ,hall conform to the Eneinecnin Standard Plan No. 475 and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Truffle and Transportation Manager prior to the issuance of the first building permit. 44. That plans shall he submitted to the Ciry Traffic and Transportation Manager for It,, review and approval showing conformance with the current version of Engineering Standard Plan Nos. 402, 436, 470, 471. 472, 473 and 475 pertaining to parking standards and driveway 10c'ali0111. Subject property shall thereupon be developed and maintained in conformance with laid plans. 45. That all driveway, to the project site shall be constructed with ten (10) foot radius curb returns a, required by the Gty Engineer in conformance with En,ineering Standard No. 1 15. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 46. That no required parkin_ area shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor aora_e uses. 47. That plans shill be submitted to the City Truffic and Transportation Manager for rcviev. and approval in conformance with the Engineering Standard No. 115 pertaining to sight distance visibility for sign, nr wall/fence locations. Said information shall be specifically shown on plans submitted for building permits. 48. That the driveway into the project from Katella Avenue shall be limited to right -in and n ght -out only. 49. That Inc owner of subject property shall submit a letter requesting termination of \ at ince No 4129 tto waive required dedication of right -of -way to construct a t,000 square foot outdoor dining area with salts of alcoholic heveragas for on premised consumption), Conditional I sc Permit No. 1427 (to establish two enclosed restaurants with cocktail lounoes, in an office bullding and bank site wuiy�m; permitted uses. minimum lot size, permitted sign location, mdaimum sign area and minimum distance between signs), and Conditional Use Permit No. 'xt,'_ (to permit a senu- enclosed restaurant ,kilt sales of alcohol for on- premises consumption �+nh t itvers of maximum wall helsht. minimum structural setback. permitted encroachments and minimum number of balking spaeesi to the Planning Services Division of the Planning f)cpattment. 50. That prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the legal property owner .hell demonsn'ate that efforts have been made to obtain the consent of the owner of the properry a. 1701 East Katella Avenue to close the first existin' driveway opening from the existing_ private a11ec (future Connector street just north of Katella :1venue. if consent is obtained, the drivewuv shall be closed prior to the fist final building and zoning inspection 51. That asm Eared parking spaces shall be provided for ouch residential unit. Said intixmation shall be specifically shown on plans submiucd for building permits. 52. That visitor parkin . spaces shall be posted, "No Overnight Parking, Except by permission of the Management.' Said information shall be specifically shown on plans gihnulted for buildin_ permits. 53. That all above - ground utility devices shall be located on private property and outside anv required setback urea. Said information shall he shown on plans submitted for the first building permits. 54. Thal subject propert shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by project applicant and which plans are on Inc with the Planning Department marked Exhibit Nos. 1 through 105. and as conditioned herein. 55. That prior to issuance of the rust building permit, or within a period of one (1) year hom the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition Nos. I, 2, 4, 7, 10. 11. IL 13.14.10.17.18 .19,20.22.23,24.26,27,28,29,30 .32,33,35.36,37,38,43,44,45,47, 49. 50, 51. 52, and 53, above - mentioned. shall he complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be !_ranted in accordance with Section 18.03.090 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 56. That prior to final building and zoning inspections. Condition Nos. 21, 25. 30, 31, 50 and 54, ahmc- mentioned, shall he complied with 57. That approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only in the extent that it complies with the Anahcim Municipal Zoning Code and any other applicable Cin. State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to .omplimtce of approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regtdation or rcquircmcnt. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Cin Council does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution i,c expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance Uith each and all of the conditions hereinabove set Ibrth- Should any such conditions, or any part rhe,col. be declared invalid or unenforceable he the final judgment of any court of competent UoSdictioa. then thin Resolution. and anv approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and i,ud 12 - THE FOKEGOING RESOLUTION is approved and adopted by the City Council A the Cn of Anaheim this 16th day of November, 2004. by the following roll call Note- Mayor Pringle, council Members Tait, McCracken, . Chavez, Hernandez NOU): Ncnc. ABSENT: N,ne ABST.Aiti: None CrFY OF AHF.IM B_r MAYOR OF THE OF ANAHELM ATTEST: CIfY CLEWOF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 111 - 1 ' - I IM,I ki C.wl ORDIN ANCI: NO_ 595? AN ORDINANCE 01: Tlllt CITY C01 NCIL OF THIS CITY OF ANAHEIM (i) APPROVIN(i DI-VFLOPMFNT AGREEMENT NO. 200400002 BY AND BLfW'LEN THL CITY OF ANAHEIM AND CRGA,NIXCS ANAHEIM CORNERS. LLC, (it) MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATED THERETO, AND (iii) A(IHIORVING THE MAYOR TO FXECHTF. SAID AGREEMENT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE CITY WI IEREtAS. Article 25 of C'haptcr 4 of Division I of'I itle 7 or the Government lode of the State of California ( hereinafter Statute ") authorizes a city to enter into a contract %shich is called a development agreement in order to establish with certainty what regulations will govern the conshztction of a development_ and W HERF.AS, the Cits of Anaheim (hereinafter the "City "). as a charter city. wretolore enacted Ordinance No. 4377 (hereinafter 'Enabling Ordinance') on November 23, 1987. making the City subject to the Statute: and R I IFREAS, pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65865 of the Statute, the City heretolive on November 23. 1982. adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (hereinafter "Procedures Resolution ) establishing procedures end requirements for consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application by the City; and W I IFRLAS. on May 25, 2004. the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan ,Amendment No. 200400419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim ('General Plan Amendment' I. and cenified l'inal Environmental Impact Report No. 310, adopting Findings of Pact and n Statement of Ovcniding Considerations, and associated Nitieation Monilming Plans ( "I+IR No t30 "1- in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General flan Amendment. amendment of the CitN s zoning code, and a series of ,clued action,,_ and WI R RL:AS. the Gencraj Plan Anhendirent sets forth a vision for development of Miwd Uses, Office Hich. Office Low. Industrial and Institutional land uses within an appn1xiwatcly 820 -acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana Rker on the east, the Anaheim ( it, limits on the south. the Santa Ana 17ecwa} (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern ('ulito nia Iidison Companv Easement on the north ( Platinum triangle "); and WHFRE AS, in order to carry out the goals and policies of the General flan for I he Platinum - I ,tangle. on August 17. 2004. the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004 -177, approving The Platinum 'triangle Master Land Use Plan. setting forth the new vision for The Plinmmm f rnmLlc; an([ W'HF.RFAS, to further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for the Platinum 'I t angle and pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 18.76 of the Anaheim A- luniripel Code, on August 24. 200-1. the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5378 amending I 11 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code to establish Yelling and development standards for the Platinum Triangle Mixe(I-lac (PIMU) Overlay Zone (the "P1MU Overlay Zone') and t)rdinuncc No. 5936, amending the zoning map to reclassify approximately three hundred and <cvcnty -fnc acres within "Ihe Platinum Triangle into the PTMI 10, cr[,I,N Zone as depicted in The Platinum Triangle n4aster I ind 1'se Plan to provide opportunities for high quality well- designed dc�vlopntcut projects that could be stand -alone projects or combine residential with non- residential uses including office, retail. business services- personal services, public spaces and uses. and other community amenities within the area: and WHEREAS. the PTMU Overlay Zone requires an approved Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement betwecv the property owner and the City of Anaheim to implement all development in the Katella_ Gene Autry and Gateway Districts of the PTMU Overlay Zone, e\cepl ;is olherwise exempt under the Code and RX I IEREAS. on August 17, 2004, the Cit, Council adopted Resolution No. 2004- 1'79, npprming the form of the Standard Development Agreement for The Platinum Triangle 1' I MU Overlay Zone: and WHEREAS, in connection with adoption of The Platinum Triangle Master Land l: x• Plan, the P MU Overlav Zone, and the form of the Standard Development Agreement for I ie Platinum 'I rianglc. the ('ily Coined by motion. as lead agency for the proposed actions, determined that EEIR No. 330 and the associated Updated and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Pro n in No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle. were in compliance with CEQA and the stale and Cite (LQA guidelines and tscre adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation lot said actions hased upon findings set torth in said motion: and W HEREAS. on October 4. 2004, pursuant to the Statute. the Enabling Ordinance, and the Procedures Resolution (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Development \gteement Law" "). CRFA,tNcxos Anaheim Comers. LLC. (hereinafter "Applicant'), submitted an application to the Planning Department for approval of Development Agreement No. 2004- 00002 (hereinafter the "Application ")_ which included a proposed development agreement Ihcrcinaftcr the `Development Agrccnrcnf prepared in cootormance with the Standard oeclopmenl Agreement for The Platinum Irianale to vest certain project entitlements and address the implementation of the Stadium I .offs - Anaheim project and W HP.RFAS. the Development Agreement pertains to approximately 6,284 acres of rctd property in the Cite of Anaheim_ owned in fee hp the Applicant. commonly known as ISoI Enst Katella Avenue (hereinalter the °Property`). which is tocated in The Platinum liiangle anti zoned PTMU Oecrlay (Katella District). and more particularly shown and described on Exhibit"A ', which is auachcd hereto and Incorporated herein by this reference, and \vHPRPAS, Applicant desires to develop the Property in accordance with the pros isions of the Dcvclopmcnt Agreement by dcrcloping a mixed use project consisting of apartments 2,820 square feet of retail_ 2839 square Iccl of restaurant, 6,297 square feet of c luhhousN leasing and an 845 space parking structure.:, more particularly set forth in Final Site Plan No. 2004 -00005 and Conditional the Permit No. 2004 -04906 (hcminafter collectively referred to as the "Project "): and W HERP:AS. on October 14. 2004. the Planning Director approved Final Site Plan \Jo. ?004- (10005 to provide fu the development of the Stadium Lofts — Anaheim project, contingent upon the approval of Conditional Fse Permit No. 2004 -04906 and Development :Agrccment No. 2004 -00002 by the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS- iEREAS_ the Cily Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim ou November 15, 2004, at 2:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing hoeing been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the Anaheim Vunicipal Code, Chapter 18.60, to hear and consider evidence for and against said Development Qieement and Conditional Usc Permit No. 2004 -04906 and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith_ and WI IBREAS. the Planning Commission, by its Resolution No. PC2004 -141, which is incorporated herein by this reference made certain findings that the Applicant has dcnionslrated ctigihility to enter into Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 and that the :Agrccment meets the criteria set fault in the Procedures Resolution and recommended to the City Council the approval of the Development .Agrccment and WHL'REAS. the City Council did hold a public hearing upon the Development \erccmeni. notice of said public hearine hai ing been duly given as required by law; and %'I ILRI_'AS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Acl ( CEQA - ). the City Council. as lead agency for the Proposed Development Agreement, by molion. did find and determine, based upon its independent review and considcration of an Initial Smd\ conducted pursuant to CEQA for Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 and (`onditional Use Permit No. 2004 - 04906. and the requirements of CLQA, including Section '1166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 ofthe CEQA Guidelines, and the evidence received at the public hearing. that FFIR No. 330 previously certified by the City ('ouncil for the Amended General Plan and related projects. together with the Updated and V1odilied Nloignuon Monitoring P'ogmm No. 106 for the Platinum Triangle, and a Miligitted Ceomi�e Declaration for the De%Avinenl Agreement and the Proposed Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 125 are adequate to serve as the required environmental dncuntentation fix the Proposed Development ;Agreement and Conditional Use Permit and :atisll all of die requirements of CFQA. and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared Ibr this Proposed Development Agnvenacm of Conditional Use Permit. WHEREAS. the Applicant has demonstrated that the Project meets the eligibility requirements of the Procedures Resolution to enter into the Development Agreement by showing that upon completion_ the Project will result in the Construction of 390 apartments, 2.820 square icci of retail- 7.839 square feet of restaurant. 6?97 square feet of cluhhouselleasing and an 845 .puce parking structure: and RIILREAS_ the City Council of the ( ny of Anaheim, after due inspection, m vevligation and Stud-, mad . by itsell'und in its behalf and after due consideration ofand based upon Al of the evidence and reports offered sit said hearing, including the evidence presented at the Planning Commission meeting and Planning Commission Revolution No. PC2004 -141 does find upon review of the land use aspects of the Development Agreement that the Project is consistent with the ( Ity's existing General plan in that it is in continuance ksith the General Plan Mixed Ilse land use designation and with the goals. policies and objectives for the Platinum Triangle as set forth in the General Plan. _. That the project is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district in that the Project is in compliance with the 1 Overlay Zone requirements as set forth in Final Site flan No. 2004 - 00005 wh _ ich has been approved by the Planning Director, and Conditional Tlsc Permit No. 2004- 04900. which has been approved by the City Council pursuant to Resolution Nu. 2004 -23 2, following recommendation lirr approval by the Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. K 2004 -140 . That the Project is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area in that it is in conformance with and implements The Platinum Triangle Master Land Ilse Plan and the PTMII Overlay Zone requirements; and. 4. that the Project is not otherwise detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the C'ily of Anaheim. _. that the Development Agreement constitutes a lawful, present exercise of the LitN -'s police power and authority under the Statute, the Fnabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution, 6. That the Development Agreement Is entered into pursuant to and in compliance . with ils chmter powers and the requirements of Section 65867 of the Statute. the Enabling Ordinance and the Procedures Resolution. NOW. THF.RHFORF. THE CITY ('Of NCIL OF THE C11 Y OF ANAIILAM DOES ORDAIN AS Vol LOWS_ S LC "PION I That Development Agreement No. 2004 -00002 be. and the same is hereby, appro' cd. SECTION 2 That the Mayor he. and is hereby authorized to execute said Development /lgrccnaent for and on behalf of dtc City. I I IF FOREGOING ORDINANC'I? was introduced at a regular meeting of the C'ilc Council of dtc City of Anaheim held on the 10"' day of November. 2004, and thereafter paced and adopted at a regular mecling of said 0k C'nuncil held on the 7th day of Mcember by the following roll call Note' \S IS Mawr Pringle_ Council Members McCracken. Tait. Chavez, Hernandez N0 1' . Nonc ,A14 N ` None ABSTAIN_ None MA ROFTHECI O NAHFJM ATTEST 0 1 ( 1 ERR OF TI If CI fY OF ANAHEIM F - A «M11TiT7, MEMO11WGV/ RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Council City of Anaheim c/o City Clerk P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92805 (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DAG 2004 -00002 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DAG 2004 -00002 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page RECITALS............................................................................... ............................... 1 Section 1. DEFINITIONS ................................................... ............................... 5 1.1 Assessment District ................................ ............................... 5 1.2 Authorizing Ordinance .......................... ............................... 5 1.3 CITY ....... ............................................. ............................... 5 1.4 Conditional Use Permit ........... ............................... 5 1.5 Development .......................................... ............................... 6 1.6 Development Agreement Date ............... ............................... 6 1.7 Development Agreement Statute ........... ............................... 6 1.8 Development Approvals ........................ ............................... 6 1.9 Enabling Ordinance ............................... ............................... 6 1.10 Existing Land Use Regulations .............. ............................... 6 1.11 Final Site Plan ......................................... ............................... 6 1.12 Gross Floor Area/ GFA ........................... ............................... 7 1.13 Interim Development Fees ...................... ............................... 7 1.14 Mortgage .................................................. ..............................7 1.15 Mortgagee .............................................. ............................... 7 1.16 Owner ..................................................... ............................... 7 1.17 Parking Areas ......................................... ............................... 7 1.18 Permitted Buildings ............................... ............................... 7 1.19 Platinum Triangle Area ........................... ............................... 7 1.20 Procedures Resolution ............................ ............................... 7 1.21 Proiect ..................................................... ............................... 7 1.22 Property ................................................... ............................... 8 1.23 Supplemental Property ... .......... ............................... 8 1.24 Support Commercial Uses ..................... ............................... 8 1.25 Term ......................................................... ..............................8 Section2. TERM .................................................................. ............................... 8 2.1 ................................................................. ............................... 8 2.2 ................................................................. ............................... 8 2.3 ....................................................... ............................... 8 Section 3. BINDING COVENANTS .................................. ............................... 9 Section 4. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT .............................. ............................... 9 Section 5. PROJECT LAND USES ..................................... ............................... 9 Section 6. PERMITTED BUILDINGS ................................ ............................... 9 6.1 Description of Permitted Buildings ..................... ............................... 9 6.2 Parking Areas ...................................................... ............................... 9 Section 7. DENSITY OF PERMITTED BUILDINGS ..... ............................... 10 Section 8. ENFORCEMENT ................................................ .............................10 Section 9. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES ............................ 10 9.1 Public Park ............................................ ............................... 11 9.2 Utilities (Water, Electrical, Gas, Sewer, & Drainage) ......... 11 9.2.1 Water Service ........................................ ............................... 11 9.2.2 Storm and Sewer Drains ....................... ............................... 12 9.3 Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public Improvements and Facilities .................. ............................... 12 9.4 Traffic Circulation Improvements ......... ............................... 12 Section 10. REIMBURSEMENT PROVISION ..................... .............................12 Section 11. DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS ... ............................... 12 Section 12. FEES, TAXES AND ASSESSMENT .............. ............................... 13 12.1 Fees Taxes and Assessments ................ ............................... 13 12.2 Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees ..................... 13 12.2.1 Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee ............................... 13 12.2.2 Fire Facilities Fee .................................. ............................... 13 12.2.3 General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee ................. 13 12.2.4 Library Facilities Fee ............................. ............................... 13 12.2.5 Park Fee ................................................. ............................... 13 12.2.6 Police Facilities Fee ................ ............................... 13 12.2.7 Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees ................. ............................... 13 12.2.8 Traffic Impact Fee ................................. ............................... 14 12.3 Excluded Development Fees ................. ............................... 14 12.3.1 Water Utilities Fees .............................. ............................... 14 12.3.2 Electrical Utilities Fees .......................... ............................... 14 12.3.3 City Processing Fees .............................. ............................... 14 12.4 Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and/or Maintenance Assessment District ................... .............................14 12.5 Accounting of Funds ................................ .............................14 12.6. Imposition of Increased Fees, Taxes or Assessments 14 Section 13 COVENANTS CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS .................15 Section 14 NEXUS/REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES ......... 15 Section 15. TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT ....................... ............................... 15 Section 16. EXISTING USES ......................................... .............................15 18 Section 17. FUTURE APPROVALS ...................................... .............................15 18 17.1 Basis for Denying or Conditionally Granting Future 18 Section 24. Approvals .............................................. ............................... 15 17.2 Standard of Review .................................. .............................16 19 17.3 Future Amendments to Final Site Plan . ............................... 16 Section 18 AMENDMENT ................................................. ............................... 16 18.1 Initiation of Amendment ....................... ............................... 16 18.2 Procedure .............................................. ............................... 16 18.3 Consent ................................................. ............................... 16 18.4 Amendments ......................................... ............................... 16 18.5 Effect of Amendment to Development Agreement .............. 17 Section 19. RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND USES FOR THE PROPERTY 17 19.1 Non - Cancellation of Rights ................... ............................... 17 Section 20. BENEFITS TO CITY ........................................ ............................... 17 Section 21. BENEFITS TO OWNER .................................. ............................... 17 Section 22. UNDERTAKINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTEMPLATED AND PROMOTED BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATUTE 18 Section 23. RESERVED AUTHORITY .............................. ............................... 18 23.1 State and Federal Laws and Regulations .............................. 18 23.2 Building Codes ..................................... ............................... 18 23.3 Public Health and Safety ....................... ............................... 18 Section 24. CANCELLATION ............................................ ............................... 19 24.1 Initiation of Cancellation ...................... ............................... 19 24.2 Procedure .............................................. ............................... 19 24.3 Consent of Both Parties ......................... ............................... 19 Section 25. PERIODIC REVIEW ........................................ ............................... 19 25.1 Time for Review ................................... ............................... 19 25.2 OWNER's Submission ............................ .............................19 25.3 Findings .................. ............................... 25.4 Initiation of Review by City Council ........................... 19 ............................ 20 iv Section 26. EVENTS OF DEFAULT .................................. ............................... 20 26.1 Defaults by OWNER ....................................... ............................... 20 26.2 Specific Performance Remedy .......................... ............................... 20 26.3 Liquidated Damages Remedy ........................... ............................... 21 Section 27. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION ............. .............................21 27.1 Notice to OWNER ............................................. ............................... 21 27.2 Public Hearing .................................................. ............................... 22 27.3 Decision ............................................................. ............................... 22 27.4 Implementation ................................................. ............................... 22 27.5 Schedule for Compliance .................................. ............................... 22 Section 28. ASSIGNMENT .................................................... .............................22 28.1 Right to Assign ................................................. ............................... 22 28.2 Release Upon Transfer ...................................... ............................... 23 Section 29. NO CONFLICTING ENACTMENTS ............. ............................... 23 Section 30. GENERAL ........................................................... .............................24 30.1 Force Maieure .................................................... ............................... 24 30.2 Construction of Development Agreement ....... ............................... 24 30.3 Severability ....................................................... ............................... 24 30.4 Cumulative Remedies ...................................... ............................... 25 30.5 Hold Harmless Agreement ............................... ............................... 25 30.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge .. ............................... 25 30.7 Public Agency Coordination ........................... ............................... 25 30.8 Initiative Measures ........................................... ............................... 25 u 30.9 Attorneys' Fees .............................................. ............................... 26 30.10 No Waiver ................................................ .............................26 30.11 Authority to Execute ................................ .............................26 30.12 Notice ...................................................... .............................26 30.12.1 Notice to OWNER ............................................ ............................... 26 30.12.2 Notice to CITY ................................................. ............................... 27 30.13 Captions ................................................... .............................27 30.14 Consent ................................................. ............................... 27 30.15 Further Actions and Instruments ........... ............................... 28 30.16 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute .............. 28 30.17 Governing Law ...................................... ............................... 28 30.18 Effect on Title ........................................ ............................... 28 30.19 Mortgagee Protection ............................... .............................28 30.20 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgagee to Cure .................................... .............................28 30.21 Bankruptcy ............................................... .............................29 30.22 Disaffirmance ........................................... .............................29 30.22.1 ........................................ ............................... 29 30.22.2 ........................................ ............................... 29 30.22.3 ....................................... ............................... 29 30.22.4 ....................................... ............................... 29 30.22.5 ........................................ ............................... 29 30.23 No Third Party Beneficiaries ................ ............................... 29 30.24 Proiect as a Private Undertaking .............. .............................30 30.25 Restrictions .............................................. .............................30 30.26 Recitals .................................................... .............................30 30.27 Recording ................................................. .............................30 30.28 Title Report ........................................... ............................... 30 30.29 Entire Agreement .................................... .............................30 30.30 Successors and Assigns ........................... .............................31 30.31 OWNER'S Title to Property .................... .............................31 30.32 Exhibits ................................................. ............................... 31 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit "A" Exhibit `B" Exhibit "C" Exhibit "D" Exhibit "D -1" Exhibit "D -2" Exhibit "D -3" Legal Description of the Property Final Site Plan (FSP 2004 - 00005) Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2004 -04906 Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee Fire Facilities Fee General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee vi Exhibit "D -4" Library Facilities Fee Exhibit "D -5" Park Fee Exhibit "D -6" Police Facilities Fee Exhibit "D -7" Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees Exhibit "D -8" Traffic Impact Fee Exhibit "E" Development and Maintenance Obligations Exhibit "F" Preliminary Title Report Exhibit "G" Connector Street Cost Estimate vii DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DAG 2004 -00002 BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AND CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC This Development Agreement is entered into this 15th day of November, 2004, by and between the City of Anaheim, a charter city and municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California (hereinafter "CITY ") and CREA/Nexus Anaheim Comers, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (hereinafter "OWNER "), pursuant to the authority set forth in Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division I of Title 7, Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Statute "). RECITALS This Development Agreement is predicated upon the following facts: A. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California adopted the Development Agreement Statute, Sections 65864, et seq., of the Government Code. The Development Agreement Statute authorizes CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other things: encourage and provide for the development of public facilities in order to support development projects; provide certainty in the approval of development projects in order to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in project costs and encourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning which will make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public; provide assurance to the applicants of development projects (1) that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, subject to the conditions of approval of such projects and provisions of such development agreements, and (2) encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development. B. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms, which are defined in this Development Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. C. On May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council approved General Plan Amendment No. 2004 -00419 setting forth the City's vision for development of the City of Anaheim (the "General Plan Amendment "), and certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 330, adopting Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans ( "FEIR No. 330 "), in conjunction with its consideration and approval of the General Plan Amendment, amendment of CITY's zoning code, and a series of related actions. 1 D. CITY desires that the approximately 820 -acre area generally bounded by the Santa Ana River on the east, the Anaheim City limits on the south, the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5) on the west, and the Southern California Edison Company Easement on the north (hereinafter called "The Platinum Triangle Area ") be developed as a combination of high quality industrial, office, commercial and residential uses, as envisioned in the General Plan Amendment. E. In order to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, on May 25, 2004, the City Council approved The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, setting forth the new vision for The Platinum Triangle. F. To further implement the goals and policies of the General Plan for The Platinum Triangle, the City Council has established The Platinum Triangle Mixed -Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (hereinafter the "PTMU Overlay Zone ") consisting of approximately three hundred and seventy-five acres within The Platinum Triangle as depicted in The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan to provide opportunities for high quality well- designed development projects that could be stand -alone projects or combine residential with non - residential uses including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities within the area. G. OWNER represents that it owns in fee approximately 6.284 acres of real property located at 1801 East Katella Avenue, in the City, County of Orange (hereinafter "County"), State of California (hereinafter collectively called the "Property ") in The Platinum Triangle and zoned PTMU Overlay and more particularly shown and described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. H. OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Development Agreement by developing a mixed use project consisting of 390 apar-tments condominiums, 2,820 square feet of retail, 7,839 square feet of restaurant, 6,297 square feet of clubhouse /leasing and an 845 space parking structure all as more particularly set forth in the Final Site Plan (hereinafter collectively called the "Project "). I. CITY desires to accomplish the goals and objectives set forth in the CITY's General Plan and the objectives for the PTMU Overlay Zone as set forth in subsection 18.20.010.020 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, and finds that the Project will accomplish said goals and objectives. J. The City Council, as duly recommended by the Planning Commission, adopted Ordinance No. 5936 on August 24, 2004 reclassifying the property in The Platinum Triangle, including the Property, into the PTMU Overlay Zone. K. Pursuant to the Final Site Plan, OWNER will submit tentative maps and/or vesting tentative maps, if required. OWNER further anticipates the submission of detailed construction plans and other documentation required by CITY in order for the OWNER to obtain its building permits. 2 L. As consideration for the benefits gained from the vested rights acquired pursuant to the Development Agreement Statute, to conform with the requirements of the PTMU Overlay Zone, and to comply with the applicable mitigation measures imposed by Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 125 for the Project, CITY is requiring that OWNER construct and install a number of public improvements, including off -site traffic circulation improvements, and provide other public benefits. M. In order to avoid any misunderstandings or disputes which may arise from time to time between OWNER and CITY concerning the proposed development of the Project and to assure each party of the intention of the other as to the processing of any land use entitlements which now or hereafter may be required for such development, the parties believe it is desirable to set forth their intentions and understandings in this Development Agreement. In order for both CITY and OWNER to achieve their respective objectives, it is imperative that each be as certain as possible that OWNER will develop and that CITY will permit OWNER to develop the Project and public improvements as approved by CITY within the time periods provided in this Development Agreement. N. CITY, as a charter city, has enacted Ordinance No. 4377 on November 23, 1982, which makes CITY subject to the Development Agreement Statute. Pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement Statute, CITY adopted Resolution No. 82R -565 (the "Procedures Resolution ") on November 23, 1982. The Procedures Resolution establishes procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements upon receipt of an application. O. On October 4, 2004, as required by Section 1.0 of the Procedures Resolution, OWNER submitted to the Planning Department an application for approval of a development agreement (hereinafter called the "Application "). The Application included a proposed development agreement (the "Proposed Development Agreement "). P. On October 21, 2004, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 2.1 of the Procedures Resolution, the Planning Director gave public notice of the City Planning Commission's intention to consider a recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of a development agreement. Q. On November 15, 2004, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 2.2 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Application. R. On that date, the City Planning Commission, after considering an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for this Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, found and determined that FEIR No 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated 3 Negative Declaration for the Development Agreement and the Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 125, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. S. The Planning Commission further found that the Development Agreement meets the following standards set forth in Section 2.3 of the Procedures Resolution, to wit, that the Proposed Project: (a) is consistent with the CITY's existing General Plan, (b) is compatible with the uses authorized in and the regulations prescribed for the applicable zoning district, (c) is compatible with the orderly development of property in the surrounding area and (d) is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of CITY. Based upon the aforesaid findings, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Application and this Development Agreement pursuant to Resolution No. PC. 2004 -140. T. On November 4, 2004, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 3.1 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Clerk caused public notice to be given of the City Council's intention to consider adoption of a development agreement. U. On November 16, 2004, as required by Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and Section 3.2 of the Procedures Resolution, the City Council held a public hearing on the Application. V. On that date, the City Council after considering an Initial Study conducted pursuant to CEQA for this Development Agreement, and the requirements of CEQA, including Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, found and determined that FEIR No. 330 previously certified by the City Council for the Amended General Plan and related projects, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106 for The Platinum Triangle, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Development Agreement and the Project, together with Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 125, are adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for this Development Agreement and satisfy all of the requirements of CEQA, and that no further environmental documentation need be prepared for this Development Agreement. W. On November 16, 2004, the City Council found and determined that this Development Agreement: (i) is consistent with the CITY's existing General Plan; (ii) is not otherwise detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of CITY; (iii) is entered into pursuant to and constitutes a present exercise of the CTTY's police power; and (iv) is entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Statute and the Procedures Resolution. 4 X. In preparing and adopting the General Plan and in granting the Development Approvals, CITY considered the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of CITY and prepared in this regard an extensive environmental impact report and other studies. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in preparing and adopting the General Plan and in granting the Development Approvals, the City Council carefully considered and determined the projected needs (taking into consideration the planned development of the Project and all other areas within the CITY) for water service, sewer service, storm drains, electrical facilities, traffic /circulation infrastructure, police and fire services, paramedic and similar improvements, facilities and services within The Platinum Triangle, and the appropriateness of the density and intensity of the development comprising the Project and the needs of the CITY and surrounding areas for other infrastructure. Y. On December 7, 2004, the City Council adopted the Authorizing Ordinance authorizing the execution of this Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Statute, as it applies to CITY, and pursuant to the Enabling Ordinance, the Procedures Resolution and the CITY's inherent powers as a charter city, and pursuant to the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement, and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. 1.1 Assessment District "Assessment District" for purposes of this Development Agreement means a special district, assessment district or benefit area existing pursuant to State law or the charter powers of the CITY for purposes of financing the cost of public improvements, facilities, services and/or public facilities fees within a distinct geographic area of the CITY. 1.2 Authorizing Ordinance The "Authorizing Ordinance" means CITY Ordinance No. 5952 approving this Development Agreement. 1.3 CITY. The "CITY" means the City of Anaheim, a charter city and municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under its charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of California. 1.4 The " Conditional Use Permit means Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2004- 04906 to modify the required setbacks and to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in the proposed restaurant with waivers of minimum dimension and area of patios/balconies and required building treatment adjacent to the street, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "C." E 1.5 Development. "Development' means the improvement of the Property for purposes of effecting the structures, improvements and facilities comprising the Project, including, without limitation: grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Project whether located within or outside the Property; the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.6 Development Agreement Date The "Development Agreement Date" means the later of (i) the date of recordation in the office of the County Recorder of this Development Agreement, or a memorandum thereof, or (ii) the effective date of the Authorizing Ordinance. 1.7 Development Agreement Statute The 'Development Agreement Statute" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Development Agreement Date. 1.8 Development Approvals 'Development Approvals" means the Final Site Plan, the Conditional Use and all site specific plans, maps, permits and other entitlements to use of every kind and nature contemplated by the Final Site Plan which are approved or granted by CITY in connection with development of the Property, including, but not limited to: site plans, tentative and final subdivision maps, vesting tentative maps, variances, conditional use permits and grading, building and other similar permits. To the extent any of such site specific plans, maps, permits and other entitlements to use are amended from time to time, 'Development Approvals" shall include, if OWNER and CITY agree in writing, such matters as so amended. If this Development Agreement is required by law to be amended in order for 'Development Approvals" to include any such amendments, 'Development Approvals" shall not include such amendments unless and until this Development Agreement is so amended. 1.9 Enabling Ordinance The "Enabling Ordinance" means Ordinance No. 4377 enacted by the CITY on November 23, 1982. 1.10 Existing Land Use Regulations "Existing Land Use Regulations" mean the ordinances and regulations adopted by the City of Anaheim in effect on the Effective Date, including the adopting ordinances and regulations that govern the permitted uses of land, the density and intensity of use, and the design, improvement, construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property, including, but not limited to, the General Plan, the Zoning Code, The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan, Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 106, Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 125, and all other ordinances of the City establishing subdivision standards, park regulations, impact or development fees and building and improvement standards, but only to the extent the Zoning Ordinance and such other regulations are not inconsistent with this Development Agreement. Existing Land Use Regulations do not include non- land use regulations, which include taxes. 1.11 Final Site Plan. The "Final Site Plan" means Final Site Plan No. ESP 2004- 00005, as approved by the City Council on November 16, 2004, a copy of which is on 0 file in the Planning Department, and made a part hereof by this reference, which is summarized in Exhibit 'B" attached hereto. 1.12 Gross Floor Area/GFA "Gross Floor Area" or "GFA" means the gross floor area of any of the Permitted Buildings. 1.13 Interim Development Fees "Interim Development Fees" are the fees imposed within The Platinum Triangle pending adoption of permanent fee programs by the City as set forth in Paragraph 12.2 of this Agreement. 1.14 Mortgage "Mortgage" means a mortgage, deed of trust or sale and leaseback arrangement or other transaction in which the Property, or a portion thereof or an interest therein, is pledged as security. 1.15 Mortgagee "Mortgagee" means the holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage, or the owner of the Property, or interest therein, under a Mortgage. 1.16 Owner "Owner" is CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC and any person or entity with which or into which CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC may merge, and any person or entity who may acquire substantially all of the assets of CREA/Nexus Anaheim Comers LLC and any person or entity who receives any of the rights or obligations of under this Development Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Section 28 (Assignment) of this Development Agreement. 1.17 Parking Areas The "Parking Areas" means all parking structure(s), and/or all surface parking servicing the Project. 1.18 Permitted Buildings 'Permitted Buildings" include a mixed use structure consisting of aPe&tmP,"ts condominiums, clubhouse /leasing, retail and restaurant uses and the Parking Areas as identified in Section 6 of this Development Agreement and as further set forth in the Final Site Plan. This Development Agreement establishes maximum and minimum characteristics for each of the Permitted Buildings, as set forth in the Final Site Plan. 1.19 Platinum Triangle Area "The Platinum Triangle" means that portion of the City of Anaheim generally bounded on the east by the Santa Ana River, on the south by the Anaheim city limits, on the west by the Santa Ana Freeway, and on the north by the Southern California Edison Easement. 1.20 Procedures Resolution The 'Procedures Resolution" is Resolution No. 82R- 565 adopted by CITY pursuant to Section 65865 of the Development Agreement Statute. 1.21 Project The 'Project" means the development project contemplated by the Development Plan with respect to the Property, including but not limited to on -site and off -site improvements, as such development project is further defined, enhanced or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Development Agreement. 7 1.22 Property. The "Property" means that certain real property shown and described on Exhibit "A" to this Development Agreement. 1.23 Supplemental Parcel A "Supplemental Parcel" is a parcel to be incorporated into the "Property" by separate action in the nature of a lot line adjustment prior to the commencement of construction on the project, at which time the supplemental parcel shall be merged into the "Property." 1.24 Support Commercial Uses "Support Commercial Uses" are commercial \retail uses which may include retail uses, banking or financial offices, food service, restaurants, service establishments and other similar uses in keeping with the nature of the Project and the required uses needed to support the occupants of office buildings, other office development, sports and entertainment venues and residential development in The Platinum Triangle. 1.25 Term. "Term" is defined in Section 2 of this Development Agreement. Section 2. TERM 2.1 The term (hereinafter called "Term ") of this Development Agreement shall be that period of time during which this Development Agreement shall be in effect and bind the parties hereto. The Term shall commence on the Development Agreement Date and shall extend for a period of five (5) years thereafter, terminating at the end of the day on the fifth anniversary of the Development Agreement Date, subject to the periodic review and modification or termination provisions defined in Section 25 and Section 27, respectively, of this Development Agreement, and further subject to a reasonable extension for completion of the Project in accordance with the Timing of Development schedule set forth in Section 15 of this Development Agreement. 2.2 This Development Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the occurrence of the entry of a final judgment or issuance of a final order, after all appeals have been exhausted, directed to CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against CITY to set aside, withdraw or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Development Agreement or if termination occurs pursuant to the provisions of the Procedures Resolution and such termination is so intended thereby. 2.3 If not already terminated by reason of any other provision in this Development Agreement, or for any other reason, this Development Agreement shall automatically terminate and be of no further force and effect upon completion of the Project pursuant to the terms of this Development Agreement and any further amendments thereto and the issuance of all occupancy permits and acceptance by CITY of all dedications and improvements as required by the development of the Project. E Section 3. BINDING COVENANTS. The provisions of this Development Agreement to the extent permitted by law shall constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits of this Development Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. Section 4. EFFECT OF AGREEMENT As a material part of the consideration of this Development Agreement, unless otherwise provided herein, the parties agree that the Existing Land Use Regulations shall be applicable to development of the Project. In connection with all subsequent discretionary actions by CITY required to implement the Final Site Plan and any discretionary actions which CITY takes or has the right to take under this Development Agreement relating to the Project, including any review, approval, renewal, conditional approval or denial, CITY, shall exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which complies and is consistent with the Final Site Plan, the Existing Land Use Regulations (as the same may be modified in accordance with this Development Agreement) and such other standards, terms and conditions expressly contained in this Development Agreement. CITY shall accept and timely process, in the normal manner for processing such matters as may then be applicable, all applications for further approvals with respect to the Project called for or required under this Development Agreement, including, any necessary site plan, tentative map, vesting tentative map, final map and any grading, construction or other permits filed by OWNER in accordance with the Development Approvals. Section 5. PROJECT LAND USES The Property shall be used for such uses as may be permitted by the Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use Regulations. The duration of this Development Agreement, the density and intensity of use, developable GFA, footprint square footage, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings and structures, lot sizes, set back requirements, zoning, public improvements, and the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes shall be those set forth in the Development Approvals, the Existing Land Use Regulations and this Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65865.2 of the Development Agreement Statute. Section 6. PERMITTED BUILDINGS. 6.1 Description of Permitted Buildings The Permitted Buildings to be located on the Property shall be as set forth on the Final Site Plan. The Project shall be constructed substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. 6.2 Parking Areas The Parking Areas shall be constructed so that there will be sufficient parking spaces available within the Property as depicted and substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the first residential dwelling unit in Stadium Lofts, OWNER shall restrict the use of the Parking E Areas to, and shall record a covenant against the Property in a form approved by the City Attorney stating that the use of the Parking Areas shall be limited to tenants, visitors, patrons, invitees and other users of the Permitted Buildings. Said covenant shall also provide that the Parking Areas shall not be used to provide public parking for patrons of Angel Stadium of Anaheim, The Grove of Anaheim or the Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim without the prior written approval of the City Traffic and Transportation Manager and the Executive Director of Convention /Sports and Entertainment, which approval shall be at CITY's sole discretion. Section 7. DENSITY OF PERMITTED BUILDINGS The Permitted Buildings shall be between the minimum and maximum sizes, and shall not exceed the maximum heights and maximum footprints set forth on the Final Site Plan. Section 8. ENFORCEMENT Unless this Development Agreement is terminated or cancelled pursuant to the provisions of this Development Agreement, this Development Agreement or any amendment hereto, shall be enforceable by any party hereto notwithstanding any change hereafter in any applicable general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance or building ordinance adopted by CITY which alters or amends the rules, regulations or policies of Development of the Project as provided in this Development Agreement pursuant to Section 65865.4 of the Development Agreement Statute; provided, however, that the limitations of this Section shall not apply to changes mandated by State or Federal laws or other permissible changes or new regulations as more particularly set forth in Section 23 of this Development Agreement. Section 9. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SERVICES In addition to performing any other obligations heretofore imposed as conditions of approval set forth in the Conditional Use Permit, as material consideration for the CITY's entering into this Development Agreement, OWNER shall undertake the construction and installation of the following public improvements required to support the Project and to enhance area -wide traffic circulation and emergency police and fire protection service within the time periods as set forth below and in conformance with the Existing Land Use Regulations. CITY shall cooperate with OWNER for the purpose of coordinating all public improvements constructed under the Development Approvals or this Development Agreement to existing or newly constructed public improvements, whether located within or outside of the Property. OWNER shall be responsible for and use good faith efforts to acquire any right(s) -of -way necessary to construct the public facility improvements required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of this Development Agreement or any Development Approvals. Should it become necessary due to OWNER's failure or inability to acquire said right(s) -of -way within four months after OWNER begins its efforts to so acquire said right(s) -of -way, CITY shall negotiate the purchase of the necessary right(s) -of -way to construct the public improvements as 10 required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement and, if necessary in accordance with the procedures established by State law, and the limitations hereinafter set forth in this section, CITY may use its powers of eminent domain to condemn said required right(s) -of way. OWNER agrees to pay for all costs associated with said acquisition and condemnation proceedings. If the CITY cannot make the proper findings or if for some other reason under the condemnation laws CITY is prevented from acquiring the necessary right(s) -of -way to enable OWNER to construct the public improvements required by, or otherwise necessary to comply with the conditions of, this Development Agreement, then the parties agree to amend this Development Agreement to modify OWNER's obligations accordingly. Any such required modification shall involve the substitution of other considerations or obligations by OWNER (of similar value) as are negotiated in good faith between the parties hereto. Nothing contained in 11 this Section shall be deemed to constitute a determination or resolution of necessity by CITY to initiate condemnation proceedings. 9.1 Public Park If the Property is eight (8) or more acres OWNER shall be required to dedicate, improve and maintain a minimum size of 44 square feet for each residential unit for public park purposes as set forth in the Final Site Plan. The value of the parkland dedication will be credited against overall park in lieu fees paid for the project. Consistent with existing Code requirements and policies, no credit will be given for improvements. 9.2 Utilities (Water, Electrical, Gas, Sewer, and Drainage) OWNER shall construct the public improvements necessary for the provision of requisite water, electrical, gas, sewer and drainage requirements for Project as more fully set forth in the Development Approvals. OWNER shall construct and relocate utilities as may be required to provide services to the Permitted Buildings on the Property or that are displaced by the construction of the Permitted Buildings. As OWNER submits detailed construction plans in order to obtain building permits for a Permitted Building and /or the size and nature of the Project varies, the utilities that OWNER will construct or relocate may be revised accordingly by the CITY. 9.2.1 Water Service OWNER will provide engineering studies to size the water mains for ultimate development within the Project. Said engineering studies will be conducted prior to rendering of water service or signature approval of the final water improvement plans, whichever occurs first. The studies shall be subject to the approval of the General Manager, Public Utilities Department or authorized designee. The water system may be constructed incrementally, provided that said incremental phasing is adequate to provide municipal demands and fire flow protection for the proposed development phasing. OWNER will conform with Rule 15D of the Water Utility's Rates, Rules and Regulations which provides for, in part, a fee based on GFA and the advancement of additional funds to construct the upgraded water facilities. OWNER shall be entitled to reimbursement in accordance with the terms of Rule 15D for the advancement of additional funds to construct the upgraded water facilities. 11 9.2.2 Storm and Sewer Drains Prior to final building and zoning inspections for each Permitted Building, OWNER will construct sewers and storm drains to serve the ultimate development of the Property as provided by area -wide engineering studies to be conducted prior to issuance of any building permits for the first Permitted Building and updated prior to the issuance of any building permits for each subsequent Permitted Building. All studies shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. OWNER will construct improvements identified in said studies. The systems may be constructed incrementally provided that said incremental phasing is adequate to provide capacity for the proposed development phasing. 9.3 Timing, Phasing and Sequence of Public Improvements and Facilities The timing, phasing and sequence of the construction of public improvements and facilities or the payment of fees therefore shall be constructed or paid in accordance with the timing, phasing and sequence set forth in this Development Agreement and the Final Site Plan 9.4 Traffic Circulation Improvements. In order to assist CITY in providing for area -wide traffic circulation as required by this Project, OWNER shall cause to be made the traffic circulation improvements identified for the Project as Mitigation Monitoring Program Nos. 106 and 125 for the Project as shown on the Final Site Plan. Section 10. REIMBURSEMENT PROVISION In the event OWNER is required to construct public improvements, which are supplemental to the requirements of the Project for the benefit of other properties, CITY will work with OWNER to establish mechanisms for proportional reimbursement from owners of the benefited properties. Section 11. DEDICATIONS AND EXACTIONS. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, OWNER shall irrevocably offer for dedication the rights -of -way, including connector streets and Market Street, if applicable, and other areas as more fully set forth in the Final Site Plan. These dedications shall be in fee or as an easement at the discretion of CITY. Upon completion and acceptance by CITY of the associated improvements in compliance with the specifications as approved by CITY, CITY may, at its discretion, accept OWNERS offer of dedication, or CITY may elect to defer acceptance of an offer of dedication, but no later than the time the ultimate improvements to the connector street have been made and accepted by the CITY. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the Project, OWNER shall further deposit with the CITY the Connector Street Cost Estimate in the amount set forth in Exhibit "G." Nothing contained in this Development Agreement, however, shall be deemed to preclude CITY from exercising the power of eminent domain with respect to the Property or the Project, or any part thereof. 12 Section 12. FEES TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS 12.1 Fees Taxes and Assessments OWNER shall be responsible for the payment of fees in the amount and at the times set forth in the Existing Land Use Regulations, as said amounts and timing may be modified in accordance with this Development Agreement. 12.2 Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees CITY anticipates that a number of fees will be adopted to pay the costs attributable to new development in The Platinum Triangle. The Interim Development Fees constitute amounts estimated by the applicable Departments to be the approximate fair share of costs attributable to the Project. If an identified fee has been adopted prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, the OWNER shall pay the fee. If an identified fee has not been adopted at the time of issuance of said building permit, the OWNER shall pay the applicable Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fees set forth in attached Exhibit "D." If the OWNER has paid a Platinum Triangle Interim Development Fee, and upon subsequent adoption of a corresponding fee it is determined that the OWNER has paid an amount greater than the amount payable pursuant to the adopted fee, the excess amount paid as an Interim Development Fee shall be refunded to the OWNER. CITY shall not be obligated to adopt any of the identified fees. If any such identified fee is not adopted, the parties agree that the Interim Development Fee is adequate to address the impacts of the Project. 12.2.1 Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee. OWNER will pay an Electrical Utilities Undergrounding Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D -1." 12.2.2 Fire Facilities Fee OWNER will pay a Fire Facilities Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D -2." 12.2.3 General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee OWNER will pay a processing FEE attributable to the cost of creating and establishing the Master Land Use Plan and the PTMU Overlay Zone for The Platinum Triangle, as well as the costs of associated environmental documentation, as said additional costs are set forth in Exhibit "D -3." 12.2.4 Library Facilities Fee OWNER will pay a Library Facilities Fee as set forth in Exhibit "D-4." 12.2.5 Park Fee OWNER will pay the Park Fee as set forth on Exhibit "D -5." and, if the Property is eight or more acres in size, OWNER will dedicate, develop and maintain a mini -park substantially in conformance with the Final Site Plan. 12.2.6 Police Facilities Fee OWNER will pay the Police Facilities Fee to defray the costs of capital facilities and equipment as set forth in Exhibit "D -6." 12.2.7 Public Works Supplemental Sewer, Storm Drain and Beautification Fees 13 OWNER will pay Public Works Fees for supplemental sewer impacts, storm drain impacts, and arterial highway beautification /aesthetics as set forth in Exhibit "D -7." 12.2.8 Traffic Impact Fee OWNER will pay the Supplemental Traffic Impact Fee for improvements required to provide acceptable traffic service levels in and through the area's Master Plan of Arterial Highways system as set forth in Exhibit "D -8." 12.3 Excluded Development Fees Fees Excluded from Existing Land Use Regulations. The following fees shall not be included among the fees, which would otherwise fall within the definition of Existing Land Use Regulations: 12.3.1 Water Utilities Fees OWNER will pay all applicable fees in accordance with the Water Utilities Rates, Rules and Regulations in effect at the time of application for service including Rule 15D which provides for, in part, a fee based on GFA to construct the necessary water facility improvements within The Platinum Triangle. 12.3.2 Electrical Utilities Fees OWNER will pay all fees in accordance with the Electrical Utilities Rates, Rules and Regulations in effect at the time of application for service. 12.3.3 City Processing Fees OWNER shall pay all standard City -wide processing fees for building permits, zoning review, and other similar fees associated with the Development of the Project which are in existence at the time of approval of this Development Agreement at the rate in existence at the time said fees are normally required to be paid to CITY. 12.4 Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and/or Maintenance Assessment District Prior to the first final building or zoning inspection, OWNER shall execute and record an unsubordinated covenant in a form approved by the City Attorney's Office wherein OWNER agrees not to contest the formation of any assessment district(s) which may be formed to finance Platinum Triangle infrastructure and /or maintenance, which district(s) could include the Property. The covenant shall not preclude OWNER from contesting (i) the determination of benefit of such improvements to the Property, (ii) the properties included in said district or area, (iii) the manner in which said fee is determined or (iv) the manner in which said improvement costs are spread. 12.5 Accounting of Funds CITY will comply with applicable requirements of Government Code Section 65865 relating to accounting of funds. 12.6 Imposition of Increased Fees Taxes or Assessments Except as expressly set forth or reserved in this Development Agreement, CITY shall not, without the prior written consent of OWNER, impose any additional fee, tax or assessment on the Project or any portion thereof as a condition to the implementation of the Project or any portion thereof, except such fees, taxes and assessments as are described in or required by this Development Agreement, including the Existing Land Use Regulations or the Development Approvals. The rates of such fees, taxes and assessments shall be the rates 14 in existence at the time said fees; taxes and assessments are normally required to be paid to CITY. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prohibit CITY from imposing fees, taxes or assessments on the Property, which are unrelated to the implementation of the project. Section 13. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS In consideration for CITY entering into this Development Agreement and other consideration set forth in this Agreement, OWNER agrees to record unsubordinated covenant conditions and restrictions (CC &Rs) applicable to the Property in a form and content satisfactory to the Planning Director and the City Attorney incorporating the requirements and obligations set forth in Exhibit "E" to this Agreement, entitled the 'Development Requirements and Maintenance Obligations. Section 14. NEXUS /REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES OWNER consents to, and waives any right it may have now or in the future to challenge the legal validity of the conditions, requirements, policies or programs required by existing land use regulations or this Agreement including, without limitation, any claim that they constitute an abuse of the police power, violate substantive due process, deny equal protection of the laws, effect a taking of property without payment of just compensation, or impose an unlawful tax. Section 15. TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT Timing of Development shall be as set forth in the Final Site Plan. Section 16. EXISTING USES CITY and OWNER agree that those existing legally established uses on the Property may be retained until the Project is implemented. When those existing uses are demolished, no credit for any such demolished square footage for which Interim Development Fees have not been paid will be given OWNER against Interim Development Fees due on a square footage basis as provided for in this Development Agreement. OWNER will pay the full Interim Development Fees for Permitted Buildings constructed pursuant to the Final Site Plan. Section 17. FUTURE APPROVALS 17.1 Basis for Denying or Conditionally Granting Future Approvals Before OWNER can begin grading on the Property or other development of the Property, OWNER must secure several additional permits and/or approvals from CITY. The parties agree that to the extent said Development Approvals are ministerial in nature, CITY shall not, through the enactment or enforcement of any subsequent ordinances, rules, regulations, initiatives, policies, requirements, guidelines, or other constraints, withhold such approvals as a means of blocking construction or of imposing conditions on the 15 Project which were not imposed during an earlier approval period unless CITY has been ordered to do so by a court of competent jurisdiction. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, CITY and OWNER will use their best efforts to ensure each other that all applications for and approvals of grading permits, building permits or other developmental approvals necessary for OWNER to develop the Project in accordance with the Final Site Plan are sought and processed in a timely manner. 17.2 Standard of Review The rules, regulations and policies that apply to any additional Development Approvals which OWNER must secure prior to the Development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations, as defined in this Development Agreement. 17.3 Future Amendments to Final Site Plan Future amendments to all or a portion of the Final Site Plan which increase the intensity or density of the Development of the Property, or change the permitted uses of the Property, and are not among those described in Section 18.4 of this Development Agreement may subject the portion or portions of the Project being amended or affected by the amendment to any change in the CITY's General Plan, zoning designations and rules applicable to the Property and further environmental review and possible mitigation of adverse impacts under CEQA in effect at the time of such amendment. Any such amendment to the Final Site Plan shall be processed concurrently with the processing of an amendment to this Development Agreement. It is the desire and intent of both parties, except as set forth herein, that any such future amendment of the Final Site Plan will not alter, affect, impair or otherwise impact the rights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Development Agreement with respect to the unamended portions of the Final Site Plan. Section 18. AMENDMENT 18.1 Initiation of Amendment Either party may propose an amendment to this Development Agreement. 18.2 Procedure Except as set forth in Section 18.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Development Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Development Agreement in the first instance. Such procedures are set forth in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of the Procedures Resolution. 18.3 Consent. Except as provided in Section 25 of this Development Agreement, any amendment to this Development Agreement shall require the consent of both parties. No amendment of this Development Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. 18.4 Amendments Subject to the foregoing provisions of this Section, the parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties 16 under this Development Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development of the Project and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Development Agreement. If and when the parties find that changes or adjustments are necessary or appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Development Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes or adjustments as specified in the Development Approvals. 18.5 Effect of Amendment to Development Agreement The parties agree that except as expressly set forth in any such amendment, an amendment to this Development Agreement will not alter, affect, impair, modify, waive or otherwise impact any other rights, duties or obligations of either party under this Development Agreement. Section 19. RESOLUTION OF INTENT AND USES FOR THE PROPERTY 19.1 Non - Cancellation of Rights Subject to defeasance pursuant to Sections 25, 26 or 27 of this Development Agreement, the Final Site Plan and other Development Approvals as provided for in this Development Agreement shall be final and the rights once granted thereby shall be vested in the Property upon recordation of this Development Agreement. Section 20. BENEFITS TO CITY The direct and indirect benefits CITY (including, without limitation, the existing and future anticipated residents of CITY) expects to receive pursuant to this Development Agreement include, but are not limited to, the following: The participation of OWNER in the accelerated, coordinated and more economical construction, funding and dedication to the public, as provided in this Development Agreement, of certain of the vitally needed on -site and area -wide public improvements and facilities, and assurances that the entire Project will be developed as set forth in the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement in order to encourage development of The Platinum Triangle; and The considerations set forth in this Development Agreement, including Section 9. Section 21. BENEFITS TO OWNER OWNER has expended and will continue to expend large amounts of time and money on the planning and infrastructure construction for the Project. OWNER asserts that OWNER would not make any additional expenditures, or the advanced expenditures required by this Development Agreement, without this Development Agreement and that any additional expenditures which OWNER makes after the Development Agreement Date will be made in reliance upon this Development Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, this Development Agreement provides for the completion of public improvements and facilities prior to the time when they would be justified 17 economically in connection with the phasing of the Project, and of a size which would be justified only by the magnitude of the Project provided for by the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. The benefit to OWNER under this Development Agreement consists of the assurance that OWNER will preserve the right to develop the Property as planned and as set forth in the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. The parties acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to CITY pursuant to this Development Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Final Site Plan and this Development Agreement. Section 22. UNDERTAKINGS AND ASSURANCES CONTEMPLATED AND PROMOTED BY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATUTE. The mutual undertakings and assurances described above and provided for in this Development Agreement are for the benefit of CITY and OWNER and promote the comprehensive planning, private and public cooperation and participation in the provision of public facilities, and the effective and efficient development of infrastructure and facilities supporting development which was contemplated and promoted by the Development Agreement Statute. CITY agrees that it will not take any actions, which are intended to circumvent this Development Agreement; provided, however, that any action of the electorate shall not be deemed an action for purposes of this section. Section 23. RESERVED AUTHORITY 23.1 State and Federal Laws and Regulations In the event that the State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after this Development Agreement has been entered into, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of the Development Agreement, such provisions of the Development Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt or undertake any rule, regulation or policy which is inconsistent with this Development Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such rule, regulation or policy is reasonably necessary to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations. 23.2. Building Codes This Development Agreement shall not prevent CITY from applying new rules, regulations and policies contained in model codes, including, but not limited to, the Anaheim Building Code as adopted in Title 15, Section 15.02 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 23.3 Public Health and Safety This Development Agreement shall not prevent CITY from adopting new rules, regulations and policies, including amendments or modifications to model codes described in Section 23.2 of this Development Agreement which directly result from findings by CITY that failure to adopt such rules, regulations or policies would result in a condition injurious or detrimental to the public health and safety. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CITY shall not adopt any such rules, regulations or policies which prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Development Agreement until CITY makes a finding that such rules, regulations or policies are reasonably necessary to correct or avoid such injurious or detrimental condition. Section 24. CANCELLATION 24.1 Initiation of Cancellation Either party may propose cancellation of this Development Agreement. 24.2 Procedure The procedure for proposing a cancellation of and canceling this Development Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Development Agreement in the first instance. Such procedures are set forth in Sections 2, 3 and 5 of the Procedures Resolution and Section 65868 of the Government Code. 24.3 Consent of Both Parties Any cancellation of this Development Agreement shall require the mutual consent of both parties. Section 25. PERIODIC REVIEW 25.1 Time for Review CITY shall, at least every twelve (12) months after the Development Agreement Date, review the extent of good faith compliance by OWNER with the terms of this Development Agreement. OWNERS failure to comply with the timing schedules set forth in the Final Site Plan shall constitute rebuttable evidence of OWNERS lack of good faith compliance with this Development Agreement. Such periodic review shall determine compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement pursuant to California Government Code Section 65865.1 and other successor laws and regulations. 25.2 OWNERS Submission Each year, not less than forty-five (45) days nor more than sixty (60) days prior to the anniversary of the Development Agreement Date, OWNER shall submit evidence to the City Council of its good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. OWNER shall notify the City Council in writing that such evidence is being submitted to CITY pursuant to the requirements of Section 6.2 of the Procedures Resolution. OWNER shall pay to CITY a reasonable processing fee in an amount as CITY may reasonably establish from time to time on each occasion that OWNER submits its evidence for a periodic review. 25.3 Findings Within forty -five (45) days after the submission of OWNERS evidence, the City Council shall determine, on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not OWNER has, for the period under review, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. If the City Council finds that OWNER has so complied, the review for that period shall be deemed concluded. If the City 19 Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement for the period under review, OWNER shall be given at least sixty (60) days to cure such non- compliance and if the actions required to cure such noncompliance take more than sixty (60) days, then CITY shall give OWNER additional time provided that OWNER is making reasonable progress towards such end. If during the cure period, OWNER fails to cure such noncompliance or is not making reasonable good faith progress towards such end, then the City Council may, at its discretion, proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 27 of this Development Agreement. 25.4 Initiation of Review by City Council In addition to the periodic review set forth in this Development Agreement, the City Council may at any time initiate a review of this Development Agreement upon the giving of written notice thereof to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the City Council of OWNERS good faith compliance with this Development Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the manner as otherwise provided in this Development Agreement. Section 26. EVENTS OF DEFAULT 26.1 Defaults by OWNER Within forty -five (45) days after the submission of OWNERS evidence, the City Council shall determine on the basis of substantial evidence, whether or not OWNER has, for the period under review, complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement. If the City Council fmds that OWNER has so complied, the review for that period shall be deemed concluded. If the City Council finds and determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement for the period under review, OWNER shall be given at least sixty (60) days to cure such non - compliance and if the actions required to cure such non- compliance take more than sixty (60) days, then CITY shall give OWNER additional time provided that OWNER is making reasonable progress towards such end. If during the cure period OWNER fails to cure such non - compliance or is not making reasonable progress towards such end, then the City Council may, at its discretion, proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 27 of this Development Agreement. 26.2 Specific Performance Remedy Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its pre - existing condition once implementation of this Development Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Development Agreement and will be investing even more significant time in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Development 20 Agreement, and it is not possible to determine sum of the money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons, CITY and OWNER agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement. Therefore, specific performance of this Development Agreement is the only remedy which would compensate OWNER if CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement, and CITY hereby agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to specific performance in the event of a default by CITY hereunder. CITY and OWNER acknowledge that, if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations under this Development Agreement, CITY shall have the right to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals, which OWNER would otherwise have been entitled to pursuant to this Development Agreement. If CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Development Agreement in reliance upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if OWNER then fails to satisfy such condition, CITY shall be entitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. The CITY's right to specific performance shall be limited to those circumstances set forth above, and CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 26.3 Liquidated Damages Remedy The parties hereto agree that this Development Agreement creates an obligation and duty upon OWNER to undertake and complete development of the Project within the time and manner specified herein. In the event OWNER breaches this Development Agreement by failing to undertake and complete development of the Project within the time and manner specified herein, the parties further agree that CITY will suffer actual damages as a result thereof, the amount of which is uncertain and would be impractical or extremely difficult to fix; therefore, OWNER agrees to pay CITY, in the event of any such breach by OWNER, the sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) as liquidated and actual damages which sum shall be in addition to any other fees and charges owing to CITY by OWNER together with a penalty thereon in the maximum amount allowed by Section 54348 of the California Government Code, and which sum shall be in addition to any other remedies available to CITY as a result of such breach pursuant to this Section 26. Section 27. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION If pursuant to Section 26.1 of this Development Agreement, CITY elects to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a revised time schedule for compliance as herein provided, then CITY shall proceed as set forth in this Section. 27.1 Notice to OWNER CITY shall give notice to OWNER of City Council's intention to proceed to modify or terminate this Development Agreement or establish a time schedule for compliance within ten (10) days of making the CITY's fmdings. 27.2 Public Hearing The City Council shall set and give notice of a public hearing on modification, termination or a time schedule for compliance to be held within forty -days after the City Council gives notice to OWNER. 21 27.3 Decision The City Council shall announce its findings and decisions on whether this Development Agreement is to be terminated, how this Development Agreement is to be modified or the provisions of the Development Agreement with which OWNER must comply and a time schedule therefore not than ten (10) days following completion of the public hearing. 27.4 Implementation Modifying or terminating this Development Agreement shall be accomplished by CITY enacting an ordinance. The ordinance shall recite the reasons which, in the opinion of the CITY, make the modification or termination of this Development Agreement necessary. Not later then ten (10) days following the adoption of the ordinance, one copy thereof shall be forwarded to OWNER. This Development Agreement shall be terminated or this Development Agreement as modified shall become effective on the effective date of the ordinance terminating or modifying this Development Agreement. 27.5 Schedule for Compliance Setting a reasonable time schedule for compliance with this Development Agreement may be accomplished by CITY enacting a resolution. The resolution shall recite the reasons, which, in the opinion of CITY, make it advisable to set a schedule for compliance and why the time schedule is reasonable. Not later than ten (10) days following adoption of the resolution, one copy thereof shall be forwarded to OWNER. Compliance with any time schedule so established as an alternative to modification or termination shall be subject to periodic review as provided in this Development Agreement and lack of good faith compliance by OWNER with the time schedule shall be basis for termination or modification of this Development Agreement. Section 28. ASSIGNMENT 28.1 Right to Assign OWNER shall have the right to sell, mortgage, hypothecate, assign or transfer this Development Agreement, and any and all of its rights, duties and obligations hereunder, to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation at any time during the term of this Development Agreement, provided that any such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof. In the event of any such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer, (a) OWNER shall notify CITY of such event and the name of the transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such transferee and (b) the agreement between OWNER and such transferee shall provide that either OWNER or the transferee or both shall be liable for the performance of all obligations of OWNER pursuant to this Development Agreement and the Development Approvals. Such transferee and/or OWNER shall notify CITY in writing which entity shall be liable for the performance of such obligations, and upon the express written assumption of any or all of the obligations of OWNER under this Development Agreement by such assignee, transferee or purchaser shall, without any act of or concurrence by CITY, relieve OWNER of its legal duty to perform said obligations under this Development Agreement with respect to the Property or portion thereof, so transferred, except to the extent OWNER is not in default under the terms of this Development Agreement. 22 28.2 Release Upon Transfer It is understood and agreed by the parties that the Property may be subdivided following the Development Agreement Date. One or more of such subdivided parcels may be sold, mortgaged, hypothecated, assigned or transferred to persons for development by them in accordance with the provisions of this Development Agreement. Effective upon such sale, mortgage, hypothecation, assignment or transfer, the obligations of OWNER shall become several and not joint, except as to OWNER's obligations set forth in Section 10 of this Development Agreement. Upon the sale, transfer, or assignment of OWNER's rights and interests under this Development Agreement as permitted pursuant to the Section 28.1 above, OWNER shall be released from its obligations under this Development Agreement with respect to the Property, or portion thereof so transferred, provided that (a) OWNER is not then in default under this Development Agreement, (b) OWNER has provided to CITY the notice of such transfer specified in Section 28.1 above, (c) the transferee executes and delivers to CITY a written agreement in which (i) the name and address of the transferee is set forth and (ii) the transferee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the obligations of OWNER under this Development Agreement and the Development Approvals with respect to the property, or portion thereof, so transferred and (d) the transferee provides CITY with security equivalent to any security provided by OWNER to secure performance of its obligations under this Development Agreement or the Development Approvals. Non- compliance by any such transferee with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement shall not be deemed a default hereunder or grounds for termination hereof or constitute cause for CITY to initiate enforcement action against other persons then owning or holding interest in the Property or any portion thereof and not themselves in default hereunder. Upon completion of any phase of development of the Project as determined by CITY, CITY may release that completed phase from any further obligations under this Development Agreement. The provisions of this Section shall be self - executing and shall not require the execution or recordation of any further document or instrument. Any and all successors, assigns and transferees of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits and obligations of OWNER as used in this Development Agreement and the term "OWNER" as used in this Development Agreement shall refer to any such successors, assigns and transferees unless expressly provided herein to the contrary. Section 29. NO CONFLICTING ENACTMENTS By entering into this Development Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining vested rights to proceed with the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement, and in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Development Approvals. By entering into this Development Agreement and relying thereupon, CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and general welfare. CITY therefore agrees that except as provided in Section 23 of this Development Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of CITY shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance or other measure which relates to the rate, timing or sequencing of the Development or construction of all or any part of the Project and which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Development Agreement. 23 Section 30. GENERAL 30.1 Force Majeure The Term of this Development Agreement and the time within which OWNER shall be required to perform any act under this Development Agreement shall be extended by a period of time equal to the number of days during which performance of such act is delayed unavoidably by strikes, lock -outs, Acts of God, failure or inability to secure materials or labor by reason of priority or similar regulations or order of any governmental or regulatory body, initiative or referenda, moratoria, enemy action, civil disturbances, fire, unavoidable casualties, or any other cause beyond the reasonable control of OWNER. 30.2 Construction of Development Agreement The language in all parts of this Development Agreement shall in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Development Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of constructions. This Development Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Development Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental functions of CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the parties understand and agree that this Development Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITY's governmental powers over the Property. 30.3 Severability If any provision of this Development Agreement shall be adjudged to be invalid, void or unenforceable, such provision shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate any other provision hereof, unless such judgment affects a material part of this Development Agreement, the parties hereby agree that they would have entered into the remaining portions of this Development Agreement not adjudged to be invalid, void or illegal. In the event that all or any portion of this Development Agreement is found to be unenforceable, this Development Agreement or that portion which is found to be unenforceable shall be deemed to be a statement of intention by the parties; and the parties further agree that in such event they shall take all steps necessary to comply with such public hearings and/or notice requirements as may be necessary in order to make valid this Development Agreement or that portion which is found to be unenforceable. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Development Agreement, in the event that any material provision of this Development Agreement is found to be unenforceable, void or voidable, OWNER or CITY may terminate this Development Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and the Procedures Resolution. 30.4 Cumulative Remedies In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenant or agreement herein, or to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, including suits for declaratory relief, specific performance, relief in the nature of mandamus and actions for damages. All of the remedies described above shall be 24 cumulative and not exclusive of one another, and the exercise of any one or more of the remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect to any other available remedy. 30.5 Hold Hannless Agreement OWNER and CITY hereby mutually agree to, and shall hold each other, each other's elective and appointive councils, boards, commissions, officers, partners, agents, representatives and employees harmless from any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, and from claims for property damage which may arise from the activities of the other's or the other's contractors', subcontractors', agents', or employees' which relate to the Project whether such activities be by OWNER or CITY, or by any of the OWNER's or the CITY's contractors, subcontractors, or by any one or more persons indirectly employed by, or acting as agent for OWNER any of the OWNER's or the CITY's contractors or subcontractors. OWNER and CITY agree to and shall defend the other and the other's elective and appointive councils, boards, commissioners, officers, partners, agents, representatives and employees from any suits or actions at law or in equity for damage caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of the aforementioned activities which relate to the Project. 30.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Development Agreement and /or the Development Approvals, the parties hereby agree to cooperate fully with each other in defending said action and the validity of each provision of this Development Agreement, however, OWNER shall be liable for all legal expenses and costs incurred in defending any such action. OWNER shall be entitled to choose legal counsel to defend against any such legal action and shall pay any attorneys' fees awarded against CITY or OWNER, or both, resulting from any such legal action. OWNER shall be entitled to any award of attorneys' fees arising out of any such legal action. 30.7 Public Agency Coordination CITY and OWNER shall cooperate and use their respective best efforts in coordinating the implementation of the Development Approvals with other public agencies, if any, having jurisdiction over the Property or the Project. 30.8 Initiative Measures Both CITY and OWNER intend that this Development Agreement is a legally binding contract which will supersede any initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing or sequencing of the Development or construction of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use approved, issued or granted within the CITY, or portions of the CITY, shall apply to the Project to the extent such initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation is inconsistent or in conflict with this Development Agreement. Should an initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance, or other limitation be enacted by the citizens of CITY 25 which would preclude construction of all or any part of the Project, and to the extent such initiative, measure, moratorium, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to invalidate or prevail over all or any part of this Development Agreement, OWNER shall have no recourse against CITY pursuant to the Development Agreement, but shall retain all other rights, claims and causes of action under this Development Agreement not so invalidated and any and all other rights, claims and causes of action as law or in equity which OWNER may have independent of this Development Agreement with respect to the project. The foregoing shall not be deemed to limit OWNER's right to appeal any such determination that such initiative, measure, referendum, statute, ordinance or other limitation invalidates or prevails over all or any part of this Development Agreement. CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in order to keep this Development Agreement in full force and effect, provided OWNER shall reimburse CITY for its out -of- pocket expenses incurred directly in connection with such cooperation and CITY shall not be obligated to institute a lawsuit or other court proceedings in this connection. 30.9 Attorneys' Fees In the event of any dispute between the parties involving the covenants or conditions contained in this Development Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable expenses, attorneys' fees and costs. 30.10 No Waiver No delay or omission by either party in exercising any right or power accruing upon non - compliance or failure to perform by the other party under any of the provisions of this Development Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof. A waiver by either party of any of the covenants or conditions to be performed by the other party shall not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of nonperformance of the same or other covenants and conditions hereof. 30.11 Authority to Execute The person executing this Development Agreement on behalf of OWNER warrants and represents that he /she has the authority to execute this Development Agreement on behalf of his/her partnership and represents that he /she has the authority to bind OWNER to the performance of OWNER's obligations hereunder. 30.12 Notice 30.12.1 Notice To OWNER Any notice required or permitted to be given by CITY to OWNER under or pursuant to this Development Agreement shall be deemed sufficiently given if in writing and delivered personally to an officer of OWNER or mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, addressee; to OWNER as follows: CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC. 9381 Judicial Drive, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92121 Attention: Eric Heffner 26 or such changed address as OWNER shall designate in writing to CITY. 30.12.2 Notice To CITY. Any notice required or permitted to be given to CITY under or pursuant to this Development Agreement shall be made and given in writing, if by mail addressed to: City Council City of Anaheim c/o City Clerk P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 or such changed address as CITY shall designate in writing to OWNER: With copies to: City Manager City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 City Attorney City of Anaheim P.O. Box 3222 Anaheim, California 92803 and if personally delivered to the City Clerk, at the Anaheim Civic Center, 200 S. Anaheim. Blvd., Anaheim, California, together with copies marked for the City Manager and the City Attorney or, if so addressed and mailed, with postage thereon fully prepaid, registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the City Council in care of the City Clerk at the above address with copies likewise so mailed to the City Manager and the City Attorney, respectively and also in care of the City Clerk at the same address. The provisions of this Section shall be deemed permissive only and shall not detract from the validity of any notice given in a manner, which would be legally effective in the absence of this Section. 30.13 Captions The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Development Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall in no way define, explain, modify, construe, limit, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any of the provisions of this Development Agreement. 30.14 Consent Any consent required by the parries in carrying out the terms of this Development agreement shall not unreasonably be withheld. 30.15 Further Actions and Instruments Each of the parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performance of all obligations under this Development Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Development Agreement. Upon the request of either party at any time, the other party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take 27 any actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Development Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Development Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Development Agreement. 30.16 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute This Development Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute in effect as of the Development Agreement Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 23.1 above, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Development Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Development Agreement unless necessary for this Development Agreement to be enforceable or unless this Development Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Development Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Development Agreement Date. 30.17 Governing Law This Development Agreement, including, without limitation, its existence, validity, construction and operation, and the rights of each of the parties shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 30.18 Effect on Title OWNER and CITY agree that this Development Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Development Agreement has terminated. 30.19 Mortgagee Protection Entering into or a breach of this Development Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of Mortgagees having a mortgage on any portion of the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. No Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Development Agreement to perform OWNER'S obligations, or to guarantee such performance prior to any foreclosure or deed in lieu thereof. 30.20 Notice of Default to Mortgagee, Right of Mortgagee to Cure If the City Clerk timely receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to OWNER under the terms of this Development Agreement, CITY shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to OWNER. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, for a period up to ninety (90) days after the receipt of such notice from CITY to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy the default unless a further extension of time to cure is granted in writing by CITY. If the default is of a nature which can only be remedied or cured by such Mortgagee upon obtaining possession, such Mortgagee shall seek to obtain possession with diligence and continually through foreclosure, a receiver or otherwise, and shall thereafter remedy or cure the default or non - compliance within thirty (30) days after obtaining possession. If any such default or non - compliance cannot, with diligence, be remedied or cured within such thirty (30) day period, then such Mortgagee shall have such additional time as may be reasonably necessary to remedy or cure such default or non - compliance if such Mortgagee commences cure during such thirty (30) day period, and thereafter diligently pursues and completes such cure. W 30.21 Bankruptcy Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of Section 30.20 of this Development Agreement, if any Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or pursues and prosecuting foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof by any process or injunction issued by any court or by reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving CITY, the times specified in this Section for commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other proceedings shall be extended for the period of the prohibition. 30.22 Disaffi mance 30.22.1 CITY agrees that in the event of termination of this Agreement by reason of any default by CITY, or by reason of the disaffirmance hereof by a receiver, liquidator or trustee for OWNER or its property, CITY, if requested by any Mortgagee, shall enter into a new Development Agreement for the Project with the most senior Mortgagee requesting such new agreement, for the remainder of the Term, effective as of the date of such termination, upon the terms, provisions, covenants and agreements as herein contained to the extent and subject to the law then in effect, and subject to the rights, if any, of any parties then in possession of any part of the Property, provided: 30.22.2 The Mortgagee shall make written request upon CITY for the new Development Agreement for the Project within thirty (30) days after the date of termination; 30.22.3 The Mortgagee shall pay to CITY at the time of the execution and delivery of the new Development Agreement for the Project expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, to which CITY shall have been subjected by reason of OWNER's default; and 30.22.4 The Mortgagee shall perform and observe all covenants herein contained on OWNER's part to be performed, and shall further remedy any other conditions which OWNER under the terminated agreement was obligated to perform under its terms, to the extent the same are curable or may be performed by the Mortgagee. 30.22.5 Nothing herein contained shall require any Mortgagee to enter into a new agreement pursuant to Section 30.22.1 above, nor to cure any default of OWNER referred to above. 30.23 No Third Party Beneficiaries This Development Agreement and all provisions hereof is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of CITY, OWNER and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have right of action based upon any provision in this Development Agreement. 30.24 Proiect as a Private Undertaking It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the Project is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each party is an 29 independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Development Agreement. No partnership, join venture or other association of any kind is formed by this Development Agreement. The only relationship between CITY and OWNER is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such private property. 30.25 Restrictions Property OWNER shall place in any agreements to sell or convey any interest in the Property or any portion thereof, provisions making the terms of this Development Agreement binding on any successors in interest of OWNER and express provision for OWNER or CITY, acting separately or jointly, to enforce the provisions of this Development Agreement and to recover attorneys' fees and costs for such enforcement. 30.26 Recitals The recitals in this Development Agreement constitute part of this Development Agreement and each party shall be entitled to rely on the truth and accuracy of each recital as an inducement to enter into this Development Agreement. 30.27 Recording The City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Development Agreement to be executed by CITY and recorded in the Official Records of Orange County no later than ten (10) days after CITY approves this Development Agreement. 30.28 Title Report CITY is required to sign this Development Agreement only after OWNER has provided CITY with a satisfactory preliminary title report evidencing and showing OWNER's legal and equitable ownership interest in the Property, current within six (6) months, unencumbered except for the exceptions (hereinafter the "Permitted Exceptions ") set in the preliminary title report for the Property dated October 25, 2004, attached hereto as Exhibit "E" (the "Preliminary Title Report"). Any instrument of monetary encumbrance such as a deed of trust or a mortgage entered into subsequent to the date of the Preliminary Title Report and prior to the Development Agreement Date shall contain language expressly subordinating such instruments of monetary encumbrance to the provisions of this Development Agreement. OWNER shall present evidence, satisfactory to CITY, of OWNER's legal title to Property, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions and any such subordinated instruments of monetary encumbrance, at the time of recordation of this Agreement, or a memorandum thereof. 30.29 Entire Agreement This Development Agreement, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Development Agreement, and this Development Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussions and agreements between the parties, and no evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof. 30.30 Successors and Assigns The burdens of the Development Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of the Development Agreement inure to all successors in interest and assigns of the parties to the Development Agreement. 30.31 OWNER's Title of Proyert y . Neither party hereto shall be bound by any provision of this Agreement unless and until OWNER shall record this Development 30 Agreement or a memorandum thereof, in the office of the County Recorder of the County sufficient to cause this Agreement and the obligations contained herein to attach to and encumber OWNER's fee title to Property. 30.32 Exhibits All exhibits, including attachments thereto, are incorporated in this Development Agreement in their entirety by this reference. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and OWNER have executed this Development Agreement as of the date and year first above written. "CITY" CITY OF ANAHEIM, a municipal corporation By: Mayor ATTEST: SHERYLLSCHROEDER City Clerk JACK L. WHITE, City Attorney 54141.2/smann.10/26/04/1gm "OWNER" CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC a Delaware limited liability company By: Stadium Lofts, LLC A California limited liability company Its Manager By: Nexus Properties, Inc. A California corporation Its Manager By: Name: Title: 31 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss: COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On this day of , 2004, be undersigned, a Notary Public for the State of California duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the person who executed the within instrument as Mayor of the City of Anaheim, the municipal corporation executing the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. [SEAL] STATE OF )ss. COUNTY OF On , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who executed the within instrument as on behalf of, the corporation therein named that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) 32 On this day of , 2004, BEFORE ME, THE Undersigned, A Notary Public for the State of California, duly commissioned and swom, personally appeared SHERYLL SCHROEDER, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the person who executed the within instrument as City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, the municipal corporation executing the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public 33 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY PARCEL A: PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 85 -214, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 208, PAGES 11 AND 12 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDEROF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL B: PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 85 -214, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 208, PAGES 11 AND 12 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL C: PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON A MAP IN BOOK 57, PAGE 1 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY. SUPPLEMENTAL PARCEL: PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 0000580, RECORDED 1 2004 AND INSTRUMENT NO. 2004 - OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 34 EXHIBIT `B" FINAL SITE PLAN (FSP 2004- 00005) The Platinum Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone (Chapter 18.20 of the Anaheim Municipal Code) requires an approved Final Site Plan and a Development Agreement between the property owner and the City of Anaheim for all development that implements the PTMU Overlay Zone in the Katella, Gene Autry and Gateway Districts, except as otherwise exempt under the Code. A Final Site Plan Application including Site Plans, Floor Plans, Elevations, Landscape Plans and Sign Plans, as well as other information determined by the Planning Director, is required to be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the Planning Director as to conformance with the provisions of the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan. Said Plans are then attached as an exhibit to the Development Agreement. The Agreement is submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council for review at a noticed public hearing. The project applicant (CREA/Nexus Anaheim Corners, LLC) submitted an application for Final Site Plan No. 2004 -00005 to the Planning Department to provide for the development of the Stadium Lofts - Anaheim project (a high - density urban mixed -use center with 390 apartment condominiums dwelling units located above 2,820 square feet of retail use, 7,839 square feet of restaurant use, and 6,297 square feet of clubhouse and leasing office surrounding a 5 -level parking structure) in the PTMU Overlay Zone, Katella District. The project site encompasses approximately 6.3 acres at the northwest corner of Katella Avenue and State College Boulevard and is currently undergoing the demolition of two restaurants and offices. . The applicant also submitted a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP No. 2004 - 04906) for the proposed Stadium Lofts - Anaheim project to modify required setbacks and to permit sales of alcoholic beverages for on- premises consumption in the proposed 7,839 square foot restaurant with waivers of minimum dimension and area of patios/balconies and required building treatment adjacent to streets. With the exception of the items and Code waivers requested pursuant to the Conditional Use Permit application under the purview of the Planning Commission and City Council, the Planning Director determined that the Final Site Plan application is in conformance with the provisions of the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and approved the Final Site Plan. As required by the PTMU Overlay Zone, the Conditional Use Permit was considered in connection with the Development Agreement. Both applications were duly considered by the Planning Commission and City Council and approved by the City Council on November 16, 2004. Copies of the Site Plans, Floor Plans, Elevations, Landscape Plans, Sign Plans and the Phasing Plan are attached hereto. Copies of the supplemental information required to determine conformance with the PTMU Overlay Zone and The Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan and the Planning Director's approval of the Final Site Plan are on file in the Planning Department and incorporated herein by this reference. 35 EXHIBIT "C" CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2004 -04906 36 EXHIBIT "D" PLATINUM TRIANGLE INTERIM DEVELOPMENT FEES 37 EXHIBIT "D -1" ELECTRIC UTILITIES UNDERGROUNDING FEE Residential Uses: $11.42 per unit 390 units x $11.42 = $4,453.80 The Anaheim Master Land Use Plan and the Underground Conversion Program envision that the public utilities along Katella Avenue, between the State College Boulevard and Anaheim Way will need to be undergrounded. The City -owned facilities will be undergrounded using City funds, pursuant to the Rule No. 20 of the City of Anaheim Rates, Rules & Regulations. Some of the facilities along Katella Avenue are owned by Southern California Edison (SCE). Moneys available to underground City -owned facilities may not be used to underground SCE facilities. The interim fee will collect the funds necessary to underground the SCE lines, and thereby significantly improve the appearance of The Platinum Triangle. The cost to underground the SCE lines is estimated at $104, 775. These funds will be collected by imposing an interim fee on the Mixed -used residential units planned in The Platinum Triangle. The formula for calculating the fee is the following: Cost to Underground SCE lines = Per -Unit Fee Number of mixed -use residential units The Per -Unit fee is calculated at: $104,775 = $11.42 per Unit 9,175 Units W EXHIBIT "D -2" FIRE FACILITIES FEE Residential Uses: $350.00 per unit Commercial/Office Uses: $ 0.20 per square foot 390 units x $350 = $136,500.00 16,956 sf x $0.20 — $ 3,391.20 The purpose of establishing a Fire Protection Fee is to finance improvements and additions to facilities and equipment to support fire protection and paramedic services made necessary by new development and expansion of and additions to existing development within The Platinum Triangle. Development will generate additional need for protection and paramedic services in The Platinum Triangle. There is a need in The Platinum Triangle for expansion of fire protection and paramedic services and for new and expanded development to contribute its fair share towards the costs of additional and improved facilities and equipment. There is a reasonable relationship between the need for the described fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment and the impacts of the types of development proposed for The Platinum Triangle, for which the corresponding Fire Protection Fee described above is charged. There is also a reasonable relationship between the use of the fee and the type of development for which the fee is charged, in that these fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment provide support for fire protection and paramedic services and accommodate additional demand generated by development. The cost estimates set forth below are reasonable cost estimates for adding to fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment in The Platinum Triangle. The Fire Protection Fees collected pursuant to this agreement shall be used to finance only the additional facilities described, which additional facilities are needed to augment existing fire protection and paramedic facilities and equipment serving The Platinum Triangle, to offset the impacts of new development and expansion of and additions to existing development within The Platinum Triangle. FIRE FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT Fire truck company with equipment $1,000,000 Fire engine company with equipment $ 750,000 Fire station $3,500,000 TOTAL $5,250,000 39 EXHIBIT "D -3" GENERAL PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSING FEE Residential Uses: $8.00 per unit Commercial/Office Uses: $0.01 per square foot 390 UNITS x $5.00 = $3,120.00 16,956 sf x $0.01 = $169.56 The General Plan and Environmental Processing Fee is based on the following: Intent: Recover partial costs incurred to develop the Mixed -Use Overlay designation for the Platinum Triangle, including the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report Contract Costs Incurred: $146,000 New Development Allowed in Platinum Triangle: 7,044,300 sq.ft. of non - residential uses 9,175 residential units (assume average unit size of 800 sq.ft. = 7,340,000 sq.ft.) 7,044,300 + 7,340,00 14,384,300 total square feet $146,000/14,384,300 = $.01 per square foot 7,340,000 x $.01= $73,400 $73,400/9175 = $8 per dwelling unit Planning Entitlement Fee 40 EXHIBIT "D -4" LIBRARY FEES Residential Uses: $144.39 per unit 390 units x $144.39 = $56,312.10 The amount of the Library fee is based upon the current fee structure for East Santa Ana Canyon residential development for single family residential uses. The 2004 fee for such residential uses is $317.67, based upon an estimated 3.3 persons per dwelling. Using an estimate of 1.5 persons per unit in The Platinum Triangle, the proposed interim developer fee for The Platinum Triangle is $144.39 per unit. 41 EXHIBIT "D -5" PLATINUM TRIANGLE PARK FEES Residential Uses: $7055.74 per unit 390 units x $7,055.74 = $2,751,738.60 Park fees are established by implementing various values identified for The Platinum Triangle into the Park Dedication fee formula, as established by Anaheim Municipal Code, Chapters 17.08 and 17.34, which is as follows: (Land Acquisition Costs + Land Development Costs) x 2 x DU density proposed =fee 1,000 Land acquisition costs are estimated by Keyser- Marsten to be $50 /sq. ft. of property purchased (for industrial properties, including goodwill and relocation costs *). This equals $2,178,000/ac. Land Development costs have been established by the City Council at $173,913.33/ac. ** City Park Acreage Standard of 2 acres /1,000 population was incorporated in the formula set forth in Chapters 17.08 and 17.34, as approved by City Council. Estimated dwelling unit density of 1.5 persons /unit for both the single family attached and apartmen condominium complexes as estimated in Final Environmental Impact Report, No. 330, Table 4.3 -1, for the City of Anaheim's General Plan and Zoning Code Update. Using the above figures the park fee is $7,055.74 per unit. ($2,178,000 + $173,913.33) x 2 x 1.5 = $7,055.74 per unit 1,000 Parkland dedication will be required for each 8 acre or larger parcel proposed for residential development. The City's Platinum Triangle consultant, EDAW, has recommended that each dwelling unit for parcels of 8 acres or larger dedicate 44 sq. ft. of public parkland per each dwelling unit proposed. * ** The value of the parkland dedication will be credited against overall park in lieu fees paid for the project. Consistent with existing zoning and policies, no credit will be given for improvements. As an example, if a subdivision were required to dedicate a .5 acre park, credit would be given against the Land Acquisition value, established above, of $2,178,000 per acre. Accordingly the Developer would be entitled to a credit of $1,089,000 for the dedication. 42 Notes: *Memorandum by Keyser - Marsten dated December 29, 2004 and updated January 15, 2004 by James Rabe of Keyser Marsten, available in the Parks Division office. **As approved by the City Council in Resolution No. 2004R -128, dated June 15, 2004. * ** The square foot figure for required recreational space per dwelling unit in The Platinum Triangle is lower than the figure used elsewhere in the City, as set forth in Section 17.08. The lower figure is recommended because of the type of residential projects anticipated for The Platinum Triangle. The mixed use type of neighborhoods proposed require smaller human scale parks within a walking distance of 2.5 to 5 minutes of each dwelling unit. 43 EXHIBIT "D -6" POLICE FACILITIES FEE Residential Uses: $31.62 per unit Office Uses: $ .10 per square foot Commercial Uses: $ .21 per square foot 390 units x $31.62 = $12,331.80 6,297 sf office x $.10 = $629.70 10,659 sf commercial x $0.21 = $2,238.39 The Revenue and Cost Specialists Consulting firm is still in the process of establishing fee guidelines for The Platinum Triangle area. During the interim the foregoing formula will be applicable to offset the equipment cost for police services in The Platinum Triangle area. The interim fee will be replaced with a one -time capital facilities fee which will be applicable to the Project. 44 EXHIBIT "D -7" PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLEMENTAL FEES SUPPLEMENTAL SEWER IMPACT FEE All Land Uses: $430.00 per 1,000 gross square foot 371,263s = 371.263 (372) x $430.00 = $159,960.00 1000 Gross Floor Building Area developed between 0.4 and 1.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) ARTERIAL HIGHWAY BEAUTIFICATION /AESTHETIC IMPACTS FEE All Land Uses: $12,500.00 per gross acre 6.284 acres x $12,500.00 = $78,550 SUPPLEMENTAL STORM DRAIN IMPACT FEE (Drainage District 27)* Residential Uses $24,500.00 per net acre Non - Residential Uses $35,000.00 per net acre This project is located in Drainage District 26 *Drainage District Maps are available in the Public Works Department. 45 EXHIBIT "D -8" TRAFFIC FEE Residential Uses Office Uses Commercial Uses $871.00 $3,384.00 $10,552.00 X $871.00 X $3,384.00 per unit per 1,000 square foot per 1,000 square foot 390 units 6,297 sf office 1000 10,659 sf commercial 1000 $339,690.00 $21,309.04 X $10,552.00 = $112,473.76 The Supplemental Traffic Fee is based upon the following: PLATINUM TRIANGLE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE CALCULATION PM PEAK AVERAGE CAPACITY COSTPER IMPACT UN TRIP LAND USE IT RATE 1 LENGTH (MI) 2 CONSUMED 3 LANE MILE 4 FEEIUNIT 5 dw elli Residential ng 0.49 1.67 0.00048086 $ 2,818,092 $ 871 Office tsf 136 1.67 0.00133330 $ 2,818,092 $ 3,384 Commercial tsf 3.89 1.67 0.00382504 $ 2,818,092 $ 10,552 1 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, hourly trip rate between 3 & 7 pm weekdays in Platinum Triangle. 2 Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model, PBQ &D, average hip length during PM peak hour in Platinum Triangle. 3 PM trip rate multiplied by average length, then divided by OCTA standard 1,700 vehicles per hour per lane. 4 Construction plus right -of -way (no landscaping) derived from State College/Lincoln project data below: $1,582,195.00 construction of State College/Lincoln intersection widening 4087 linear feet pf) of project length $387.13 per if (no landscape costs included) $2,044,039.00 coast cost per mile $774,053.00 row cost per mile 5 Impact Fee is exclusive of Citywide Traffic and Transportation Improvement Fee, which also is due. 46 EXHIBIT "'E" Development Agreement No. DAG 2004 -00002 DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS As a condition of approval of Development Agreement No. 2004-00002, the City requires OWNER to undertake and implement the maintenance of certain landscaping, private streets and private utilities, and the performance of other obligations, as set forth herein. Prior to the earlier of either the sale of the first residential dwelling unit or the issuance of the temporary or permanent "Certificate of Occupancy" for the first residential dwelling unit, OWNER shall execute and record with the Orange County Recorder a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC &Rs ") shall be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the City Attorney's Office creating maintenance obligations for an incorporated association ( "Association ") to establish a financial mechanism or financial mechanisms to maintain those areas and facilities (collectively referred to hereinafter as the "Maintenance Obligations "), which include: a. Private Alleyway /Connector Street at the west boundary of the project including sidewalks, parkway landscaping and irrigation, street lighting, signage, striping and all other appurtenances to the private alleyway /connector street. b. Private sewer and storm drain lines, together with all appropriate appurtenances including, but not limited to, area drains, inlets, and catch basins, grease interceptor, and clean outs. C. All landscape improvements within the boundaries of the Project, including all trees and tree wells, shrubbery and any and all special landscaping. e. All hardscape improvements within the boundaries of the Project. f. Parkway landscaping and irrigation (Connector Street, Katella Avenue, State College Boulevard and Wright Circle). g. Parkway hardscape (Connector Street, Katella Avenue, State College Boulevard and Wright Circle). h. Onsite fountains and art elements. i. Enclosed parking structure with mail facilities, rubbish collection areas, and bicycle storage. J- 47 k. HVAC equipment in each dwelling unit associated mechanical equipment in common roof areas. 1. Recreational amenities areas including pool & spa, barbecue areas, clubhouse meeting room(s), sauna, workout room. m. Public restrooms. n. Site lighting systems. o. Common areas associated with Restaurant & Retail facilities. p. Trash collection and facilities. q. Squeal -free surface in parking structure. r. Maintenance of on -site signs and awnings. Until such time as the Association is formed, the CC &Rs are recorded, and the Association has assumed responsibility to perform the Maintenance Obligations, OWNER shall be responsible for the performance of the Maintenance Obligations, including any additional obligations which may be specified herein. Reconveyance of all or part of any property interest therein established for the common enjoyment of the residents in the Project to a party other than the Association shall require (i) the prior written consent of the City, (ii) appurtenant easements over the said property for the benefit of each and every lot in the Property and (iii) that the reconveyance expressly affirm that the provisions of Civil Code Section 1367 relating to lien rights to enforce delinquent assessments and the CC &Rs shall remain applicable. The CC &Rs may provide any of the Maintenance Obligations may be assumed by a duly formed Platinum Triangle Infrastructure and/or Maintenance Assessment District subject to CITY's written approval.. The covenants and restrictions set forth herein constitute a general scheme for the development, protection and maintenance of the Property. Said covenants and restrictions are for the benefit of the Property and shall bind all successor owners thereof. Such covenants and restrictions shall be a burden upon, and a benefit to, not only the OWNER but also its successors and assigns. All of such covenants and restrictions are intended to be and shall be declared to be running with the land or equitable servitudes upon the land, as the case may be. The CC &R's shall provide that termination of the CC &R's or amendment of any provision thereof, which may negatively impact performance of the Maintenance Obligations, shall require prior written consent of the City. Termination of this Declarant with regard to Declarant's independent obligations in connection with development and CH approval of the Project or with regard to obligations and liabilities incurred prior to such termination. 49 EXHIBIT "F" PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT 50 EXHIBIT "G" CONNECTOR STREET COST ESTIMATE PCC SIDEWALK 2,760 LF @ 6.00 16,560 PCC CURB & GUTTER 610 LF @ 20.50 12,505 AC PAVING 12,700 @ 5.00 63,500 CATCH BASIN (w /connection) 2 EA @ 7,700 15,400 STREETLIGHTS* 3 EA @ 12,000 36,000 DRY UTILIIES 610 LF @ 20.00 12,200 SEWER MAIN 322 LF @ 122.00 39,040 REMOVE EXISTING SEWER 320 LF @ 19.00 6,080 NEW SEWER MANHOLE 1 EA @ 2,350.00 2,350 MAINTAIN SEWER FLOW 1 LS @ 6,550.00 6,550 STREET TREES 17 EA @ 1,000 17,000 LANDSCAPING 2,250 SF @ 5.00 11,250 SIGNING /STRIPING 1 LS @ 1,000 1,000 REMOVE EX AC PAVING 12,700 SF @ 2.00 25,400 REMOVE EX CURB & GUTTER 610 LF @ 7.50 4,575 REMOVE EX SIDEWALK 2,760 SF @ 2.00 5,520 ADJUST UTILITIES TO GRADE I LS @ 2,000 2,000 DRIVEWAY APPROACH 380 SF @ 7.50 2,850 REMOVE EXISTING DRIVEWAY APPROACH 380 SF @ 7.00 2,660 CURB RAMP 2 EA @ 1,450.00 2,900 REMOVE EXISTING CURB RAMP 1 LS @ 1,000.00 1,000 REMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASIN 2 EA @ 1,400.00 2,800 SUBTOTAL 289,140 15% CONTINGENCY 43,371 TOTAL 332,511 * Unit price provided by Electrical Engineering 10 -12 -04 Revised: 10 -12 -04 51 ITEM NO. 1 -A Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05049 Subject Property Date January 23, 2006 Scale Graphic Requested By FREMONT INVESTMENT Q.S. No. 184 REQUEST TO PERMIT STORAGE OF VEHICLES WITHIN AN EXISTING PARKING STRUCTURE FOR AN OFF -SITE AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 5635 East La Palma Avenue — Cinema City Theatres 2131 f f Q C-G 1 ¢ l 1 CL 9 R CUP w j 3823 1 j I CUP 2313 OW SHOPPING GET HORPE i.._.._.. AVENUE 1 ANAHEIM CITY LIMITS SP 941 RCL 70-71 -15 (1) SP 941 RCL 70-71 -1 RCL 70 -71 -15 (1) CUP 2167 RCL 70.71 -14 VAR 4271 CUP 2167 OFFICE BLDG. ' VAR 4271 D.A. 2 OFFICE BLDG. SP 94 -1 DA2 NORTHEAST INDUSTRIALAREA SP 941 RCL 89 -9048 RCL 89 -9048 RCL 87 -88-08 RCL88-89 -59 SP 941 RCL 86 -87 -29 RCL 84 -85-04 RCL 70-71 -15(1) RCL653fi -25(2) RCL 65 -66-25 } RCL 70-71 -14 RCL 65-66-17 (Res of Intent to ML) Q CUP 2001 -04318 CUP 2005-05049 RCL 65-66-17 CUP 2167 T -CUP 200404889 CUP 2003-04699 VAR 4271 CUP 2003-04822 CUP 351 = OFFRF B�DG. CUP 3484 CUP 3514 = CUP 3240 VAR 4198 CUP 2905 VAR 4192 J VAR 3892 VAR 4156 Q ( CUP SHOPPING CNTR. SP 941 (CUP 5 5) D.A. RCL 7 0 - 71 - 15 (1) ROL15 CINEMA CITY LU RCL L 70-74 4 RCL 70-7 4 THEATRES 0- CUP P 2167 CUP P 2167 D.A.5 acL S VAR 4271 4271 VAR 4271 4271 (ae :O noe OFFICE BLDG. OFFICE BLDG. 77 RCL-7s22 . 9 DA.2 a VM 3 2 - VAR 31455 RCL 63]0.6' V 1-055 -3 RCL65E61] BANK I CUP 3914 p A.5 CVUP21 L � f V -39]] RESTAURANT 296'�ry LA PALMA AVENUE SP 941 SP 94 -1 SP 94 - 1 RCL 70 -71 -15 1 ( ) S 96 RC RCL 84-05 - 07 4 8 CEROMETINC. RCL ?0.71 -14 Tc ZOOS -oa9]3 R CL S5s625 ry) RCL Q CENTER T -CUP 2003 -04765 T -CUP 2003 810 CUP3ni v DA 2 T-CUP 2001 -04375 cuP 20m -0464' PCN 9604 CDA5B5 a CUP 4094 SS /MINI MKT CUP 350 IN N -OUT & CAR WASH CUP 2708 ResT. DA 5 CUP 2022 C -G IANAHEI CUP 1983 SP 94-0 L69 -70-64 SP 941 CUP 1747 RCL]6 -T] -25 RCL 6556 -25 CUP3 234 L69 -70 -18 _RCL70 -71 -15(1) INDUSTRIAL PARK (Res.ffNentto ML) CUP3233 L65-66 -17 RCL 70-71 -1 SMALLINDUSTRIAL T- CUP2008-04973 CUPT]22 UP 2392 FIRMS T- CUP200304810 ONP 1721 UP 1635 D.A.5 cU P 20M04644 VAR HEIM HI LLS T -CUP 2002 -04609 VAR4252 AVELODGE FAMILY TREE TCCUP 200100.004219 VAR 3863 PRODUCE ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE (SC) (SCENIC CORRIDOR OVERLAY) ZONE. Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05049 Subject Property Date January 23, 2006 Scale Graphic Requested By FREMONT INVESTMENT Q.S. No. 184 REQUEST TO PERMIT STORAGE OF VEHICLES WITHIN AN EXISTING PARKING STRUCTURE FOR AN OFF -SITE AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 5635 East La Palma Avenue — Cinema City Theatres 2131 Date ofAerlal Photo: May 2002 Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05049 Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Scale: Graphic Requested By: FREMONT INVESTMENT Q.S. No. 184 REQUEST TO PERMIT STORAGE OF VEHICLES WITHIN AN EXISTING PARKING STRUCTURE FOR AN OFF -SITE AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIP WITH WAIVER OF MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. 5635 East La Palma Avenue — Cinema City Theatres 2131 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 8 8a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion) 8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT (Motion) 8c. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05049 (Resolution) SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 5.6 -acre property has a frontage of 275 feet on the north side of La Palma Avenue, a maximum depth of 888 feet and is located 296 feet west of the centerline of Imperial Highway (5635 East La Palma Avenue — Cinema City Theatres). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit under authority of Code Section 18.120.100.050.0527 to permit storage of vehicles within an existing parking structure for an off -site automotive dealership with waiver of: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces (565 required; 476 existing and recommended by the City's independent parking and traffic consultant) BACKGROUND: (3) This property is developed with an indoor theater complex, is zoned SP94 -1 (DA 5) (SC) (Northeast Area Specific Plan; Commercial Area) (Scenic Corridor Overlay) and is designated for General Commercial land uses on the Anaheim General. This property is also located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area. PREVIOUS ZONING ACTIONS: (4) The following zoning actions have occurred on the subject property: (a) Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -04822 (to permit an amusement arcade within an existing movie theater) was approved by the Planning Commission on February 9, 2004. (b) Conditional Use Permit No. 3414 (to permit the expansion of a multi- screen indoor theater complex with roof - mounted equipment and to construct a 29 -foot high parking structure with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces (899 required; 668 proposed) and minimum landscaped setback adjacent to a railroad right -of -way) was approved by the Planning Commission on July 29, 1991. (c) Conditional Use Permit No. 3240 (to permit a church to use the theatre facility, with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces (862 required; 562 proposed) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 20, 1990 for a 3 -year period. This Conditional Use Permit expired on January 20, 1993 and the church is no longer in operation. (d) Conditional Use Permit No. 2905 (to permit a 40 -foot high, 10- screen, indoor theater complex with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces (757 required; 526 proposed) was approved by the Planning Commission on August 17, 1987. On February 13, 1989, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved revised plans Page 1 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 8 to permit a 55 -foot high, 10- screen theater complex with roof - mounted equipment and waiver of minimum number of parking spaces (788 required; 412 proposed). (e) Variance No. 3892 (to waive the requirements pertaining to signs to construct a 242 square foot freestanding sign and two (2) 152 square foot roof signs) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 16, 1989. PROPOSAL: (5) The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to permit storage of vehicles within an existing 21,047 square foot (190- space) parking structure for an off -site automotive dealership (Simpson Buick Pontiac GMC). (6) The site plan (Exhibit No. 1) indicates that the property is currently developed with a 49,060 square foot theater complex and a 21,047 square foot parking structure. The applicant has indicated that the entire parking structure would be used for the storage of vehicles from the off -site automobile dealership. (7) Vehicular access is provided by two existing driveways adjacent to La Palma Avenue. The site plan and survey from the City's independent traffic engineer indicates a total of 666 existing parking spaces on -site including the parking structure and parking spaces available by agreement. With the proposed use of 190 parking spaces in the parking structure for the storage facility, there are 476 existing spaces remaining available for the theater use (398 surface spaces on -site, 43 parking spaces available with an agreement from the adjacent bank property and 35 spaces within a parking easement agreement with the adjacent commercial center to the east). Since the original approval, the theater has remodeled the Page 2 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 8 interior of the theater resulting in a reduction in the number of seats. Based on this modification, Code requires a minimum of 565 parking spaces based on 0.3 parking spaces per theater seat (1,795 seats) plus two (2) employee spaces per screen (13 screens). Since the prior conditional use permit approval, the parking lot has been re- striped resulting in a change in the number of parking spaces provided on -site. The current count reflects actual usable parking spaces in compliance with code requirements. (8) Sign plans were not submitted as part of this application nor is any signage proposed for the parking garage. (9) The applicant has indicated in the letter of operation and project description that the parking structure is to be used as a storage lot for new vehicles from the Simpson Buick, Pontiac, and GMC dealership located in Anaheim. The entire parking structure will be used for storage of vehicles. The applicant has indicated that the parking structure will be secured with steel roll up doors and gated stair wells. The applicant has further indicated that a security company will patrol the site frequently during the evening and early morning hours and that no employees will be on -site. The hours of activity for the parking structure would be 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., 7 days a week. Vehicles that are needed from the storage facility for a customer would be picked up by a sales person from the dealership. The applicant has stipulated that there would not be any truck deliveries of vehicles to the site, as these deliveries occur at the auto dealership. The vehicles are individually driven to the site. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: (10) Staff has reviewed the proposal and the Initial Study (a copy of which is available for review in the Planning Department) and finds no significant environmental impact and, therefore, recommends that a Negative Declaration be approved upon a finding by the Commission that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency; and that it has considered the proposed Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the Initial Study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment- EVALUATION (11) Storage of vehicles within an existing parking structure for an off -site automotive dealership is permitted in the SP94 -1 (DA 5) zone subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (12) The waiver pertains to the minimum number of parking spaces. Code requires a minimum of 565 spaces for the existing theater use. Plans indicate 476 spaces provided. The City's independent Traffic Consultant has prepared the parking analysis and has determined that the proposed parking area would be sufficient for the proposed uses on the property. Based upon the information provided by the applicant and upon the recommendation of the City's independent Traffic Consultant, staff recommends approval of this waiver based on the following findings: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. Page 3 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 8 All of the parking spaces will be provided on -site in the surface parking lot or in the off - site shared parking lots. The parking demand of this particular theater has been observed to be lower than the City's Municipal Code. (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. There is no curbside parking allowed along La Palma Avenue along the project frontage. (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. All of the parking will be provided within the site's surface parking lot or in the two off site lots that have allocated spaces for the theater use. (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use. The off - street parking area is providing sufficient parking for this use. The drive aisles through this site are sufficient to accommodate the site's anticipated traffic, and no congestion is anticipated, as a result of the re- allocation of the parking structure to uses other than for theater parking. (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The site will not impact the ingress or egress from any adjacent uses to the public street. (13) The applicant has indicated that due to its location and limited visibility, customers have not traditionally used the parking structure. Due to the lack of use, the parking structure has been closed and secured with roll -up doors since at least February 2005. Moreover, the reduction in the number of seats within the movie theater further reduces the need for the structure. Therefore, staff is confident that the parking study conducted by the City's consultant adequately assessed the situation that would exist if the proposal was approved since the structure is currently not in use. (14) The applicant has indicated that the storage of vehicles is limited to a one -year period with the possibility of an extension. Given the limited duration of the proposed storage facility, the lack of use of the parking structure, and the parking demand study approved by the City's independent Traffic Consultant, staff recommends that the subject use be approved for a period of one -year to expire on January 26, 2007. FINDINGS: (15) Section 18.42.110 of the parking code sets forth the following findings which are required to be made before a parking waiver is approved by the Planning Commission: (a) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces Page 4 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 8 necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use. (b) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. (c) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. (d) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use. (e) That the waiver, under the conditions imposed, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. Unless conditions to the contrary are expressly imposed upon the granting of any waiver pursuant to this section, the granting of the waiver shall be deemed contingent upon operation of the proposed use in conformance with the assumptions relating to the operation and intensity of the use as contained in the Parking Demand Study that formed the basis for approval of the waiver. Exceeding, violating, intensifying or otherwise deviating from any of the assumptions as contained in the Parking Demand Study shall be deemed a violation of the express conditions imposed upon the waiver, which shall subject the waiver to revocation or modification pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.60200 (City - Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits). (16) 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 (17) Staff recommends that, unless additional or contrary information is received during the meeting, and based upon the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, Page 5 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 8 that the Planning Commission approve the petitioner's request by taking the following actions: (a) By motion, approve a Negative Declaration for the project. (b) By motion, approve the waiver pertaining to the minimum number of parking spaces based on the findings outlined in the parking study prepared by the City's Traffic Consultant. (c) By resolution, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2005 -05049 to permit storage of vehicles within an existing parking structure for an off -site automotive dealership for a period of one year to expire January 23, 2007, by adopting the attached resolution including the findings and conditions contained herein. [DRAFT] RESOLUTION NO. PC2006 * ** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION THAT PETITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2005 -05049 BE GRANTED (5635 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE — CINEMA CITY THEATRES) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Planning Commission did receive a verified Petition for Conditional Use Permit for certain real property situated in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, described as: PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A PARCEL MAP FILED IN BOOK 84, PAGE(S) 5, 6, 7 AND 8 OF PARCEL MAPS, 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 January 23, 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 use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.120.100.050.0507 with the following waiver: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces (565 required; 476 existing and recommended by the City's independent parking and traffic consultant) 2. That the parking waiver is hereby approved based upon a parking analysis prepared by the City's independent traffic engineer who has determined that the proposed parking area referenced in the study would be sufficient for the proposed uses on the property 3. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonable foreseeable conditions of operation of such use because the observed parking demand is lower that the City's code requirement, and all of the site required parking spaces will be provided on-site- 4- That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the use as there is no curbside parking allowed along La Palma Avenue. 5. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for such use because the off - street parking is sufficient for this use, the drive aisles through the site are sufficient to accommodate the site's anticipated traffic and no congestion is anticipated as a result of the re- allocation of the parking structure to accommodate the storage of vehicles. 6. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement) in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use as all parking will Cr\PC2006 -0 -1- PC2006- be provided within the site's surface parking lot or in the two off -site lots that have allocated spaces for the theater use. 7. That the parking waiver, under the conditions imposed if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. 8. That the parking structure proposed for vehicular storage has not been used for some time, and the parking was found to be adequate without it, thereby supporting the conclusion that the surface parking provided on -site is adequate for the demand generated by the theater. 9. That the proposed 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 because the parking spaces used for the proposed storage facility are in excess of those required for the existing land use on the property. 10. 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. 11. That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 12. 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 the Anaheim Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal to permit storage of vehicles within an existing parking structure for an off -site automotive dealership with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces; and does hereby approve the Negative Declaration upon finding that the declaration reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency and that it has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process and further finding on the basis of the initial study and any comments received that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. 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 temporary storage of vehicles is approved for a period of one (1) year to expire on January 23, 2007. 2. That the hours of operation for the storage and retrieval of vehicles shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m., daily. Said retrieval shall be conducted in an orderly and safe manner through the parking lot. 3. That in the event any unloading of vehicles needs to occur, it shall occur on -site only, and shall not take place in any required parking area or within the public right -of -way. If on -site unloading through large car carriers or trucks is proposed, a plan indicating where the unloading would occur shall be submitted to the Planning Department, Planning Services Division for review and approval. 4. That no activity other than vehicle storage shall occur on the property. No vehicle repair, sales, rental, washing, detailing shall be permitted. 5. That the number of seats in the theater shall be limited to one thousand, seven hundred and ninety -five (1,795) as stipulated to by the applicant- -2- PC2006- 6. That the subject property shall be developed substantially in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department Exhibit No. 1 as conditioned herein. 7. That prior to commencement of the activity, or within a period of one (1) year from the date of this resolution, whichever occurs first, Condition No. 6, above - mentioned, shall be complied with. Extensions for further time to complete said conditions may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. 8. 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 23, 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. CHAIRMAN, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) 1, 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 23, 2006, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand this day of 2006. SENIOR SECRETARY, ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION -3- PC2006- F - % m. li iTalml r-M -1 CINEMA CITY THEATRES PARKING STUDY 5635 East La Palma Avenue Anaheim, California Prepared for: Prepared by: 11 Rafrq & L Hssociates, Inc. January 2006 Table of Contents Section Page I. Introduction 1 II. Project Location 1 III. Site Description 1 a. Existing Site 1 b. Proposed Site 1 c. Characteristics 1 IV. Site Uses 2 a. Off -Site Parking Agreements 2 V. Parking Requirements 2 VL Site Parking Counts 3 VII. Methodology of Study 3 VIII. Findings 4 IX. Recommendations and Conclusions 4 X. Appendix A: Parking Counts 5 I. Introduction This Parking Study has been prepared to determine whether the existing parking structure is needed to serve the Cinema City Theatres. When the parking structure was constructed, the theater had 2,464 seats. During a recent renovation to all- stadium seating, the number of seats has been reduced to 1,795. Another theater has since been constructed six miles away, also serving Anaheim Hills. II. Project Location The Cinema City Theatres site is located at 5635 East La Palma Avenue. It is one block west of the intersection of Imperial Highway and La Palma Avenue, and within one - quarter mile of the State Route 91 Freeway at Imperial Highway. III. Site Description a. Existing Site The Cinema City Theatres site is situated on the north side of La Palma Avenue. It has two access driveways. The easterly driveway is a signalized access, which is a shared access with the adjacent Imperial Promenade retail center. The westerly access is a right -in /right -out access onto La Palma Avenue. There are three connecting drive aisles between the Cinema City Theatres site and the Imperial Promenade. Directly across La Palma Avenue from this site is another retail center, the Anaheim Hills Village. b. Proposed Site No changes are proposed to the site at this time, other than the re- purposing of the parking structure for use by others. C. Characteristics The Cinema City Theatres is a 13- screen theater. The Imperial Promenade is a retail center with restaurants, a bank, coffee shop, and retail uses. There are signs posted with parking restrictions in the Imperial Promenade, to discourage theater patrons from parking on the Imperial Promenade site. It is our understanding from City staff, that these two sites have separate owners, who have only a reciprocal access agreement for ingress and egress along the shared driveway. The bank has 43 parking spaces that it shares with the theater, in a reciprocal parking agreement. There are an additional 35 parking spaces available at a site to the east of the theater, in a recorded parking easement agreement. IV. Site Uses The Cinema City Theatres have 13- screens and approximately 1,795 seats. The surface parking lot contains 398 parking spaces. Per the previous parking study prepared by LLG, the parking structure just north of the theater contains 190 parking spaces. The parking structure has been locked and unavailable for theater patrons for some time. This theater recently instituted self -serve, un- staffed ticket booths, which sell tickets to all customers. This machine accepts cash and charge cards. The maximum number of employees onsite at the Cinema City Theatres during the day is five and at night, eight, per City staffs conversation with the theater manager. The manager also stated that the employees are generally teenagers, who are dropped -off, and do not drive themselves to work at the theater. a. Off -Site Parking Agreements There are 35 parking spaces available in a recorded parking easement agreement and 43 parking spaces available in a reciprocal parking agreement. The total offsite spaces available are 78. V. Parking Requirements Per the City of Anaheim Municipal code, Section 18.42.040. Recreational, Commercial Indoor, Theaters — Multi- Screen Motion Picture, 0.3 spaces per seat or per patron are required, whichever results in a higher number, plus 2 employee spaces per screen. Calculation of Parkins Spaces Required by Code Theater Parking Rate Spaces Required by Code 1,795 seats 0.3 spaces/seat 539 Patrons 13 screens 2 spaces/screen 26 Employees Total required by Code 565 Tabulation of parking spaces available for theater patrons without parking structure) Location Number of existing spaces Onsite surface parking 398 Recorded Parking Easement Agreement 35 Reciprocal Parking Agreement 43 Total surface parking available 476 Adding the surface parking and offsite parking from the two agreements results in a total of 476 available parking spaces, which results in a shortfall of 89 parking spaces, based on the Code - required parking. The number of employee parking spaces is overestimated by the Code, as this Cinema City Theater Parking Study 2 Rafiq & Associates, Inc. theater employs a maximum of eight employees, which is considerably less than the 26 assumed in the Code. VI. Site Parking Counts Parking counts were taken by Southland Car Counters on four nights in December to reflect the peak demand due to holidays and school breaks. The counts are provided in Appendix A. VII. Methodology of Study Based on the number of occupied parking stalls during peak and non -peak periods, the observed parking ratio are compared with the Municipal code's parking ratio. The maximum observed number of occupied parking spaces during the four nights counted, was 356 spaces at 8:00 PM on Saturday December 17, 2005. The timeframe for the parking counts was chosen to provide an observation of the peak holiday crowd, and is considered to be a "worst- case" scenario. Compared to the 398 existing surface parking spaces available, the spaces in the surface parking lot were only 89% utilized at 8:00 PM on a Saturday during the holiday peak period. The observed parking ratio is then obtained by dividing 356 occupied spaces by 1,795 seats, to achieve 0.20 spaces per seat. This assumes that all parking in the surface lot is occupied by theater patrons, and that employees do not drive, or have parked in one of the offsite lots. The observed parking ratio is much lower than the City's code. VIIL Findings The number of existing surface parking spaces occupied onsite during the peak holiday period was 89 %. The parking ratio observed at this theater was 0.20 spaces per seat, which is considerably lower than the Municipal Code. Due to implementation of self -serve ticket dispensing machines, the number of employees required onsite (eight on duty at night) is considerably less than the Municipal Code assumes (two per screen, or 26). There are several possible explanations for the reduced parking demand that has been observed. The variety of movies shown at this theater are predominantly geared towards families and children. Of the nine movies showing during the holiday period, one was rated G, two were rated PG, four were rated PG -13 and two were rated R. Families typically have a higher vehicle occupancy rate than couples. Also, it is not uncommon for parents to drop off their children during the holiday period, rather than accompany them, resulting in a reduced parking demand. Also, the opening of a more modern theater within six miles, has created a reduced demand at this theater. Based on the parking counts taken and the review of the Cinema City Theatres site, the following findings for a variance from the Municipal Code for non - residential parking are made, below: Cinema City Theater Parking Study 3 Rafiq & Associates, Inc. Finding18.42.110.0101: That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off - street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation ofsuch use. All of the parking spaces will be provided onsite in the surface parking lot or in the offsite shared parking lots. The parking demand of this particular theater has been observed to be lower than the City's Municipal code. Finding 18.42.110.0102: That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. There is no curbside parking allowed along La Palma Avenue along the project frontage. Finding 18.42.110.0103: That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use (which property is not expressly provided as parking for such use under an agreement in compliance with subsection 18.42.050.030 (Non - Residential Uses Exception) All of the parking will be provided within the site's surface parking lot or in the two offsite lots that have allocated spaces for theater use. Finding 18.42.110.0104: That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic congestion within the off - street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use. The off -street parking area is providing sufficient parking for this use. The drive aisles through this site are sufficient to accommodate the site's anticipated traffic, and no congestion is anticipated, as a result of the re- allocation of the parking structure to uses other than for theater parking. Finding 18.42.110.0105: That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use. The site will not impact the ingress or egress from any adjacent uses to the public streets. IX. Recommendations and Conclusions The Cinema City Theatres site has an observed parking demand considerably lower than the City's Municipal Code. All of the findings for a variance from the City's Municipal Code have been met. Cinema City Theater Parking Study 4 Rafiq & Associates, Inc. Cinema City Project #: 05- 1265 -001 Appendix A Parking Counts — Holiday Period 5635 East La Palma- Anaheim Date: 12116/2005 Fri Area A B C D I E F ITotal Spaces 212 17 47 50 16 56 398 5:00 PM 194 18 35 27 0 25 6:00 PM 211 18 32 37 0 26 7:00 PM 198 15 37 36 0 31 8:00 PM 186 14 40 36 0 37 M273 9:00 PM 182 11 40 34 0 34 10:00 PM 178 11 32 26 0 26 A: 200 Std. & 12 HC Spaces Layout of Parking Areas (north is up; La Palma Avenue is down) Total Available Max.Occupied 3 romenade site) Anaheim Hills Village across street Cinema City Theater Parking Study 5 Rafiq & Associates, Inc. right in /out access signalized access La Palma Avenue Appendix A (Continued) Parking Counts — Holiday Period Cinema City 5635 East La Palma- Anaheim Project #: 05- 1265 -001 Date: 12/17/2005 Sat Area A B I C I D I E I F Total S aces 212 17 1 47 1 50 1 16 398 5:00 PM 198 14 41 33 0 38 324 6:00 PM 207 14 41 35 0 39 336 7:00 PM 213 16 44 39 0 41 353 8:00 PM 215 17 44 39 0 41 356 9:00 PM 190 16 35 23 0 30 294 10:00 PM 184 12 31 19 0 24 270 A: 200 Std. & 12 HC Spaces Total Available Max.Occupied 356 was the maximum observed number of parking spaces occupied throughout the four day count period. Cinema City Theater Parking Study 6 Rafiq & Associates, Inc. Appendix A (Continued) Parking Counts -- Holiday Period Cinema City 5635 East La Palma- Anaheim Project #: 05- 1265 -001 Date: 12/23/2005 Friday Area A B C D E F Total Spaces 212 17 47 50 16 56 398 5:00 PM 166 14 25 27 0 16 248 6:00 PM 143 14 28 24 0 18 227 7:00 PM 131 14 24 20 0 14 203 8:00 PM 129 14 19 18 0 12 192 9:00 PM 120 14 17 15 0 6 172 10:00 PM 109 11 14 13 0 5 152 A: 200 std. & 12 HC spaces Total Available Max. Occupied Cinema City Theater Parking Study 7 Rafiq & Associates, Inc. Appendix A (Continued)Parking Counts — Holiday Period Cinema City 5635 East La Palma- Anaheim Project #: 05- 1265 -001 Date: 12/30/2005 Friday Area A B C D E F Total # of Spaces 212 17 47 50 16 56 398 5:00 PM 189 11 31 24 0 17 272 6:00 PM 185 13 32 24 0 19 273 7:00 PM 171 14 32 25 0 19 261 8:00 PM 167 14 31 19 0 17 248 9:00 PM 151 14 29 17 0 12 223 10:00 PM 134 14 27 13 0 8 196 A: 200 Std. & 12 HC Spaces Total Available Max. Occupied Cinema City Theater Parking Study 8 Rafiq & Associates, Inc. SL �' .s. �, rJ • NI f :b- ' ®FANAHEIM HILLS Letter of operation The parking structure located at 5635 E. La Palma, Anaheim Ca. 92807 is to be used as a storage lot for new vehicles from #1 Simpson Buick, Pontiac, GMC at 8200 E. Crystal Dr. Anaheim, Ca. 92807. The entire parking structure will be used for storage. The parking structure is secured with steel roll up doors and gated stair wells. There is adequate lighting throughout the facility on each level. Although the structure is completely secure, we will have our security company patrol the site frequently during the evening and early morning hours. The traffic we create will be minimal since we will only be moving vehicles in and out of the facility for storage purposes. There will not be any employees at the site accept when vehicles need to be moved or washed. The hours of use will be anytime between 7:00 am and 11:00 pm 7 days a week as necessary to obtain vehicles from the storage facility. Jay Malloy Service Director Simpson Buick Pontiac GMC 8200 E. CRYSTAL DarvE • PRONE (714) 998 -5411 • FAx (714) 998 -6994 www.lsimpson.com CUP 2005 n 0 5 9 Qf NMI I,.Ac0Lai O-H RCL 2004-00127 RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 83 -84-19 RCL 70 -71 -28 RCL 70 -71 -27 VAR 3390 llxn. VAR 2152 F it �5 qL SINCLAIR ST RCL ss -oo 1s (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 59 -60-23 T -CUP 2002 -04578 T -CUP 2001 -04446 CUP 2001 -04441 CUP 1424 CUP 1301 VAR 3791 V -1779 S AUTO REPAIR & RENTAL q Variance No. 2005 -04675 Z 99-00-15 5 (Res. es. of to SE) '5 > RCL 9d-00-15 J� 0 (Res. to SE) REQUEST WAIVERS OF (A) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES RCL 1 -28 B PERMITTED NUMBER OF TENANTS ON A MONUMENT SIGN RCL 1x11 -21 STADIUM PLAZA BUSINESS PARK SMALL IND. FIRMS O-H RCL 2004-00127 RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 83 -84-19 RCL 70 -71 -28 RCL 70 -71 -27 VAR 3390 llxn. VAR 2152 F it �5 qL SINCLAIR ST RCL ss -oo 1s (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 66 -67 -14 RCL 59 -60-23 T -CUP 2002 -04578 T -CUP 2001 -04446 CUP 2001 -04441 CUP 1424 CUP 1301 VAR 3791 V -1779 S AUTO REPAIR & RENTAL IND. FIRMS o� Pv �NVE � C6 (PTMU) RCL 99-00 -15 (Res. of Int SE) RCL 87 -88 -26 RCL 8384 -24 RCL 59 60 -23 CUP 2005-04966 CUP 3369 CUP 3165 O-L IPTMUI RCL 9 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 90 -91 -11 RCL 82 -83-33 RCL 59 -60-23 CUP 3369 CUP 2433 CUP 2257 STADIUM TOWER PLAZA OFFICE BLDG. FR (PTMU) RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 56 -57 -93 CUP 2400 CUP 750 RCL 66 -67 -14 ANGEL STADIUM a$ o T -CUP 2003 -04774 kDIUM TOWER PLF OFFICE BLDG. O -L (PTMU) RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 90 -91 -11 RCL 83 -84 -24 RCL 59 -60 -23 CUP 3369 CUP 3326 r CUP 3165 CUP 2651 VAR 3608 PARKING q qNp Rq / T /GN SgNT FF Rq Ctl'qY VACANT h W W C7 • ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE PTMU (PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE OVERLAY) ZONE q Variance No. 2005 -04675 Z 99-00-15 (Res. es. of to SE) '5 > RCL 70-7 0 -71 -ze Requested By: THE SHOPS AT STADIUM TOWERS RCL 70 -71 -27 REQUEST WAIVERS OF (A) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES I B PERMITTED NUMBER OF TENANTS ON A MONUMENT SIGN (C) MAXIMUM NUMBER OF MONUMENT SIGNS D) MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF MONUMENT SIGN SMALL IND. FIRMS IND. FIRMS o� Pv �NVE � C6 (PTMU) RCL 99-00 -15 (Res. of Int SE) RCL 87 -88 -26 RCL 8384 -24 RCL 59 60 -23 CUP 2005-04966 CUP 3369 CUP 3165 O-L IPTMUI RCL 9 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 90 -91 -11 RCL 82 -83-33 RCL 59 -60-23 CUP 3369 CUP 2433 CUP 2257 STADIUM TOWER PLAZA OFFICE BLDG. FR (PTMU) RCL 99 -00-15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 56 -57 -93 CUP 2400 CUP 750 RCL 66 -67 -14 ANGEL STADIUM a$ o T -CUP 2003 -04774 kDIUM TOWER PLF OFFICE BLDG. O -L (PTMU) RCL 99 -00 -15 (Res. of Int. to SE) RCL 90 -91 -11 RCL 83 -84 -24 RCL 59 -60 -23 CUP 3369 CUP 3326 r CUP 3165 CUP 2651 VAR 3608 PARKING q qNp Rq / T /GN SgNT FF Rq Ctl'qY VACANT h W W C7 • ALL PROPERTIES ARE IN THE PTMU (PLATINUM TRIANGLE MIXED USE OVERLAY) ZONE TO WAIVE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AND PERMITTED SIGNS. 2410 -2420 East Katella Avenue — Stadium Towers Plaza D 2135 Variance No. 2005 -04675 Eli Subject Property Date: January 23, 2006 Scale: Graphic Requested By: THE SHOPS AT STADIUM TOWERS Q.S. No. 117 REQUEST WAIVERS OF (A) MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES B PERMITTED NUMBER OF TENANTS ON A MONUMENT SIGN (C) MAXIMUM NUMBER OF MONUMENT SIGNS D) MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF MONUMENT SIGN E) PERMITTED NUMBER OF WALL SIGNS (F) PERMITTED LOCATION OF WALL SIGNS (G) MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF LETTERS /LOGOS ON WALL SIGNS TO WAIVE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AND PERMITTED SIGNS. 2410 -2420 East Katella Avenue — Stadium Towers Plaza D 2135 Staff Report to the Planning Commission January 23, 2006 Item No. 9 9a. CEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Motion for continuance) 9b. VARIANCE NO. 2005 -04675 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: (1) This irregularly- shaped, 2.4 -acre property has a frontage of 600 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue, a maximum depth of 480 feet and is located 37 feet east of the centerline of Howell Avenue (2410 -2420 East Katella Avenue - Stadium Towers Plaza). REQUEST: (2) The applicant requests approval of the following: Variance No. 2005 -04675 — Request waivers of (a) minimum number of parking spaces, (b) permitted number of tenants on a monument sign, (c) maximum number of monument signs, (d) maximum height of monument sign, (e) permitted number of wall signs, (f) permitted location of wall signs, and (g) maximum height of letters /logos on wall signs to waive minimum number of parking spaces and permitted signs for a previously- approved commercial center- BACKGROUND (3) This property is currently developed with an office building and a freestanding restaurant and is zoned C -G (General Commercial). The Land Use Element Map of the Anaheim General Plan designates this property for Mixed Use land uses. Surrounding properties to the east, west and south are also designated for Mixed Use land uses, and to the north (across Katella Avenue) for Office High land uses. (4) The applicant, John Hill, has submitted the attached letter dated, January 11, 2006, requesting a continuance to the February 6, 2006, Commission meeting in order to complete revisions to the parking study and sign program- RECOMMENDATION (5) That the Commission, by motion, continue this item to the February 6, 2006, Planning Commission meeting. S R- VAR2005- 04675(co n't)akv Page 1 Attachment - Item No. 9 Amy, Per our conversation this morning, we would like to request a continuance for our Parking and Sign Variance submittal (VAR2005- 04675). Currently we are scheduled for the January 23rd Planning Commission Hearing, but based on additional comments from the city's traffic consultant we understand that meeting the deadline for the January 23rd hearing date is not possible and would like to request that we push our hearing date back to the February 6th Planning Commission Hearing. If there are any additional items that need to be resolved or that arise before our new hearing date, please let us know. Thank you for your help. Sincerely, Peter Louis rha robinson hill architecture, inc. A California Corporation 3195 B Airport Loop Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 www. rhainc. net E -mail: louisarhainc.net Telephone: 714. 825. 8888 Facsimile: 714. 825. 8889