Loading...
PC 2015/08/24 City of Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda Monday, August 24, 2015 Council Chamber, City Hall 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California • Chairman: Michelle Lieberman • Chairman Pro-Tempore: Mitchell Caldwell • Commissioners: Paul Bostwick, Bill Dalati, Grant Henninger, Victoria Ramirez, John Seymour • Call To Order - 5:00 p.m. • Pledge Of Allegiance • Public Comments • Public Hearing Items • Commission Updates • Discussion • Adjournment 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. A copy of the staff report may be obtained at the City of Anaheim Planning Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805. A copy of the staff report is also available on the City of Anaheim website www.anaheim.net/planning on Thursday, August 20, 2015, after 5:00 p.m. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda (other than writings legally exempt from public disclosure) will be made available for public inspection in the Planning Department located at City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, during regular business hours. You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following e-mail address: planningcommission@anaheim.net 08/24/15 Page 2 of 5 APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications, Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Public Convenience or Necessity Determinations, Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 calendar 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. If you 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. Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 5:00 P.M. Public Comments: This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the jurisdiction of the Anaheim City Planning Commission or public comments on agenda items with the exception of public hearing items. 08/24/15 Page 3 of 5 Public Hearing Items ITEM NO. 2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05805 (DEV2015-00059) Location: 2002 East Lincoln Avenue Request: For a conditional use permit for the sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages at a restaurant with an outdoor patio within a commercial center (Chipotle). Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Amy Vazquez avazquez@anaheim.net . ITEM NO. 3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05813 VARIANCE NO. 2015-05027 (DEV2015-00067) Location: 100 North Harbor Boulevard Request: To permit an adult educational and job training facility in an existing office building with fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Vanessa Norwood vnorwood@anaheim.net ITEM NO. 4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05814 (DEV2015-00069) Location: 1515 South Manchester Avenue Request: To utilize an existing 158,708 square foot warehouse and office building for “back-of-house” office and warehouse uses to support Disneyland Resort theme parks, hotels and entertainment venues. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines as a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) Categorical Exemption. Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Elaine Thienprasiddhi ethien@anaheim.net 08/24/15 Page 4 of 5 ITEM NO. 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 348 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00492 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00065 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00115 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2014-00262 (DEV2011-00125) Location: Anaheim Canyon encompasses approximately 2,600 acres in the northern portion of the City of Anaheim, roughly bounded on the north by Orangethorpe Avenue, on the south by the Santa Ana River, on the east by Imperial Highway (SR-90), and on the west by the Orange Freeway (SR-57). Request: City-initiated request for the Planning Commission to recommend City Council approval of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (ACSP) Project. The ACSP has been prepared to provide the framework for current and future development in Anaheim Canyon. The ACSP would replace the development requirements of the existing zoning on the properties in this area with the requirements of the ACSP. The ACSP is intended to remove regulatory obstacles to the reuse of existing structures and promote infill development of currently vacant or underutilized properties. The goal of the ACSP is to encourage sustainable development and create a business environment attractive to a wide variety of industries. Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission will determine whether to recommend City Council certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 348 and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 312, and the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Water Supply Assessment. Resolution No. ______ Resolution No. ______ Resolution No. ______ Resolution No. ______ Resolution No. ______ Project Planner: Susan Kim skim@anaheim.net Adjourn to Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. 08/24/15 Page 5 of 5 CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at: 4:00 p.m. August 19, 2015 (TIME) (DATE) LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK SIGNED: ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION The City of Anaheim wishes to make all of its public meetings and hearings accessible to all members of the public. The City prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. If requested, the agenda and backup materials will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Any person who requires a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, in order to participate in the public meeting may request such modification, accommodation, aid or service by contacting the Planning Department either in person at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, or by telephone at (714) 765-5139, no later than 10:00 a.m. one business day preceding the scheduled meeting. La ciudad de Anaheim desea hacer todas sus reuniones y audiencias públicas accesibles a todos los miembros del público. La Ciudad prohíbe la discriminación por motivos de raza , color u origen nacional en cualquier programa o actividad que reciba asistencia financiera federal. Si se solicita, la agenda y los materiales de copia estarán disponible en formatos alternativos apropiados a las personas con una discapacidad, según lo requiere la Sección 202 del Acta de Americanos con Discapacidades de 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), las normas federales y reglamentos adoptados en aplicación del mismo. Cualquier persona que requiera una modificación relativa a la discapacidad, incluyendo medios auxiliares o servicios, con el fin de participar en la reunión pública podrá solicitar dicha modificación, ayuda o servicio poniéndose en contacto con la Oficina de Secretaria de la Ciudad ya sea en persona en el 200 S Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, o por teléfono al (714) 765-5139, antes de las 10:00 de la mañana un día habil antes de la reunión programada. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM NO. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: AUGUST 24, 2015 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05805 LOCATION: 2002 East Lincoln Avenue (Chipotle Mexican Grill) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Kim Oganesyan with Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. The agent representing the applicant is Valerie Sacks with Liquor License Specialists and the property owner is NMC Anaheim, LLC. REQUEST: The applicant requests a conditional use permit to allow the sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages at a restaurant with an outdoor dining area within a retail center. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities), and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05805. BACKGROUND: This 27.3-acre property is developed with a 381,000 square foot retail center. The property is located in the “C-G” General Commercial zone and the General Plan designates this property for Regional Commercial land uses. The property is surrounded by apartments to the south, retail uses to the west across State College Boulevard, retail uses and single-family residences to the north across Lincoln Avenue and apartments to the east across Peregrine Street. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to open a 1,800 square foot Chipotle Grill with a 452 square foot outdoor dining area. This space is currently occupied by The Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf. The restaurant would serve alcoholic beverages inside and in the outdoor dining area as part of a full lunch and dinner menu. The restaurant would operate seven days a week from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The business would operate with an On-Sale Beer and Wine-Eating Place (Type 41) Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license, and would strictly serve beer at this time. The applicant is requesting approval for full alcohol in order to add margaritas to their menu at a future date. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05805 August 24, 2015 Page 2 of 3 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS: Conditional Use Permit: Before the Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this Zoning 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; 3) 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 either the particular area or 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; and 5) 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. The Zoning Code requires a conditional use permit to authorize the sale of alcoholic beverages in a restaurant in order to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. A determination of public convenience or necessity is not required for restaurants serving alcoholic beverages. The number of alcohol licenses allowed in each of the City’s census tracts is regulated by ABC and is based upon population. The restaurant is located within Census Tract No. 863.04, which has a population of 4,847 residents. This population allows for five on-sale licenses and presently there are two licenses within the tract. The location is within Police Reporting District No. 1628, which has a crime rate that is 265 percent above the city average. There have been 53 calls for service to The Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf location in the last year. The calls have consisted of 23 disturbances, 11 trespassing complaints, two brandishing of knife calls, two petty thefts, one burglary alarm, three sales of narcotics, six suspicious subjects, one fight, one missing juvenile, one stolen vehicle, one robbery and one lost or stolen property. The crime rate within ¼ mile of this property has a crime rate of 256 percent above the citywide average with calls for service during the past year consisting of 86 petty thefts, 30 vandalisms, 82 drug abuse violations and 33 simple assaults. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05805 August 24, 2015 Page 3 of 3 Police Department staff attributes the high number of calls for service at this location to the pro-active management of the existing coffee shop to monitor and inform the Police Department of loitering activities that routinely occur. Police Department staff has found that loitering issues are often associated with coffee shops in the City and they believe the calls for service will significantly decrease when the coffee shop closes. The proposed restaurant operates with a business model that focuses on quick lunch and dinner meals and the high turnover in tables does not create an attractive environment for loitering. The proposed restaurant will have a defined outdoor dining area enclosed by a 40-inch high railing that will be less inviting to loitering than the openly accessible outdoor seating area provided at the coffee shop. Staff believes the sale of alcoholic beverages would be compatible with the surrounding area because this is a predominantly commercial area consisting of other restaurant and retail uses. Staff does not anticipate that the addition of the sales of alcoholic beverages at this location would contribute to an increase in crime. The two other Chipotle restaurants that sell alcoholic beverages in the City have not generated significant calls for service or code violations. Conditions of approval to help ensure that the business is operated in a responsible manner have been attached to the draft resolution. These conditions include a prohibition on any exterior advertising of alcoholic beverages and required ABC LEAD (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs) training for employees. Staff conducted an inspection of the property and found it to be well maintained. There are no outstanding Code Enforcement violations associated with this property. CONCLUSION: The sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a restaurant would complement existing nearby retail businesses. The recommended conditions of approval would ensure that the sale of alcoholic beverages would be compatible with surrounding land uses. Staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Amy Vazquez Jonathan E. Borrego Contract Planner, Lilley Planning Group Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution 2. Letter of Request 3. Conditional Use Permit Justification Letter 4. Police Memorandum 5. Photographs 6. Site Plan 7. Floor Plan RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE C-GRETAIL C-GRETAIL C-GRETAIL C-GSTATE OF CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RES. RS-2 SINGLE FAMILY RE S I D E N C E RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RM-4BARKLEY APARTMENTS161 DU RS-2 SFR RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-2 SINGLE FAMILY RE S I D E N C E R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E C-GRETAIL RM-4APTS6 DU C-GRETAIL C-GAUTO R/S RM-4APTS8 DU RM-44PLEX TAPTS12 DU TAPTS24 DU TWESTPORT GDNSAPTS 24 DU RM-4WESTPORT VILLA APTS 30 DU RM-4 APTS T D U P L E XRM-4 APTS T S F R TAPTS16 DU T APTS 8 DU T S F R C-GANAHEIM TOWNSQUARE C -G R E T A I L C -G R E T A I L RS-2 SFR C-GOFFICES C -G S E R V I C E S T A T I O N / R E T A I L R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E O-LMED OFF T SFR O -L R E T A I L R S -2 S F R O -L O F F . R S -2 S F R O -L M E D O F F T S F R O -L R E L I G . U S E O -L D A Y C A R E C-GMEDICAL OFFICE C -G A U T O R /S C -G 4 P L E X C -G O F F I C E C-GRESTAURANT C-G RETAIL R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E RS-2SFR C -G R E S T A U R A N T RS-2SFR R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E RS-2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-2 SFR RS-2 SFR C -G T A M P I C O M O T E L C -G R E S T A U R A N T R S -2 S F R RS-2SFR R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S . R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S . R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S . R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S . R S -2 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RES. E LINCOLN AVE E B R O A D W A Y E WARD TER E CENTER ST S A S H S T S R E S E D A S T S P E R E G R I N E S T E PARADISE RD S P R I S C I L L A W A Y S T O W E R C T S D U S T I N P L S L O N D O N C T S N E W A V E S C I T A D E L L L N S P L Y M O U T H P L S P E R E G R I N E S T E. LINCOLN AVE E. LA PALMA AVEN . E A S T S T E. SOUTH ST S . E A S T S T S .S U N K I S T S T S . R I O V I S T A S T E . B R O A D WAY N . S U N K I S T S T N . R I O V I S T A S T 2002 East Lincoln Avenue DEV No. 2015-00059 Subject Property APN: 083-051-15083-051-16083-051-14 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 E LINCOLN AVE S S T A T E C O L L E G E B L V D E B R O A D W A Y E WARD TER E CENTER ST E WESTPORT DR S A S H S T S R E S E D A S T S P E R E G R I N E S T E PARADISE RD S P R I S C I L L A W A Y E PURITAN LN S R E V E R E S T S T O W E R C T S D U S T I N P L S L O N D O N C T S N E W A V E S C I T A D E L L L N E S A N T A A N A S T S P L Y M O U T H P L S O L A N A W A Y S C E N P L A W A Y S P E R E G R I N E S T S A S H S T S C I T A D E L L L N E. LINCOLN AVE E. LA PALMA AVEN . E A S T S T E. SOUTH ST S . E A S T S T S .S U N K I S T S T S . R I O V I S T A S T E . B R O A D WAY N . S U N K I S T S T N . R I O V I S T A S T 2002 East Lincoln Avenue DEV No. 2015-00059 Subject Property APN: 083-051-15083-051-16083-051-14 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 - 1 - PC2015-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05805 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2015-00059) (2002 EAST LINCOLN AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve (i) Conditional Use Permit No. 2015- 05805 to permit the sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages at a restaurant with an outdoor patio within a portion of an existing commercial retail center (collectively referred to herein as the "Proposed Project") for premises located at 2002 East Linclon Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the premises is located within a commercial retail center approximately 27.3 acres in size (the "Property"). The Anaheim Genreral Plan designates the Property for Regional Commercial land uses. The Property is located in the "C-G" Commercail Zone and is, therefore, subject to the zoning and development standards set forth in Chapter 18.08 (Commercial Zones) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (“Code”); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 24, 2015 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05805, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, in conformance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the Planning Commission finds and determines that the effects of the Proposed Project are typical of those generated within those classes of projects which involve negligible or no expansion of an existing use [i.e., Section 15301 (Existing Facilities)]. Therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and - 2 - PC2015-*** WHEREAS, the Planning 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 with respect to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05811, does find and determine the following: 1. The proposed restaurant with the sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized under 18.08.030. 2. The proposed conditional use permit to permit alcoholic beverages within a restaurant and outdoor patio, as conditioned herein, would 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 restaurant would be located within a small tenant of an existing commercial retail center surrounded by compatible buildings and uses. 3. The size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the restaurant and outdoor patio in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety because the facility would be located within an commercial retial center building that is surrounded by other commercial use land uses. 4. The traffic generated by the restaurant with alcoholic beverages and outdoor patio will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the traffic generated by this use will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking will be provided to accommodate the use. 5. 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 as the proposed land use will continue to be integrated with the surrounding retial use area and would not pose a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. - 3 - PC2015-*** NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. No. 2015-05805, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of that portion of the Property for which Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05805 is applicable in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the 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. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 2015. 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, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 4 - PC2015-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on August 24, 2015 by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of August, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2015-*** - 6 - PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05805 (DEV2015-00059) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the business premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the business owner shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied or discovered by the business owner. Planning & Building Department, Code Enforcement Division 2. The business shall be operated in accordance with the Letter of Request submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the business operation, as described in that document, shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial conformance with the Letter of Request and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning & Building Department, Planning Services Division 3. There shall be no exterior advertising or sign of any kind or type, including advertising directed to the exterior from within, promoting or indicating the availability of alcoholic beverages. Interior displays of alcoholic beverages or signs which are clearly visible to the exterior shall constitute a violation of this condition. Police Department 4. Security measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to deter unlawful conduct of employees and patrons, promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of persons and vehicles, and to prevent disturbances to the neighborhood by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the business premisess. Police Department 5. Any and all security 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 Professions Code. (Section 4.16.070 Anaheim Municipal Code). Police Department 6. Petitioner shall not share any profits, or pay any percentage or commission to a promoter or any other person, based upon monies collected as a door charge, cover charge, or any other form of admission charge, including minimum drink orders, or the sale of drinks. Police Department 7. There shall be no entertainment, amplified music or dancing permitted in, on or at the business premises at any time unless the proper permits have been obtained from the City of Anaheim. Police Department - 7 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 8. The number of persons occupying the premises shall not exceed the maximum occupancy load as determined by the Anaheim Fire Department. Signs indicating the occupant load shall be posted in a conspicuous place on an approved sign near the main exit from the room. (Section 25.114(a) Uniform Fire Code). Police Department 9. There shall be no amplified music in the patio area. Police Department 10. Managers, owners, and wait staff need to call the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and Police Department obtain LEAD (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs Program) Training. The contact number is 714-558-4101. Police Department 11. There shall be no admission fee, cover charge, or minimum purchase required of any patron of the business premises. Police Department 12. The patio must be fenced and fully enclosed in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to and approved by the City. If there is a pedestrian gate, it must be self-closing and have a sign posted on the interior that reads “No alcohol beyond this point.” Police Department 13. That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a public premise (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be operated as a public premise, as defined in Section 23039 of the Business and Professions Code. Police Department 14. At all times when the business premises is open for business, the business premises shall be maintained as a bona fide restaurant and shall provide a menu containing an assortment of foods normally offered in such restaurant. Police Department 15. Parking lots, driveways, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses and grounds contiguous to buildings, shall be provided with enough lighting to illuminate and make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the business premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and vehicles onsite. Police Department 16. The petitioner(s) shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter the area adjacent to the business premises over which they have control, as depicted on the plans submitted to and approved by the City. Police Department 17. The door(s) shall be kept closed at all times during the operation of the business premises except in cases of emergency. Said door(s) shall not consist of a screen or ventilated security door. Police Department - 8 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 18. The Petitioner(s) shall post and maintain a professional quality sign facing the business premises parking lot(s) that reads as follows: NO LOITERING, NO LITTERING NO DRINKING OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES VIOLATORS ARE SUBJECT TO ARREST The sign shall be at least two feet square with two-inch block lettering. The sign shall be in English and Spanish. Police Department 19. The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the business premises shall be prohibited. Police Department 20. Petitioner(s) shall police the area under their control in an effort to prevent the loitering of persons about the business premises. Police Department GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 21. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning & Building Department, Planning Services Division 22. The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 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 may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning & Building Department, Planning Services Division 23. The business premises shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner, which plans are on file with the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein. Planning & Building Department, Planning Services Division ATTACHMENT “A” Project Description REQUEST FOR DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL Anaheim Municipal Code §§18.08.030, 18.38.220.0206 Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806 Chipotle Mexican Grill (Chipotle Mexican Grill, LLC, d/b/a Chipotle Mexican Grill, (“the Applicant” and/or “Chipotle”) is seeking the following discretionary approval: Pursuant to Anaheim Municipal Code Sections 18.08.030 and 18.38.220.0206, the Applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for a 452 s.f. outdoor seating/dining area and the on-site sale, service, and consumption of alcoholic beverages, pursuant to a type 47 ABC license in connection with a new 46-seat (30 indoor and 26 outdoor), 2,252 s.f. fast food restaurant (1,800 s.f. indoor; 452 s.f. outdoor), and proposed hours of operation from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily, located in the C-G (General Commercial) zone. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant is requesting an Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) to allow seating and dining on a 452 s.f. patio and the sale, service, and on-site consumption of a full line of alcoholic beverages at its forthcoming 2,252 s.f. (1,800 s.f. indoor and 452 s.f. outdoor) restaurant at 2002 E Lincoln Avenue in Anaheim (“Site”). The Site is developed with a mix of automobile-oriented restaurant and retail uses in single-story commercial buildings with adjacent on-site surface parking in an area with a C-RC (Regional Commercial) land use designation. Chipotle will replace a Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf and is expected to open to the public in October 2015. As a practical matter, Chipotle will be operating pursuant to a type 41 (beer and wine) license rather than a type 47 (full line). However, the Applicant would like the ability to upgrade the license type going forward to give it operational flexibility should it decide it wants to offer margaritas at this location as it does in many of its other locations in California. The restaurant will have 30 indoor seats and 26 seats on an outdoor patio. The Applicant proposes to serve alcohol on the patio, and the client is requesting the ability to do so. The within request for a Conditional Use Permit is based upon the Applicant’s desire to be able to offer patrons a beer or margarita to enjoy with their meals in all of its dining areas at this location. The Applicant believes that its request for conditional use approval for the sale and service of alcoholic beverages for on- site consumption along with meals in all dining areas at its “fast casual” Mexican-style restaurant is warranted based upon the company’s outstanding record of compliance with the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”), the appropriateness of the location for the requested use, and its 1 Conditional Use Permit Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue ATTACHMENT NO. 2 overall reputation as a well-established, responsible company that can be trusted to manage the requested ABC license and CUP appropriately. THE APPLICANT The Applicant owns and operates more than 1,700 restaurants throughout the United States, Canada, and overseas, and is rapidly expanding its brand. The Applicant attributes its tremendous growth rate since it opened its first location in 1993 on its vision for its restaurants. The idea is simple: demonstrate that customers could be served good quality food in a distinctive atmosphere—quickly and at an affordable price point. Chipotle uses high-quality raw ingredients, classic cooking methods and distinctive interior design—features that are more frequently found in the world of fine dining. The Applicant essentially established the category of dining now called "fast-casual," the fastest growing segment of the restaurant industry, where customers expect food quality that's more in line with full-service restaurants, but with the speed and convenience of fast food. As the company has grown, the Applicant’s vision has evolved as well. Several years ago, the Applicant launched a campaign to incorporate a concern for the environmental and societal impact of its restaurants into its business model. Features of this model, which the Applicant calls “Food with Integrity,” include a commitment to high-quality food, sustainable business practices, charitable giving, and responsible sourcing of animal products. This philosophy is part of an overall commitment to running a business which has a positive impact on its employees, its patrons, its environmentally minded vendors and suppliers, and the communities in which its restaurants are located. Certainly practices designed to ensure appropriate training and management practices related to sales of alcoholic beverage products are an important feature of Chipotle’s corporate philosophy. Indeed, the Applicant has an outstanding record of compliance with the California ABC and parallel regulatory agencies wherever its restaurants are located. THE SITE The subject Site is on a cluster of parcels near the southeast corner of E Lincoln Avenue and State College Boulevard and within a 27.5 acre regional automobile-oriented shopping center called Anaheim Town Square, The shopping center is anchored by a Ralph’s supermarket and a K Mart. The Site is designated Regional Commercial under the Anaheim General Plan Land Use Element and is zoned C-G (General Commercial). The shopping center is developed with approximately 12 buildings and a surface parking lot with over 1,700 parking stalls for the shared use of the restaurant and retail tenants on-site. The parcels in the northeast corner of the shopping center, where Chipotle will be located, are developed with surface parking and two commercial buildings perpendicular to each other and occupied by variety of retail and restaurant uses. The 5,722 s.f. building in which Chipotle will operate consists of three commercial tenant spaces. Chipotle will replace a Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf establishment adjacent to private and shared patio areas on the westerly side of the subject space. The other two tenants currently occupying the space are Gamestop and an AT&T retail store. Lincoln Avenue and State College Boulevard are developed with a number of small to large shopping centers with a variety of commercial uses, including retail, restaurant and service-related uses; low density office uses; and some single-family residential uses. The properties north of Chipotle and E Lincoln Avenue are zoned C-G (General Commercial) and O-L (Low Intensity Office), and are developed with a Walgreens 2 Conditional Use Permit Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue pharmacy and service-related office uses respectively. The area east of the Chipotle is zoned C-G (General Commercial) and is part of the Anaheim Town Square shopping center, which is developed with a variety of retail and restaurant uses. The property just east of the center is developed with multi-family residential buildings in the RM-4 (Multi-family Residential) zone. The properties west of Chipotle and State College Boulevard are zoned C-G (General Commercial) and are developed with a gas station and a variety of retail uses. Just west of these commercial properties are single family houses in the RS-2 (Single Family Residential) zone. The properties south of Chipotle are part of Anaheim Town Square shopping center in the C-G (General Commercial) zone. Past these uses are retail and restaurant uses in the C-G (General Commercial) zone along State College Boulevard and multi-family residential buildings in the RM-4 zone oriented toward E Westport Drive. The nearest residential uses are oriented toward small side streets. These uses are buffered from the Site due to the high concentration of commercial uses along State College Boulevard and E Lincoln Avenue in general, and surrounding their intersection specifically. The nearest residentially zoned parcels relative to the forthcoming Chipotle are located approximately 350 feet from its forthcoming location. The Applicant’s proposed hours of operation are 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily. Adequate parking is provided on site. The Applicant believes that the request for an CUP to permit an Outdoor Seating and Dining Area and the sale and service of a full line of alcoholic beverages at its forthcoming restaurant is appropriate for this location. The within application is operational only and will have no negative impact on parking supply or the surrounding neighborhood. In fact, the request, if granted, will allow the Applicant to make a more positive contribution to the character of the surrounding neighborhood and to the City of Anaheim by providing a popular, tasty, responsibly managed restaurant to add to the synergy of uses in this area. 3 Conditional Use Permit Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue ATTACHMENT “B” Letter of Justification REQUEST FOR DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL Anaheim Municipal Code §§18.08.030, 18.38.220.0206 Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E. Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, CA 92806 A. Indicate how the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area. The Applicant’s requested Conditional Use Permit to allow the sale, service, and consumption of a full line of alcoholic beverages and seating and dining on a 452 s.f. outdoor patio at its forthcoming restaurant at 2002 E Lincoln Avenue will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area. On the contrary, the Applicant believes that the new restaurant at this location, like all of its locations, will have a positive impact on its surroundings for many reasons. First, the Applicant believes the design and construction of its restaurants have a positive impact on the surrounding built environment. Chipotle, as a company, pays an unusual amount of attention to the design of its restaurants as compared to other venues in the same category. The design of each restaurant is unique and tailored to be aesthetically complementary to the neighborhoods and centers in which it is located. Chipotle is an international chain, but its restaurants are not “cookie cutter” in their design. Each store is designed by an architectural team which employs a certain design vocabulary but provides variety from location to location. The forthcoming restaurant will be designed to provide a clean, sophisticated environment. In addition, as part of its corporate philosophy, Chipotle is dedicated to including many green building methods and sustainable building materials into the construction of its restaurant. Chipotle’s dedication to creating a sense of place within the communities where its restaurants are located is uncommon in its sector of the restaurant industry. The thoughtful design and construction of each of Chipotle’s restaurants is another factor that ensures that they have a positive impact on surrounding properties and the growth and development of the area. The Applicant anticipates that this location will be consistent with this pattern. It’s forthcoming 2,252 s.f. restaurant (1,800 s.f. indoor and 452 s.f. outdoor) with alcohol sales and an outdoor dining patio is being sited and designed to be inviting to motorists and pedestrians and to engage surrounding uses and passersby. The Applicant’s restaurant will operate in a responsible and professional manner which will be compatible with the other uses on the subject Site and in the surrounding area. The request for a CUP to enable the sale and service of alcohol at this location and to establish an outdoor dining patio is supportive of the restaurant, which in turn is supportive of the growth and development of the larger site and surrounding area. In terms of its operational characteristics, Chipotle owns and operates more than 1,700 restaurants throughout the United States, Canada, and overseas, and is rapidly expanding its brand. Chipotle attributes 1 Conditional Use Permit Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue ATTACHMENT NO. 3 its tremendous growth rate since it opened its first location in 1993 on its vision for its restaurants. The idea is simple: demonstrate that customers could be served good quality food in a distinctive atmosphere, quickly and at an affordable price point. Chipotle uses high-quality raw ingredients, classic cooking methods, and distinctive interior design—features that are more frequently found in the world of fine dining. Chipotle essentially established the category of dining now called "fast-casual," the fastest growing segment of the restaurant industry, where customers expect food quality that's more in line with full- service restaurants, but with the speed and convenience of fast food. The Applicant’s ability to offer beer and margaritas to its customers in its fast-casual, Mexican-style restaurant is part of the company’s overall approach of offering a higher level of dining experience than one typically finds at this price point. The ability of customers to enjoy a full line of alcoholic beverages at Chipotle’s forthcoming Lincoln Avenue location is part of this unique dining experience, and an important factor in the overall success of the Chipotle brand of restaurants. The long-term success of the restaurant, in turn, will benefit the surrounding community as the success of the various uses in the area synergistically support each other. In terms of the requested 452 s.f. outdoor dining patio, 26 seats will be provided and enclosed behind a patio railing that separates the dining patio from the shared patio adjacent to it. The Applicant is requesting the ability for patrons to enjoy a beer or margarita with their meals in the restaurant as a whole, including the patio. The Applicant believes that the patio dining will add a pleasant ambiance to the restaurant. Its location at the corner of State College Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue will help attract customers to the shopping center as a whole. The area surrounding the Anaheim Town Square shopping center is developed with a variety of uses including healthcare, office, retail, and restaurant uses. The properties north of Chipotle and E Lincoln Avenue are zoned C-G (General Commercial) and O-L (Low Intensity Office), and are developed with a Walgreens pharmacy and service-related office uses respectively. The area east of the Chipotle is zoned C-G (General Commercial) and is part of the Anaheim Town Square shopping center, which is developed with a variety of retail and restaurant uses. The property just east of the center is developed with multi-family residential buildings in the RM-4 (Multi-family Residential) zone. The properties west of Chipotle and State College Boulevard are zoned C-G (General Commercial) and are developed with a gas station and a variety of retail uses. Just west of these commercial properties are single family houses in the RS-2 (Single Family Residential) zone. The properties south of Chipotle are part of the Anaheim Town Square shopping center and are in the C-G (General Commercial) zone. Some of the other C-G (General Commercial) zoned uses include the other retail and restaurant uses in the along State College Boulevard. There are multi-family residential buildings in the RM-4 zone, oriented toward E Westport Drive. The nearest residential uses are oriented toward small side streets and are buffered from the Site by the variety of commercial uses along State College Boulevard and E Lincoln Avenue. The nearest residentially zoned parcels relative to the forthcoming Chipotle are located approximately 350 feet away. In this context, the restaurant with proposed sale of beer and margaritas and an outdoor patio with dining and alcohol consumption will not adversely affect nearby residential uses. The Applicant recognizes an obligation to be a respectful operator within the community and has established procedures in place to ensure the responsible management of beer and margaritas at all the restaurants that offer these items. The Applicant’s restaurants attract a sophisticated customer base, maintain modest daily hours of operation, and operate in a responsible and professional manner. The Applicant has established itself as a reputable and successful company by virtue of its attention to detail 2 Conditional Use Permit Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue and quality with respect to all aspects of its business. Indeed, its responsible management and training of all employees selling and handling alcoholic beverages is critical to the company’s continued success. As a result, the Applicant has an outstanding record of compliance with the California Alcoholic Beverage Control agency and other parallel agencies wherever its restaurants are located. In any case, the service of these items is expected to be a very small component of Chipotle’s business. The Applicant’s desire for the requested CUP is because its experience at its other locations—over 1,700 worldwide—is that its customers appreciate having the ability to enjoy beer or margaritas with their meals. The ability to offer these items is an important component of Chipotle’s business model, and is one of various features that help it contribute positively to the character of the surrounding area. There is a demand for such products, and the ability to obtain them in a well-designed, responsibly managed environment at the price point at which Chipotle offers meal service is beneficial to the community. The ability to serve these items is an important element of each restaurant’s success, and Chipotle’s restaurants have a positive impact on their surroundings. Moreover, Chipotle’s success at this location will generate employment and tax dollars for the benefit of the City, and will assist in the synergy of uses in this area. In addition, the Applicant welcomes input from the Planning Department and the Police Department to ensure that the negative impacts sometimes associated with the consumption of these items are mitigated. Finally, the owners and operators of the restaurant are committed to providing a safe and enjoyable experience to their patrons, and to operating the restaurant with alcohol sales indoor and on the outdoor dining patio in a manner which is consistent with this goal. Thus, the Applicant’s restaurant will operate in a manner which will be compatible with its surroundings and will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses or the growth and development of the area. B. Explain how the site proposed for the use is large enough to accommodate anticipated growth of the development and allow the continued operation without causing a detriment to the particular area or to health and safety. The Site of the proposed Chipotle, the Anaheim Town Square shopping center, is large enough to accommodate the proposed variety of uses on the site and will allow the continued operation without causing a detriment to the area or to health and safety. The subject site is a level, irregularly shaped plot of land at the southeasterly corner of an active intersection at State College Boulevard and E Lincoln Avenue. It is improved with a variety of retail, restaurant, and community-serving commercial uses to which the Chipotle will make a positive contribution. The area of the Site where Chipotle will operate provides pedestrian-oriented access through the shared patio at the northwest corner of the Site. The Site is also accessible by automobile and provides shared parking on-site that accommodates the various retail and restaurant uses. In any case, Chipotle will take over a space most recently occupied by a Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf, also classified as a restaurant use. As such, it is unlikely to spur an appreciable amount of growth in the context of the shopping center as a whole. The Anaheim Town Square shopping center is anchored by several large retail tenants including Ralph’s and K Mart. Other tenants within the same corner of the shopping center include Togo’s, Baskin Robbins, Game Stop, an AT&T retail store, WaBa Grill, and various other neighborhood-serving retail and restaurant uses. Other businesses in the shopping center include Pep Boys Auto, Goodwill, 99 Cents Only Store, Planet 3 Conditional Use Permit Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue Fitness Anna’s Linens, IHOP Restaurant, and Payless Shoe Source, just to illustrate a selection. The Applicant’s restaurant will occupy 1,800 s.f. of an approximately 5,722 s.f. building in a space previously occupied by a Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf and enclose a 452 s.f. outdoor dining area out of what is now a common patio. For all of the above reasons, the site improvements are more than adequate to accommodate the Applicant’s restaurant with alcohol service and a 452 s.f. outdoor dining patio without causing a detriment to the particular area or to health and safety. C. Indicate how the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon the roads designed and constructed to handle the traffic in the area. The Applicant anticipates that the forthcoming Chipotle with sale of alcohol and outdoor dining will not trigger a significant amount of additional traffic nor impose an undue burden on the adjacent streets. The shopping center is located at the southeast corner of E Lincoln Avenue and State College Boulevard. According to the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan, Lincoln Avenue and State College Boulevard are both Primary Arterials with existing bus and truck routes. The sections of these roadways adjacent to the center are six lane divided facilities with no street-side parking. The forthcoming Chipotle will occupy a 2,252 s.f. space (1,800 s.f. indoor and 452 s.f. outdoor) in a 3-unit, 5,722 s.f. building that was designed and developed for retail and restaurant uses and which is currently occupied by a Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf, GameStop and AT&T retail store. The space that Chipotle will occupy is only a small portion of a large, regional commercial center with approximately 372,185 s.f. of retail and restaurant space, and approximately forty retail, restaurant, and other commercial tenants. According to the property owner’s estimates, the traffic count for the site is approximately 59,000 cars daily for all uses on-site. The area of the Site where Chipotle will operate provides pedestrian-oriented access through the shared patio at the northwest corner of the Site. Over 1,700 shared, on-site parking stalls for the uses within the center are available throughout the Site, more than enough to accommodate the traffic the Applicant’s restaurant will generate. The Applicant anticipates that the traffic that will be generated by the forthcoming Chipotle will be only a small fraction of the traffic generated by all the uses on-site as a whole, given the size and operating characteristics of the restaurant. Moreover, The Applicant’s restaurant itself is a by-right use in the C-G (General Commercial) zone. The restaurant will be taking over a space most recently occupied by a Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf—a use that is also categorized as a restaurant. Additionally, the Applicant expects that most of its patrons will be people already on the site or in the area running errands. Finally, the within requests are for on-site alcohol sales and an outdoor dining area—uses that won’t themselves impact the roads and traffic. Nonetheless, the Applicant and the property owner anticipate that the forthcoming Chipotle will provide an economic benefit to the center and to the immediate area by responsibly operating a Mexican-style restaurant popular with the communities and jurisdictions wherever they operate. For all the reasons above, the traffic generated by the forthcoming Chipotle will not impose an undue burden upon the Primary Arterials adjacent to the site. 4 Conditional Use Permit Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue D. Indicate how approval of this Conditional Use Permit with any conditions of approval, will not harm the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. The approval of this Conditional Use Permit with any conditions of approval for the proposed Chipotle restaurant at Anaheim Town Square with the sale, service, and consumption of a full line of alcoholic beverages and outdoor dining will not harm the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim because of the Site’s location within the shopping center and district and the responsible operational and management practices of the restaurant. The forthcoming restaurant will be located at an active intersection at State College Boulevard and E Lincoln Avenue, which is improved with a variety of retail, restaurant, and community-serving commercial uses to which the Chipotle will make a positive contribution. The Anaheim Town Square shopping center itself is anchored by several large retail tenants including Ralph’s and K Mart. Other tenants within the same corner of the shopping center include Togo’s, Baskin Robbins, Game Stop, an AT&T retail store, WaBa Grill, and various other neighborhood-serving retail and restaurant uses. Other businesses in the shopping center include Pep Boys Auto, Goodwill, 99 Cents Only Store, Planet Fitness Anna’s Linens, IHOP Restaurant, and Payless Shoe Source, just to illustrate a selection. The Applicant’s restaurant will occupy 1,800 s.f. of an approximately 5,722 s.f. building in a space most recently occupied by a Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf and proposes to add a 452 s.f. outdoor dining area adjacent to the building. The nearest residential uses are oriented toward small side streets. These uses are buffered from the Site due to the high concentration of commercial uses along State College Boulevard and E Lincoln Avenue in general, and surrounding their intersection specifically. The nearest residentially zoned parcels relative to the forthcoming Chipotle are located approximately 350 feet from its forthcoming location. These residential neighborhoods are generally buffered from the project Site due to the large concentration of commercial uses in the area. In this context, the restaurant with proposed sale of beer and margaritas and an outdoor dining patio will not harm the health and safety of the nearby residential neighborhoods. Chipotle restaurants are popular with consumers as well as the communities and municipalities in which they are located. The same forward-thinking approach that makes these restaurants popular with customers also carries over into the responsible operational and management practices that make them an asset to the citizens in the cities wherever they are located. As a practical matter, Chipotle will initially be operating pursuant to a type 41 (beer and wine) license rather than a type 47 (full line). However, the Applicant would like the operational flexibility to upgrade the license type going forward should it decide it wants to upgrade the ABC license and start offering margaritas at this location as it does in many of its other restaurants in California. Regardless, the Applicant’s experience at its other locations has been that alcohol sales comprise only a very small percentage of gross sales at its restaurants. The Applicant’s desire for the requested CUP is because its experience at its other locations—over 1,700 worldwide—is that its customers appreciate having the ability to enjoy beer or margaritas with their meals. There is a demand for such products, and the ability to obtain them in a well-designed, responsibly managed environment at the price point at which Chipotle offers meal service is beneficial to the community. The ability to serve these items is an important element of each restaurant’s success and their ability to have a positive impact on their surroundings. Indeed, the ability to offer these items is an important component of Chipotle’s business model, and is one of various features that help it contribute positively to the character of the surrounding area. Chipotle uses 5 Conditional Use Permit Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue high-quality raw ingredients, classic cooking methods and distinctive interior design—features that are more frequently found in the world of fine dining. The Applicant essentially established the category of dining now called "fast-casual," the fastest growing segment of the restaurant industry, where customers expect food quality that's more in line with full-service restaurants, but with the speed and convenience of fast food. As the company has grown, the Applicant’s vision has evolved as well. Several years ago, the Applicant launched a campaign to incorporate a concern for the environmental and societal impact of its restaurants into its business model. Features of this model, which the Applicant calls “Food with Integrity,” include a commitment to high-quality food, sustainable business practices, charitable giving, and responsible sourcing of animal products. This philosophy is part of an overall commitment to running a business which has a positive impact on its employees, its patrons, its environmentally minded vendors and suppliers, and the communities in which its restaurants are located. Certainly practices designed to ensure appropriate training and management practices related to sales of alcoholic beverage products are an important feature of Chipotle’s corporate philosophy. It is because of these practices that the Applicant has an outstanding record of compliance with the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and local municipalities at all of its locations. Indeed, the Applicant believes that its restaurants have a positive impact on communities wherever they are located. The Applicant’s restaurants attract a sophisticated customer base, maintain modest daily hours of operation from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and operate in a responsible and professional manner. Alcohol sales are anticipated to be a small percentage of gross receipts. Further, the Applicant recognizes an obligation to be a respectful operator within the community, and welcomes input from the Planning Department and the Police Department. Ultimately, the reputation of the company depends in part on its ability to ensure that all of its locations operate in a manner which does not harm the health and safety of the citizens in the cities where its restaurants are located. Chipotle has established procedures in place in its restaurants to ensure the safe and responsible management of these products. Finally, the owners and operators of the restaurant are committed to providing a safe and enjoyable experience to their patrons, and to operating the restaurant in a manner which is consistent with this goal. Thus, the restaurant with modest operating hours (11:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. daily), alcoholic beverage service, and an outdoor dining patio can be expected to operate in a manner that will be compatible with and not adversely affecting of its surroundings. The Applicant believes that its proposed hours of operation are modest and consistent with the commercial character of the neighborhood and compatible with the other commercial and restaurant uses in the vicinity. Additionally, the Applicant does not plan to offer happy hour or other discounted drink promotions. The Applicant has established itself as a reputable and successful company by virtue of its attention to detail and quality with respect to all aspects of its business. Indeed, its responsible management and training of all employees selling and handling alcoholic beverages is critical to the company’s continued success. For all of the above reasons, the restaurant with the sale and service of alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption and an outdoor dining patio will not harm the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. 6 Conditional Use Permit Chipotle Mexican Grill Store # 2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue ATTACHMENT NO. 4 Site Location: Chipotle #2619 2002 E Lincoln Avenue., Anaheim, CA 92806 Photo Exhibit ATTACHMENT NO. 5 Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 2 - 02/27/15 1 Looking at regional aerial. 2 Looking at city aerial. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 3 - 02/27/15 3 Looking at community aerial. 4 Looking at site overall aerial. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 4 - 02/27/15 5 Looking at site close up aerial. 6 Looking west on Lincoln. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 5 - 02/27/15 7 Looking east on Lincoln. 8 Looking South on College. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 6 - 02/27/15 9 Looking at existing storefront and accessible parking. 10 Looking at existing trash enclosure. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 7 - 02/27/15 11 Looking at north elevation. 12 Looking at partial east elevation and tower over existing shared patio. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 8 - 02/27/15 13 Looking at proposed north patio area and future patio door location. 14 Looking southwest at future patio. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 9 - 02/27/15 15 Looking south at future patio. 16 Looking southeast across common area from patio area. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 10 - 02/27/15 17 Looking west along Lincoln Avenue. 18 Looking at tower signage. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 11 - 02/27/15 19 Looking at accessible path to sidewalk on south elevation. 20 Looking at accessible access to sidewalk on south elevation. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 12 - 02/27/15 21 Looking at home-made window film. 22 Looking at existing trash enclosure. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 13 - 02/27/15 23 Looking at side entry to existing trash enclosure. 24 Looking at potential grease interceptor location. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 14 - 02/27/15 25 Looking north through east side of space. 26 Looking south through east side of space. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 15 - 02/27/15 27 Looking at northeast corner of space. 28 Looking at existing north entry storefront. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 16 - 02/27/15 29 Looking east at the future patio door location. 30 Looking at front of space from entry. Photo Exhibit Anaheim Town Square Store No. 2619 - 17 - 02/27/15 31 Looking at existing back kitchen conditions. 32 Looking at existing back of kitchen conditions. /LTXRU/LFHQVH&RQVXOWDQW 9DOHULH6DFNV /LTXRU/LFHQVH6SHFLDOLVWV 'DPRQ6WUHHW /RV$QJHOHV&$(PDLOYDOHULH#OLTXRUOLFHQVHFRP 3KRQH RIILFH   H[W3KRQH GLUHFW   )D[  ZZZOLTXRUOLFHQVHFRPATTACHMENT NO. 6 Liquor License Consultant Valerie Sacks Liquor License Specialists 2222 Damon Street Los Angeles, CA 90021 Email: valerie@liquorlicense.com Phone (office): (800) 222-5777 ext. 237 Phone (direct): (310) 500-6282 Fax: (310) 943-3322 www.liquorlicense.com /LTXRU/LFHQVH&RQVXOWDQW 9DOHULH6DFNV /LTXRU/LFHQVH6SHFLDOLVWV 'DPRQ6WUHHW /RV$QJHOHV&$(PDLOYDOHULH#OLTXRUOLFHQVHFRP 3KRQH RIILFH   H[W3KRQH GLUHFW   )D[  ZZZOLTXRUOLFHQVHFRPATTACHMENT NO. 7 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM NO. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: AUGUST 24, 2015 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05813 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05027 LOCATION: 100 North Harbor Boulevard, Suite 200 (Taller San Jose) APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Nancy Loughrey representing Taller San Jose Anaheim. The property owner is Morteza Danesh, representing Harbor Lincoln, LLC. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to permit an adult educational and job training facility in an existing office building. The applicant also requests a variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities), and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05813 and Variance No. 2015-05027. BACKGROUND: This 2.1-acre property is developed with a multi-tenant, two- story office building and is located in the “O-L” Low Intensity Office Zone. The General Plan designates this property for Mixed Use land uses. Surrounding land uses include office uses and multi-family residential uses to the north across Chartres Street, medical offices to the east, a bank and a church to the west across Harbor Boulevard, and a mixed use building to the south across Lincoln Avenue. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to establish a 9,771 square foot educational and job training facility that provides courses in the medical assisting and construction fields. A maximum of 40 students would be enrolled in the program at any time. There would be nine full-time and three part-time employees. The facility would be located on the second floor of an existing two-story office building. No changes to the existing building or parking lot are proposed. The proposed hours of operation are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05813 VARIANCE NO. 2015-05027 August 24, 2015 Page 2 of 4 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS: Conditional Use Permit: Before the Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this 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; 3) 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 either the particular area or 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; and 5) 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. A conditional use permit is required to permit an adult educational and job training facility in this zone in order to determine compatibility with the surrounding area. The proposed facility would offer classroom training in the medical assisting and construction fields. Hands-on construction training would take place at a separate location in Santa Ana and no construction-type activities would occur on-site. All activities would be conducted indoors. The property has medical offices, a barber/cosmetology school, and general office uses on-site. Staff believes that the proposed use would be compatible with these other uses and would not limit the operations of businesses on the property. Further, staff believes that the school would be compatible with surrounding land uses in the area and would not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Proposed conditions of approval limit the number of students and require the school to operate as described in the attached Letter of Request. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05813 VARIANCE NO. 2015-05027 August 24, 2015 Page 3 of 4 Parking Variance: A variance shall be granted upon a finding by the Planning Commission or City Council that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) 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 of such use; 2) 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; 3) 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; 4) 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; and 5) 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 Zoning Code requires a total of 189 parking spaces: 53 spaces for general offices; 43 spaces for the medical offices; 28 spaces for the barber/cosmetology school; and, 65 spaces for the proposed adult school based on 20 spaces per 1,000 square feet of classroom area and 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of office area. The property contains a total of 141 parking spaces. The applicant indicates in the letter of operation that the parking demand for their program is anticipated to be approximately 28 spaces, including 12 spaces for employees and 16 spaces for students. The letter indicates the majority of students in the program would take public transportation to the facility and that only approximately 40% of the 40 students enrolled in the program would drive their own car. A parking survey was conducted by the applicant on August 5th to document the number of parking spaces occupied on a typical weekday, during peak morning and afternoon parking times. The survey notes that a maximum of 53 spaces were occupied on the site. With the additional demand of approximately 28 parking for the educational facility, the total parking demand for the property would be 81 spaces. Staff has visited this property on various occasions since the submittal of this application and observed that there is adequate parking available and no evidence of parking impacts from this site on adjacent streets or properties. Based on the operational characteristics of the educational facility, the parking survey provided by the applicant, and staff observations, staff believes that the number of parking spaces on-site would be adequate to accommodate the proposed business without impact to adjacent businesses within the complex or on the surrounding public streets or properties. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05813 VARIANCE NO. 2015-05027 August 24, 2015 Page 4 of 4 CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the conditions exist for Planning Commission to make the required findings to approve this request. The proposed educational facility and job training center is compatible with the other uses on the property and the surrounding area. Further, the number of parking spaces provided is adequate to accommodate the educational and job training facility and other businesses on the property. Staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Vanessa Norwood Jonathan E. Borrego Associate Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution 2. Applicant’s Letter of Request and Parking Justification Letter 3. Parking Survey 4. Site and Floor Plans 5. Photographs C-GBANK C-G (DMU)HARBOR LOFTS C-GMEDICAL OFFICE C-G (DMU)ANAHEIM ICE O-LOFFICES TST. CATHERINE'SMILITARY ACADEMY C-GRETAIL O-LOFFICES C-GRETAILC-GRETAIL R S -3 F O U R P L E X R S -3DUPL E X R S - 3 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E R S -3 T R I P L E X R S - 3 S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E R S -3 T R I P L E X R S -3 F O U R P L E X R S -3SFR R S -3 T R I P L E X RS-3SFR N H E L E N A S T W C H A R T R E S S T W L I N C O L N A V E S H A R B O R B L V D N H A R B O R B L V D S . E A S T S T W.LINCOLN A V E E. L INC O LN AVE N . E A S T S T N . H A R B O R B L V D W. BROADWAY N . A N A H E I M B L V D N . L O A R A S T E . B RO A D W AY S . A N A H E I M B L V D 100 North Harbor Boulevard DEV No. 2015-00067 Subject Property APN: 255-064-17 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 N H E L E N A S T W C H A R T R E S S T W L I N C O L N A V E S H A R B O R B L V D N H A R B O R B L V D S . E A S T S T W.LINCOLN A V E E. L INC O LN AVE N . E A S T S T N . H A R B O R B L V D W. BROADWAY N . A N A H E I M B L V D N . L O A R A S T E . B RO A D W AY S . A N A H E I M B L V D 100 North Harbor Boulevard DEV No. 2015-00067 Subject Property APN: 255-064-17 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 - 1 - PC2015-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05813 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05027 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2015-00067) (100 NORTH HARBOR BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (hereinafter referred to as the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05813 to permit an "adult educational and job training facility" in an existing office building and Variance No. 2014-05027 to permit fewer off-street parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code (herein referred to collectively as the "Proposed Project") for certain real property at 100 North Harbor Boulevard, in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property, consisting of approximately 2.1 acres is currently developed with an office building. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for Mixed Use land uses. The Property is located in the "O-L" Low Intensity Office Zone and is subject to the zoning and development standards of Chapter 18.08 (Commercial Zones) of the Zoning Code (the "Code"); WHEREAS, this Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 24, 2015, at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05813 and Variance No. 2015-05027 and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, in conformance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the Planning Commission finds and determines that the effects of the Proposed Project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and - 2 - PC2015-*** WHEREAS, the Planning 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 with respect to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05813, does find and determine the following: 1. The request for a conditional use permit to permit an "adult educational and job training facility" is considered to be within the Zoning Code definition of an "Educational Institution", i.e., "[a] public, parochial, private, charitable or nonprofit institution that provides educational instruction to students over the age of five (5) years" and, for purposes of this application, is considered to be an "Educational Institution - Business". An "Educational Institution - Business" is a permitted primary use in the "O-L" Low Intensity Office Zone subject to a conditional use permit under Subsection .010 of Section 18.08.030 of the Code. 2. The conditional use permit, under the conditions imposed, will not adversely affect the surrounding land uses and the growth and development of the area because the Property is developed with a office building and, based upon the parking justification letter described below, there are a sufficient number of parking spaces in the parking lot to accommodate the parking demand for all proposed uses. 3. The size and shape of the Property is adequate to allow the full operation of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health, safety and general welfare. 4. The traffic generated by the use would not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the number of vehicles entering and exiting the site would not exceed the typical office uses that would be permitted as a matter of right within the “O-L” Office Low Zone. 5. The granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05813 under the conditions imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim and will provide a land use that is compatible with the surrounding area. WHEREAS, based upon the parking justification letter submitted by the applicant, the Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for Variance No. 2015-05027 to permit less parking than required by the Code in conjunction with job training and educational facility within an existing office building should be approved for the following reasons: SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces. (189 spaces required; 141 spaces proposed) 1. That the parking variance, under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer off- street parking spaces to be provided for the Proposed Project 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 because the site has ample parking spaces to accommodate the use on the site. A parking justification letter and analysis was prepared by the applicant, determining that the current number of parking spaces is sufficient to accommodate the use. Because the majority of students will take public transportation to the facility ample parking spaces would be available for all uses on the site; and - 3 - PC2015-*** 2. That the parking variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the Proposed Project because the on-site parking on the Property will adequately accommodate the parking demands of the Proposed Project; and 3. That the parking variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate vicinity of the Proposed Project because the on-site parking on the Property will adequately accommodate parking demands of all uses on the site; and 4. That the parking variance, under the conditions imposed, will not increase traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the Proposed Project because the project site provides adequate ingress and egress points to the Property and are designed to allow for adequate on-site circulation; and 5. That the parking variance, 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 Project because the project site has existing ingress or egress access points that are designed to allow adequate on-site circulation and therefore will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the office building; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05813 and Variance No. 2015-05027, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property under Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05813 and Variance No. 2015-05027 in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. - 4 - PC2015-*** BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the 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. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 2015. 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, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on August 24, 2015 by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of August, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2015-*** - 6 - PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05813 AND VARIANCE NO. 2015-05027 (DEV2015-00067) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS 1. The business shall be operated in accordance with the Letter of Request submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the business operation as described in that document shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial conformance with the Letter of Request and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses. Planning & Building Department, Planning Services Division 2. No Loitering - 647b P.C.” signs shall be posted at the entrances to parking lots/structures as well as pedestrian gathering places. Signs must be at least 2’ x 1’ in overall size, with white background and black 2” lettering. Signage may be combined with “No Trespassing – 602(k) P.C.” requirement provided both code sections are referenced as shown. Additionally, occupant shall instruct students not to loiter and to leave the premises within a reasonably short period of time following their classes and/or business with the school. Police Department, Planning & Research Unit 3. Adequate lighting of parking lots, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be maintained with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all person, property, and vehicles on-site. Police Department, Planning & Research Unit 4. On-going during project operation, no required parking areas shall be fenced or otherwise enclosed for outdoor storage uses. Public Works, Traffic and Transportation Division 5. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the business owner shall be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being applied or its discovery by the business owner. Planning & Building Department, Code Enforcement Division GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 6. The subject Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein. Planning & Building Department, Planning Services Division - 7 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT 7. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning & Building Department, Code Enforcement Division 8. The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 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 may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning & Building Department, Code Enforcement Division 9. The subject Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein. Planning & Building Department, Code Enforcement Division •• TALLER SAN JOSE ST. JOSEPH'S WORKSHOP August 13, 2015 Planning Department Planning Services Division City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Conditional Use Permit Parking Justification Letter - Taller San Jose Anaheim Taller San Jose empowers young adults (ages 18-28), who are disconnected from the workforce and educational opportunities, with the job training and life skills needed to achieve economic stability and enduring personal and professional success. It has been in operation in Santa Ana since 1995, and is enthusiastic about the opportunity to offer its programs in Anaheim. Taller San Jose has been encouraged to offer their programs in Anaheim by ACT Anaheim, a consortium of government and businesses operating together through the Orange County Community Foundation to help at-risk Anaheim youth. Taller San Jose has been a two year recipient of their funding. The Accelerate Change Together Anaheim (ACT Anaheim) grant initiative addresses gaps in service for underserved Anaheim youth. It is focused on building the ability of the nonprofit sector to engage youth and parents in programs that strengthen families and communities. It was launched in 2014 by Angels Baseball, the Anaheim Ducks and Disneyland Resort, which together committed $3 million to benefit Anaheim youth over three years. More information is available at http://www.oc-cf.org/for­ nonprofits/act-anaheim. Taller San Jose provides skills training, case management, and linkage with employment placement and education pathways during the 28 months that our interns are engaged with the program. The most intensive time is during skills training, when they are on site for 35 hours per week for approximately four months. We intend to have two cohorts of up to 20 students on site at any one time. After the training phase, they are expected to either obtain employment or continue their education at another institution. They are also expected to check in with their support specialists on a regular basis for two years after training. Skills training in Anaheim will be in construction and medical assisting. Both programs offer classroom and hands on experience. The medical assisting training will be done completely at this location. The construction interns will spend about 18 hours of their training time at our construction training facility in Santa Ana. Our office hours are 8:00 to 5:00, Monday through Friday. We expect to have approximately 9 full time and 3 part time staff on site on a regular basis. 801 North Broadway Santa Ana, CA 92701 Phone (714) 543-5105 Fax (71 4fa51fJr�tf Jose -Additional information to Conditional Use Permit Application www.tallersanjose.org 8/14/15 sponsored by the Sisters of St.Joseph of Orange ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Ta l l e r  Sa n  Jo s e  An a h e i m Re q u e s t e d  In f o m a t i o n  fo r  CU P 7/ 1 5 / 1 5 Ha r b o r  Li n c o l n  LL C Te n a n t B l d g S u i t e B u s i n e s s  Ho u r s R e n t a b l e  Va c a n t P r o r a t a  Sh a r e 1 4 1  Parking  places We s t e r n  Me c i c a l 1 0 0  N.  Ha r b o r 1 0 0 8 : 0 0 ‐4: 3 0 7 , 1 8 9                19 . 7 7 % 2 8 . 7 5                           Ta l l e r  Sa n  Jo s e 1 0 0  N.  Ha r b o r 2 0 0 8 : 0 0 ‐4: 3 0 9 , 7 7 1                9, 7 7 1                    26 . 8 0 % 3 9 . 0 8                           Th e  Re a l  Ba r b e r s ,  In c . 4 5 1  W.  Li n c o l n 1 0 0 8 : 0 0 ‐5: 0 0 4 , 7 8 7                13 . 1 6 % 1 9 . 1 5                           VA C A N T 45 1  W.  Li n c o l n 2 4 9 1 , 1 0 0                1, 1 0 0                    3. 0 2 % 4 . 4 0                             VA C A N T 45 1  W.  Li n c o l n 2 5 1 1 , 1 0 0                1, 1 0 0                    3. 0 2 % 4 . 4 0                             VA C A N T 45 1  W.  Li n c o l n 2 5 2 1 , 0 1 9                1, 0 1 9                    2. 8 0 % 4 . 0 8                             VA C A N T 40 1  W.  Li n c o l n 1 0 0 1 0 , 0 4 4            10 , 0 4 4                27 . 6 2 % 4 0 . 1 8                           TO T A L 3 5 , 0 1 0            23 , 0 3 4                140.04                         Si z e Taller San Jose - Additional information to Conditional Use Permit Application 8/14/15 Wednesday, August 5th 1:46 pm 40 cars observed - 141 total spaces available ATTACHMENT NO. 3 Taller San Jose - Additional information to Conditional Use Permit Application 8/14/15 Wednesday, August 5th 4:39 PM 23 cars observed Taller San Jose - Additional information to Conditional Use Permit Application 8/14/15 Thursday, August 6th 8:35am 53 cars observed Taller San Jose is comfortable that parking will be more than adequate for our needs. ATTACHMENT NO. 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM NO. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: AUGUST 24, 2015 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05814 LOCATION: 1515 South Manchester Avenue APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant and property owner is The Walt Disney Company, represented by Deanna Detchemendy. The applicant’s agent is Kathleen Truman with Truman & Elliott, LLC. REQUEST: The applicant proposes to utilize an existing 158,708 square foot warehouse and office building for “back-of-house” office and warehouse uses to support Disneyland Resort theme parks, hotels and entertainment venues. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1, Existing Facilities), and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05814. BACKGROUND: This 9.4-acre property is located in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2) Zone and is designated for Commercial Recreation land uses by the General Plan. The site is developed with a one-story office and warehouse building currently occupied by Sybron Dental Specialties. Surrounding uses include a vocational college to the north, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office building to the south, the I-5 Freeway to the east, and hotels to the west. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to use the existing building for back-of-house office and warehouse uses to support the theme parks, hotels and entertainment venues associated with the Disneyland Resort. Use of the building would include 86,500 square feet of warehouse area to be used, among other things, as a model shop and for storage of sets, props and costumes. Approximately 70,000 square feet of the building would be used for administrate office uses and an existing 2,200 square foot training room would remain. The project does not include any expansion or modifications to the exterior of the building or parking lot. Vehicular access to the site is gained via three driveways on Manchester Avenue, with the northerly driveway being used for ingress only. Deliveries to the site would enter at the northernmost driveway and exit from the southernmost driveway. Existing roll up doors and loading areas would be utilized for deliveries and pick-up. Typical hours of peak use would be 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday to Friday, however the building would be used seven days a week to support theme park activities. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05814 August 24, 2015 Page 2 of 3 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS: Before the Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: Conditional Use Permit: Before the Planning Commission grants a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by this 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; 3) 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 either the particular area or 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; and 5) 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. The proposed use of this property for back of house uses is not a land use type that is specifically identified in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan; however, the Specific Plan zone contains the following provision: “Uses or activities not specifically listed or prohibited in this chapter may be established by conditional use permit when determined by the Planning Commission to be consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of the Specific Plan.” Staff believes that the proposed land use plan is consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan because the uses proposed are directly related to, and support, a major tourism-related use. The proposed use is less intensive than the existing use of the project site since Sybron Dental Specialties uses the building primarily as active office space. The proposed split between warehouse, office, and classroom space results in a surplus of Code-required parking spaces available on-site for the back-of-house uses. Though not required, the applicant submitted a traffic memo which indicates that the project would result in a decrease of 552 daily vehicle trips, compared to the previous use. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05814 August 24, 2015 Page 3 of 3 CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the proposed use of the building for back-of-house operations is consistent with the goals, policies and vision of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. Staff recommends approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Elaine Thienprasiddhi Jonathan Borrego Senior Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution 2. Letter of Operation 3. CUP Justification 4. Traffic Memo 5. Development Plans 6. Site Photographs SP 92-2DA1ANAHEIM FAIRFIELD INN BY MARRIOTT SP 92-1DA3APARKING LOT SP 92-2DA1QUALITY INN HOTEL SP 92-2DA1VACANT SP 92-2DA1VACANT SP 92-1DA3ARETAIL SP 92-1DA3AINDUSTRIAL SP 92-2DA1VOCATIONAL SCHOOL SP 92-1DA3AVACANT SP 92-1DA3APARKING LOT SP 92-2DA1CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES SP 92-2DA1SPECIALTIES TANAHEIM RESORT RV PARK T (MHP)GOLDEN SKIESMOBILE HOME PARK C-GANAHEIM BUSINESS PARK SP 92-2 DA1ANAHEIM CAMELOTINN & SUITES SP 92-2 DA1CAROUSEL INN & SUITES SP 92-2DA1TROPICANA INN SP 92-2DA1BEST WESTERNPARK PLACE HOTEL SP 92-2DA1PARK VUE INN SP 92-2 DA1ANAHEIM DESERT INN & SUITES SP 92-2 DA1ANAHEIM DEL SOL INN SP 92-2DA1ANAHEIM INN SP 92-2DA1RAMADA MAINGATE W ALRO WAY S C L E M E N T I N E S T S M ANCHESTER AVE 5 FREEWAY W. BALL RD S . L E W I S S T E. BALL RD W. KATELLA AVE S . W A L N U T S T S . H A R B O R B L V D S . A N A H E I M B L V D E. KATELLA AVE E. GENE AUTRY WAY 1515 South Manchester Avenue DEV No. 2015-00069 Subject Property APN: 082-211-01 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 W ALRO WAY S C L E M E N T I N E S T S M ANCHESTER AVE 5 FREEWAY W. BALL RD S . L E W I S S T E. BALL RD W. KATELLA AVE S . W A L N U T S T S . H A R B O R B L V D S . A N A H E I M B L V D E. KATELLA AVE E. GENE AUTRY WAY 1515 South Manchester Avenue DEV No. 2015-00069 Subject Property APN: 082-211-01 °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014 [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 - 1 - PC2015-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05814 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (DEV2015-00069) (1515 SOUTH MANCHESTER AVENUE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2015- 05814 to utilize an existing 158,708 square foot warehouse and office building for “back-of- house” office and warehouse uses to support Disneyland Resort theme parks, hotels and entertainment venues (the "Proposed Project"). The warehouse and office is located at 1515 South Manchester Avenue, in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 9.4 acres in size and is designated under the Anaheim Genreral Plan for Commercial Recreation land uses. The Property is located within the boundaries of Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 ("ARSP"). As such, the Property is located in the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District identified as Development Area 1 of Exhibit 3.3.1 of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-2) document entitled "Development Plan" and is subject to the zoning and development standards set forth in Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SP 92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, the Proposed Project is not among the uses permitted in the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District; provided, however, that pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Planning Commission under Table 116-C [Primary Uses and Structures: C-R District (Development Area 1)] of Section 18.116. 070 [Uses – Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1)] of Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SP 92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Code, the Proposed Project may be permitted subject to a conditional use permit if the Planning Commission determines that such uses are consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-2); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim on August 24, 2015 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05814, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and - 2 - PC2015-*** WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, in conformance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the Planning Commission finds and determines that the effects of the Proposed Project are typical of those generated within that class of projects which involve negligible or no expansion of an existing use [i.e., Section 15301 (Existing Facilities)] and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Planning 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 with respect to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2015- 05814, does find and determine the following: 1. Pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Planning Commission under Table 116-C [Primary Uses and Structures: C-R District (Development Area 1)] of Section 18.116. 070 [Uses – Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1)] of Chapter 18.116 (Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (SP 92-2) Zoning and Development Standards) of the Code, the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is not listed as a use permitted within Commercial Recreation (C-R) District but is, however, properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized by the Code because it is consistent and compatible with the intended purpose of Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-2). 2. The Proposed Project 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 Proposed Project is consistent and compatible with existing resort and tourism related uses in the zone; and 3. The size and shape of the site for the use is adequate to allow the full development of the Proposed Project in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety because no exterior modifications are proposed and there is more than sufficient parking to support the proposed uses; and 4. The traffic generated by the Proposed Project will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the traffic generated by this use will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking will be provided to accommodate the use. Further, the proposed use would result in a substantial reduction in the number of vehicle trips compared to the former use approved on the site; and - 3 - PC2015-*** 5. 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 as the proposed land use will be integrated with the surrounding commercial area and would not pose a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim or the adjoining City. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. No. 2015-05814, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii) the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the use or approved development. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any amendment, modification or revocation of this permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 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 approval of this application constitutes approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the 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. - 4 - PC2015-*** THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 2015. 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, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on August 24, 2015 by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of August, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM - 5 - PC2015-*** - 6 - PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “B” CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2015-05814 (DEV2015-00069) NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 1. Prior to approval of building plans, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence to the satisfaction of the Fire Department that all lockable pedestrian and/or vehicular access gates shall be equipped with “knox box” devices as required and approved by the Fire Department. Fire Department 2. Any new air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be shown on plans as shielded from public view and the sound buffered to comply with City of Anaheim noise ordinances from any adjacent residential or transient-occupied properties. A note indicating that these improvements shall be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. Planning & Building, Planning Services Division ONGOING DURING OPERATIONS 3. Ongoing, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the removal of any on-site graffiti within 24 hours of its application. Planning & Building, Code Enforcement Division 4. Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall implement measures to reduce emissions to the extent practical, schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours, and use clean fuel for vehicles and other equipment, as practicable. Planning & Building, Planning Services Division 5. Ongoing during construction and project operation, sweeping operations in the parking facilities and private on-site roadways shall be performed utilizing sweeping/scrubbing equipment which operate at a level measured not greater than 60 dBA at the nearest adjacent property line. Planning & Building, Code Enforcement Division 6. Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall provide private security on the premises to maintain adequate security for the entire project subject to review and approval of the Police Department. The use of security patrols and electronic security devices (i.e., video monitors) should be considered to reduce the potential for criminal activity in the area. Police Department 7. Ongoing during project operation, the following practices shall be implemented, as feasible, by the property owner/developer: a. Usage of recycled paper products for stationary, letterhead, and packaging. b. Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard. c. Collection of office paper for recycling. d. Collection of polystyrene (foam) cups for recycling. Collection of glass, plastics, kitchen grease, laser printer toner cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. Public Works Department - 7 - PC2015-*** NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT GENERAL CONDITIONS 8. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with such proceeding. Planning & Building, Planning Services Division 9. The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing of this discretionary case application within 30 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 may result in the revocation of the approval of this application. Planning & Building, Planning Services Division 10. The subject Property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein. Planning & Building, Planning Services Division ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 523 W. 6th Street,Suite 1234 Los Angeles,CA 90014 p.213.683.0088 f.213.683.0033 MEMORANDUM TO: Kathleen Truman, Truman & Elliott LLP FROM: Jonathan Chambers, P.E. DATE: July 31, 2015 RE: Traffic Study for 1515 South Manchester Back of House 1515 Manchester Avenue, Anaheim Ref: J1350-5 36/38/40 West 66 Realty Co., Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. (Disney), recently acquired the property located at 1515 South Manchester Avenue in Anaheim. The site currently houses the Sybron Learning Center, which is a dental laboratory and teaching center. Disney intends to convert the existing building to serve Disney back of house (BOH) uses, primarily including a combination of office and warehouse uses (the Project). Gibson Transportation Consulting, Inc. (GTC) analyzed the new traffic generated by the site with its new use and this memorandum summarizes that analysis. PROJECT TRAFFIC The Sybron Learning Center includes approximately 139,043 square feet (sf) of office uses, 12,112 sf of research and development facilities, a 4,275 sf classroom, and 4,225 sf of warehouse uses within a 158,708 sf warehouse and office building. The Project would convert the site to provide 70,008 sf of office space, 86,500 sf of warehouse space, and 2,200 sf of classroom space. The Project would generate traffic from three primary sources: (1) Disney cast members (employees) who work at the Project site, (2) trips made by Disney cast members between the Project site and the Disneyland Resort, and (3) truck traffic delivering bulk product to or from the Project site. Each type of traffic is discussed in more detail below. On-Site Cast Member Traffic The traffic generated by cast members working at the Project site was estimated using trip generation rates published in Trip Generation, 9th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 2012). Additionally, employee trip generation was estimated for the Sybron Learning Center to determine whether the Project would represent a net increase or decrease in employee traffic levels. The trip generation rates and estimates are shown in Table 1. ATTACHMENT NO. 4 Ms. Kathleen Truman July 31, 2015 Page 2 Daily Morning Peak Hour Afternoon Peak Hour Office 710 11.03 1.56 1.49 Research & Development 760 8.11 1.22 1.07 Warehouse 150 3.56 0.30 0.32 Daily Morning Peak Hour Afternoon Peak Hour Sybron Learning Center Office 139,043 1,534 217 207 Research & Development 12,112 98 15 13 Total 1,632 232 220 Project Office 70,008 772 109 104 Warehouse 86,500 308 26 28 Total 1,080 135 132 Change in Trip Generation with Project -552 -97 -88 Table 1 - On-Site Employee Trip Generation Estimates Land Use ITE Code Trip Generation Rates Land Use Size (square feet) Trip Generation Estimates As Table 1 shows, the Project would result in a net decrease in employee trip generation as compared to the Sybron Learning Center, the site’s current use. The Project would generate approximately 552 fewer daily trips, including 97 fewer trips during the morning peak hour and 88 fewer trips during the afternoon peak hour. The reduction is primarily due to the conversion of office and research and development space to warehouse space, which houses far fewer employees and, therefore, generates fewer trips. It should be noted that the classroom space in both the Sybron Learning Center (4,275 sf) and the Project (2,200 sf) was assumed not to generate trips on a regular basis. Regardless, the greater classroom space at the Sybron Learning Center would generate more trips than the Project’s classroom space and, therefore, including classroom space in the trip generation estimates would result in a larger reduction in employee traffic. Trips Between Project Site and Disneyland Resort Because the Project would serve Disney BOH uses, some movement of personnel or goods between the Project site and the Disneyland Resort is anticipated. Individuals employed at the Project site who participate in meetings at the Disneyland Resort (or vice versa), or individuals transporting small quantities of products or goods, would use company vehicles or a personal automobile to travel back and forth. Up to 30 such individual trips per day are anticipated. Ms. Kathleen Truman July 31, 2015 Page 3 These trips would be new to the area as a result of the Project, as there are no existing business-related trips between the Sybron Learning Center and the Disneyland Resort. Delivery Truck Traffic Approximately five to 10 trips per day to the Project site are anticipated by small trucks for the delivery of bulk quantities of product. These trips are conservatively assumed to be new to the area, though no effort was made to quantify the number of delivery trips that are currently generated by the Sybron Learning Center, which would offset the Project delivery trips. IMPACT OF PROJECT TRAFFIC As discussed above, general employee traffic levels to and from the site are expected to significantly decrease as a result of the Project. There will be new daily trips added in the forms of up to 30 auto trips between the Project site and the Disneyland Resort and from five to 10 delivery trips to the Project site in small trucks. Even with those new trips, the Project will result in a net decrease in trip generation both considering daily and peak hour totals. However, to further investigate the significance (or insignificance) of Project traffic, GTC analyzed the existing operating conditions of nearby intersections. The trips between the Project site and the Disneyland Resort would follow the general paths of travel shown in Figure 1. These paths pass through the following intersections:  Cast Place & Ball Road  Harbor Boulevard & Ball Road  Harbor Boulevard & I-5 Northbound ramps  Harbor Boulevard & I-5 Southbound ramps  Harbor Boulevard & Manchester Avenue  Harbor Boulevard & East Shuttle Area  Harbor Boulevard & Disney Way  Manchester Avenue / Clementine Street & Disney Way Table 2 summarizes the existing operating conditions of those intersections based on level of service (LOS), which ranges from LOS A (free-flow) to LOS F (over-saturated, congested). The LOS results were calculated using the City’s preferred Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology and are based on new morning and afternoon peak period traffic counts conducted in April 2015 during Spring Break week, when Disneyland Resort attendance was high. As Table 2 shows, each of the intersections operates at LOS A during both the morning and afternoon peak hours, except for the intersection of Harbor Boulevard & Ball Road, which operates at LOS B during both peak hours. Ms. Kathleen Truman July 31, 2015 Page 4 Morning Peak Hour Afternoon Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS Cast Place & Ball Road 0.43 A 0.44 A Harbor Boulevard & Ball Road 0.67 B 0.65 B Harbor Boulevard & I-5 Northbound Ramps 0.48 A 0.48 A Harbor Boulevard & I-5 Southbound Ramps 0.30 A 0.33 A Harbor Boulevard & Manchester Avenue 0.37 A 0.48 A Harbor Boulevard & East Shuttle Area 0.36 A 0.35 A Harbor Boulevard & Disney Way 0.37 A 0.41 A Clementine Street & Disney Way 0.25 A 0.26 A Intersection Table 2 - Current Intersection Operating Conditions SUMMARY In conclusion, there is more than sufficient capacity on these streets to accommodate the few additional vehicle trips that would be generated by the Project, even if they weren’t offset by the removal of Sybron Learning Center traffic. A T T A C H M E N T N O . 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net City of Anaheim PLANNING DEPARTMENT There is no new correspondence regarding this item. 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net ITEM NO. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: AUGUST 24, 2015 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00492, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00065, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00115 AND RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2014-00262 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT LOCATION: The project area, referred to as Anaheim Canyon, encompasses approximately 2,600 acres in the northern portion of Anaheim, roughly bounded on the north by Orangethorpe Avenue, on the south by the Santa Ana River, on the east by Imperial Highway (SR-90), and on the west by the Orange Freeway (SR-57). APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: This is a City-initiated project. REQUEST: The Draft Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (ACSP) has been prepared to provide the regulatory framework for current and future land development in Anaheim Canyon. The ACSP would replace the existing zoning on the properties which is described later in this staff report. The ACSP is intended to remove regulatory obstacles to the reuse of existing buildings and promote infill development on vacant or underutilized properties. A primary goal of the ACSP is to create a business environment attractive to a wide variety of industries while encouraging sustainable development practices. The zoning actions needed to approve this project include the following: • Environmental Impact Report No. 2013-00348 which discloses the project’s environmental impacts per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), including the adoption of Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring Program 312 and a Water Supply Assessment. • General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492 to amend the Land Use, Circulation, Green, Economic Development and Community Design Elements of the Anaheim General Plan to achieve consistency with the proposed ACSP. • Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065 to rescind PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan (ACSP) and Northeast Area Specific Plan (NEASP) and adopt the ACSP in their place. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 2 of 11 • Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 to amend Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to (a) rescind Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP 88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) and Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoning and Development Standards), (b) adopt Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards), and (c) amend other portions of the Anaheim Municipal Code to be consistent with the addition of the new Chapter 18.120. • Reclassification No. 2014-00262 to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.120 to those properties within the Anaheim Canyon that are currently classified under the SP 88-3 Zone, the SP 94-1 Zone, the "I" Industrial Zone, the "C-G" General Commercial Zone, the "T" Transition Zone, and the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached resolutions recommending that City Council certify Environmental Impact Report No. 2013-00348 and approve General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492, Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065, Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 and Reclassification No. 2014-00262. BACKGROUND: In 2011, the City of Anaheim was awarded a grant from the California Strategic Growth Council to prepare a specific plan for Anaheim Canyon. A specific plan is a land use planning document that provides the framework for current and future development for a defined area. The ACSP would replace the PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan (PCASP) and the Northeast Area Specific Plan (NEASP) which are further described below. The ACSP would also incorporate a limited number of properties located outside of the existing specific plan areas, including commercial properties located on La Palma Avenue east of Imperial Highway, properties adjacent to and including the Santa Ana River and property located southwest of the intersection of the BNSF rail line and Tustin Avenue. The existing specific plan boundaries have been expanded to include these properties because they have uses and characteristics that are similar to those included within the current NEASP. In addition, the owners of these properties would benefit from the streamlined processes and flexible development standards incorporated into the new specific plan. The PCASP was approved in 1989 and encompasses approximately 26 acres, south of La Palma Avenue, west of Tustin Avenue, north of the 91 Freeway and east of the Metrolink rail line. The PCASP was designed to implement a mixed use development that would include offices, retail, restaurants and a hotel with supporting services to encourage transit use and facilitate business operations. Much of the PCASP has been implemented; however, it has not been developed to its maximum potential. In recent years, there have been requests to incorporate transit-oriented residential development within and adjacent to this specific plan area. As further detailed in this report, the proposed ACSP would allow mixed-use residential development at this location and across the street on the east side of Tustin Avenue. The NEASP was approved in 1995 and generally includes the same project area as the ACSP, with the exception of those previously described properties being added to the specific plan area. The NEASP was intended to provide for a wide variety of industrial and commercial uses. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 3 of 11 However, the regulations within the NEASP have become outdated, are cumbersome to use, and somewhat inflexible. Public Participation: Prior to the receipt of grant funding for this project, City staff had begun meeting with several area property and business owners and local real estate brokers to discuss the area’s future and steps the City could take to attract new businesses and encourage existing businesses to stay and expand. These stakeholders, referred to as the Anaheim Canyon Advisory Group, helped identify issues and opportunities within Anaheim Canyon and served as a liaison between the City and the local business community. The planning process for the ACSP also included direct outreach to other members of the development and business community, residents, employees, interdepartmental staff and other government agencies. An Open House was held in 2012 that included an interactive discussion on existing conditions and opportunities. The City also conducted a survey to identify the types of amenities lacking in Anaheim Canyon. The survey results revealed that the area is lacking certain types of support businesses, such as sit-down restaurants. In addition, the survey revealed that the area could benefit from improved mobility and accessibility and an enhanced physical appearance. The survey results were captured in an Existing Conditions and Opportunities Analysis which is summarized in Chapter 2 and detailed in Appendices D and E of the ACSP. The Draft ACSP was released to the public in May 2013. In November 2013, the City held a workshop to present the ACSP to the community and to solicit input any specific issues that should be analyzed in the project environmental impact report (EIR). Following the release of the draft ACSP and the community meeting, staff made minor revisions to the specific plan and prepared the Draft EIR. The Revised Draft ACSP and Draft EIR were released to the public on May 28, 2015. PROPOSAL: The ACSP is intended to be a roadmap for the City, other public agencies, and the private sector to respond to changing market forces and revitalize this important jobs center. The ACSP is divided into topical chapters to convey planning and policy ideas in a clear and concise manner. The ACSP is guided by the following vision statement: “Anaheim Canyon is an engaging, innovative, and dynamic business environment that provides opportunities for growth, development, and sustained success supported by clear policies and principles.” This vision statement was formed through the input that staff received from property and business owners, as well as the local community. The following is a summary of contents of the document: Chapter 1: Introduction - provides the overarching goals of the specific plan to: 1. Create a successful business climate with flexible regulations. 2. Help local businesses meet State and regional sustainability mandates. 3. Engage private stakeholders in creating new economic development strategies. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 4 of 11 4. Create a comprehensive vision that is supported by business owners, property owners, and the greater community. 5. Improve the physical image of the public realm to help promote economic growth. Chapter 2: Key Findings and Opportunities – Provides the background necessary for understanding future needs. These findings and opportunities are related to economic and market conditions, land use and urban design, mobility, infrastructure, sustainability, identity and branding and current regulations. This chapter provides the foundation for the subsequent chapters that provide the framework for future development and improvement of publically and privately-owned properties. Chapter 3: Public Realm Improvements – Within the public realm, the ACSP suggests using the public streets, sidewalks and parkways to brand the Anaheim Canyon through landscaping, signage and street design. Proposed “complete street” features will ensure that public rights of way are designed for all types of users such as pedestrians, bicycles, automobiles, busses and trucks. Open space areas will play an important role in the overall aesthetics and quality of life. The Orange County Water District (OCWD) owns nearly a third of the properties within Anaheim Canyon. The City will work with the OCWD to enhance its facilities with drought tolerant landscaping and perimeter trails while ensuring its ground water recharge activities can continue in a safe and efficient manner. Chapter 4: Private Realm Incentives and Strategies – To support local businesses, the ACSP identifies City and other public agency incentives that will be applied in the Anaheim Canyon to promote economic growth, such as the City’s energy and water efficiency programs. The ACSP restructures the existing development areas and standards from the NEASP and the PCASP to streamline the permitting process for business and industrial uses, while protecting industrial areas from incompatible uses. The ACSP is divided into seven development areas: 1. Development Area 1: Industrial Area – provides locations for light and heavy industrial uses and related support facilities; the majority of Anaheim Canyon is within this development area. 2. Development Area 2: Recycling Area – includes properties within or adjacent to existing waste recycling and material recovery uses and facilities; other industrial uses are also permitted within this development area. 3. Development Area 3: Transit-Oriented Area – allows residential mixed used development on properties currently within the PCASP or within a comfortable, one quarter mile walk from the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station. 4. Development Area 4: Local Commercial Area – Provides locations near major intersections for locally-serving commercial and retail amenities. 5. Development Area 5: General Commercial Area – Provides locations for larger, regionally-serving commercial, entertainment and medical uses that are visible or easily accessible from the 91 Freeway or Imperial Highway. 6. Development Area 6: Open Space/Water Area – Ensures that existing water-related open space areas are protected from incompatible uses while allowing certain industrial uses by Conditional Use Permit. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 5 of 11 7. Development Area 7: Flex Area – Provides locations for a wide range of industrial, office and commercial uses, intentionally flexible to allow all uses included in either Development Area 1 or 5. Chapter 5: Implementation – To ensure successful implementation of the ACSP, the specific plan includes a clear and strategic Implementation Action Plan that organizes physical improvements, policy and regulatory changes, and coordination activities. The Action Plan includes a table which establishes a timeline, responsible department, general cost and potential funding source for each action item. It will guide the City in prioritizing and implementing these actions and help the community understand the investment that the City intends to make in this area. Appendices – The plan also includes the following appendices that provide additional detail for: A. Street Cross Sections: Prototypical street cross-sections are provided for each of the streets within the specific plan area. B. Zoning and Development Standards: A new chapter of the Anaheim Municipal Code that restructures and revises the area’s zoning and development standards into concise tables and easy to read requirements that are consistent with the terms and structure found in the balance of the Zoning Code. Buildings and uses that are permitted under the existing specific plans and zoning and not permitted under the new standards are referred to as legal non-conforming uses and structures. These may remain in place, be expanded, or be replaced by other uses that were permitted prior to the adoption of the ACSP. C. Public Realm Plant Palette: A table of sustainable plants that will be used to enhance roadways and recommended for private property landscaping. D. Existing Conditions and Opportunities Analysis: A full summary of background information. E. Industrial Park Amenities Survey and Analysis: Report that identifies the amenities that were most requested to enhance the industrial park setting. F. General Plan Consistency Analysis: References the Environmental Impacts Report’s analysis of the ACSP’s consistency with the Anaheim General Plan. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS: The ACSP Project requires approval of the following actions: Environmental Impact Report: This project has been reviewed using the standards and processes contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Draft EIR has been prepared for this project. The Draft EIR analyzes and discloses the environmental effects of implementation of the ACSP. Significant effects on the environment anticipated as a result of implementation of this project include air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation and traffic. The proposed certification of the EIR includes adoption of a Water Supply Assessment, Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program. The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day public review period that ended on July 13, 2015. The City received comments from nine agencies and organizations. City staff subsequently met with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the PRS Group to discuss their ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 6 of 11 respective comments which were the most significant. All other Draft EIR comments could be addressed without consultation and/or were corrections to the EIR or specific plan documents that were not substantive to their content. None of the comments raised issues that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR, with the exception of the comment discussed in the following paragraph. Responses were sent to the nine agencies and organizations that commented on the Draft EIR on August 20, 2015. CEQA requires these responses to be provided a minimum of ten days prior to the City Council’s certification of the EIR. These comments, responses and subsequent modifications to the Draft EIR are included in the Final EIR (Attachment 7). The City received a request from the PRS Group to consider allowing mixed use residential development south of La Palma Avenue, adjacent to Carpenter Street. The PRS Group represents certain property owners in this area. The ACSP, as currently proposed, designates the Carpenter Street area for General Commercial use (Development Area 5). This designation is intended to encourage large-scale commercial development in an area which has excellent freeway exposure, convenient accessibility and large parcels. As previously-noted, the proposed ACSP limits mixed-use residential development to the area immediately adjacent to the Canyon Metrolink station. This is intended to ensure that any future residential development in the area is located within comfortable walking distance of the train station. Allowing additional residential development in the Carpenter Street area has the potential to dilute an overarching goal of the ACSP by allowing residential development on large parcels which could otherwise be used to support job-creating businesses that would have a significant positive impact to the local economy. While providing conveniently-located housing serving the local business community is an important consideration, the ACSP, as proposed, achieves this need by allowing approximately 2,600 additional residential units in strategic proximity to the Metrolink rail station. In order accommodate the expanded mixed-use designation proposed by the PRS Group, the ACSP would need to be modified to reflect the change in uses, additional environmental analysis would need to be conducted and the Draft EIR would need to be recirculated for public review. Staff has had several discussions with representatives from the PRS Group regarding its proposal. Through these discussions, staff has recommended that the PRS Group bring forth a detailed, comprehensive land plan for the Carpenter Street area, with or without residential uses, that achieves the overarching goals of the ACSP. This plan would then be analyzed to ensure that the uses proposed are compatible with the surrounding area and larger Anaheim Canyon Vision. The plan would also be evaluated to ensure that it did not create any environmental impacts beyond those analyzed in the Draft EIR that will be certified with the adoption of the ACSP. Although the alternatives analyzed by the Draft EIR included an “Increased Residential Use Alternative,” this alternative was not site specific and could not be used to “environmentally clear” the change proposed by the PRS Group. This EIR alternative also reduced the amount of new non-residential development by 50% area-wide. Similar to the proposed ACSP, the Increased Residential Use Alternative does not avoid significant environmental impacts and, although it meets some of the project objectives, it does not meet these objectives to the degree of the proposed ACSP. The City met with Caltrans on July 29, 2015 to discuss the issues raised in its comment letter. Many of the questions and issues raised by Caltrans were answered or addressed during the meeting. Staff will continue working with Caltrans with the goal of resolving any outstanding issues prior to EIR certification. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 7 of 11 CEQA permits agencies to certify an EIR that discloses significant and unavoidable impacts if it can determine that the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the significant impacts. The benefits of the proposed project include economic growth, increased employment opportunities for highly skilled workers, reduction in vehicle miles traveled, promotion of sustainable development and the provision of housing. The ACSP will preserve Anaheim Canyon as a major employment center while improving the area’s physical image while helping business owners comply with regional sustainability regulations and mandates. All of these factors and benefits outweigh the unavoidable environmental impacts identified in the EIR. As a result, the City Council will be asked to adopt a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” as part of its Resolution certifying the EIR. General Plan Amendment: A General Plan Amendment may be granted upon a finding that all of the following conditions exist: 1) The proposed amendment maintains the internal consistency of the General Plan; 2) The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City; 3) The proposed amendment would maintain the balance of land uses within the City; and 4) If the amendment is to the General Plan Land Use Map, the subject property is physically suitable to accommodate the proposed modification, including but not limited to, access, physical constraints, topography, provision of utilities, and compatibility with surrounding land uses. The currently-adopted Land Use Element of the General Plan includes the following Goal and Policies for the Anaheim Canyon: Goal 16.1: Preserve and project the image of The Canyon as one of the most prominent business centers in Orange County. 1) Intensify land uses in close proximity to the Metrolink Station. 2) Facilitate a dynamic mix of uses and create a distinctive employment setting through adherence to policies in the Community Design Element related to The Canyon. 3) Intensify uses in close proximity to bus stops along La Palma Avenue, a future enhanced bus system route. 4) Improve pedestrian mobility through the addition of sidewalks (e.g., on La Palma Avenue near the Metrolink Station). 5) Take advantage of freeway accessibility and visibility by intensifying office uses along the south side of La Palma Avenue, pursuant to the Land Use Plan. 6) Protect and enhance the integrity and desirability of industrial sites from non-industrial uses. 7) Improve landscaping along the edge of the Santa Ana River and settling basins in cooperation with the Orange County Water District. 8) Work with the Orange County Water District to expand upon the development potential of the water percolation basins located in the area. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 8 of 11 9) Ensure quality development through Zoning Code development standards and the Community Design Element policies and guidelines. The Community Design Element of the General Plan includes the following Goal and Policies for Anaheim Canyon: GOAL 20.1: Continue to strengthen The Canyon’s image as one of the region’s most desired economic centers. 1) Improve and project the image of the area through continuing the development of enhanced entryways at key intersections, improved landscaping along the Santa Ana River and groundwater recharge basins, and a coordinated sign program. 2) Provide ample landscaping throughout the area to encourage a professional atmosphere. 3) Encourage building products with individual identity, distinctive signage, varied color and materials rather than long, monotonous blank walls. 4) Where practical, orient buildings to take advantage of the Santa Ana River as a scenic and recreational amenity. 5) Work with the Orange County Water District to expand upon the recreational and commercial of the groundwater water recharge basins located in the area. The proposed General Plan Amendment would modify the General Plan Land Use, Circulation, Green, Economic Development and Community Design Elements to provide consistency with the ACSP. These amendments include, but are not limited to, changes in land use designations, expanding the description of the Water Use land use category to allow certain non-water uses within Anaheim Canyon, creation of a new “Complete Streets Connector” roadway classification, changing references to the project area from “The Canyon” to “Anaheim Canyon,” and modifications to Anaheim Canyon bikeways and trails system; however, no substantive changes to existing General Plan Goals or Policies are proposed. Table 5.8-1 of the Draft EIR addresses the consistency of the ACSP with the relevant General Plan Goals and Policies and concludes the ACSP is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City in that the proposed amendment would not change any of the Goals and Policies of the General Plan. The proposed amendment would maintain the balance of land uses within the City, in that the Anaheim Canyon would continue to be preserved as an employment center consisting of privately owned land primarily designated by the General Plan for Industrial and Commercial land use. The proposed changes to the General Plan Land Use Map are intended to enhance or be consistent with the subject properties’ access, physical constraints, topography, provision of utilities, and compatibility with surrounding land uses: • Properties currently designated for Industrial land use would continue to the designated for Industrial land use with the exception of: o Properties located at the intersection of Miller Street and Miraloma Avenue and east of the intersection of Hunter Avenue and Kellogg Drive, which would be designated for Commercial land use in order to provide additional food, retail and service amenities to surrounding employment areas; and, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 9 of 11 o Properties located south of La Palma Avenue and east of Kraemer Boulevard, which would be designated for Non-Residential Mixed Use land use to allow the greatest flexibility of commercial and industrial land uses. • Properties currently designated for Commercial land use would continue to be designated for Commercial land use. • Properties currently designated for Office land use, east of Tustin Avenue would be changed to the Industrial land use designation consistent with the current zoning and use of the properties. • City-owned property at 5030 East La Palma Avenue would be changed from the Institutional land use designation to the Industrial land use designation consistent with surrounding properties. • Properties located south of La Palma Avenue, generally within one quarter mile east of the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station would be changed from the Commercial land use designation to the Mixed Use land use designation, consistent with land use designation for properties along Grove Street, south of La Palma Avenue and west of the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station. • Properties designated for Non-Residential Mixed-Use, north of La Palma Avenue would be changed to the Industrial land use designation consistent with the current use of the properties and the land use designation for adjacent properties. • Properties designated for Office land use, south of La Palma Avenue, between Tustin and Kraemer Avenues would be designated for Commercial land use consistent with other properties to the east and west. • The Kaiser Medical Center would continue to be designated for Institutional land use due to its high floor area ratio. • Properties owned or operated by the Orange County Water District and the Orange County Flood Control District that are currently designated for Water and Park land use would continue to retain these designations. Specific Plan Amendment: A specific plan may be adopted or amended upon a finding that all of the following conditions exist: 1) That the property proposed for the specific plan has unique site characteristics, such as topography, location or surroundings, that are enhanced by special land use and development standards; 2) That the specific plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, and with the purposes, standards and land use guidelines therein; 3) That the specific plan results in development of desirable character that will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood; 4) That the specific plan contributes to a balance of land uses throughout the City; and 5) That the specific plan respects environmental, aesthetic and historic resources consistent with economic realities. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 10 of 11 As previously described, the ACSP will replace two existing specific plans. The proposed ACSP is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan as described above. The Draft EIR includes a consistency analysis of the ACSP with the relevant General Plan Goals and Policies. This analysis concludes the ACSP is consistent with the General Plan. In addition, the proposed Public Realm Improvements and Private Realm Incentives and Strategies are consistent with the goals and policies for Anaheim Canyon contained within the Community Design Element of the General Plan and will result in development of desirable character that will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood. The ACSP is intended to maintain and enhance the City’s employment base in Anaheim Canyon, contributing to a balance of land uses throughout the City. As previously described, the goal of the ACSP is to encourage sustainable development and create a business environment attractive to a wide variety of industries; therefore, respecting environmental, aesthetic and historic resources consistent with economic realities. Zoning Code Amendment and Reclassification: The Zoning Code may be amended and/or properties may be reclassified from one zone to another zone upon a finding that the action is necessary to implement the General Plan and will enhance and preserve the general welfare. The Proposed Project would amend the Zoning Code to rescind the Zoning and Development Standards that apply to the existing PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan and Northeast Area Specific Plan in their entirety, amend the description of the Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone to remove properties within Anaheim Canyon, and adopt the ACSP Zoning and Development Standards. Properties within the Anaheim Canyon would be reclassified from their existing zone to the Anaheim Canyon Specific Zone and removed from the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone. Section 7.4.1 of the Draft EIR analyzes the impact of removing Anaheim Canyon from the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone. The SC Overlay Zone currently applies to the area of the City generally located east of the SR-55 Freeway and south of Orangethorpe Avenue. The SC Overlay Zone is intended to protect the area’s semi-rural appearance including features such as mountain ridgelines, canyons, rolling hills, and intermittent riparian and chaparral vegetation. The SC Overlay adds a layer of unnecessary regulation to this area as the ACSP area is largely urbanized and does not contain many of the natural physical features that the SC Overlay Zone is intended to protect (i.e., hillsides and canyons). Those limited natural features that do exist, including the Santa Ana River, would remain protected under the Specific Plan. Implementation of the ACSP would alter the appearance of existing structures, but future development pursuant to the ACSP would not obstruct the views of the mountain ridgelines, or rolling hills in the background of Anaheim Canyon. The proposed ACSP zoning and development standards are intended to consolidate and update the zoning and development standards of the PCASP and NEASP. As previously stated, the updated standards will continue to implement the General Plan goals and policies for Anaheim Canyon to enhance this important City asset. The ACSP will implement the General Plan’s industrial, commercial, open space/water and mixed use land use designations through its seven development areas. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 August 24, 2015 Page 11 of 11 CONCLUSION: The proposed ACSP and related actions will preserve and protect this area as a major employment center for Anaheim and the region. The streamlined development regulations and processes included in the ACSP will achieve the goal of ensuring that Anaheim Canyon remains a competitive business and employment center that greatly strengthens the local economy. Staff recommends that Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of this request. Prepared by, Submitted by, Susan Kim Jonathan E. Borrego Principal Planner Planning Services Manager Attachments: 1. Draft CEQA Resolution 2. Draft General Plan Amendment Resolution 3. Draft Specific Plan Amendment Resolution 4. Draft Zoning Code Amendment Resolution 5. Draft Reclassification Resolution 6. Second Revised Draft Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan 7. Draft Environmental Impact Report 8. Final Environmental Impact Report [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 AND ADOPT FINDINGS AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM NO. 312 AND A WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT FOR THE ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN AND RELATED ACTIONS (DEV2011-00125) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Canyon encompasses approximately 2,600 acres in the northern portion of the City of Anaheim, roughly bounded on the north by Orangethorpe Avenue, on the south by the Santa Ana River, on the east by Imperial Highway (SR-90), and on the west by the Orange Freeway (SR-57); and WHEREAS, in 1989, the Anaheim City Council approved the PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (the "SP 88-3 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 88-3 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 88-3 Zone") of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") to guide development of a mixed use center that would include offices, retail, restaurants and a hotel with supporting services to encourage transit use and facilitate business operations on approximately 26 acres, located south of La Palma Avenue, west of Tustin Avenue, north of the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) and east of the Metrolink rail line; and WHEREAS, in 1995, the Anaheim City Council approved the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (the "SP94-1 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 94-1 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1(SP94-1) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 94-1 Zone") of the Code to provide for a wide variety of industrial and commercial uses within an area generally consistent with the Anaheim Canyon, excluding properties within the SP88-3 Specific Plan area; and WHEREAS, in 2011, the City of Anaheim was awarded a grant from the California Strategic Growth Council to prepare a Specific Plan for Anaheim Canyon to replace the development requirements of the existing zoning on the properties in this area, remove regulatory obstacles to the reuse of existing structures, promote infill development of currently vacant or underutilized properties, encourage sustainable development, and create a business environment attractive to a wide variety of industries; and WHEREAS, staff has initiated the preparation of a proposed Specific Plan for the establishment of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in the form presented to this Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, staff determined that several properties outside of the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area should also be included within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area because they have uses that are similar to the uses on adjacent properties within the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area, which additional properties include commercial properties located east of SR-90, -2- PC2015-*** properties adjacent to and including the Santa Ana River, and property located southwest of the intersection of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line and Tustin Avenue, currently designated for industrial use; and WHEREAS, there are currently approximately 27.9 million square feet of non- residential buildings within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan would result in the potential to develop an additional 19.6 million square feet of non-residential building area; and WHEREAS, there are currently 312 multi-family residential units in the Transit Core Area (Development Area 4) of the SP94-1 Zone. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area would result in the potential to develop an additional 2,607 multi-family residential units within Development Area 3: Transit-Oriented Area of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, a series of actions is required to establish a Specific Plan for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area (collectively, the “Project Actions”), including: 1. General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492 to amend the Land Use, Circulation, Green, Economic Development and Community Design Elements of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim to be consistent with the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01; and 2. Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065 to rescind PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 and Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 and adopt the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1; and 3. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 to amend Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to (a) rescind Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP 88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) and Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoning and Development Standards), (b) adopt Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards), and (c) amend other portions of the Anaheim Municipal Code to be consistent with the addition of said new Chapter 18.120; and 4. Reclassification No. 2014-00262 to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards) to those properties within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area that are currently classified under the SP 88-3 Zone, the SP 94-1 Zone, the "I" Industrial Zone, the "C-G" General Commercial Zone, the "T" Transition Zone, and the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone. WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Actions; and -3- PC2015-*** WHEREAS, in September 2013, City Council approved a contract with Placeworks (formerly The Planning Center DC&E) to prepare Environmental Impact Report No. 2013-00348 ("EIR No. 348") for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) for Draft EIR No. 348 was distributed to the public on October 28, 2013. The public review period for the initial study ended on November 27, 2013. The City held a public scoping meeting on November 12, 2013 to provide members of the public with an opportunity to learn about the Proposed Actions, ask questions and provide comments about the scope and content of the information to be addressed in Draft EIR No. 348; and WHEREAS, Draft EIR No. 348 was made available for a 45-day public review period from May 28, 2015 to July 13, 2015. The Notice of Availability (“NOA”), which also included noticing for the Planning Commission public hearing and a tentative date for the City Council public hearing, was sent to a list of interested persons, agencies and organizations, as well as property owners within the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area and within a 300-foot radius thereof. The Notice of Completion (“NOC”) was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk-Recorder’s office on May 28, 2015. Copies of Draft EIR No. 348 were made available for public review at the City of Anaheim Planning Department and has been available for download via the City’s website; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with California Water Code Section 10910, Draft EIR No. 348 includes a Water Supply Assessment (“WSA”) dated October 2014 as Appendix J, which concludes that a sufficient water supply and its reliability is and will be available for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area; and WHEREAS, in conformance with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City will prepare or cause to be prepared prior to the City Council Public Hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommendations and the Proposed Actions, tentatively scheduled for September 15, 2015, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 312 relating to EIR No.348; and WHEREAS, in conformance with Sections 15132 and 15362(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, Final EIR No. 348 will consist of Draft EIR No. 348; comments and recommendations received on Draft EIR No. 348 either verbatim or in summary; a list of persons, organizations and public agencies that submitted comments on Draft EIR No. 348; and the responses of the City, as lead agency, to significant points raised in the review and consultation process; and Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 312; and WHEREAS, on August 24, 2015, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (hereinafter referred to as "Planning Commission") did hold a public hearing, notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Code, to hear and consider evidence and testimony concerning the contents and sufficiency of Draft EIR No. 348 and for and against the Project Actions, and to investigate and make findings in connection therewith; and -4- PC2015-*** WHEREAS, at said public hearing, the Planning Commission did receive evidence and reports, including all written and verbal comments received during the 45-day public review period, concerning the contents and sufficiency of Draft EIR No. 348; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, based on the information and evidence received concerning EIR No. 348, does hereby find and determine as follows: • Draft EIR No. 348 has been presented to and independently reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission; • Draft EIR No. 2008-00340 reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission; • Draft EIR No. 348 has been processed and completed in compliance with the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual; and • Draft EIR No. 348 is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the Project Actions. WHEREAS, to the extent authorized by law, the City desires and intends to use Draft EIR No. 348 as the environmental documentation required by CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual for the Project Actions; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the environmental information contained in Draft EIR No. 348 and does hereby recommend that the City Council find that Final EIR No. 348 provides an adequate assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project Actions and certify EIR No. 348, including the adoption of Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program 312, and determine that Draft EIR No. 348 fully complies with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, and is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the Project Actions. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve and adopt the WSA. -5- PC2015-*** THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 2015. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures. CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on August 24, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of August, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 111711-v2/TJR ATTACHMENT NO. 2 [DRAFT] 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THE ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00492 FOR THE ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN (DEV2011-00125) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Anaheim (“City Council”) did adopt the Anaheim General Plan by Resolution No. 69R-644, showing the general description and extent of possible future development within the City; and WHEREAS, following the adoption of the Anaheim General Plan, several amendments and updates to the General Plan and certain elements thereof have been approved and adopted by the City Council over the years; and WHEREAS, the Anaheim Canyon encompasses approximately 2,600 acres in the northern portion of the City of Anaheim, roughly bounded on the north by Orangethorpe Avenue, on the south by the Santa Ana River, on the east by Imperial Highway (SR-90), and on the west by the Orange Freeway (SR-57); and WHEREAS, in 1989, the City Council approved the PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (the "SP 88-3 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 88-3 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 88-3 Zone") of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") to guide development of a mixed use center that would include offices, retail, restaurants and a hotel with supporting services to encourage transit use and facilitate business operations on approximately 26 acres, located south of La Palma Avenue, west of Tustin Avenue, north of the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) and east of the Metrolink rail line; and WHEREAS, in 1995, the City Council approved the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (the "SP94-1 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 94-1 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1(SP94- 1) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 94-1 Zone") of the Code to provide for a wide variety of industrial and commercial uses within an area generally consistent with the Anaheim Canyon, excluding properties within the SP88-3 Specific Plan area; and WHEREAS, in 2011, the City of Anaheim was awarded a grant from the California Strategic Growth Council to prepare a Specific Plan for Anaheim Canyon to replace the development requirements of the existing zoning on the properties in this area, remove regulatory obstacles to the reuse of existing structures, promote infill development of currently vacant or underutilized properties, encourage sustainable development, and create a business environment attractive to a wide variety of industries; and -2- PC2015-*** WHEREAS, staff has initiated the preparation of a proposed Specific Plan for the establishment of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in the form presented to this Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, staff has determined that several properties outside of the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area should also be included within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area because they have uses that are similar to the uses on adjacent properties within the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area, which additional properties include commercial properties located east of SR-90, properties adjacent to and including the Santa Ana River, and property located southwest of the intersection of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line and Tustin Avenue, currently designated for industrial use; and WHEREAS, there are currently approximately 27.9 million square feet of non-residential buildings within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan would result in the potential to develop an additional 19.6 million square feet of non-residential building area; and WHEREAS, there are currently 312 multi-family residential units in the Transit Core Area (Development Area 4) of the SP94-1 Zone. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area would result in the potential to develop an additional 2,607 multi-family residential units within Development Area 3: Transit-Oriented Area of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, a series of actions is required to establish a Specific Plan for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area (collectively, the “Project Actions”), including: 1. General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492 to amend the Land Use, Circulation, Green, Economic Development and Community Design Elements of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim to be consistent with the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01; and 2. Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065 to rescind PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 and Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 and adopt the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1; and 3. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 to amend Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to (a) rescind Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP 88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) and Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoning and Development Standards), (b) adopt Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards), and (c) amend other portions of the Anaheim Municipal Code to be consistent with the addition of said new Chapter 18.120; and 4. Reclassification No. 2014-00262 to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards) to those properties within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area that are currently classified under the SP 88-3 Zone, the SP 94-1 Zone, the "I" Industrial Zone, the "C-G" General Commercial Zone, the "T" Transition Zone, and the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone; and -3- PC2015-*** WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, in September 2013, City Council approved a contract with Placeworks (formerly The Planning Center DC&E) to prepare Environmental Impact Report No. 2013-00348 ("EIR No. 348") for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) for Draft EIR No. 348 was distributed to the public on October 28, 2013. The public review period for the initial study ended on November 27, 2013. The City held a public scoping meeting on November 12, 2013 to provide members of the public with an opportunity to learn about the Proposed Actions, ask questions and provide comments about the scope and content of the information to be addressed in Draft EIR No. 348; and WHEREAS, Draft EIR No. 348 was made available for a 45-day public review period from May 28, 2015 to July 13, 2015. The Notice of Availability (“NOA”), which also included noticing for a public hearing before this Planning Commission and a tentative date for a public hearing before the City Council to review and consider the Draft EIR No. 348 and the Project Actions, was sent to a list of interested persons, agencies and organizations, as well as property owners within the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area and within a 300-foot radius thereof. The Notice of Completion (“NOC”) was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk-Recorder’s office on May 28, 2015. Copies of Draft EIR No. 348 were made available for public review at the City of Anaheim Planning Department and has been available for download via the City’s website; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with California Water Code Section 10910, Draft EIR No. 348 includes a Water Supply Assessment (“WSA”) dated October 2014 as Appendix J, which concludes that a sufficient water supply and its reliability is and will be available for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area; and WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492 proposes to modify and amend the Land Use, Circulation, Green, Economic Development and Community Design Elements of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim to be consistent with the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01, and would include, among other things, changes in land use, expanding the description of the "Water Use" land use category to allow certain non-water uses within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area, a new “Complete Streets Connector” roadway classification, changing references from “The Canyon” to “Anaheim Canyon,” and modifications to bikeways and trails within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area. No substantive changes to the General Plan Goals or Policies are proposed. The proposed modifications are shown on Exhibit A attached to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Anaheim Civic Center, Council Chamber, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, on August 24, 2015, at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of the -4- PC2015-*** Anaheim Municipal Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed Project Actions, including General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, before the Planning Commission recommends approval of any General Plan amendment, it must make findings of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1. The proposed amendment maintains the internal consistency of the General Plan; 2. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; 3. The proposed amendment would maintain the balance of land uses within the City; and 4. If the amendment is to the General Plan Land Use Map, the subject property is physically suitable to accommodate the proposed modification including, but not limited to, access, physical constraints, topography, provision of utilities, and compatibility with surrounding land uses; and WHEREAS, by the adoption of a resolution concurrently with, but prior in time to, the adoption of this Resolution and pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as "CEQA"), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, this Planning Commission has found and determined and has recommended that the City Council so find and determine that Final EIR No. 348 provides an adequate assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project Actions and certify EIR No. 348, including the adoption of Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program 312, and determine that Draft EIR No. 348 fully complies with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, and is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the Project Actions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due consideration, inspection, investigation and study made by itself, and after due consideration of, and based upon, all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does hereby find and determine the following: 1. Table 5.8-1 of Draft EIR No. 348 addresses the consistency of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 with the relevant General Plan Goals and Policies. This analysis is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. This analysis concludes that Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 is consistent with the General Plan; 2. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City in that the proposed amendment to the General Plan would not change any of the Goals and Policies of the General Plan; -5- PC2015-*** 3. The proposed amendment would maintain the balance of land uses within the City, in that the proposed General Plan Amendment would continue to maintain the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area as an employment center consisting primarily of privately owned land designated by the General Plan for Industrial and Commercial land uses; and 4. The proposed changes to the General Plan Land Use Map are intended to enhance or be consistent with the subject properties’ access, physical constraints, topography, provision of utilities, and compatibility with surrounding land uses, as described below: a) Properties currently designated for Industrial land use would continue to the designated for Industrial land use with the exception of: (i) Properties located at the intersection of Miller Street and Miraloma Avenue and east of the intersection of Hunter Avenue and Kellogg Drive, which would be designated for Commercial land use in order to provide amenities to surrounding industrial employment areas; (ii) Properties located south of La Palma Avenue and east of Kraemer Boulevard, which would be designated for Non-Residential Mixed Use land use to allow the greatest flexibility of commercial and industrial land uses; b) Properties currently designated for Commercial land use would continue to be designated for Commercial land use; c) Properties currently designated for Office land use east of Tustin Avenue would be changed to the Industrial land use designation consistent with the current zoning and use of the properties; d) City-owned property at 5030 East La Palma Avenue would be changed from the Institutional land use designation to the Industrial land use designation consistent with surrounding properties; e) Properties located south of La Palma Avenue, generally within one quarter mile east of the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station, would be changed from the Commercial land use designation to the Mixed Use land use designation, consistent with the land use designation for properties along Grove Street, south of La Palma Avenue and west of the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station; f) Properties designated for Non-Residential Mixed-Use, north of La Palma Avenue would be changed to the Industrial land use designation consistent with the current use of the properties and the land use designation for adjacent properties; g) Properties designated for Office land use, south of La Palma Avenue, between Tustin and Kraemer Avenues would be designated for Commercial land use consistent with other properties to the east and west; -6- PC2015-*** h) The Kaiser Medical Center would continue to be designated for Institutional land use due to its high floor area ratio; i) Properties owned or operated by the Orange County Water District and the Orange County Flood Control District that are currently designated for Water and Park land use would continue to retain these designations; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, on the basis of the above findings and determinations, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492, as shown on Exhibit A attached to this Resolution, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of (1) Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065, (2) Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115, and (3) Reclassification No. 2014-00262, now pending. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 2015. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures. CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: _ SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM -7- PC2015-*** STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on August 24, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of August, 2015. _ SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 111718-v1/TJR -8- PC2015-*** EXHIBIT “A” LAND USE ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-i Land Use Element INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 Relationship to Other Elements .................................................................................... 1 Relationship to Other Planning Tools ............................................................................ 1 Achieving the Vision ................................................................................................... 5 Setting ...................................................................................................................... 6 Existing Land Uses ...................................................................................................... 6 LAND USE PLAN ............................................................................................................ 11 Land Use Designation System .................................................................................... 11 Plan Objectives ......................................................................................................... 30 Land Use Buildout Analysis ........................................................................................ 35 GOALS & POLICIES ....................................................................................................... 38 Citywide Goals and Policies ....................................................................................... 38 Neighborhoods .................................................................................................. 38 Housing Opportunities ........................................................................................ 39 Corridors........................................................................................................... 40 Compatibility ..................................................................................................... 41 Creating Identifiable Places .................................................................................. 42 Redevelopment and Revitalization ........................................................................ 43 Jobs-Housing Relationship ................................................................................... 44 Community Policy Areas ............................................................................................ 46 The Hill and Canyon Area ................................................................................... 46 West Anaheim ................................................................................................... 47 North Euclid Street ............................................................................................. 48 East Anaheim ..................................................................................................... 50 North Central Industrial Area ............................................................................... 51 The Colony and Downtown ................................................................................. 52 South Anaheim Boulevard ................................................................................... 54 The Platinum Triangle ......................................................................................... 55 The Anaheim Canyon .......................................................................................... 56 CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-2 | May 2004 Zoning The City’s Zoning Code is the primary tool for implementing the General Plan, providing development standards, identifying allowable land uses, and specifying other regulations. The Zoning Code guides the use patterns, design, and improvements for development projects. By establishing rules regarding the use of property and site development standards (e.g., building heights and setbacks, parking standards, etc.), the Zoning Code provides detailed guidance for development based on, and consistent with, the land use policies established within the General Plan. Specific Plans Specific plans are customized regulatory documents that provide more focused guidance and regulation, for particular areas. They generally include a land use plan, circulation plan, infrastructure plan, development standards, design guidelines, phasing plan, financing plan, and implementation plan. Anaheim has 1110 approved specific plans governing land use development in designated areas. The specific plans listed below are depicted on Figure LU-1, and can be viewed at the City’s Planning Department. TABLE LU-1 CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVED SPECIFIC PLANS Number Plan Name 87-1 The Highlands at Anaheim Hills 88-1 Sycamore Canyon 88-2 The Summit of Anaheim Hills 88-3 Pacificenter Anaheim 90-1 The Anaheim Hills Festival 90-2 East Center Street Development 90-4 Mountain Park 92-1 The Disneyland Resort 92-2 The Anaheim Resort 93-1 Hotel Circle 94-12015-1 Northeast Area (Anaheim Canyon Business Center) Anaheim Canyon H o l d e r S t K n o t t A v e W e s t e r n A v e B e a c h B l v d D a l e S t M a g n o l i a A v e G i l b e r t S t B r o o k h u r s t S t M u l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave E u c l i d S t N u t w o o d S t 9 t h S t W a l n u t S t D i s n e y l a n d D r H a r b o r B l v d L e w i s S t L o a r a S t S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d D o u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e st S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m Blv d O liv e S t E a st S tSouth St Ver m o nt A v e Sa n t a Ana StBroadwayLincolnAve S y c a m o re StNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave E u c l i d S t L e m o n S t R a y m o n d A v e H a r b o r B l v d A c a c i a A v e S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e S u n k i s t S t R i o V i s t a S t CrowtherAve Or a n g et horp e Ave M ira lom a Ave L a Palma A v e R e d G u m S t K r a e m e r Blv d M ill e r S t TustinAve V a n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e K e l l o g g D r Esperanz a RdOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e I mpe r i a l H w y NohlRanch Rd SantaAna CanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e W eirCanyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M e tr olin k B l u e G u m St Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d Specific Plan Map (Existing) City of Anaheim Figure LU-1 Page LU-3General Plan Program 0 1 20.5 Miles AnaheimResort HotelCircleDisneylandResort East CenterStreet NortheastArea PacificenterAnaheim TheHighlands TheSummit SycamoreCanyonAnaheim HillsFestival Note: See Specific Plans for further descriptionof land uses and density. *See Table LU-4 for density information. City Boundary Sphere-of-Influence Adopted: May 25, 2004Revised: September 8, 2006 SP 87-1 The Highlands at Anaheim Hills SP 88-1 Sycamore Canyon SP 88-2 The Summit of Anaheim Hills SP 88-3 Pacificenter Anaheim SP 90-1 Anaheim Hills Festival SP 90-2 East Center Street Development SP 92-1 The Disneyland Resort* SP 92-2 The Anaheim Resort* SP 93-1 Hotel Circle* SP 94-1 Northeast Area (Anaheim Canyon Business Center) SP 90-4 Mountain Park MountainPark H o l d e r S t K n o t t A v e W e s t e r n A v e B e a c h B l v d D a l e S t M a g n o l i a A v e G i l b e r t S t B r o o k h u r s t S t M u l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave E u c l i d S t N u t w o o d S t 9 t h S t W a l n u t S t D i s n e y l a n d D r H a r b o r B l v d L e w i s S t L o a r a S t S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d D o u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e st S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m Blv d O liv e S t E a st S tSouth St Ver m o nt A v e Sa n t a Ana StBroadwayLincolnAve S y c a m o re StNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave E u c l i d S t L e m o n S t R a y m o n d A v e H a r b o r B l v d A c a c i a A v e S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e S u n k i s t S t R i o V i s t a S t CrowtherAve Or a n g et horp e Ave M ira lom a Ave L a Palma A v e R e d G u m S t K r a e m e r Blv d M ill e r S t TustinAve V a n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e K e l l o g g D r Esperanz a RdOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e I mpe r i a l H w y NohlRanch Rd SantaAna CanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e W eirCanyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M e tr olin k B l u e G u m St Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d Specific Plan Map (Proposed) City of Anaheim Proposed Figure LU-1 Page LU-3General Plan Program 0 1 20.5 Miles AnaheimResort HotelCircleDisneylandResort East CenterStreet TheHighlands TheSummit SycamoreCanyonAnaheim HillsFestival Note: See Specific Plans for further descriptionof land uses and density. *See Table LU-4 for density information. City Boundary Sphere-of-Influence SP 87-1 The Highlands at Anaheim Hills SP 88-1 Sycamore Canyon SP 88-2 The Summit of Anaheim Hills SP 90-1 Anaheim Hills Festival SP 90-2 East Center Street Development SP 92-1 The Disneyland Resort* SP 92-2 The Anaheim Resort* SP 93-1 Hotel Circle* SP 90-4 Mountain Park MountainPark SP 2015-1 Anaheim Canyon AnaheimCanyon CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-6 | May 2004 SETTING Located in northwestern Orange County, the City of Anaheim lies approximately 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles northwest of Santa Ana (see Figure LU-1). At the time of its incorporation in 1876, Anaheim covered just over 1,660 acres. Today, the City encompasses over 28,000 acres of land, stretching nearly 20 miles along the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway, and includes another 2,431 acres of unincorporated land within its sphere-of-influence. In addition to SR-91, regional access to and from Anaheim is provided by the Santa Ana (I-5), Orange (SR-57) and Costa Mesa (SR-55) freeways; the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241); and Amtrak and Metrolink passenger train services. The City of Anaheim is a geographically diverse community. The western and central portions of the City are characterized by relatively flat ground that slopes gently to the southwest. This portion of the City is also characterized by a mix of suburban and urban development and is relatively built out. The area is home to Downtown and the Anaheim Colony Historic District, which are located within the City’s original 1.8 square mile boundary and contains a vast majority of Anaheim’s valued historic structures. The eastern portion of the City extends generally along the Santa Ana River to the Riverside County line. This part of the City includes hillside terrain and an abundance of natural resources. Residential development in the eastern portion of Anaheim largely consists of the various hillside communities on the south side of the Riverside Freeway that extend to the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241). Other relatively flat residential neighborhoods are located north of the Santa Ana River and east of Imperial Highway, and generally south of the Santa Ana River at the intersection of the Riverside (SR-91) and Costa Mesa (SR-55) Freeways. The Anaheim Canyon, a regional employment center consisting of office, industrial and commercial uses that generally spans the north side of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway between the Orange (SR-57) Freeway and Imperial Highway, is also located in the eastern part of the City. EXISTING LAND USES Anaheim is well known for its various world-class tourist destinations, including The Anaheim Resort, which includes The Disneyland Resort and the Anaheim Convention Center, and its professional sports franchises/venues. However, it is also home to over 330,000 residents, 11,000 businesses, and 1,500 acres of passive and active parks and open space areas. Various types of existing land uses are found throughout Anaheim and are categorized by uses that can be grouped into nine broad categories: Residential, Quasi-Public/ Governmental, Sphere-of-Influence: Established by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), spheres-of-influence are intended to reflect “the probable physical boundaries and service area” of cities. LAFCO is directed by State law (the Cortese/Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985, as amended) to establish and periodically review the spheres-of-influence for each agency under its jurisdiction. LAND USE ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-7 Industrial/Manufacturing, Commercial/Office, Entertainment/Lodging, Parks/Open Space, Water Uses/Waterways, Agriculture/Vacant, and Other. Residential Residential land uses account for nearly half of the total land area in the City, most of which are devoted to single-family residential uses. Residential uses are found in nearly all areas of the City. A wide variety of housing types and affordability can be found throughout the City making it possible to provide for a diverse population both in age and income. Housing types range from large hillside estates to historic single-family homes, to duplexes and four-plexes, to multiple-family apartments and townhomes, and mixed-use developments. Commercial/Office Retail and service commercial uses in Anaheim follow the same basic pattern as most cities in North Orange County – that is, they are located primarily along arterial corridors. Two regional shopping areas are also located in the City, the Anaheim Plaza in West-Central Anaheim and The Festival in the Hill and Canyon Area. Office uses are generally dispersed throughout the City along arterial corridors and adjacent to its freeways, with small concentrations of larger-scale office buildings found in The Platinum Triangle and Downtown areas. Entertainment/Lodging Anaheim is known worldwide for its tourist attractions and sports/entertainment venues. These uses are concentrated in two adjacent areas separated by the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway: The Anaheim Resort, comprised of the Anaheim Convention Center, the Disneyland Theme Park, Disney’s California Adventure Theme Park, Downtown Disney, and numerous hotels; and The Platinum Triangle, which includes the Arrowhead Pond and Angel Stadium of Anaheim. The Platinum Triangle is also home to a variety of restaurants, hotels and the Grove of Anaheim. Industrial/Manufacturing A critical component of Anaheim’s economic base, manufacturing and industrial uses comprise a significant portion of Anaheim’s land area. Much of Anaheim’s manufacturing and lighter industrial uses are concentrated in The Anaheim Canyon and in areas north of Angel Stadium of Anaheim. Some of the City’s older and heavier industrial uses are concentrated in the North Central Industrial Area, generally located south of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway between Lemon Street and Raymond Avenue, and in the southeastern portion of Downtown along the Metrolink railway. Consistent with the Anaheim Vision and General Plan Land Use Map, many of the Downtown industrial areas are transitioning to residential uses. Additional industrial uses are found in other areas of the City, particularly along freeways and railroads. Quasi-Public/Governmental Quasi-public and governmental uses include a wide range of uses: governmental office buildings, fire and police stations, hospitals, utility buildings and substations, community centers, assembly CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-8 | May 2004 areas and libraries and schools, among others. Their locations are found throughout the City in order to effectively serve the public. Quasi-public and governmental uses account for a relatively small portion of the City’s total land area. Parks/Open Space Anaheim’s parks and open space account for approximately 6% or just over 1,500 acres of the City’s total land area. These areas include sports fields, playgrounds, nature preserves, golf courses, and other passive and active recreational uses. A more thorough discussion of Anaheim’s existing and planned park and open space resources can be found in the Green Element. Water Uses/Waterways The Santa Ana River is the most prominent water feature in Anaheim. It runs through the Hill and Canyon Area and The Anaheim Canyon alongside the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway and along the eastern edge of The Platinum Triangle. The river provides a scenic and recreational resource for the entire region. It also serves as the City’s primary drainage and flood control facility as well as the primary source for groundwater recharge in the City. Two smaller, yet important drainage and flood control facilities in western Anaheim are the Carbon Creek Channel and the Anaheim/Barber City Channel. Another major water-related facility includes the 920-million gallon Walnut Canyon Reservoir, located in the Hill and Canyon Area. Flood control facilities and related goals and policies are discussed in the Safety Element; water and drainage systems and related goals and policies are discussed in the Public Services and Facilities Element; and water conservation and quality are addressed in the Green Element. Agriculture/Vacant Lands Although nearly 3,400 acres of land in Anaheim is utilized for agricultural purposes or is vacant, very little remains that is not already entitled for future development. The primary exceptions are the many utility easements that are envisioned to serve as trail connections, passive open space or low intensity commercial uses. The largest portion of vacant land is found in the Mountain Park Specific Plan area on the eastern edge of the City. The area includes 3,169 acres and is planned for a mix of residential uses, a park, a school, a fire station and open space. Kn o t t A v e We s t e r n A v e Be a c h B l v d Da l e S t Ma g n o l i a A v e Gil b e r t S t Br o o k h u r s t S t Mu l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave Eu c l i d S t Nu t w o o d S t 9th S t Wa l n u t S t Dis n e y l a n d D r Ha r b o r B l v d Le w i s S t Lo a r a S t Sta t e C o l l e g e B l v d Do u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e st S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m B lv d O li v e S t E a s t S tSou t h St V e r mont A v e S a n t a An a StBroadwayLincolnAve Syc a more StNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave Eu c l i d S t Le m o n S t Ra y m o n d A v e Ha r b o r B l v d Ac a c i a A v e Sta t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e Su n k i s t S t Rio V i s t a S t CrowtherAve O r a ngetho r p e Ave M i r a l o m a A ve L a P a lm a Ave R e d G u m S t K ra e m e r B lv d M ill e r S t TustinAve Va n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e Ke l l o g g D r Esperanza R dOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy Sa n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Impe r i a l H w y NohlRanch R d SantaAnaCanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e W eirCanyonRd O a k CanyonDr M e tr olin k B l u e G u m St Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d R R R R R R R k ")!(SP Land Use Plan(Existing) Figure LU-4 Page LU-13 0 1 20.5 Miles City of Anaheim General Plan Program Note: Land Use Map includes Anaheim's Sphere of Influence. Commercial Regional General Neighborhood Center Commercial Recreation Residential Corridor (0-13.0 du/ac) Medium (0-36.0 du/ac) Low Medium (0-18.0 du/ac) Low Medium Hillside (0-6 du/ac) Low (0-6.5 du/ac) Estate (0-1.5 du/ac) R Office High Low Industrial Institutional School Open Space Parks Water Railroad Non-Residential Mixed-Use Mixed-Use General Park Location General School Location") !(P S City Boundary Intermodal Transportation Centerk Sphere-of-Influence Adopted: May 25, 2004Revised: May 22, 2015 K n o t t A v e W e s t e r n A v e B e a c h B l v d D a l e S t M a g n o l i a A v e G i l b e r t S t B r o o k h u r s t S t M u l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave E u c l i d S t N u t w o o d S t 9 t h S t W a l n u t S t D i s n e y l a n d D r H a r b o r B l v d L e w i s S t L o a r a S t S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d D o u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e st S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m B lv d O li v e S t E a s t S tSou t h St V e r mont A v e S a n t a An a StBroadwayLincolnAve Syc a more StNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave E u c l i d S t L e m o n S t R a y m o n d A v e H a r b o r B l v d A c a c i a A v e S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e S u n k i s t S t R i o V i s t a S t CrowtherAve O r a ngetho r p e Ave M i r a l o m a A ve L a P a lm a Ave R e d G u m S t K ra e m e r B lv d M ill e r S t TustinAve V a n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e K e l l o g g D r Esperanza R dOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Impe r i a l H w y NohlRanch R d SantaAnaCanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e W eirCanyonRd O a k CanyonDr M e tr olin k B l u e G u m St Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d R R R R R R R k ")!(SP Land Use Plan(Proposed) Proposed Figure LU-4 Page LU-13 0 1 20.5 Miles City of Anaheim General Plan Program Note: Land Use Map includes Anaheim's Sphere of Influence. Commercial Regional General Neighborhood Center Commercial Recreation Residential Corridor (0-13.0 du/ac) Medium (0-36.0 du/ac) Low Medium (0-18.0 du/ac) Low Medium Hillside (0-6 du/ac) Low (0-6.5 du/ac) Estate (0-1.5 du/ac) R Office High Low Industrial Institutional School Open Space Parks Water Railroad Non-Residential Mixed-Use Mixed-Use General Park Location General School Location") !(P S City Boundary Intermodal Transportation Centerk Sphere-of-Influence CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-28 | May 2004 Mixed-Use Designation Mixed-Use Areas designated as Mixed-Use are designed to function differently from the typical patterns of individual, segregated land uses. Uses and activities are designed together in an integrated fashion to create a dynamic urban environment that serves as the center of activity for the surrounding area. The designation provides opportunities for an integrated mix of residential, retail, service, entertainment and office opportunities in a pedestrian-friendly environment. Because of their more intense, compact nature of development, Mixed-Use areas encourage the use of transit service and other forms of transportation, including pedestrian and bicycle travel. Continuous commercial street frontage on the first and, perhaps, second floors, supported by residential and/or office uses above, is the typical pattern of vertically mixed land use. Uses may also be mixed in a horizontal, or multi-use, pattern. For example, freestanding structures may consist of a single use adjacent to structures with different uses on the same or adjacent parcel. Stand-alone uses within a multi-use project need to be integrated into an overall project design and connected to other adjoining uses by plazas, promenades, and landscaped corridors, and should include common architectural themes and signage. Typical residential uses could include apartments, live-work units, town homes, flats and artist-style lofts. Residential development in these areas emphasizes quality and offers a variety of amenities. Structured parking is an essential component in most-mixed-use developments. The scale, size and mixture of uses in the mixed-use areas vary based upon the character of the surrounding area. Depending upon a project’s location, the Mixed-Use designation is implemented by one of three Zoning Code districts: the Downtown Mixed-Use Overlay; The Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use Overlay; and, for areas outside of The Platinum Triangle or Downtown areas, the Mixed-Use Overlay Zone. Non-Residential Mixed-Use The purpose of the Non-Residential Mixed-Use designation is to encourage a mix of commercial and office uses, but prohibit residential uses in certain areas, where residential uses are not compatible with surrounding land uses. This designation is limited to the Northeast Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan area. All uses, densities and intensities, other than residential uses, that are permitted by the Mixed-Use designation are allowed within the Non-Residential Mixed-Use designation. Zoning provisions for this designation are included in the Northeast Area Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (SP-94-12015-1). The adaptive reuse of the historic Kraemer Building is an example of a vertically mixed-use development, with two floors of office space and four floors of residential lofts above. LAND USE ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-33 Objective: Plan land uses that preserve and enhance Anaheim’s economic assets Anaheim enjoys a diversified economic base offering economic opportunities through tourism, entertainment, retail, office and industrial activity. The City is also home to a number of major economic centers, including The Anaheim Resort, The Platinum Triangle, and The Anaheim Canyon. These areas represent key economic assets that must be preserved and enhanced for the long-term economic health of the City. The Land Use Element offers a variety of employment generating land uses in these areas to ensure their vitality. In The Anaheim Resort, the Commercial Recreation land use designation reflects the visitor- oriented nature of the area. The plan also extends this designation along Harbor Boulevard, south of Orangewood Avenue, to create a visible, unified entry from the City’s southern border. In The Platinum Triangle, a vibrant mix of higher intensity office, retail and residential land use designations is intended to create an extremely dynamic urban place with well-integrated opportunities for housing, employment, shopping, entertainment and social interaction. The Platinum Triangle is envisioned to become the economic center of the region with a unique urban appeal and identity. The Land Use Plan enhances The Anaheim Canyon’s industrial base with limited, strategically located office and mixed uses that take advantage of the area’s location, visibility and access. LAND USE ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-35 Anaheim, the area is well-served by various modes of transportation. Taking advantage of these transportation opportunities, as well as the area’s proximity to The Anaheim Resort, the Land Use Plan identifies the area as a major economic center that brings people together in an integrated mix of office, retail, entertainment and residential opportunities. Another example of an area that capitalizes on its transportation opportunities is The Anaheim Canyon. The Land Use Plan Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan recognizes the area’s history as an important industrial corridor, but it also provides for additional uses that take advantage of its current transportation options. The Plan provides for mixed-use development adjacent to The Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station and identifies office uses in strategic locations along La Palma Avenue. These locations also take advantage of the visibility and access to the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway. LAND USE BUILDOUT ANALYSIS Providing a blueprint for the future development of Anaheim is one of the primary purposes of the General Plan. The Land Use Plan, which includes areas within Anaheim’s sphere-of- influence, identifies 16,519 acres of residential land uses, 659 acres of residential mixed-use land uses, and 5,619 acres of other employment-generating land uses. Assuming a probable intensity for each of the land use designations, the land use plan provides for 137,954 dwelling units (see Table LU-5). Based on a factor of 3.3 persons per household (1.5 per household in mixed-use areas), the estimated build-out population of the Land Use Plan would be 407,463 persons. Of the employment-generating land uses, the land use plan provides for a total of 1,121 acres of Neighborhood, Regional and General Commercial uses, 532 acres of office uses, and 2,684 acres of industrial uses and 707 acres of residential and non-residential mixed mixed-use. Combined these land use designations would generate approximately 228,470 jobs using the probable intensity factors (FARs) for each non-residential land use designation (see Table LU-6). Additional employment opportunities will also be provided by the implementation of the Commercial Recreation land use designation through the Anaheim Resort, Disneyland Resort and Hotel Circle Plans. LAND USE ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-45  Other Mixed-Use Areas. In addition to the Downtown and Platinum Triangle, the Land Use Plan identifies a handful of other mixed-use areas (e.g., North Euclid Street adjacent to the North Orange County Community College, adjacent to Tthe Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station, and at the intersection of State College Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue) located along some of the City’s major transportation corridors. These areas will provide for new residential uses in close proximity to employment, retail and/or entertainment opportunities. GOAL 7.1: Address the jobs-housing relationship by developing housing near job centers and transportation facilities. Policies: 1) Address the jobs-housing balance through the development of housing in proximity to local job centers. 2) Develop housing that addresses the need of the City’s diverse employment base. 3) Promote new residential development within Downtown, The Platinum Triangle, and other mixed-use districts, in accordance with the Land Use Plan. 4) Continue to pursue infill residential development opportunities at mid-block locations along the City’s arterial streets as an alternative to underutilized commercial land uses. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-56 | May 2004 GOAL 15.1: Establish The Platinum Triangle as a thriving economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment, shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades. Policies: 1) Continue more detailed planning efforts to guide the future development of The Platinum Triangle. 2) Encourage a regional inter-modal transportation hub in proximity to Angel Stadium of Anaheim. 3) Encourage mixed-use projects integrating retail, office and higher density residential land uses. 4) Maximize and capitalize upon the view corridor from the Santa Ana (I-5) and Orange (SR-57) Freeways. 5) Maximize views and recreational and development opportunities afforded by the area’s proximity to the Santa Ana River. The Anaheim Canyon This 2,450-acre business center borders the north side of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway between Imperial Highway to the east and the Orange (57) Freeway to the west, and is considered a major regional employment center. Its highly visible location and accessibility to both the Inland Empire and Los Angeles County give it an added advantage. The Land Use Plan maintains the industrial/office emphasis throughout the area. The Plan enhances these uses by identifying more intense office uses in close proximity to major transportation facilities and to take advantage of views and access to the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway. The Plan also identifies a major transit-oriented mixed- use node adjacent to the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station. LAND USE ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-57 As an ongoing effort to improve the image of the area and stimulate economic development, the City will continue to work with the Orange County Water District to explore opportunities to improve the aesthetics of, and consider alternative uses for, areas along the Santa Ana River and settling/percolation basins. GOAL 16.1: Preserve and project the image of The Anaheim Canyon as one of the most prominent business centers in Orange County. Policies: 1) Intensify land uses in close proximity to the Metrolink Station. 2) Facilitate a dynamic mix of uses and create a distinctive employment setting through adherence to policies in the Community Design Element related to The Anaheim Canyon. 3) Intensify uses in close proximity to bus stops along La Palma Avenue, a future enhanced bus system route. 4) Improve pedestrian mobility through the addition of sidewalks (e.g., on La Palma Avenue near the Metrolink Station). 5) Take advantage of freeway accessibility and visibility by intensifying office uses along the south side of La Palma Avenue, pursuant to the Land Use Plan. 6) Protect and enhance the integrity and desirability of industrial sites from non-industrial uses. 7) Improve landscaping along the edge of the Santa Ana River and settling basins in cooperation with the Orange County Water District. 8) Work with the Orange County Water District to expand upon the development potential of the water percolation basins located in the area. 9) Ensure quality development through Zoning Code development standards and the Community Design Element policies and guidelines. CIRCULATION ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page C-7 are typically two-lane undivided roadways with a 42-foot right-of-way width without driveway access and 54 feet with driveway access.  Complete Streets Collector: Roadways that distribute local traffic from its point of origin to higher capacity facilities. They include enhanced multimodal features to ensure the efficient and safe movement of all forms of travel including automobile, truck, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian. They are typically two lane undivided roadways with a 90-foot right-of-way width. Interstate Freeways Freeways are controlled-access, separated highways that provide for vehicular traffic. The Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway is a northwest-southeast freeway that serves interstate and regional travel, proceeding through the western and central parts of Anaheim. It provides access to Los Angeles County to the north and San Diego County to the south. This facility diagonally traverses the City, crossing the north-south street grid at an angle. It has four to five mixed flow lanes and one HOV lane in each direction through Anaheim. This freeway has a total of eleven interchanges that provide access to and from the City. OCTA maintains and annually updates a Traffic Flow map to depict traffic volumes on freeways and arterial highways throughout Orange County. This map may be accessed on the web at www.octa.net. State Highways The Orange (SR-57) Freeway is a north-south freeway with its southern terminus at the I- 5 and Garden Grove (SR-22) Freeways just south of the Anaheim City limit. It provides regional access to northern Orange County and eastern Los Angeles County. The SR-57 is a ten-lane freeway, including two high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, with a total of five interchanges that provide access to the City. The SR-22 is located approximately one mile south of the City. It provides regional access to western Orange County and eastern Los Angeles County. OCTA’s plan for the SR-57 within the City of Anaheim includes the following improvements:  Adding a northbound auxiliary lane from Katella Avenue to Lincoln Avenue  Adding a southbound auxiliary lane from Ball Road to Katella Avenue  Adding a fourth northbound through lane at SR-91  Adding an HOV ramp at Douglass Road The Riverside (SR-91) Freeway is an east-west freeway that lies at the northern edge of the City. It provides regional access to Riverside County, San Bernardino County and points east, as well as regional access westerly to Los Angeles County. The SR-91 generally has 8 mixed flow lanes through the City, plus 2 HOV lanes from the Los Angeles County Line to the Costa Mesa (SR-55) Freeway. Planned RoadwayNetwork (Existing) City of Anaheim General Plan ProgramExisting Figure C-1 Page C-8 City Boundary 0 1 20.5 Miles Freeway/Tollroad Future Passenger RailGrade Separations! Sphere-of-Influence ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! Ho l d e r S t Kn o t t A v e We s t e r n A v e Be a c h B l v d Da l e S t Ma g n o l i a A v e Gil b e r t S t Bro o k h u r s t S t Mu l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave Eu c l i d S t Nu t w o o d S t 9th S t Wa l n u t S t Dis n e y l a n d D r Ha r b o r B l v d Le w i s S t Sta t e C o l l e g e B l v d Do u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e st S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m Blv d O liv e S t E a s t S tSouth St V ermo n t Ave San t a Ana StBroadwayLincolnAve S y c a m o re StNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave Eu c l i d S t Le m o n S t Ra y m o n d A v e Ha r b o r B l v d Ac a c i a A v e Sta t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e Su n k i s t S t Rio V i s t a S t CrowtherAve Ora n g e t ho rpe Ave Miraloma Ave L a Palma A v e R e d G u m S t K r a e m e r B lv d M ill e r St TustinAve Va n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e Ke l l o g g D r Esperanza RdOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy Sa n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e I mpe r i a l H w y NohlRanch Rd SantaAnaCanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e W eirC anyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M e tr olin k |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55|ÿ57 §¨¦5 B lu e G u m St Cerritos A v e Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d We s t S t |ÿ91 FronteraSt Adopted: May 25, 2004Revised: November 30, 2010 Passenger & Commuter Rail Hillside Secondary Arterial Secondary Arterial Hillside Collector Street Collector Street Hillside Primary Arterial Primary Arterial Major Arterial Stadium Area Smartstreet Resort Smartstreet Scenic Expressway Roadway Classifications Right-of-Way Reserve Planned RoadwayNetwork (Proposed) City of Anaheim General Plan ProgramProposed Figure C-1 Page C-8 City Boundary 0 1 20.5 Miles Freeway/Tollroad Future Passenger RailGrade Separations! Sphere-of-Influence ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! H o l d e r S t K n o t t A v e W e s t e r n A v e B e a c h B l v d D a l e S t M a g n o l i a A v e G i l b e r t S t B r o o k h u r s t S t M u l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave E u c l i d S t N u t w o o d S t 9 t h S t W a l n u t S t D i s n e y l a n d D r H a r b o r B l v d L e w i s S t S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d D o u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e st S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m Blv d O liv e S t E a s t S tSouth St V ermo n t Ave San t a Ana StBroadwayLincolnAve S y c a m o re StNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave E u c l i d S t L e m o n S t R a y m o n d A v e H a r b o r B l v d A c a c i a A v e S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e S u n k i s t S t R i o V i s t a S t CrowtherAve Ora n g e t ho rpe Ave Miraloma Ave L a Palma A v e R e d G u m S t K r a e m e r B lv d M ill e r St TustinAve V a n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e K e l l o g g D r Esperanza RdOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e I mpe r i a l H w y NohlRanch Rd SantaAnaCanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e W eirC anyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M e tr olin k |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55|ÿ57 §¨¦5 B lu e G u m St Cerritos A v e Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d W e s t S t |ÿ91 FronteraSt Passenger & Commuter Rail Hillside Secondary Arterial Secondary Arterial Hillside Collector Street Collector Street Hillside Primary Arterial Primary Arterial Major Arterial Stadium Area Smartstreet Resort Smartstreet Scenic Expressway Roadway Classifications Right-of-Way Reserve Complete Streets Collector (OO ( ( ( O ( ( (O (O O (O ((( OO (! ! ! T ustinA ve Va n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e Ke l l o g g D r Esperanza R d OrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy Sa n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e I m p e r i a l H w y NohlRanchRd Santa Ana Canyon Rd Fairm ontBlvd C a n y o n R im Rd S e r r a n o A v e W eir C a n y o n Rd O a k C a nyonDr |ÿ241 |ÿ91 |ÿ55 A n a h e i m H i l l s R d R o y a l O a k R d R o o s e v e l t R d |ÿ90 1 2 6 7654 9 8 164a 9b 10 9a 13 15 10a 12,12a 3 5a 11 14 Santa Ana Canyon RoadAccess Points(Existing) City of Anaheim General Plan ProgramFigure C-2 Page C-10 0 1 20.5 Miles Adopted: Januray 11, 1966Revised: December 17, 1996 O 3-Way Intersection (4-Way Intersection !Conflicting Access Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone Rivers and Reservoirs City Boundary Sphere-of-Influence (OO ( ( ( O ( ( (O (O O (O ((( OO (! ! ! T ustinA ve Va n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e Ke l l o g g D r Esperanza R d OrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy Sa n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e I m p e r i a l H w y NohlRanchRd Santa Ana Canyon Rd Fairm ontBlvd C a n y o n R im Rd S e r r a n o A v e W eir C a n y o n Rd O a k C a nyonDr |ÿ241 |ÿ91 |ÿ55 A n a h e i m H i l l s R d R o y a l O a k R d R o o s e v e l t R d |ÿ90 1 2 6 7654 9 8 164a 9b 10 9a 13 15 10a 12,12a 3 5a 11 14 Santa Ana Canyon RoadAccess Points(Proposed) City of Anaheim General Plan ProgramProposed Figure C-2 Page C-10 0 1 20.5 Miles O 3-Way Intersection (4-Way Intersection !Conflicting Access Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone Rivers and Reservoirs City Boundary Sphere-of-Influence IA IA k k H o l d e r S t K n o t t A v e W e s t e r n A v e B e a c h B l v d D a l e S t M a g n o l i a A v e G i l b e r t S t B r o o k h u r s t S t M u l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave E u c l i d S t N u t w o o d S t 9 t h S t W a l n u t S t D i s n e y l a n d D r H a r b o r B l v d L e w i s S t L o a r a S t S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d D o u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e s t S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m B lv d O liv e S t E a st S tSo uth S t V e r m on t Ave Santa A na StBroadwayLincolnAve S y camo r e StNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave E u c l i d S t L e m o n S t R a y m o n d A v e H a r b o r B l v d A c a c i a A v e S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e S u n k i s t S t R i o V i s t a S t CrowtherAve O rangethorpe A v e M i r a l o m a A v e L a P al m a Ave R e d G u m St K r a e m e r B lv d M iller S t TustinAve V a n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e K e l l o g g D r Esperanza R dOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Im per i a l H w y NohlRanch R d SantaAnaCanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e WeirCanyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M etr olin k B lu e G u m St Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d Existing and ProposedBicycle Facilities (Existing) Figure C-5 Page C-33 0 1 20.5 Miles City of Anaheim General Plan Program Parks/Open Space School City Boundary Park-and-RideIA Transit StationkProposed Top PriorityClass II BikewayProposed 2nd PriorityClass II BikewayProposed 3rd PiorityClass II Bikeway Proposed Top PriorityClass III BikewayProposed 2nd PriorityClass III Bikeway Proposed 3rd PriorityClass III Bikeway Existing Class I Bikeway Exisitng Class II Bikeway Existing Class III Bikeway Existing Off Road Trail Proposed Off Road Trail Proposed Top PriorityClass I BikewayProposed 2nd PriorityClass I BikewayProposed 3rd PriorityClass I Bikeway Sphere-of-Influence Adopted: May 25, 2004Revised: February 20, 2013 IA IA k k H o l d e r S t K n o t t A v e W e s t e r n A v e B e a c h B l v d D a l e S t M a g n o l i a A v e G i l b e r t S t B r o o k h u r s t S t M u l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave E u c l i d S t N u t w o o d S t 9 t h S t W a l n u t S t D i s n e y l a n d D r H a r b o r B l v d L e w i s S t L o a r a S t S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d D o u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e s t S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m B lv d O liv e S t E a st S tSo uth S t V e r m on t Ave Santa A na StBroadwayLincolnAve S y camo r e StNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave E u c l i d S t L e m o n S t R a y m o n d A v e H a r b o r B l v d A c a c i a A v e S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e S u n k i s t S t R i o V i s t a S t CrowtherAve O rangethorpe A v e M i r a l o m a A v e L a P al m a Ave R e d G u m St K r a e m e r B lv d M iller S t TustinAve V a n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e K e l l o g g D r Esperanza R dOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Im per i a l H w y NohlRanch R d SantaAnaCanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e WeirCanyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M etr olin k B lu e G u m St Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d Existing and ProposedBicycle Facilities(Proposed) Proposed Figure C-5 Page C-33 0 1 20.5 Miles City of Anaheim General Plan Program Parks/Open Space School City Boundary Park-and-RideIA Transit StationkProposed Top PriorityClass II BikewayProposed 2nd PriorityClass II BikewayProposed 3rd PiorityClass II Bikeway Proposed Top PriorityClass III BikewayProposed 2nd PriorityClass III Bikeway Proposed 3rd PriorityClass III Bikeway Existing Class I Bikeway Exisitng Class II Bikeway Existing Class III Bikeway Existing Off Road Trail Proposed Off Road Trail Proposed Top PriorityClass I BikewayProposed 2nd PriorityClass I BikewayProposed 3rd PriorityClass I Bikeway Sphere-of-Influence ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page ED-3 Area-Specific Land Use Strategies  Develop appropriate regulations to facilitate the transition of The Platinum Triangle into a major, economic center of regional significance, which exemplifies a dynamic place where people live, work and visit.  Promote the continued revitalization of Downtown Anaheim as a vibrant town center with major civic, cultural, retail, office and residential uses.  Revitalize the South Anaheim Boulevard corridor as an important link between Downtown Anaheim, The Anaheim Resort and The Platinum Triangle with a mix of retail, office, employment and residential uses.  Enhance the long-term viability of The Anaheim Canyon by preserving the integrity of industrially-designated land uses; improving urban design standards; providing additional employment-generating uses, such as commercial and mixed-use development; and enhancing water recharge basins as visual and recreational amenities, where appropriate.  Revitalize the North Euclid Street Area, including the areas around the North Orange County Community College campus, as a major gateway into the City, offering educational and employment training opportunities for Anaheim’s workforce and residents and new mixed-use development opportunities for the surrounding neighborhoods.  Expand The Anaheim Resort to include those areas along the Harbor Boulevard corridor south of Orangewood Avenue to the southern City limit.  Encourage the development of a new mixed-use village at the northwest corner of State College Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue.  Pursue commercial opportunities in the Hill and Canyon Area provided by the additional retail demand created by the development of the Mountain Park Specific Plan.  Encourage the development of quality, mid-block residential land uses and while concentrating future commercial uses at major intersections and other strategic locations in West and East Anaheim, as designated on the General Plan Land Use Plan.  Preserve and enhance “Tile Mile” along State College Boulevard, the well-known concentration of tile and stone distributors and their associated showrooms, as a major regional attraction.  Continue discussions with the Orange County Water District in an effort to explore the commercial viability of strategically-located groundwater recharge basins. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page ED-12 | May 2004 regional centers in south Orange County. Nevertheless, various strategies contained in this Element will serve to ensure that the City is positioned to attract such uses to the community. GOAL 1.1: Continue and expand the City’s marketing and promotional campaign. Policies: 1) Continue to market Anaheim as a business-friendly city and implement the following strategies to promote the City’s special activity areas and neighborhoods:  Continue to market the Anaheim Convention Center as a showcase for the community and an opportunity for new and existing businesses to network.  Market The Anaheim Resort, Angel Stadium of Anaheim, The Grove Theater and the Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim as major entertainment amenities for local regional and national businesses.  Promote The Platinum Triangle as a unique and special urban place where a wide variety of people come together to work, live, shop and recreate.  Promote Downtown Anaheim/Colony as the cultural, artistic, historic and civic center of the City.  Continue to promote The Anaheim Canyon as a high profile, business center in Orange County.  Promote West and East Anaheim as areas with emerging high quality housing and retail opportunities. 2) Continue to market and promote redevelopment project areas and business districts throughout the City. 3) Continue to utilize the City’s Geographic Information Systems (GIS) capabilities and other technological resources to help identify sites for future development and redevelopment. GOAL 1.2: Attract new businesses and help existing ones through effective Public Utilities programs. Policies: 1) Maintain public/private partnerships through the Business Savings Programs, the Anaheim Advantage Services Program and Business Development Program.  Refer to the Public Services and Facilities Element for a description of goals and policies related to Anaheim’s public utilities. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page ED-18 | May 2004 3) Continue efforts to target high-quality residential opportunities along major corridors throughout East, Central and West Anaheim. 4) Ensure quality development through adherence to Community Design Element design policies and applicable zoning provisions. Area-Specific Goals and Policies To identify target strategies that promote economic development in specific areas of the City, the following section is divided into five sub-areas: Hill and Canyon Area The primarily residential Hill and Canyon Area of the City is expected to generate additional demand for retailers. The area’s in-place demand is currently served by a regional retail center (The Festival), but limited leakage of retail dollars still occurs. Projected increases in population will support the need for additional large-scale retailers, but will not likely support the need for any additional retail centers. GOAL 6.1: Attract new retailers to help strengthen existing commercial centers. Policies: 1) Develop strategies to attract retailers to the Hill and Canyon Area and to capture any demand generated by future residential development. The Anaheim Canyon The Anaheim Canyon is the largest industrial area in the City, constituting approximately 60% of Anaheim’s industrial inventory. Due to its size and diversity of employment, The Anaheim Canyon represents a very important economic engine. Stretching in an east/west direction along the northern side of the Santa Ana River through the eastern portion of the City, The Anaheim Canyon is served by rail, the regional arterial highway system, and the Orange (SR-57) and Riverside (SR-91) Freeways. While the predominant land use direction of The Anaheim Canyon will remain industrial, the potential exists for additional office and research/development activity due to the area’s high visibility and easy access from major corridors and the freeway. A mixed-use retail/office/residential node is also designated in the vicinity of the Metrolink Station. Challenges for the area include a shortage of vacant land, demand by non-industrial users and desire to provide higher skill, higher wage employment opportunities. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page ED-19 GOAL 6.2: Maintain and enhance The Anaheim Canyon as one of the region’s major industrial/office employment centers by improving the area’s visibility, vitality and image and by taking advantage of its transportation links. Policies: 1) Discourage land uses that compromise the integrity of the area’s industrial and office park setting. 2) Enhance the physical appearance of The Anaheim Canyon through better “edge” identification, entry monumentation, signage, and landscaping. 3) Improve the architectural quality of buildings through façade improvements and design guidelines. 4) Encourage strategically-located convenience retail development for the benefit of workers and visitors. 5) Encourage additional office development along the southern edge of La Palma Avenue as indicated in the Land Use Element. 6) Encourage mixed-use development around the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station as indicated in the Land Use Element. 7) Explore opportunities to introduce retail, restaurant or entertainment uses adjacent to the area’s strategically-located groundwater recharge basins. The Platinum Triangle The 807-acre Platinum Triangle, bounded by the Santa Ana (I-5) and Orange (SR-57) Freeways and south of the Southern California Edison easement, represents the greatest commercial and office expansion opportunity for the City. Its proximity to major amenities such as the Angel Stadium of Anaheim, the Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim, and The Anaheim Resort along with its visibility from local freeways and railways make it a strong candidate to become a major regional economic center. The area’s visibility, central location and underutilized land combine for a potential large market capture of office, industrial and retail development. In addition, the employment, entertainment and retail opportunities provided in the area, combined with the high demand for housing, presents tremendous opportunities for high-quality residential uses for the area’s future workforce and those seeking an urban, mixed-use living environment. The vision of The Platinum Triangle goes far beyond that of the area’s historic land use patterns – the area will become a vibrant, mixed-use urban center serving the entire  Refer to the Community Design Element for design – related policies for industrial areas. GREEN ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page G-23 County Central-Coast Sub-regional NCCP was approved in July of 1996. It consists of 37,000 acres covering portions of several cities and unincorporated areas, contains twelve habitat types and covers 39 sensitive plant and animal species. The City will continue to support regional planning efforts to conserve biological resources within and adjacent to the City. In addition, future development in the easternmost portion of the City should be sensitively integrated with the adjoining habitat areas. GOAL 14.1: Conserve natural habitat and protect rare, threatened and endangered species. Policies: 1) Support efforts to preserve natural habitat through continued participation in the Natural Communities Conservation Plan. GOAL 14.2: Support educational outreach programs related to habitat resources and conservation efforts. Policies: 1) Encourage and support regional efforts to educate the public about habitat resources and conservation efforts. GOAL 14.3: Ensure that future development near regional open space resources will be sensitively integrated into surrounding sensitive habitat areas. Policies: 1) Require new development to mitigate light and glare impacts on surrounding sensitive habitat and open space areas, where appropriate. Mineral Resources The California Geological Survey provides information about California’s non-fuel mineral resources. The primary focus of the Mineral Resources Project is to classify lands throughout the State that contain regionally significant mineral resources as mandated by State Law. According to the California Geological Survey, parts of the East Anaheim, The Anaheim Canyon, and Hill and Canyon Areas are identified as being within a Mineral Resource Zone, Class 2 (MRZ-2). Lands within this zone are determined to have a high potential for significant mineral deposits. The City of Anaheim has three sectors identified as containing mineral resources of regional significance. These sectors are shown on Figure G-3, Mineral Resource Map. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page G-28 | May 2004 effects of prevailing winds and locating landscaping and landscape structures to shade buildings). 2) Encourage energy-efficient retrofitting of existing buildings throughout the City. 3) Continue to provide free energy audits for the public. Waste Management and Recycling On average, Americans produce over four pounds of trash per day. As available space in and for landfills grows scarcer, cities all over the country have been mandated to manage waste more efficiently. Waste Management and Recycling The City’s program – Recycle Anaheim – consists of an automated trash collection program along with a broader recycling and yard waste collection system. The Public Works Department also offers information on disposal and collection of hazardous waste, enclosure design and additional disposal services. In addition, the City, in partnership with the California Integrated Waste Management Board, has identified The Anaheim Canyon as a regional Recycling Market Development Zone (RMDZ). The RMDZ program diverts waste from California landfills by stimulating recycling businesses. The program provides assistance, such as information and low interest loans, to companies in The Anaheim Canyon that use recycled goods to manufacture finished products. Statewide, the program serves 70 cities and over 700,000 customers. GOAL 16.1: Continue to monitor and improve the Anaheim Recycle program. Policies: 1) Continue educational outreach programs for Anaheim’s households, businesses, and schools on the need for recycling solid waste. 2) Provide adequate solid waste collection and recycling for commercial areas and construction activities. The City of Anaheim has made great strides in reducing solid waste through its Recycle Anaheim program. In collaboration with its private contractor, the City provides an automated, curbside solid waste collection and recycling system for its residents. Anaheim’s recycling program uses color-coded barrels for waste disposal: green for recyclables, brown for yard waste and black for other trash. Ho l d e r S t Kn o t t A v e We s t e r n A v e Be a c h B l v d Da l e S t Ma g n o l i a A v e Gil b e r t S t Br o o k h u r s t S t Mu l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave Eu c l i d S t Nu t w o o d S t 9th S t Wa l n u t S t Dis n e y l a n d D r Ha r b o r B l v d Le w i s S t Sta t e C o l l e g e B l v d Do u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e s t S t H ar b o r B lv d A n a h e i m B lv d O li v e S t E a st S tSouth St Ver m o n t A ve Sant a Ana S tBroadwayLincolnAve S y ca m o re S tNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave Eu c l i d S t Le m o n S t Ra y m o n d A v e Ha r b o r B l v d Ac a c i a A v e Sta t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e Su n k i s t S t Rio V i s t a S t CrowtherAve Ora n g e t h o rpe Av e Mi raloma Ave La P alma A v e R e d G u m S t K ra e m e r Blv d M ille r S t TustinAve Va n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e Ke l l o g g D r Esperanza RdOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy Sa n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Im pe r i a l H w y NohlRanch Rd SantaAnaCanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e Weir C anyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M e tr oli n k |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55|ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 B l u e G u m St Cerritos A v e Lo a r a S t Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d 2 1 32 4 20 10 18 1 9 1 3 1 1 24 9 17 2 0 24 14 1 4 7 8 5 6 2 0 16 22 1 1 2 1 1 15 1 5 2 3 12 Equestrian, Riding andHiking Trails Plan(Existing) City of Anaheim General Plan ProgramFigure G-5 Page G-47 City Boundary 0 1 20.5 Miles Trail Study Area Feeder Backbone Regional Sphere-of-Influence Feeder Trail Overlay Note: Trails shown of this plan are either existing or planned. Adopted: May 25, 2004Revised: June 7, 2005 H o l d e r S t K n o t t A v e W e s t e r n A v e B e a c h B l v d D a l e S t M a g n o l i a A v e G i l b e r t S t B r o o k h u r s t S t M u l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave E u c l i d S t N u t w o o d S t 9 t h S t W a l n u t S t D i s n e y l a n d D r H a r b o r B l v d L e w i s S t S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d D o u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e s t S t H ar b o r B lv d A n a h e i m B lv d O li v e S t E a st S tSouth St Ver m o n t A ve Sant a Ana S tBroadwayLincolnAve S y ca m o re S tNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave E u c l i d S t L e m o n S t R a y m o n d A v e H a r b o r B l v d A c a c i a A v e S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e S u n k i s t S t R i o V i s t a S t CrowtherAve Ora n g e t h o rpe Av e Mi raloma Ave La P alma A v e R e d G u m S t K ra e m e r Blv d M ille r S t TustinAve V a n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e K e l l o g g D r Esperanza RdOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Im pe r i a l H w y NohlRanch Rd SantaAnaCanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e Weir C anyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M e tr oli n k |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55|ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 B l u e G u m St Cerritos A v e L o a r a S t Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H ills R d 2 1 32 4 20 1 0 1 8 1 9 1 3 1 1 24 9 17 2 0 24 14 1 4 7 8 5 6 2 0 16 22 1 1 2 1 1 15 1 5 2 3 12 Equestrian, Riding andHiking Trails Plan(Proposed) City of Anaheim General Plan ProgramProposed Figure G-5 Page G-47 City Boundary 0 1 20.5 Miles Trail Study Area Feeder Backbone Regional Sphere-of-Influence Feeder Trail Overlay Note: Trails shown of this plan are either existing or planned. GREEN ELEMENT City of Anaheim General Plan | Page G-49  Backbone Trails – These are major links in the overall City trail system. They provide access out of local areas to the trail system as a whole and, as such, will generally receive priority for trail capital improvements funded out of the City’s budget or through grants. Backbone trails may also be dedicated and developed by individual developers, as conditioned by the City.  Feeder Trails – These are public trails that serve a local purpose, usually in an equestrian-oriented neighborhood. While not as critical as the backbone trail system, feeder trails do serve an important role as short loops. Feeder trail systems are required to be dedicated in connection with development of properties along the trail route. Private trails are not shown on the Equestrian, Riding and Hiking Trails Plan map (Figure G-5). Where private trails exist, they should remain under private ownership. Future private trails should be designed and laid out to link with the public trails system.  Feeder Trail Overlay – This specifies areas where feeder trails for primarily equestrian uses should be dedicated and improved as development occurs, but where precise trail routes have not yet been mapped.  Trail Heads – These are major nodes where resting and staging facilities are provided. Such amenities can include parking, hitching posts, water, picnic facilities, shade trees, trail markers and informational postings and bulletin boards.  Trail Loops – These are the basis of the trail system in the Master Plan. The idea is to provide varying lengths of trail loops that allow riders to return to their point of departure without requiring them to double back during their trip.  Varied Trail Segments – Trail segments should vary in terrain, difficulty and surrounding environment to provide users with a varied and interesting trail options. Some trails run along urban streets with access to shopping and community facilities, offering an alternative to the car or sidewalks. Other trails link, circle or run through open, scenic and natural areas.  Expanded Trail System east of Weir Canyon – The trail system will be expanded in the area east of Weir Canyon Road as the area develops. This provides direct links to the Chino Hills State Park and Cleveland National Forest trail network, and links to Riverside County’s riding and hiking trails via the Santa Ana River Trail. Trail Study Areas – A number of trail study areas have been identified on Figure G-65 in central and western Anaheim that depict potential trail locations that connect residents with recreational opportunities, schools and activity centers such as Downtown, Anaheim Canyon, The Anaheim Resort and The Platinum Triangle. The locations of these study areas are based on existing utility easements, railroad rights-of-way and flood control channels. Although they are mapped, the feasibility of their implementation has yet to be determined. Analysis of these study areas will need to look at potential COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page CD-i Community Design Element INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 Achieving the Vision ................................................................................................... 2 Enhancing the General Plan ......................................................................................... 2 Relationship to the Zoning Code .................................................................................. 3 Using the Community Design Element .......................................................................... 3 Community Design Components .................................................................................. 3 GOALS AND POLICIES ..................................................................................................... 6 Community Design Scope and Structure ....................................................................... 6 City Level Design Features ........................................................................................... 7 Community Design Identity ................................................................................... 7 Enhanced Arterial Corridors .................................................................................. 9 Single-Family Neighborhood Quality ..................................................................... 10 Multiple-Family Development .............................................................................. 12 Mid-Block Corridor Residential Development ........................................................ 14 Retail Activity Centers ......................................................................................... 16 Neighborhood Retail Centers ............................................................................... 18 Mixed Use Development ..................................................................................... 19 Industrial Areas .................................................................................................. 21 Signage ............................................................................................................. 23 Architectural Diversity and Context ...................................................................... 25 Public Art .......................................................................................................... 26 District-Level Design Features .................................................................................... 28 Downtown Revitalization ..................................................................................... 31 Historic Preservation in Residential Areas of the Colony .......................................... 34 Platinum Triangle Development ........................................................................... 37 North Euclid Street ............................................................................................. 38 West Anaheim ................................................................................................... 39 East Anaheim ..................................................................................................... 39 North Central Industrial Area ............................................................................... 40 The Anaheim Canyon .......................................................................................... 41 Hill and Canyon Area .......................................................................................... 41 CITY OF ANAHEIM Page CD-6 | May 2004 GOALS AND POLICIES COMMUNITY DESIGN SCOPE AND STRUCTURE The organizing principle of this Element is that community design exists at two levels, from the scale of the entire community to that of individual design districts. The goals and policies that follow will start at the “macro” level of the community and then proceed downward to specific districts. These policies, combined with the development standards of the Zoning Code and design guidelines for specific areas in the City, form a basis for individual project review. In this way, the design policies are tailored to the appropriate scale or area, yet fit together to address all aspects of community design. The following structure offers a way of thinking about design features applicable to these distinct levels and provides the basis for the goals and policies that follow. The list is not exhaustive, but illustrates design features that occur at various levels simultaneously. City Level Design Features  Community design identity  Enhanced arterial corridors  Single-family neighborhood design quality  Multiple-family development  Mid-block corridor residential areas  Retail activity centers  Neighborhood retail centers  Mixed-use development  Industrial areas  Signage  Architectural diversity and context  Public art District Level Design Features  Downtown revitalization  Historic preservation in residential areas of the Colony  Platinum Triangle development  North Euclid Street  West Anaheim  East Anaheim  North Central Industrial Area  The Anaheim Canyon  The Hill and Canyon Area COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page CD-21 Industrial Areas Anaheim has several key industrial areas, including The Anaheim Canyon, the North Central Industrial Area, the area west of the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway between La Palma Avenue and Magnolia Avenue, and portions of The Platinum Triangle. These areas are sited to minimize conflicts with potentially sensitive land uses. Industrial uses can be noisy, require outdoor storage, create fumes, and generate truck traffic. Despite these characteristics, the City can still strive to make industrial areas attractive and, at the same time, allow for the kinds of activities inherent to industrial uses. Design policies and guidelines should address the obvious issues of buffers, screening and parking; strengthening the overall image of industrial areas through entry monumentation, coordinated public signage and landscaping should also be addressed. The following policies will also assist in improving the appearance and future of these areas. GOAL 9.1: Anaheim’s industrial areas and the buildings within them are strategically planned, visually distinctive and attractive, abundantly landscaped and appropriately signed. Policies: 1) Strengthen the identity of key industrial areas through entry monumentation, signage, attractive landscape treatments, and a complementary range of building colors and types. 2) Encourage individual design identity and clearly visible main entrances for industrial buildings. 3) Avoid use of long, blank walls by breaking them up with vertical and horizontal facade articulation achieved through stamping, colors, materials, modulation and landscaping. 4) Thoroughly screen and enclose all outside storage areas through the use of perimeter walls and landscape treatments. 5) Use abundant landscaping to minimize views of surface parking, storage and service areas. 6) Where possible, encourage adjacent buildings to share open, landscaped and/or hardscaped areas for visual relief, access and outdoor employee gathering places. 7) Where practical, underground or screen utilities and utility equipment or locate and size them to be as inconspicuous as possible. 8) Permit convenience retail uses, such as restaurants in proximity to industrial areas for the convenience of employees and clients. Ho l d e r S t Kn o t t A v e We s t e r n A v e Be a c h B l v d Da l e S t Ma g n o l i a A v e Gil b e r t S t Bro o k h u r s t S t Mu l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave Eu c l i d S t Nu t w o o d S t 9th S t Wa l n u t S t Dis n e y l a n d D r Ha r b o r B l v d Le w i s S t Lo a r a S t Sta t e C o l l e g e B l v d Do u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e s t S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m B lv d O liv e S t E a st S tSouth St Ver m o n t A ve Sa n t a Ana StBroadwayLincolnAve S y c a m ore S tNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave Eu c l i d S t Le m o n S t Ra y m o n d A v e Ha r b o r B l v d Ac a c i a A v e Sta t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e Su n k i s t S t Rio V i s t a S t CrowtherAve Or a n g e t h orp e Av e Mira lo m a Ave L a Pa lma A v e R e d G u m S t K r a e m e r B lv d M ille r S t TustinAve Va n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e Ke l l o g g D r Esperanz a R dOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy Sa n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Impe r i a l H w y NohlRanch Rd SantaAna CanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e Weir C anyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M e tr oli n k B l u e G u m St Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 We s t S t NORTH EU CLID• Create gatew ay at northern City entrance• Continue to im plem ent streetscape and landscape im provem ents along m ajor corridors and local streets• Create guidelines for boulevard housing NORTH CENTRAL INDU STRIAL AREA• Strengthen identity• Encourage landscaped buffers betw een industrial and residential uses• Enhance pedestrian link s betw een park s and residential areas ANAHEIM COLONY HISTORIC DISTRICT AND DOWNTOWN• Create recognizable im age as the civic, cultural, and historic center of the City• Create pedestrian-friendly Dow ntow n core• Encourage historically sensitive, diverse, distinctive architecture• Continue preservation/restoration of Historic District THE CANYON• Enhance entries• Coordinate sign and landscape program s• Im prove interface w ith Santa Ana River• Landscape w ater basins and recreational facilities WEST ANAHEIM• Continue program of streetscape im provem ents• Design attractive, pedestrian-friendly retail activity centers and enhanced intersections• Im prove quality of residential street environm ent• Visually enhance k ey entryw ays• Encourage appropriately-scaled and architecturally-rich residential developm ent• Provide guidance for transitioning/revitalizing aging, m id-block retail properties THE ANAHEIM RESORT• Continue to ensure design quality through the im plem entation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, and Hotel Circle Specific Plan, w hich contain Design Guidelines as w ell as specific program s to address signage, streetscape and landscaping• Extend the Anaheim Resort to the southern City lim its along Harbor Boulevard THE PLATINU M TRIANGLE• Create regional center of dram atic urban scale and strong sense of place• Integrate professional sports venues/entertainm ent, office/retail and urban housing land uses to create day and night activity • Create netw ork of pedestrian link s and vibrant public spaces• Ensure high quality developm ent through design guidelines and com prehensive property m anagem ent• Create strong entryw ays and edge treatm ents• Provide diverse m ix of quality urban housing EAST ANAHEIM• Com plete streetscape im provem ents plans• Pursue opportunities to provide additional pedestrian link s to Santa Ana River• Expand residential street tree program• Encourage appropriately-scaled and architecturally-rich residential developm ent HILL AND CANYON AREA• Reinforce the natural environm ent of the area through appropriate landscaping and the preservation of open space• Preserve view s and ridgelines• Incorporate natural aesthetics into design• Reinforce quality developm ent standards and guidelines com patible w ith the hillside area. Notes: District boundaries are not precise, They are intendedto dem onstrate general areas w ith com m on designfeatures and characteristics. Design policies, guidelines and program s for the AnaheimResort area are contained in the Anaheim Resort SpecificPlan, Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, and Hotel CircleSpecific Plan. Figure CD-1 Page CD-29 0 1 20.5 Miles City of Anaheim General Plan Program Com m unity Design Districts(General Study Areas)(Existing) City Boundary Sphere-of-Influence West Anaheim North Euclid Street North Central Industrial Area The Anaheim Resort East Anaheim The Platinum Triangle The Canyon Hill & Canyon Area The Anaheim Colony Historic Districtand Dow ntow n H o l d e r S t K n o t t A v e W e s t e r n A v e B e a c h B l v d D a l e S t M a g n o l i a A v e G i l b e r t S t B r o o k h u r s t S t M u l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave E u c l i d S t N u t w o o d S t 9 t h S t W a l n u t S t D i s n e y l a n d D r H a r b o r B l v d L e w i s S t L o a r a S t S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d D o u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e s t S t H a r b o r B lv d A n a h e i m B lv d O liv e S t E a st S tSouth St Ver m o n t A ve Sa nt a Ana StBroadwayLincolnAve S y c a m ore S tNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave E u c l i d S t L e m o n S t R a y m o n d A v e H a r b o r B l v d A c a c i a A v e S t a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e S u n k i s t S t R i o V i s t a S t CrowtherAve Or a n g e t h orp e Av e Mira lo m a Ave L a Pa lma A v e R e d G u m S t K r a e m e r B lv d M ille r S t TustinAve V a n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e K e l l o g g D r Esperanz a R dOrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Impe r i a l H w y NohlRanch Rd SantaAna CanyonRd FairmontBlvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e Weir C anyonRd O a k Canyon Dr M e tr oli n k B l u e G u m St Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91|ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 W e s t S t NORTH EUCLID• Create gateway at northern City entrance• Continue to implement streetscape and landscape improvements along major corridors and local streets• Create guidelines for boulevard housing NORTH CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL AREA• Strengthen identity• Encourage landscaped buffers between industrial and residential uses• Enhance pedestrian links between parks and residential areas ANAHEIM COLONY HISTORIC DISTRICT AND DOWNTOWN• Create recognizable image as the civic, cultural, and historic center of the City• Create pedestrian-friendly Downtown core• Encourage historically sensitive, diverse, distinctive architecture• Continue preservation/restoration of Historic District ANAHEIM CANYON• Enhance entries• Coordinate sign and landscape programs• Improve interface with Santa Ana River• Landscape water basins and recreational facilities WEST ANAHEIM• Continue program of streetscape improvements• Design attractive, pedestrian-friendly retail activity centers and enhanced intersections• Improve quality of residential street environment• Visually enhance key entryways• Encourage appropriately-scaled and architecturally-rich residential development• Provide guidance for transitioning/revitalizing aging, mid-block retail properties THE ANAHEIM RESORT• Continue to ensure design quality through the implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, and Hotel Circle Specific Plan, which contain Design Guidelines as well as specific programs to address signage, streetscape and landscaping• Extend the Anaheim Resort to the southern City limits along Harbor Boulevard THE PLATINUM TRIANGLE• Create regional center of dramatic urban scale and strong sense of place• Integrate professional sports venues/entertainment, office/retail and urban housing land uses to create day and night activity• Create network of pedestrian links and vibrant public spaces• Ensure high quality development through design guidelines and comprehensive property management• Create strong entryways and edge treatments• Provide diverse mix of quality urban housing EAST ANAHEIM• Complete streetscape improvements plans• Pursue opportunities to provide additional pedestrian links to Santa Ana River• Expand residential street tree program• Encourage appropriately-scaled and architecturally-rich residential development HILL AND CANYON AREA• Reinforce the natural environment of the area through appropriate landscaping and the preservation of open space• Preserve views and ridgelines• Incorporate natural aesthetics into design• Reinforce quality development standards and guidelines compatible with the hillside area. Notes: District boundaries are not precise, They are intendedto demonstrate general areas with common designfeatures and characteristics. Design policies, guidelines and programs for the AnaheimResort area are contained in the Anaheim Resort SpecificPlan, Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, and Hotel CircleSpecific Plan. Figure CD-1 Page CD-29 0 1 20.5 Miles City of Anaheim General Plan Program Community Design Districts(General Study Areas)(Proposed) City Boundary Sphere-of-Influence West Anaheim North Euclid Street North Central Industrial Area The Anaheim Resort East Anaheim The Platinum Triangle Anaheim Canyon Hill & Canyon Area The Anaheim Colony Historic Districtand Downtown COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT May 2004 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page CD-41 4) Improve pedestrian links between residential areas and adjacent parks (La Palma and Julianna). The Anaheim Canyon This 2,450-acre business center borders the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway to the north, between the Orange (SR-57) Freeway and Imperial Highway, and is a major employment center. Its highly visible location and accessibility to both the Inland Empire and Los Angeles County give it an added advantage. An ongoing effort of the City has been to reinforce the Center’s image as a high quality, attractive industrial center. GOAL 20.1: Continue to strengthen The Anaheim Canyon’s image as one of the region’s most desired economic centers. Policies: 1) Improve and project the image of the area through continuing the development of enhanced entryways at key intersections, improved landscaping along the Santa Ana River and groundwater recharge basins, and a coordinated sign program. 2) Provide ample landscaping throughout the area to encourage a professional atmosphere. 3) Encourage building products with individual identity, distinctive signage, and varied color and materials rather than long, monotonous blank walls. 4) Where practical, orient buildings to take advantage of the Santa Ana River as a scenic and recreational amenity. 5) Work with the Orange County Water District to expand upon the recreational and commercial of the groundwater water recharge basins located in the area. Hill and Canyon Area The topography of the Hill and Canyon Area requires special design attention. Residents in this area are proud of the natural, semi-rural setting and have consistently expressed the desire to preserve open space, specimen trees views and vistas. Applying design guidelines that respect the existing topography can enhance views to and from adjacent freeways, arterials and streets. Scenic view in the Hill and Canyon Area. [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 3 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RESCIND PACIFICENTER ANAHEIM SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-3 AND NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 94-1 AND ADOPT ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2015-1 (SPN2014-00065) (DEV2011-00125) WHEREAS, on April 29, 1986, the City Council of the City of Anaheim ("City Council") adopted Ordinance No. 4709 to establish uniform procedures for the adoption and implementation of Specific Plans for the coordination of future development within the City, which specified that zoning and development standards would be substituted for existing zoning regulations under the Zoning Code for a Specific Plan area when the Specific Plan includes zoning regulations and development standards, which zoning and development standards are to be adopted by ordinance independent of the adoption of the Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Anaheim Canyon encompasses approximately 2,600 acres in the northern portion of the City of Anaheim, roughly bounded on the north by Orangethorpe Avenue, on the south by the Santa Ana River, on the east by Imperial Highway (SR-90), and on the west by the Orange Freeway (SR-57); and WHEREAS, the Anaheim Canyon encompasses approximately 2,600 acres in the northern portion of the City of Anaheim, roughly bounded on the north by Orangethorpe Avenue, on the south by the Santa Ana River, on the east by Imperial Highway (SR-90), and on the west by the Orange Freeway (SR-57); and WHEREAS, in 1989, the City Council approved the PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (the "SP 88-3 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 88-3 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 88-3 Zone") of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") to guide development of a mixed use center that would include offices, retail, restaurants and a hotel with supporting services to encourage transit use and facilitate business operations on approximately 26 acres, located south of La Palma Avenue, west of Tustin Avenue, north of the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) and east of the Metrolink rail line; and WHEREAS, in 1995, the City Council approved the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (the "SP94-1 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 94-1 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94- 1(SP94-1) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 94-1 Zone") of the Code to provide for a wide variety of industrial and commercial uses within an area generally consistent with the Anaheim Canyon, excluding properties within the SP88-3 Specific Plan area; and -2- PC2015-*** WHEREAS, in 2011, the City of Anaheim was awarded a grant from the California Strategic Growth Council to prepare a Specific Plan for Anaheim Canyon to replace the development requirements of the existing zoning on the properties in this area, remove regulatory obstacles to the reuse of existing structures, promote infill development of currently vacant or underutilized properties, encourage sustainable development, and create a business environment attractive to a wide variety of industries; and WHEREAS, staff has initiated the preparation of a proposed Specific Plan for the establishment of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in the form presented to this Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, staff has determined that several properties outside of the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area should also be included within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area because they have uses that are similar to the uses on adjacent properties within the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area, which additional properties include commercial properties located east of SR-90, properties adjacent to and including the Santa Ana River, and property located southwest of the intersection of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line and Tustin Avenue, currently designated for industrial use; and WHEREAS, there are currently approximately 27.9 million square feet of non-residential buildings within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan would result in the potential to develop an additional 19.6 million square feet of non-residential building area; and WHEREAS, there are currently 312 multi-family residential units in the Transit Core Area (Development Area 4) of the SP94-1 Zone. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area would result in the potential to develop an additional 2,607 multi-family residential units within Development Area 3: Transit-Oriented Area of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, a series of actions is required to establish a Specific Plan for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area (collectively, the “Project Actions”), including: 1. General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492 to amend the Land Use, Circulation, Green, Economic Development and Community Design Elements of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim to be consistent with the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01; and 2. Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065 to rescind PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 and Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 and adopt the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1; and 3. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 to amend Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to (a) rescind Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP 88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) and Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoning and Development Standards), (b) adopt Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards), and (c) amend other portions of the Anaheim Municipal Code to be consistent with the addition of said new Chapter 18.120; and -3- PC2015-*** 4. Reclassification No. 2014-00262 to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards) to those properties within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area that are currently classified under the SP 88-3 Zone, the SP 94-1 Zone, the "I" Industrial Zone, the "C-G" General Commercial Zone, the "T" Transition Zone, and the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, in September 2013, City Council approved a contract with Placeworks (formerly The Planning Center DC&E) to prepare Environmental Impact Report No. 2013-00348 ("EIR No. 348") for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) for Draft EIR No. 348 was distributed to the public on October 28, 2013. The public review period for the initial study ended on November 27, 2013. The City held a public scoping meeting on November 12, 2013 to provide members of the public with an opportunity to learn about the Proposed Actions, ask questions and provide comments about the scope and content of the information to be addressed in Draft EIR No. 348; and WHEREAS, Draft EIR No. 348 was made available for a 45-day public review period from May 28, 2015 to July 13, 2015. The Notice of Availability (“NOA”), which also included noticing for a public hearing before this Planning Commission and a tentative date for a public hearing before the City Council to review and consider the Draft EIR No. 348 and the Project Actions, was sent to a list of interested persons, agencies and organizations, as well as property owners within the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area and within a 300-foot radius thereof. The Notice of Completion (“NOC”) was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk-Recorder’s office on May 28, 2015. Copies of Draft EIR No. 348 were made available for public review at the City of Anaheim Planning Department and has been available for download via the City’s website; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with California Water Code Section 10910, Draft EIR No. 348 includes a Water Supply Assessment (“WSA”) dated October 2014 as Appendix J, which concludes that a sufficient water supply and its reliability is and will be available for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Anaheim Civic Center, Council Chamber, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, on August 24, 2015, at 5:00 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, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed project actions, including Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and -4- PC2015-*** WHEREAS, Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065 proposes to rescind PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 and Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 and adopt the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area; and WHEREAS, before the Planning Commission can recommend approval of any Specific Plan, it must make findings of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist: 1. That the property proposed for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 has unique site characteristics, such as topography, location or surroundings, that are enhanced by special land use and development standards; 2. That the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, and with the purposes, standards and land use guidelines therein; 3. That the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 results in development of desirable character that will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood; 4. That the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 contributes to a balance of land uses throughout the City; and 5. That the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 respects environmental, aesthetic and historic resources consistent with economic realities. WHEREAS, by the adoption of a resolution concurrently with, but prior in time to, the adoption of this Resolution and pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as "CEQA"), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, this Planning Commission has found and determined and has recommended that the City Council so find and determine that Final EIR No. 348 provides an adequate assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project Actions and certify EIR No. 348, including the adoption of Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program 312, and determine that Draft EIR No. 348 fully complies with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, and is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the Project Actions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due consideration, inspection, investigation and study made by itself, and after due consideration of, and based upon, all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does hereby find and determine the following: 1. Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 will replace the SP88-3 Specific Plan and the SP94-1 Specific Plan, therefore indicating that the area encompassed by the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area is suitable for a specific plan; and -5- PC2015-*** 2. The proposed adoption of Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 and rescission of SP88-3 Specific Plan and the SP94-1 Specific Plan are being processed concurrently with General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492, which will modify and amend the Land Use, Circulation, Green, Economic Development and Community Design Elements of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim to be consistent with the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01, and would include, among other things, changes in land use, expanding the description of the "Water Use" land use category to allow certain non-water uses within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area, a new “Complete Streets Connector” roadway classification, changing references from “The Canyon” to “Anaheim Canyon,” and modifications to bikeways and trails within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area. No substantive changes to the General Plan Goals or Policies are proposed; 3. Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 includes Public Realm Improvements and Private Realm Incentives and Strategies that are consistent with the goals and policies for Anaheim Canyon contained within the Community Design Element of the General Plan and will result in development of desirable character that will be compatible with existing and proposed development in the surrounding neighborhood; 4. Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 is intended to maintain and enhance the City’s employment base in the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area, contributing to a balance of land uses throughout the City; and 5. Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 is intended to encourage sustainable development and create a business environment attractive to a wide variety of industries; therefore, respecting environmental, aesthetic and historic resources consistent with economic realities; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, on the basis of the above findings and determinations, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve and adopt Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065, as described above and on file with the Planning and Building Department of the City of Anaheim, contingent upon and subject to the adoption of (1) General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492, (2) Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115, and (3) Reclassification No. 2014-00262, now pending. -6- PC2015-*** THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 2015. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures. CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: _ SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on August 24, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of August, 2015. _ SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 111719-v1/TJR [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 4 -1- PC2015-*** RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THE ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM: (A) AMENDING (1) SECTION 6.28.010 (BEEKEEPING PROHIBITED) OF TITLE 6 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE; AND (2) SECTION 18.18.020 (DELINEATION OF (SC) OVERLAY ZONE BOUNDARIES OF CHAPTER 18.38 (SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS), SECTION 18.38.025 (ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE MANUFACTURING) OF CHAPTER 18.38 (SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS), SECTION 18.38.125 (EMERGENCY SHELTERS) OF CHAPTER 18.38 (SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS), SECTION 18.48.020 (APPLICATION AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS) OF CHAPTER 18.48 (RECYCLING FACILITIES), AND TABLE 90-A ZONE CORRESPONDENCE OF SECTION 18.90.100 (FORMER ZONES) OF CHAPTER 18.90 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE; (B) RESCINDING (1) CHAPTER 18.106 (PACIFICENTER ANAHEIM SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-3 (SP 88-3) ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS) OF TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, AND (2) CHAPTER 18.120 (NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 94-1 (SP 94-1) ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS) OF TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE; AND (C) ADDING NEW CHAPTER 18.120 (ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2015-01 (SP2015-01) ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS) TO TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE. (ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00115) (DEV2011-00125) WHEREAS, the Anaheim Canyon encompasses approximately 2,600 acres in the northern portion of the City of Anaheim, roughly bounded on the north by Orangethorpe Avenue, on the south by the Santa Ana River, on the east by Imperial Highway (SR-90), and on the west by the Orange Freeway (SR-57); and WHEREAS, in 1989, the City Council approved the PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (the "SP 88-3 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 88-3 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 88-3 Zone") of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") to guide development of a mixed use center that would include offices, retail, restaurants and a hotel with supporting services to encourage transit use and facilitate business operations on approximately 26 acres, located south of La Palma Avenue, west of Tustin Avenue, north of the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) and east of the Metrolink rail line; and -2- WHEREAS, in 1995, the City Council approved the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (the "SP94-1 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 94-1 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1(SP94-1) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 94-1 Zone") of the Code to provide for a wide variety of industrial and commercial uses within an area generally consistent with the Anaheim Canyon, excluding properties within the SP88-3 Specific Plan area; and WHEREAS, in 2011, the City of Anaheim was awarded a grant from the California Strategic Growth Council to prepare a Specific Plan for Anaheim Canyon to replace the development requirements of the existing zoning on the properties in this area, remove regulatory obstacles to the reuse of existing structures, promote infill development of currently vacant or underutilized properties, encourage sustainable development, and create a business environment attractive to a wide variety of industries; and WHEREAS, staff has initiated the preparation of a proposed Specific Plan for the establishment of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in the form presented to this Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, staff has determined that several properties outside of the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area should also be included within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area because they have uses that are similar to the uses on adjacent properties within the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area, which additional properties include commercial properties located east of SR-90, properties adjacent to and including the Santa Ana River, and property located southwest of the intersection of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line and Tustin Avenue, currently designated for industrial use; and WHEREAS, there are currently approximately 27.9 million square feet of non-residential buildings within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan would result in the potential to develop an additional 19.6 million square feet of non-residential building area; and WHEREAS, there are currently 312 multi-family residential units in the Transit Core Area (Development Area 4) of the SP94-1 Zone. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area would result in the potential to develop an additional 2,607 multi-family residential units within Development Area 3: Transit-Oriented Area of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, a series of actions is required to establish a Specific Plan for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area (collectively, the “Project Actions”), including: 1. General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492 to amend the Land Use, Circulation, Green, Economic Development and Community Design Elements of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim to be consistent with the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01; and 2. Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065 to rescind PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 and Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 and adopt the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1; and -3- 3. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 to amend Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to (a) rescind Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP 88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) and Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoning and Development Standards), (b) adopt Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards), and (c) amend other portions of the Anaheim Municipal Code to be consistent with the addition of said new Chapter 18.120; and 4. Reclassification No. 2014-00262 to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards) to those properties within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area that are currently classified under the SP 88-3 Zone, the SP 94-1 Zone, the "I" Industrial Zone, the "C-G" General Commercial Zone, the "T" Transition Zone, and the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone; and WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, in September 2013, City Council approved a contract with Placeworks (formerly The Planning Center DC&E) to prepare Environmental Impact Report No. 2013-00348 ("EIR No. 348") for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) for Draft EIR No. 348 was distributed to the public on October 28, 2013. The public review period for the initial study ended on November 27, 2013. The City held a public scoping meeting on November 12, 2013 to provide members of the public with an opportunity to learn about the Proposed Actions, ask questions and provide comments about the scope and content of the information to be addressed in Draft EIR No. 348; and WHEREAS, Draft EIR No. 348 was made available for a 45-day public review period from May 28, 2015 to July 13, 2015. The Notice of Availability (“NOA”), which also included noticing for a public hearing before this Planning Commission and a tentative date for a public hearing before the City Council to review and consider the Draft EIR No. 348 and the Project Actions, was sent to a list of interested persons, agencies and organizations, as well as property owners within the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area and within a 300-foot radius thereof. The Notice of Completion (“NOC”) was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk-Recorder’s office on May 28, 2015. Copies of Draft EIR No. 348 were made available for public review at the City of Anaheim Planning Department and has been available for download via the City’s website; and WHEREAS, in accordance with California Water Code Section 10910, Draft EIR No. 348 includes a Water Supply Assessment (“WSA”) dated October 2014 as Appendix J, which concludes that a sufficient water supply and its reliability is and will be available for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area; and -4- WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Anaheim Civic Center, Council Chamber, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, on August 24, 2015, at 5:00 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, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed project actions, including Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, proposed Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 would: (A) amend (1) Section 6.28.010 (Beekeeping Prohibited) of Title 6 of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and (2) Section 18.18.020 (Delineation of (SC) Overlay Zone Boundaries of Chapter 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations), Section 18.38.025 (Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing) of Chapter 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations), Section 18.38.125 (Emergency Shelters) of Chapter 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations), Section 18.48.020 (Application and Permit Requirements) of Chapter 18.48 (Recycling Facilities), and Table 90-A Zone Correspondence of Section 18.90.100 (Former Zones) of Chapter 18.90 (General Provisions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code; (B) rescind Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP 88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) and Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and (C) add new Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards) to Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, by the adoption of a resolution concurrently with, but prior in time to, the adoption of this Resolution and pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as "CEQA"), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, this Planning Commission has found and determined and has recommended that the City Council so find and determine that Final EIR No. 348 provides an adequate assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project Actions and certify EIR No. 348, including the adoption of Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program 312, and determine that Draft EIR No. 348 fully complies with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, and is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the Project Actions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, on the basis of the above findings and determinations, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 and adopt an ordinance implementing its approval of Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A and -5- incorporated herein by this reference with such revisions and modifications (if any) as the City Council may determine necessary and appropriate upon the advice of the City Attorney. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 is contingent upon and subject to the adoption by the City Council of General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492, (2) Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065, and (3) Reclassification No. 2014-00262, now pending. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 2015. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures. CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: _ SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on August 24, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of August, 2015. SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 111723-v1/TJR -6- EXHIBIT “A” FORM OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE FOR ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2014-00115 REDLINED TO SHOW REVISIONS TO CURRENT MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS ORDINANCE NO. 2015- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM: (A) AMENDING (1) SECTION 6.28.010 (BEEKEEPING PROHIBITED) OF TITLE 6 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE; AND (2) SECTION 18.18.020 (DELINEATION OF (SC) OVERLAY ZONE BOUNDARIES OF CHAPTER 18.38 (SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS), SECTION 18.38.025 (ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE MANUFACTURING) OF CHAPTER 18.38 (SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS), SECTION 18.38.125 (EMERGENCY SHELTERS) OF CHAPTER 18.38 (SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS), SECTION 18.48.020 (APPLICATION AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS) OF CHAPTER 18.48 (RECYCLING FACILITIES), AND TABLE 90-A ZONE CORRESPONDENCE OF SECTION 18.90.100 (FORMER ZONES) OF CHAPTER 18.90 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE; (B) RESCINDING (1) CHAPTER 18.106 (PACIFICENTER ANAHEIM SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-3 (SP 88-3) ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS) OF TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE, AND (2) CHAPTER 18.120 (NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 94-1 (SP 94-1) ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS) OF TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE; AND (C) ADDING NEW CHAPTER 18.120 (ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2015-01 (SP2015-01) ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS) TO TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE. WHEREAS, pursuant to the City’s police power, as granted broadly under Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution, the City Council of the City of Anaheim ("City Council") has the authority to enact and enforce ordinances and regulations for the public peace, morals and welfare of the City and its residents; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3; herein referred to as the "CEQA -7- Guidelines"), because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and is not a "project", as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City Council determines that this ordinance is a valid exercise of the local police power and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable State and local laws and requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That Section 6.28.010 (Beekeeping Prohibited) of Chapter 18.28 (Beekeeping) of Title 6 (Public Health and Safety) of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read in full as follows: 6.28.010 BEEKEEPING PROHIBITED. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to keep or suffer to be kept or maintained within the corporate limits of the City of Anaheim any hive or hives, swarm or swarms of honey bees; provided, however, that this prohibition shall not apply to any property which is zoned RS-A-43,000 RESIDENTIAL/AGRICULTURAL or RS-HS-43,000 RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY HILLSIDE ZONES T Transition Zone, RH-1 Single-Family Hillside Residential, or SP 2015-01 Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan and for which a Conditional Use Permit has been approved for beekeeping pursuant to Title 18 of this code. SECTION 2. That Section 18.18.020 (Delineation of (SC) Overlay Zone Boundaries) of Chapter 18.18 (Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read in full as follows: 18.18.020 DELINEATION OF (SC) OVERLAY ZONE BOUNDARIES. The area of the City designated as being within the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone is defined as that area lying easterly of the intersection of the State Route 55/Costa Mesa and State Route 91/Riverside Freeways, westerly of the Orange County line, southerly of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way, and northerly of the present or any future south city limits of the City of Anaheim, with the exception of those properties within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP2015-01) Zone. SECTION 3. -8- That Subsection .170 of Section 18.38.025 (Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing) of Chapter 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read in full as follows: .170 Up to four (4) Special Event Permits are allowed for an alcoholic beverages manufacturing use subject to Section 18.38.240, except that Special Event Permits may be permitted for alcoholic beverage manufacturing uses in the “I” Industrial Zone and in the Industrial Area (Development Area 1), Industrial Area – Recycling Overly Area (Development Area 1A), Expanded Industrial Area (Development Area 2) and the La Palma Core Area (Development Area 3) of the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. SP94-1.Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. SP 2015-01 (SP2015-01) Zone. SECTION 4. That subsection .010 (Maximum Occupancy) of Section 18.38.125 (Emergency Shelters) of Chapter 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read in full as follows: .010 Maximum Occupancy. A single Emergency Shelter housing up to 50 occupants, or a combination of multiple shelters with a combined capacity not to exceed 50 occupants, shall be a permitted use on any parcel within the "I" (Industrial) Zone or the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP2015-01) Zone, excluding properties within Development area Areas 3, 4, 5 or 6; however, emergency shelters shall not be permitted in either zone on parcels designated by the General Plan for any residential use, including mixed-use residential. Any other Emergency Shelter in the "I" Industrial Zone or the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zone Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP2015-01) shall be subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit consistent with Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permits). Religious institutions located within the "I" (Industrial) Zone may establish on-site Emergency Shelters for up to 50 occupants without the need to amend an existing conditional use permit or apply for a new conditional use permit, regardless of current combined capacity with any existing Emergency Shelters currently in operation, subject to the minimum development standards contained in this Section. SECTION 5. That subsection .010 of Section 18.48.020 (Application and Permit Requirements) of Chapter 18.48 (Recycling Facilities) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, amended to read in full as follows: .010 An application for reverse vending machines or small collection facilities pursuant to this subsection .010 shall be made in writing on a form established for that purpose by the Planning Director and shall receive a recycling permit prior to the first day of operation, which recycling permit shall remain in effect at all times. A conditional use permit must also be obtained if the facility is located within the "I" (Industrial) Zone, other than the SP94-1 (Northeast Area -9- Specific Plan No. 94-1) Overlay area. Reverse vending machines or small collection facilities in the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP2015-01) are permitted within Development Area 2, require a Conditional Use Permit within Development Areas 1 and 6, and are prohibited in Development Areas 3, 4 and 5. SECTION 6. That portion of Table 90-A Zone Correspondence of Section 18.90.100 (Former Zones) of Chapter 18.90 (General Provisions) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code that describes "Specific Plan Zones" be, and the same is hereby, amended to read in full as follows: Table 90-A ZONE CORRESPONDENCE Specific Plan Zones The names of the specific plan zones did not change – the chapter numbers changed as indicated Chapter Number Title Current Former Specific Plan No. 87-1 (The Highlands) 18.100 18.70 Specific Plan No. 88-1 (Sycamore Canyon) 18.102 18.71 Specific Plan No. 88-2 (Summit) 18.104 18.72 Specific Plan No. 88-3 (Pacific Center) Rescinded 18.106 Specific Plan No. 90-1 (Festival) 18.108 18.74 Specific Plan No. 90-2 (East Center Street Development) 18.110 18.75 Specific Plan No. 90-4 (Mountain Park) 18.112 18.76 Specific Plan No. 90-3 (Cypress Canyon) Rescinded 18.77 Specific Plan No. 92-1 (Disneyland Resort) 18.114 18.78 Specific Plan No. 92-2 (Anaheim Resort) 18.116 18.48 Specific Plan No. 93-1 (Hotel Circle) 18.118 18.79 Specific Plan No. 94-1 (Northeast Area) Rescinded 18.120 Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (Anaheim Canyon) 18.120 N/A SECTION 7. That Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP 88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, rescinded in its entirety. SECTION 8. -10- That Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoning and Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code be, and the same is hereby, rescinded in its entirety SECTION 9. That new Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards) be, and the same is, hereby added to Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, to read in full as follows: CHAPTER 18.120 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Sections: 18.120.010 Purpose. 18.120.020 Development review and permits. 18.120.030 Intent of individual Development Areas. 18.120.040 Uses. 18.120.050 Site and building area. 18. 120.060 Floor area ratio, residential density and structural heights. 18. 120.070 Structural and landscape setbacks. 18. 120.080 Parking and loading. 18. 120.090 Signs. 18. 120.100 Landscaping and screening. 18.120.010 PURPOSE. .010 Purpose. The provisions contained herein shall govern zoning and development within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area. Where the provisions contained herein do not discuss a specific condition or situation which arises, the provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, as it may be amended from time to time, shall apply to the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this chapter and the other provisions of the Anaheim Municipal Code, the provisions set forth in this chapter shall govern. All uses within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan boundaries shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, ordinances and regulations. .020 Intent. The regulations set forth in this chapter have been established to provide for orderly development of that certain property (hereinafter referred to as the “Specific Plan Area”) described in the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (hereinafter referred to as the “Specific Plan”). These regulations provide for the arrangement, development and use of various “development areas” within the Specific Plan Area, to create a regional employment center, which will provide for a wide variety of industrial and related uses, a range of services and commercial support facilities, and a limited amount of mixed-use transit oriented development. Application of these regulations is specifically intended to provide for and to ensure the most appropriate use of the Specific Plan Area, to create a harmonious relationship among land uses, and to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. .030 Organization. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.72 (Specific Plans), the standards herein are patterned after the zone districts and definitions of Title 18 (Zoning -11- Code). The Specific Plan is consistent with the intent, purpose and goals of the Anaheim General Plan and Title 18 (Zoning Code). 18.120.020 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND PERMITS. .010 Prior to commencing any work pertaining to the erection, construction, reconstruction, moving, conversion, alteration or addition to any building or structure within the Specific Plan Area, all building plans shall be subject to review and approval of the City in compliance with all provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures). .020 Specific Plan Amendments and Adjustments. .0201 Specific Plan Amendments. Specific Plan amendments, including the modification of development area boundaries or the creation of new development areas, shall be processed in accordance with the provisions of Chapters 18.76 (Zoning Amendments) and 18.72 (Specific Plans). .0202 Specific Plan Adjustments. Modification to zoning and development standards in one or more development areas (including provisions pertaining to land uses) shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 18.72 (Specific Plans). .030 Area Boundaries. The Specific Plan is divided into six (6) development areas: Industrial Area (DA-1), Recycling Area (DA-2), Transit-Oriented Area (DA-3), Local Commercial Area ( DA-4), General Commercial Area (DA-5), and Open Space/Water Area (DA-6). In addition, the Specific Plan also includes a Flex Area (DA-7), which combines the zoning and development standards of the Industrial Area (DA-1) and General Commercial Area (DA-5). The Specific Plan Area is identified on Figure 1-2, Anaheim Canyon Planning Area, and the development areas, including the Flex Area, are shown on Figure 4-2, Developmental Areas in the Specific Plan. A legal description of the Specific Plan Area is provided in Ordinance No. _____, approved by the City Council on _________, 2015. .040 Nonconforming Building Requirements. .0401 The site development standards contained in this chapter shall apply to new buildings or to any expanded portion of an existing building. However, the expansion area of an existing building may extend up to, but cannot exceed, an existing building’s legal non- conforming setback. Such setback encroachments may be allowed, provided that the length of the expansion does not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the length of the legal non-conforming building wall. .0402 Any expansion that increases a building’s gross floor area beyond 25% (with the exception of interior mezzanine additions) shall result in the need for the entire building site to comply with all landscaping, signage and site screening requirements of this chapter. Exceptions to this retrofit provision may be approved by the Planning Director if such site enhancements cannot be achieved due to existing physical constraints. .050 Expansion or Change of Nonconforming Uses. .0501 A nonconforming use lawfully existing upon the date of adoption of the Specific -12- Plan may be expanded or extended throughout a building lawfully existing upon said date. Building additions to allow the expansion of such use shall be permitted. .0502 A nonconforming use lawfully existing upon the date of adoption of the Specific Plan may be may be changed to another nonconforming primary permitted use of the zoning designation in effect prior to the adoption of the Specific Plan. .060 Destroyed Homes. A legally established single-family residence, existing on the date of adoption of the Specific Plan, that is damaged or destroyed by earthquake, fire, wind, flood, explosion or other disaster, casualty or act of God, or of a public enemy, may be reconstructed subject to development standards contained within either the RS-2 or RS-3 Zone, based on lot size; provided, however, that a complete and proper application for a building permit is filed with the Building Division within two (2) years of the date of the event that caused the damage or destruction. 18.120.030 INTENT OF INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT AREAS. .010 Industrial Area (DA-1). The intent of the Industrial Area (DA-1) is to provide for and encourage the development of light and heavy industrial uses and related facilities, and further, to recognize the unique and valuable industrial land resources existing within the City of Anaheim and to protect Anaheim Canyon as a viable, successful commerce and employment center. This resource is found to have both local and regional significance due to an ideal industrial environment, including central geographic location, regional access and circulation, availability of utilities and services, and a well-established industrial base. The underlying base zone for this area is the “I” Industrial Zone and, unless otherwise indicated, the standards of the “I” Industrial Zone shall apply. .020 Recycling Area (DA-2). The intent of the Recycling Area (DA-2) is to provide for and encourage a specific location for waste recycling and material recovery uses and facilities within Anaheim Canyon. Due to the presence of an ideal industrial environment, including central geographic location, regional access and circulation, availability of utilities and services, and the presence of a large urban population, the availability of land for recycling, materials recovery and related uses is a resource found to have both local and regional significance. The underlying base zone for this area is the “I” Industrial Zone and, unless otherwise indicated, the standards of the “I” Industrial Zone shall apply. .030 Transit Oriented Area (DA-3). The intent of the Transit Oriented Area (DA-3) is to provide for and encourage the development of a high-quality, pedestrian and bicycle friendly mixed-use district that will define the core of Anaheim Canyon and take full advantage of the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station and convenient access to the Riverside Freeway and open space areas. This area provides a unique location for new workforce and commuter housing within Anaheim Canyon, including affordable housing. These resources are found to have both local and regional significance due to the City's central geographic location and ideal proximity to regional markets and labor pools, and regional access, circulation and public transit routes. This mixed use area, and its continued development in a quality manner, is found to be a resource essential to the community's economic health and the preservation of a competitive growth potential. The underlying, base zone for this area is the Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone and, unless otherwise indicated, the standards of the Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone shall apply. -13- .040 Local Commercial Area (DA-4). The intent of the Local Commercial Area (DA-4) is to provide locations for the development of locally-serving commercial and retail amenities, such as sit-down restaurants, fast food restaurants, professional services and other commercial uses that serve the local workforce. These areas are dispersed throughout Anaheim Canyon and provide a viable opportunity to create new worker amenities within a walkable or bikeable distance from most area businesses. The underlying base zone for this area is "C-NC" Neighborhood Center Commercial Zone and, unless otherwise indicated, the standards of the “C- NC” Neighborhood Center Commercial Zone shall apply. .050 General Commercial Area (DA-5). The intent of the General Commercial Area (DA-5) is to provide locations for larger, regionally-serving commercial, entertainment and medical uses. These larger uses are important to the city and the region. These uses are intended to take full advantage of good freeway access and visibility. The underlying base zone for this area is "C-G" General Commercial Zone and, unless otherwise indicated, the standards of the "C-G" General Commercial Zone shall apply. .060 Open Space/Water Area (DA-6). The intent of the Open Space/Water Area (DA-6) is to ensure that all existing water-related, open space areas are protected from incompatible uses and maintained in an orderly manner. Anaheim Canyon is located on some of the most permeable soil in Orange County, and groundwater recharge is a critically important activity of regional importance. Protecting these areas is an important focus of the Specific Plan. In addition to groundwater recharge activities, this area also encourages the creation of bicycle and pedestrian trails that link Anaheim Canyon to surrounding neighborhoods and the Santa Ana Trail system. Certain non-open space or water uses are also allowed within this development area, as indicated in Tables 120-A, 120-B and 120-C. The underlying base zone for this area is the “OS” Open Space Zone, and, unless otherwise indicated, the standards of the “OS” Open Space Zone shall apply. .070 Flex Area (DA-7). The intent of the Flex Area (DA-7) is to provide locations for a wide range of industrial, office and commercial uses. This area allows flexibility in both the types of uses and development standards that are applied. Every use that is included in either “DA-1” or “DA-5” can also be located within the Flex Area. In the event there is a conflict between the development standards of the two Development Areas, the least restrictive standard shall apply within the Flex Area. The underlying base zones for this area are “I” Industrial Zone and “C-G” General Commercial Zone and, unless otherwise indicated, the standards of the “I” Industrial Zone and “C-G” General Commercial Zone shall apply. 18.120.040 USES. .010 Primary Uses. Table 120-A (Primary Uses by Development Area: Residential Use Classes) and Table 120-B (Primary Uses by Development Area: Non-Residential Use Classes) identify allowable primary uses, listed by classes of uses as defined in Chapter 18.36 (Types of Uses). .020 Accessory Uses. Table 120-C (Accessory Use Classes by Development Area) identifies allowable accessory uses and structures, listed by classes of uses as defined in Section 18.36.050 of Chapter 18.36 (Types of Uses). .030 Temporary Uses. Table 120-D (Temporary Use Classes by Development Area) -14- identifies allowable temporary uses and structures, listed by classes of uses as defined in Section 18.36.060 of Chapter 18.36 (Types of Uses). .040 Use Tables. The allowable uses in Tables 120-A, 120-B, 120-C and 120-D for each development area are established by letter designations as follows: .0401 "P" designates classes of uses permitted by right; .0402 "C" designates classes of uses permitted with a conditional use permit; .0403 "N" designates classes of uses that are prohibited; and .0404 "T" designates classes of uses permitted with a telecommunications antenna review permit. .050 Interpreting Classes of Uses. The provisions for interpreting the classes of uses in Tables 120-A, 120-B, 120-C or 120-D are set forth in Section 18.36.020 (Classification of Uses) of Chapter 18.36 (Types of Uses). .060 Unlisted Uses. Any class of use that is not listed in Tables 120-A, 120-B, 120-C or 120-D is not permitted. .070 General Requirements for Permitted Uses. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, the following general requirements shall apply for the conduct of any use permitted in any development area: .0701 All uses shall be maintained in such a manner that they are neither obnoxious, offensive or objectionable by reason of emission of odor, dust, smoke, gas, noise, vibration, electromagnetic disturbance, radiation, fumes, excessive lighting (glare) or other similar causes detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. .0702 All uses shall be conducted wholly within a building except the following: (1) Normal service station operations; (2) Those uses whose description in Chapter 18.36 (Types of Uses) allow for outdoor activities; and, (3) Those uses specifically allowed by this chapter to have outdoor activities. .080 Special Provisions. Special provisions related to a use are referenced in the "Special Provisions" column of Tables 120-A, 120-B and 120-C. Such provisions may include references to other applicable code sections or limitations to the specified land use. .090 Overlay Zones. Any property that is located within an overlay zone may be subject to additional requirements as specified in the overlay zone. .100 Flex Area (DA-7). Every use that is included in either “DA-1” or “DA-5” can also be located within the Flex Area (DA-7). The least restrictive use requirements of the two -15- development areas will apply to the use. Table 120-A PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA-3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Dwellings–Multiple Family N N C N N N Dwellings–Single- Family Attached N N C N N N Dwellings–Single-Family Detached N N N N N N Mobile Home Parks N N N N N N Residential Care Facilities N N C N N N May be permitted in compliance with State law Senior Citizen Housing N N C N N N Senior Citizens' Apartment projects subject to Chapter 18.50 Supportive Housing N N C N N N Transitional Housing N N C N N N Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA-3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Agricultural Crops P P N P P P Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C C Subject to Section 18.38.025 -16- Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Alcoholic Beverage Sales-Off-Sale N N P/C P/C P/C N Permitted without a conditional use permit in DA 3, DA 4 and DA 5 if use is in conjunction with Markets–Large Alcoholic Beverage Sales-On-Sale C C P P P C Ambulance Services P P N N C C Animal Boarding P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C Permitted without a conditional use permit when conducted entirely indoors subject to Section 18.38.270 Animal Grooming P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C Permitted without a conditional use permit when conducted entirely indoors subject to Section 18.38.270 Antennas-Broadcasting P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C Permitted without a conditional use permit if designed similar to stealth telecommunications facility as defined in Section 18.38.060.030.0312 Antennas-Private Transmitting T T T T T T Antennas- Telecommunications T T T T T T Subject to Section 18.38.060 & 18.62.020 -17- Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Automated Teller Machines (ATM’s) P P P P P P Subject to Section 18.36.040 Automotive-Vehicle Sales, Lease & Rental C C C N C N Subject to Section 18.38.200 Automotive – Sales Agency Office C C C C C N Subject to Section 18.38.065 Automotive-Impound Yards C C N N N N Subject to Section 18.38.200 Automotive-Public Parking P P P P P P Automotive-Parts Sales P/C P/C N P/C P/C N Permitted without a conditional use permit when conducted entirely indoors Automotive-Repair and Modification C C N C C N Automotive-Service Stations P P N P P N Subject to Section 18.38.070 Automotive-Washing C C C C C C Bars & Nightclubs N N C C C N Bed & Breakfasts Inns N N C C C N Subject to Section 18.38.080 Beekeeping C C N N N C Billboards N N N N N N Boat & RV Sales C C N N C N Subject to Section 18.38.200 -18- Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Building Material Sales C C N N C N No more than 30% of the outdoor area, excluding parking, shall be devoted to outdoor displays; subject to Sections 18.38.190 and 18.38.200 Business & Financial Services P P P P P N Cemeteries N N N N N N Commercial Retail Centers N N P/C P/C P/C N Subject to Section 18.38.115; otherwise a CUP is required. Community & Religious Assembly N N C C C N Computer Internet & Amusement Facilities N N N N N N Convalescent & Rest Homes N N C N N N Convenience Stores N N P P P N Subject to Section 18.38.110; otherwise a CUP is required. Dance & Fitness Studios–Large N N P P P N Dance & Fitness Studios–Small N N P P P N Day Care Centers P/C P/C P/C P P N Permitted without a CUP in DA-1, DA-2 and DA-3 if integrated within a multi-tenant office building as an accessory use to serve office tenants. -19- Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Drive-Through Facilities N N C C C N Educational Institutions-Business P P P P P N Educational Institutions-General N N C C C N Educational Institutions-Tutoring N N P P P N Subject to Section 18.36.040.050 Emergency Shelters (50 or fewer occupants) P P N N N N Subject to Section 18.38.125 Emergency Shelters (more than 50 occupants) C C N N N N Subject to Section 18.38.125 Entertainment Venue N N C C C N Equipment Rental- Large P/C P/C N P/C P/C N Permitted without a conditional use permit if use is conducted wholly indoors including storage and display of equipment Equipment Rental-Small P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C N Permitted without a conditional use permit if use is conducted wholly indoors including storage and display of equipment Golf Courses & Country Clubs N N N N N C Group Care Facilities N N C N N N Subject to Section 18.36.040.070 -20- Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Helipads & Heliports P/C P N N C N Requires a CUP in DA-1 if the use is located within 1,000 feet from a residentially-zoned parcel Hospitals C C N N C N Hotels & Motels N N C N C N Industry P P N N N C Industry–Heavy P P N N N C Junkyards C C N N N N Subject to Section 18.38.200 Markets-Large N N P P P N Markets-Small N N P/C P/C P/C N Subject to Section 18.38.155; otherwise a CUP is required Medical & Dental Offices C C P P P N Mortuaries C C N N N N Offices–Development P P P P P N Offices–General P P P P P N Oil Production C C N N N N Subject to Section 18.38.180 Outdoor Storage Yards P/C P/C N N N N Permitted without a conditional use permit if all storage is screened from view; subject to Section 18.38.200 -21- Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Personal Services- General N N P/C P/C P/C N Laundromats are subject to Section 18.38.150; otherwise a CUP is required. Massage subject to Section 18.16.070 Personal Services- Restricted N N C C C N Plant Nurseries P/C P/C N P/C P/C P/C Subject to Sections 18.38.190, 18.38.200 and 18.38.205; otherwise a CUP is required. Public Services P P C C C N Recreation-Billiards N N P/C P/C P/C N Subject to Section 18.38.085; otherwise a CUP is required. Recreation- Commercial Indoor N N C P P N Amusement arcades are allowed only in conjunction with a hotel, motel, or a bowling alley Recreation- Commercial Outdoor N N C C C C Recreation-Low- Impact P P P P P P Recreation-Swimming & Tennis N N P/C P/C P/C P/C Permitted without a conditional use permit if use is conducted wholly indoors Recycling Services-General C P N N N C Subject to Chapter 18.48 -22- Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Recycling Services-Processing P/C P N N N P/C Subject to Chapter 18.48. Small processing facilities under 4,000 s.f. that conduct all work inside are allowed in DA-1 and DA-6 without a CUP Repair Services-General P P P P P N Repair Services- Limited P P P P P N Research & Development P P P P P C Restaurants-Drive- Through N N C C C N Subject to Section 18.38.220 Restaurants-General C C P P P C Fast food and take-out service are permitted without a conditional use permit when a part of an industrial or office complex of 5 or more units; subject to Section 18.38.220 Restaurants-Outdoor Dining C C P P P C Subject to Section 18.38.220 Restaurants-Walk-Up C C P P P C Retail Sales-General C/N C/N P P P N Subject to Section 18.38.220; Permitted by CUP in DA-1 & DA-2 only if the retail is industrially-related -23- Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Retail Sales-Household Furniture C/N C/N N N C N Permitted by CUP in DA-1 & DA 2 only if the retail sales portion of the business occupies a minimum of 50,000 square feet of building floor area. Retail Sales-Kiosks N N C C C C Retail Sales-Outdoor N N C C C C Subject to Sections 18.38.190 and 18.38.200 Retail Sales-Used Merchandise N N P P P N Room & Board N N C N N N Self-Storage C C N N N N Subject to Council Policy No. 7.2 Sex-Oriented Businesses P P N N N N Subject to Chapter 18.54 Smoking Lounge N N P/C P/C P/C N Subject to Section 18.16.080; otherwise CUP is required. Studios–Broadcasting P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C N Permitted without a CUP if there is no live audience. Studios–Recording P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C N Permitted without a CUP if there is no live audience. Towing Services P P N N N N Transit Facilities C C P C C N Truck Repair & Sales P P N N C N Subject to Section 18.38.200 Utilities–Major C C C C C C -24- Table 120-B PRIMARY USES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA: NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CLASSES P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Utilities–Minor P P P P P P Payphones must be located on the interior of a building or attached to the exterior within 10 feet of the main building’s entrance Veterinary Services P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C P/C Subject to 18.38.270; otherwise a CUP is required. Warehousing & Storage–Enclosed P P N N P C Wholesaling P P N N P C Table 120-C ACCESSORY USE CLASSES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA-3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Accessory Living Quarters N N N N N N Agricultural Workers Quarters N N N N N N Accessory Entertainment N N P P P N Subject to Section 18.16.060 in conjunction with a commercial use Amusement Devices N N P P P N Subject to Section 18.16.050 Animal Keeping N N P N N P Subject to Section 18.38.030 -25- Table 120-C ACCESSORY USE CLASSES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Antennas–Dish P P P P P P Subject to Section 18.38.050 Antennas–Receiving P P P P P P Subject to Section 18.38.050 Automated Teller Machines (ATM’s) P P P P P N Subject to Section 18.36.050.035 Bingo Establishments N N P P P N Subject to Chapter 7.34 Caretaker Units P P P P P P Subject to Section 18.38.090 Day Care–Large Family N N C N N N Day Care–Small Family N N C N N N Fences & Walls P P P P P P Subject to Section 18.40.050; this use may occur on a lot without a primary use Greenhouses–Private N N N N N N Home Occupations N N P N N N Subject to Section 18.38.130 Landscaping & Gardens P P P P P P Subject to Chapter 18.46; this use may occur on a lot without a primary use Mechanical & Utility Equipment–Ground Mounted P P P P P P Subject to Section 18.38.160 Mechanical & Utility Equipment–Roof Mounted P P P P P P Subject to Section 18.38.170 Outdoor Displays C C C C P C Subject to Section 18.38.190 -26- Table 120-C ACCESSORY USE CLASSES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Outdoor Storage P P N N P C Subject to Section 18.38.200 Parking Lots & Garages P P P P P P Petroleum Storage– Incidental P P P P P N Shall comply with the Uniform Fire Code Portable Food Carts N N C C C N Subject to Section 18.38.210 Recreation Buildings & Structures N N P N N C Recycling Services– Consumer P P P P P N Subject to Chapter 18.48 Retail Floor, Wall & Window Coverings P P P P P N Subject to Section 18.38.250 Second Units N N N N N N Senior Second Units N N N N N N Signs P P P P P P Subject to Chapter 18.44 Solar Energy Panels P P P P P P Thematic Elements P P P P P P Vending Machines P P P P P P Shall be screened from view from public rights-of-way and shall not encroach onto sidewalks Warehousing & Storage-Outdoors P P N P P N Subject to Section 18.38.200 -27- Table 120-D TEMPORARY USE CLASSES BY DEVELOPMENT AREA P=Permitted by Right C=Conditional Use Permit Required N=Prohibited T=Telecommunications Antenna Review Permit Required DA-1 DA-2 DA- 3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Carnivals & Circuses N N N N P N Subject to Section 18.38.095 and Chapter 3.32 Christmas Tree & Pumpkin Sales P P P P P N Subject to Section 18.38.240 Contractor's Office & Storage P P P P P N Subject to Section 18.38.105 Real Estate Tract Office P P P P P N Real Estate Tract Signs P P P P P N Special Events P P P P P P Subject to 18.38.240; Special Events – Outdoor Activity are not permitted in DA-1 and DA-2 18.120.050 SITE AND BUILDING AREA. .010 Site Development Standards – General. Site development standards are intended to provide for the continued orderly development of each development area, to assure adequate levels of light, air and density of development, to maintain and enhance the locally recognized values of community appearance, to promote the functional compatibility of uses and the safe and efficient circulation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic, all of which are found to be necessary for the preservation of the community health, safety and general welfare. .020 Building Site Requirements. The size and shape of the site proposed for the use shall be adequate to allow the full development of the proposed use in a manner consistent with the stated purpose and intent of the development area within which it is proposed to be developed. .0201 Adequate provision shall be made for the safe and orderly circulation of both pedestrian and vehicular traffic between the proposed site and all streets and highways, and between coordinated facilities, access-ways or parking areas on adjacent sites. .0202 The proposed development shall not limit or adversely affect the growth and development potential of adjoining lands or the general area in which it is proposed to be located. -28- .0203 Adequate provisions shall be made for loading and unloading of supplies and materials, and collection of refuse in a manner that is screened from view and does not obstruct required parking and access-ways or impact adjacent land uses. .030 Building Size. No commercial building shall be less than four hundred (400) square feet in size, excluding kiosks. 18.120.060 FLOOR AREA RATIO, RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND STRUCTURAL HEIGHT. The maximum floor area ratio, residential density and structural height for each Development Area is shown in Table 120-E. Special provisions are referenced in the "Special Provisions" column. .010 Floor Area Ratio Exception. An increase in the maximum floor area ratio is permitted in connection with a conditional use permit, as set forth in Chapter 18.66 (Conditional Use Permit) and subject to the following additional finding: .0101 The proposed use of the structure(s) shall not create a greater impact to infrastructure than impacts anticipated by the maximum permitted floor area ratio, as analyzed by Environmental Impact Report No. 348 prepared for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan, unless such impacts are duly analyzed and mitigated pursuant to subsequent environmental review. Such impacts shall be determined through a sewer and traffic impact analysis to be submitted to the City Engineer. Additional infrastructure studies may be required as determined by the Planning Director. .020 Structural Height Exceptions. Projections above the height limit are permitted as set forth in Section 18.40.030 in Chapter 18.40 (General Development Standards). Table 120-E MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO AND STRUCTURAL HEIGHT BY DEVELOPMENT AREA DA-1 DA-2 DA-3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Floor Area Ratio 0.50 0.50 3.0 0.45 0.50 0.10 An increase in Floor Area Ratio may be permitted subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit per Section 18.120.060.010. Residential Density N/A N/A 60 dwelling units/acre N/A N/A N/A Subject to 18.32.040 -29- Table 120-E MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO AND STRUCTURAL HEIGHT BY DEVELOPMENT AREA DA-1 DA-2 DA-3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Special Provisions Structural Height 60 feet 60 feet 100 feet 60 feet 60 feet 30 feet Minimum ground-floor height for all commercial, office and mixed-use buildings shall be 15 feet 18.120.070 STRUCTURAL AND LANDSCAPE SETBACKS. .010 Structural and Landscape Setbacks. Every building, structure or addition thereto erected in any Development Area shall be provided with setbacks and landscaping in conformance with the provisions of Section 18.40.040 (Structural Setbacks and Yards) of Chapter 18.40 (General Development Standards), and Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping and Screening), with the exception of the provisions contained in this section and Section 18.120.100 (Landscaping and Screening). Table120-F MINIMUM STRUCTURAL SETBACKS BY DEVELOPMENT AREA DA-1 DA-2 DA-3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Major Arterial 50 feet 50 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 50 feet Primary Arterial 50 feet 50 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 50 feet Secondary Arterial 50 feet 50 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 50 feet Complete Streets Collector 25 feet 25 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 25 feet Collector Street 25 feet 25 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 25 feet Local Street 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet Freeway, Freeway Frontage Road, Freeway On/Off Ramps 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet Interior Property Line 0 feet 0 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet Table 120-G MINIMUM LANDSCAPE SETBACKS BY DEVELOPMENT AREA -30- DA-1 DA-2 DA-3 DA-4 DA-5 DA-6 Major Arterial 10 feet 10 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 10 feet Primary Arterial 10 feet 10 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 10 feet Secondary Arterial 10 feet 10 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 10 feet Complete Streets Collector 10 feet 10 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 10 feet Collector Street 10 feet 10 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 10 feet Local Street 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet Freeway, Freeway Frontage Road, Freeway On/Off Ramps 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet Interior Property Line 0 feet 0 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet .020 Permitted Encroachments within Minimum Required Setback Areas. The encroachments set forth in Table 120-H may encroach, as indicated in the table, into the required setback areas described in Tables 120-F and 120-G. Special provisions are referenced in the "Special Provisions" column. Any encroachment that conflicts with the California Building Code, as adopted by the City, shall not be permitted. Table 120-H PERMITTED ENCROACHMENTS WITHIN MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK AREAS Encroachment Permitted Within Minimum Building Setback Per Table 120-F Permitted Within Minimum Landscaped Setback Per Table 120-G Special Provisions Canopies (fixed) or trellises Yes Yes Shall encroach no more than three (3) feet Cornices, eaves, sills, belt courses, buttresses and fireplaces Yes Yes Shall encroach no more than two (2) feet Driveways providing access from adjacent streets or private accessways Yes Yes Subject to Engineering Standard Detail No. 475 Fences and walls Yes Yes Subject to Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping and Screening) -31- Table 120-H PERMITTED ENCROACHMENTS WITHIN MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK AREAS Encroachment Permitted Within Minimum Building Setback Per Table 120-F Permitted Within Minimum Landscaped Setback Per Table 120-G Special Provisions Fences, open wrought iron, maximum six (6) feet in height Yes No All other fences and walls are subject to Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping and Screening) Flagpoles, including solar flagpoles Yes Yes Limited to three flagpoles for the display of national, state, city and/or company trademark or logo; shall not exceed the maximum structural height per Table 120-E Fountains, ponds, sculptures and landscaped planters Yes Yes Subject to Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping and Screening) Gates Yes No Subject to Engineering Standard Detail No. 475 Light fixtures Yes Yes Shall not exceed the maximum structural height per Table 120-E Non-commercial recreation areas Yes No Outdoor dining and seating areas Yes No Parking areas Yes No Subject to Section 18.120.100 (Landscaping and Screening) Solar canopies and wind turbines Yes No Shall not exceed the maximum structural height per Table 120-E Signs Yes Yes Subject to Chapter 18.44 (Signs) Trees, shrubs, flowers, and plants Yes Yes Subject to Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping and Screening) Walkways leading from parking areas and public sidewalks Yes Yes Provided the walkway is integrated with the landscape design and does not significantly reduce the landscape area -32- 18.120.080 PARKING AND LOADING. Minimum Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements. All parking and loading areas shall comply with Chapter 18.42 (Parking and Loading). 18.120.090 SIGNS. Sign Regulations. All signs shall comply with Chapter 18.44 (Signs). 18.120.100 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING. .010 Landscaping and screening. All landscaping and screening shall comply with Chapter 18.46 (Landscaping and Screening) with the exception of the provisions contained in this section and Section 18.120.070 (Structural and Landscape Setbacks). .020 Required Enclosure and Screening for Industrial Uses. Industrial uses shall be enclosed to provide effective site screening from adjoining properties and public rights-of-way as follows: .0201 Required Screening Adjacent to residential properties. A solid masonry wall, planted with vines so as to prevent graffiti, landscaped earthen berm, or any combination thereof, totaling not less than eight (8) feet in height, shall be required along, and adjacent to, any side or rear property line abutting any residential zone boundary; provided, however, said wall or berm shall not be required adjacent to any lot zoned “T” Transition, which is under a resolution of intent to any non-residential zone, or any alley abutting any such zone boundary. Further, any access gates shall be constructed of view-obscuring material to provide effective sight screening. .0202 Required Enclosure of Outdoor Uses. The perimeter of any portion of a site upon which any outdoor use of an industrial nature is permitted shall be enclosed to a height of not less than six (6) feet, either by a solid masonry wall, a chain link fence (interwoven with cedar, redwood or PVC slats) or building walls, which incorporate live plants with adequate growing area, planted along and adjacent to said wall(s) or fence. No outdoor industrial use, or enclosure thereof, shall encroach into any required setback area adjacent to any public right-of- way, nor shall any storage of products or materials exceed the height of any such enclosure. .030 Required Screening of Vehicle Storage or Parking Areas. Any vehicular storage or parking area visible from a public right-of-way or a freeway shall be screened from view by landscaping or architectural devices to a height of thirty-six (36) inches. .040 Required Enclosure and Screening for Recycling Uses. Where recycling facilities are adjacent to properties not developed with such facilities, a minimum ten (10) foot high masonry block wall or metal-panel fence, as approved by the Planning Director, shall separate such uses. .050 Irrigation. All new development with landscaped areas over 2,500 square feet shall construct separate irrigation lines for recycled water. All such irrigation systems shall be designed to function properly with recycled water. SECTION 10. SEVERABILITY. -33- The City Council of the City of Anaheim hereby declares that should any section, paragraph, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance hereby adopted be declared for any reason invalid or unconstitutional by the final judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, it is the intent of the City Council that it would have adopted all other portions of this ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom of any such portion as may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. The City Council of the City of Anaheim hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsection, sentence clause, phrases or portions be declared valid or unconstitutionally. SECTION 11. SAVINGS CLAUSE; CONTINUITY. Neither the adoption of this ordinance nor the repeal of any other ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver of any license or penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation thereof. To the extent the provisions of this Ordinance are substantially the same as ordinance provisions previously adopted by the City relating to the same subject matter, the provisions of this ordinance shall be construed as restatements and continuations of those provisions and not as new enactments or amendments of the earlier provisions. SECTION 12. CERTIFICATION; PUBLICATION BY CLERK. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance or a summary thereof to be printed once within fifteen (15) days after its adoption in the Anaheim Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Anaheim. SECTION 13. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days from and after its final passage. /// /// /// /// /// THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Anaheim held on the ____ day of ______________, 2015, and thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the ____ day of ______________, 2015, by the following roll call vote: AYES: -34- NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CITY OF ANAHEIM By: MAYOR OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: _____________________________________ CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 111724-v2/TJR [DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 5 1 RESOLUTION NO. PC2015-*** A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2014-00262 FOR THE ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN (DEV2011-00125) WHEREAS, on April 29, 1986, the City Council of the City of Anaheim ("City Council") adopted Ordinance No. 4709 to establish uniform procedures for the adoption and implementation of Specific Plans for the coordination of future development within the City, which specified that zoning and development standards would be substituted for existing zoning regulations under the Zoning Code for a Specific Plan area when the Specific Plan includes zoning regulations and development standards, which zoning and development standards are to be adopted by ordinance independent of the adoption of the Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Anaheim Canyon encompasses approximately 2,600 acres in the northern portion of the City of Anaheim, roughly bounded on the north by Orangethorpe Avenue, on the south by the Santa Ana River, on the east by Imperial Highway (SR-90), and on the west by the Orange Freeway (SR-57); and WHEREAS, the Anaheim Canyon encompasses approximately 2,600 acres in the northern portion of the City of Anaheim, roughly bounded on the north by Orangethorpe Avenue, on the south by the Santa Ana River, on the east by Imperial Highway (SR-90), and on the west by the Orange Freeway (SR-57); and WHEREAS, in 1989, the City Council approved the PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (the "SP 88-3 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 88-3 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 88-3 Zone") of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code") to guide development of a mixed use center that would include offices, retail, restaurants and a hotel with supporting services to encourage transit use and facilitate business operations on approximately 26 acres, located south of La Palma Avenue, west of Tustin Avenue, north of the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) and east of the Metrolink rail line; and WHEREAS, in 1995, the City Council approved the Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (the "SP94-1 Specific Plan") together with zoning and development standards applicable to the SP 94-1 Specific Plan area that are set forth in Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1(SP94-1) Zoning and Development Standards) (the "SP 94-1 Zone") of the Code to provide for a wide variety of industrial and commercial uses within an area generally consistent with the Anaheim Canyon, excluding properties within the SP88-3 Specific Plan area; and WHEREAS, in 2011, the City of Anaheim was awarded a grant from the California Strategic Growth Council to prepare a Specific Plan for Anaheim Canyon to replace the development requirements of the existing zoning on the properties in this area, remove regulatory obstacles to the reuse of existing structures, promote infill development of currently vacant or underutilized properties, encourage sustainable development, and create a business environment attractive to a wide variety of industries; and 2 WHEREAS, staff has initiated the preparation of a proposed Specific Plan for the establishment of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in the form presented to this Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, staff has determined that several properties outside of the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area should also be included within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area because they have uses that are similar to the uses on adjacent properties within the SP94-1 Specific Plan Area, which additional properties include commercial properties located east of SR-90, properties adjacent to and including the Santa Ana River, and property located southwest of the intersection of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line and Tustin Avenue, currently designated for industrial use; and WHEREAS, there are currently approximately 27.9 million square feet of non-residential buildings within the boundaries of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan would result in the potential to develop an additional 19.6 million square feet of non-residential building area; and WHEREAS, there are currently 312 multi-family residential units in the Transit Core Area (Development Area 4) of the SP94-1 Zone. Formation of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area would result in the potential to develop an additional 2,607 multi-family residential units within Development Area 3: Transit-Oriented Area of the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, a series of actions is required to establish a Specific Plan for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area (collectively, the “Project Actions”), including: 1. General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492 to amend the Land Use, Circulation, Green, Economic Development and Community Design Elements of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim to be consistent with the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01; and 2. Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065 to rescind PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 and Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 and adopt the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1; and 3. Zoning Code Amendment No. 2014-00115 to amend Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to (a) rescind Chapter 18.106 (PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP 88-3) Zoning and Development Standards) and Chapter 18.120 (Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoning and Development Standards), (b) adopt Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards), and (c) amend other portions of the Anaheim Municipal Code to be consistent with the addition of said new Chapter 18.120; and 4. Reclassification No. 2014-00262 to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards) to those properties within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area that are currently classified under the SP 88-3 Zone, the SP 94-1 Zone, the "I" Industrial Zone, the "C-G" General Commercial Zone, the "T" Transition Zone, and the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone; and 3 WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as “CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, in September 2013, City Council approved a contract with Placeworks (formerly The Planning Center DC&E) to prepare Environmental Impact Report No. 2013-00348 ("EIR No. 348") for the Proposed Actions; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) for Draft EIR No. 348 was distributed to the public on October 28, 2013. The public review period for the initial study ended on November 27, 2013. The City held a public scoping meeting on November 12, 2013 to provide members of the public with an opportunity to learn about the Proposed Actions, ask questions and provide comments about the scope and content of the information to be addressed in Draft EIR No. 348; and WHEREAS, Draft EIR No. 348 was made available for a 45-day public review period from May 28, 2015 to July 13, 2015. The Notice of Availability (“NOA”), which also included noticing for a public hearing before this Planning Commission and a tentative date for a public hearing before the City Council to review and consider the Draft EIR No. 348 and the Project Actions, was sent to a list of interested persons, agencies and organizations, as well as property owners within the proposed Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area and within a 300-foot radius thereof. The Notice of Completion (“NOC”) was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk-Recorder’s office on May 28, 2015. Copies of Draft EIR No. 348 were made available for public review at the City of Anaheim Planning Department and has been available for download via the City’s website; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with California Water Code Section 10910, Draft EIR No. 348 includes a Water Supply Assessment (“WSA”) dated October 2014 as Appendix J, which concludes that a sufficient water supply and its reliability is and will be available for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Anaheim Civic Center, Council Chamber, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, on August 24, 2015, at 5:00 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, to hear and consider evidence for and against said proposed Project Actions, including Reclassification No. 2014-00262, and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, Reclassification No. 2014-00262 proposes to apply the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards) to those properties within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area that are currently classified under the SP 88-3 Zone, the SP 94-1 Zone, the "I" Industrial Zone, the "C-G" General Commercial Zone, the "T" Transition Zone, and the Scenic Corridor (SC) Overlay Zone; and 4 WHEREAS, by the adoption of a resolution concurrently with, but prior in time to, the adoption of this Resolution and pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as "CEQA"), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (herein referred to as the "State CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, this Planning Commission has found and determined and has recommended that the City Council so find and determine that Final EIR No. 348 provides an adequate assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project Actions and certify EIR No. 348, including the adoption of Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program 312, and determine that Draft EIR No. 348 fully complies with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, and is adequate to serve as the environmental documentation for the Project Actions; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due consideration, inspection, investigation and study made by itself, and after due consideration of, and based upon, all evidence and reports offered at said hearing, does hereby find and determine as follows: 1. Reclassification No. 2014-00262 is necessary to ensure that all properties located within the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area will be consistent with the land use designations in General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492 and the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01, now pending; and 2. The proposed reclassification of the properties shown on Exhibit A attached to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference is necessary and/or desirable for the orderly and proper development of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Area; and 3. The proposed reclassification of the properties shown on Exhibit A hereto does properly relate to the zoning and development standards of the proposed new Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP 2015-01) Zoning and Development Standards), now pending. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due consideration of all evidence presented to it. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, on the basis of the above findings and determinations, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve Reclassification No. 2014-00262 to authorize an amendment to the Zoning Map of the Anaheim Municipal Code to rezone and reclassify those properties shown on Exhibit A attached to this Resolution. 5 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of Reclassification No. 2014-00262 is contingent upon and subject to approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2014-00492 and Specific Plan Amendment No. 2014-00065, now pending, and adoption by the City Council of an ordinance. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall not constitute a rezoning of, or a commitment by the City to rezone, the 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. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 2015. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures. CHAIRMAN, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ATTEST: _ SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 6 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on August 24, 2015, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th day of August, 2015. _ SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM 111725-v1/TJR 7 EXHIBIT “A” 1 3 2 2 ' 2 6 1 ' 2 9 0 ' 3 2 9 ' 1 3 6 9 ' 3 9 7 '1 2 6 6 ' 1 8 7 '3 9 8 2 ' 3 8 1 '2425' 1 1 0 0 ' 1851'7 7 9 '912' 6 2 7 '3 2 9 ' 6 9 2 ' 2 0 4 9 ' 2 0 8 2 ' 6147'9 7 9 ' 1 1 1 6 '6 9 4 '1 5 8 6 '4830' 4 0 6 ' N K R A E M E R B L V D N B L U E G U M S T N T U S T I N A V E E M I R A L O M A A V E E L A P A L M A A V E N M I L L E R S T N J E F F E R S O N S T 9 1 F R E E W A Y 5 7 F R E E W A Y E . L A P A L M A AV E E . M I R A L O M A A V E N . T U S T I N A VE N . M I L L E R S T N . B L U E G U M S T E. CROWTHER AVE E. FRONTERA ST Proposed Reclassification to Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (ACSP) No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zone °0 1,000 2,000 Feet *Measurement follows line shape* Page 1/2 ACSP Boundary Industrial to SP 2015-1 SP 88-3 to SP 2015-1 General Commercial to SP 2015-1 SP 94-1 to SP 2015-1 Transition to SP 2015-1 928' 7 0 3 ' 4527' 1851'7 7 9 '912' 8 2 6 7 ' 4 0 6 ' 1542'3 8 3 ' 1390' 1 6 0 8 ' 8566' 3 8 7 ' 2 1 1 2 ' 887' 4 4 1 ' 5 0 3 ' S R O Y A L O A K R D N L A K E V I E W A V E E SANTA A N A C A N Y O N R D E S A N T A A N A CANYON RD E LA PALMA AVE E R I V E R D A L E A V E N K E L L O G G D R E ORANGETHORPE AVE S I M P E R I A L H W Y 91 FREEWAY E. LA PALMA AVE N . L A K E V I E W AV E N . I M P E R I A L H W Y E.SANTA A N A CANYON RD E . R I V E R D A L E A V E E. ORANGETHORPE AVEE. MIRALOMA AVEProposed Reclassification to Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (ACSP) No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zone °0 1,000 2,000 Feet *Measurement follows line shape* Page 2/2 ACSP Boundary Industrial to SP 2015-1 SP 88-3 to SP 2015-1 General Commercial to SP 2015-1 SP 94-1 to SP 2015-1 Transition to SP 2015-1 821' 1 2 0 8 ' 960' 1 3 6 0 ' E EAGLE DR N G R O V E S T N G R O V E S T N G R O V E S T E LA PALMA AVE N T U S T I N A V E N T U S T I N A V E 91 FREEWAY E. LA PALMA AVE N.IMPERIAL H W Y E .S A N T A A N A C A N Y O N R D E. ORANGETHORPE AVE E. SANTA ANA CANYON RD E .L A P A L M A A V E Proposed Reclassificationfrom PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan No. 88-3 (SP 88-3) Zoneto Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zone Subject Property °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014*Measurement follows line shape* 8 3 1 '8 9 2 '8 5 8 ' 4 4 4 '4 0 0 ' 4 2 ' 1 3 2 2 ' 2 6 1 ' 2 9 0 ' 3 2 9 ' 1 3 6 9 ' 3 9 7 '1 2 6 6 ' 1 8 7 '1 9 4 0 '1 2 4 '9 4 5 ' 2 4 2 ' 1017' 1 2 2 5 ' 660' 8 2 0 ' 1555' 1 1 0 0 ' 1851'7 7 9 '912' 6 2 7 '3 2 9 ' 6 9 2 ' 2 0 4 9 ' 2 0 8 2 ' 5028' 7 1 9 '5 3 7 ' 1128' 1 0 0 3 ' 1 5 7 '1 1 1 0 '6 9 4 '1 5 8 6 '1317'1 0 8 ' 1235' 1 3 8 7 ' 746' 1 3 6 0 ' 1853' 1 8 5' 1 8 0 ' 4 0 6 ' N K R A E M E R B L V D N B L U E G U M S T E R I V E R D A L E A V E N T U S TI N AVE E M I R A L O M A A V E E L A P A L M A A V E N M I L L E R S T N J E F F E R S O N S T 9 1 F R E E W A Y 5 7 F R E E W A Y E. LA PALMA AVE E .S A N T A ANA CANY O N RD E.R I V E R D A L E A VE E. MIRALOMA AVE E. ORANGETHORPE AVE Proposed Reclassificationfrom Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoneto Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zone Subject Property °0 1,000 2,000 Feet *Measurement follows line shape* Page 1/2 89 2'8 5 8 ' 4 4 4 '4 0 0 ' 4 2 ' 2 4 7 3 ' 8 6 6 ' 1463'272' 1 0 2 ' 6178' 1555' 1 1 0 0 ' 1851'7 7 9 '912' 1 0 8 ' 1235' 746' 1 3 6 0 ' 1853' 1 8 5' 1 8 0 ' 4 0 6 ' 1542'3 8 3 ' 1390' 1 6 0 8 ' 8566' 1 5 1 5 ' 2 1 5 '2136' 1 7 3 ' S R O Y A L O A K R D E S A N T A A N A CANYON RD E R I V E R D A L E A V E N K E L L O G G D R E ORANGETHORPE AVE N J E F F E R S O N S T S I M P E R I A L H W Y 9 1 F R E E W A Y E . L A P A L M A AV E E . M I R A L O M A A V E N . T U S T I N A VE N . M I L L E R S T N . B L U E G U M S T E. CROWTHER AVE E. FRONTERA ST Proposed Reclassificationfrom Northeast Area Specific Plan No. 94-1 (SP 94-1) Zoneto Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zone Subject Property °0 1,000 2,000 Feet *Measurement follows line shape* Page 2/2 759' 8 1 5 ' 332' 3 6 8 ' 4 6 2 ' 1 5 2 ' 1 7 4 ' 3 7 5 ' 2 0 8 6 ' E E N T E R P R I S E D R N G R O V E S T S R O S E D R E M I R A L O M A A V E E ORANGETHORPE AVE E ORANGETHORPEAVE N T U S T I N A V E E . M I R A L O M A A V E N . M I L L E R S T N.T USTIN A V E N . K R A E M E R B L V D E. ORANGETHORPE AVE E .L A P A L M A A VE E. CROWTHER AVE S . R I C H F I E L D R D E . L A PALMA AV E Proposed Reclassificationfrom Industrial (I) Zoneto Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zone Subject Property *Measurement follows line shape*°0 50100 Feet 753' 70 2 ' 49 9 ' 810' 1454' 1487' 14 ' 52 9 ' E LA PALMA AVE E ESPERANZA R D N C H R I S D E N S T N I M P E R I A L H W Y E ORANGETHORPE AVE 91 FREE W A Y E. MIRALOMA A V E E.RIV E R D A L E A V E E .L A P A L M AAVEN . M I L L E R S T N . K R A E M E R B L V D N . T U S TIN A V E E. LA PALMA AV EProposed Reclassificationfrom General Commercial (C-G) Zone to Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zone Subject Property °0 50 100 Feet Aerial Photo:May 2014*Measurement follows line shape* 1 7 4 ' 3 7 5 ' 1513'8 3 1 ' 89 2' 1011' 8 5 8 ' 1 8 0 ' 8 4 3 '6 1 '1 0 5 ' 4 4 4 '4 0 0 ' 1 2 2 6 '5 4 1 ' 4 2 ' 1 4 3 1 ' 1 0 5 3 ' 1 0 4 2 ' 2 0 7 0 ' 8 6 6 ' 1463' 4 1 3 ' 9 7 0' 1 5 5 0' 154'1 0 2 ' 2146' 2 2 6 0 ' 6 5 4 ' 72' 4 3 7 ' 1007' E R I V E R D A L E A V E E S A N T A A N A C A N Y O N R D N J E F F E R S O N S T E MIRALOMA AVE E L A P A L M A AVE E LA PALMA AVE N TUSTIN AVE N L A K E V IE W A V E NTUSTIN A V E N T U S T I N A V E 91 FREEWAY 9 1 F R E E W A Y E. LA PALMA AVE E.NOHLRAN C H R D E .S A N T A ANA CANYO N RD N . I M P E R I A L H W Y E. ORANGETHORPE AVE S . R O Y A L O A K R D E.SANTA A N A C AN Y O N R DProposed Reclassificationfrom Transition (T) Zoneto Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zone Subject Property °0 1,000 2,000 Feet *Measurement follows line shape* Page 1/2 9 7 0' 1 5 5 0' 1 0 2 ' 2146' 2 2 6 0 ' 6 5 4 ' 72' 4 3 7 ' 6098'1007'7 0 ' 4456' 5 2 5 ' 5 0 3 '230' 1 6 5 6 ' 114' 4 4 1 ' 5 6 2 ' 2 3 9 ' 1 5 0 0 ' N I M P E R I A L H W Y N K E L L O G G D R E LA PALM A A V E EORANGETHORPE AVE E S A N T A A N A C A N Y O N R D N L A K E V I E W AVE E S A N T A A N A C A N Y O N R D E SANTA ANA CANYON RD S R O Y A L O A K R D S I M P E R I A L H W Y 9 1 F R E E W A Y 9 1 F R E E W A Y E. LA PALMA AVE N . T U S TIN AVE E.MIRALOMAAVE E.RI V E R DA L E A V E N . L A K E V IE W AVE E .S A N T A A N A C A N Y O N R DProposed Reclassificationfrom Transition (T) Zoneto Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zone Subject Property °0 1,000 2,000 Feet *Measurement follows line shape* Page 2/2 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 SECOND REVISED DRAFT ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN The Draft Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (ACSP) was released to the public in May 2013. In November 2013, the City held a workshop to present the ACSP to the community and to solicit input on what the public felt should be analyzed in the environmental impact report (EIR) for the project. Following the release of the draft ACSP and the community meeting, staff made minor revisions to the specific plan and prepared the Draft EIR. The Revised Draft ACSP and Draft EIR were released to the public on May 28, 2015 for a public review period that ended on July 13, 2015. The City received comments from nine agencies and organizations including certain technical corrections to the Draft EIR or specific plan documents that were not substantive to their content. Revisions to the Draft EIR will be included in the Final EIR. Revisions to the specific plan are included in the Second Revised Draft ACSP, which has been made available on-line at www.anaheim.net/anaheimcanyon. ATTACHMENT NO. 7 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2013-00348 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 2008-00340 (Draft EIR) was made available for a 45-day public review period from May 28, 2015 through July 13, 2015. Copies of the Draft EIR were made available for public review at the City of Anaheim Planning Department and for download via the project website at www.anaheim.net/anaheimcanyon. August 2015 | Final Environmental Impact Report No. 348 State Clearinghouse No. 2013101087 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN for City of Anaheim Prepared for: City of Anaheim Contact: Susan Kim, AICP, Principal Planner 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California 92805 714.765.4958 Prepared by: PlaceWorks Contact: William Halligan, Esq. 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 Santa Ana, California 92707 714.966.9220 info@placeworks.com www.placeworks.com ATTACHMENT NO. 8 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM Table of Contents August 2015 Page i W Section Page 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 FORMAT OF THE FEIR ................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ................................. 1-2 2. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ...................................................................................................... 2-1 3. REVISIONS TO THE DRAFT EIR ................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 DEIR REVISIONS IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN COMMENTS ..................................................... 3-1 APPENDIX Appendix A. Additional Traffic Data ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM Table of Contents Page ii PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. August 2015 Page 1-1 1. Introduction 1.1 INTRODUCTION This Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (California Administrative Code Section 15000 et seq.). According to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15132, the FEIR shall consist of: (a) The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) or a revision of the Draft; (b) Comments and recommendations received on the DEIR either verbatim or in summary; (c) A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies comments on the DEIR; (d) The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and (e) Any other information added by the Lead Agency. This document contains responses to comments received on the DEIR for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan during the public review period, which began May 28, 2015, and closed July 13, 2015. This document has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and represents the independent judgment of the Lead Agency. This document and the circulated DEIR comprise the FEIR, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15132. 1.2 FORMAT OF THE FEIR This document is organized as follows: Section 1, Introduction. This section describes CEQA requirements and content of this FEIR. Section 2, Response to Comments. This section provides a list of agencies and interested persons commenting on the DEIR; copies of comment letters received during the public review period, and individual responses to written comments. To facilitate review of the responses, each comment letter has been reproduced and assigned a number (A1 through A9). Individual comments have been numbered for each letter and the letter is followed by responses with references to the corresponding comment number. Section 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR. This section contains revisions to the DEIR text and figures as a result of the comments received by agencies and interested persons as described in Section 2, and/or errors and omissions discovered subsequent to release of the DEIR for public review. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 1. Introduction Page 1-2 PlaceWorks The responses to comments contain material and revisions that will be added to the text of the FEIR. City of Anaheim staff has reviewed this material and determined that none of this material constitutes the type of significant new information that requires recirculation of the DEIR for further public comment under CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. None of this new material indicates that the project will result in a significant new environmental impact not previously disclosed in the DEIR. Additionally, none of this material indicates that there would be a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified environmental impact that will not be mitigated, or that there would be any of the other circumstances requiring recirculation described in Section 15088.5. 1.3 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COMMENTS AND RESPONSES CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 (a) outlines parameters for submitting comments, and reminds persons and public agencies that the focus of review and comment of DEIRs should be “on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing possible impacts on the environment and ways in which significant effects of the project might be avoided or mitigated. Comments are most helpful when they suggest additional specific alternatives or mitigation measures that would provide better ways to avoid or mitigate the significant environmental effects. At the same time, reviewers should be aware that the adequacy of an EIR is determined in terms of what is reasonably feasible. …CEQA does not require a lead agency to conduct every test or perform all research, study, and experimentation recommended or demanded by commenters. When responding to comments, lead agencies need only respond to significant environmental issues and do not need to provide all information requested by reviewers, as long as a good faith effort at full disclosure is made in the EIR.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 (c) further advises, “Reviewers should explain the basis for their comments, and should submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts in support of the comments. Pursuant to Section 15064, an effect shall not be considered significant in the absence of substantial evidence.” Section 15204 (d) also states, “Each responsible agency and trustee agency shall focus its comments on environmental information germane to that agency’s statutory responsibility.” Section 15204 (e) states, “This section shall not be used to restrict the ability of reviewers to comment on the general adequacy of a document or of the lead agency to reject comments not focused as recommended by this section.” In accordance with CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21092.5, copies of the written responses to public agencies will be forwarded to those agencies at least 10 days prior to certifying the environmental impact report. The responses will be forwarded with copies of this FEIR, as permitted by CEQA, and will conform to the legal standards established for response to comments on DEIRs. August 2015 Page 2-1 2. Response to Comments Section 15088 of the CEQA Guidelines requires the Lead Agency (City of Anaheim) to evaluate comments on environmental issues received from public agencies and interested parties who reviewed the DEIR and prepare written responses. This section provides all written responses received on the DEIR and the City of Anaheim’s responses to each comment. Comment letters and specific comments are given letters and numbers for reference purposes. Where sections of the DEIR are excerpted in this document, the sections are shown indented. Changes to the DEIR text are shown in underlined text for additions and strikeout for deletions. The following is a list of agencies and persons that submitted comments on the DEIR during the public review period. Number Reference Commenting Person/Agency Date of Comment Page No. Agencies & Organizations A1 Orange County Water District July 9, 2015 2-3 A2 Orange County Public Works July 9, 2015 2-11 A3 Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County July 10, 2015 2-17 A4 The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California July 10, 2015 2-21 A5 California Department of Transportation July 14, 2015 2-25 A6 California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance June 12, 2015 2-35 A7 The PRC Group July 13, 2015 2-39 A8 Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation July 7, 2015 2-47 A9 Southern California Regional Rail Authority July 13, 2015 2-53 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-2 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-3 LETTER A1 – Orange County Water District (5 page[s]) ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-4 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-5 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-6 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-7 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-8 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-9 A1. Response to Comments from Michael R. Markus, P.E., D. WRE, BCEE, F. ASCE, dated July 9, 2015. A1-1 Comments are related to the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Revised Public Draft and not to the DEIR. However, the City of Anaheim is in agreement with your suggested changes and they will be incorporated into the Specific Plan prior to adoption. A1-2 Comment noted. As suggested by the comment, where Metrolink Station Connection and Waterway Trail Connection projects as described in page 5.13-4 of the DEIR have potential for impact OCWD properties, the City will consult and involve OCWD during planning process. A1-3 Comment noted. The DEIR has been revised to reflect the correct references to the water bodies including pages 5.3-4, 5.3-7, 5.3-11, 5.8-21, and 5.13-3. Revisions to the description of the water bodies would not change the conclusion of the DIER analysis. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A1-4 Comment noted. The DEIR has been revised to reflect the correct references to the groundwater and water supply systems including pages 5.7-9, 5.13-3, 5.15-13, 5.15-14, and 5.15-15. Revisions to the description of the groundwater and water supply systems would not change the conclusion of the DEIR analysis. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-10 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-11 LETTER A2– Orange County Public Works (3 page[s]) ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-12 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-13 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-14 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-15 A2. Response to Comments Laree Brommer, Manager, Planning Division, OC Public Works Service Area/OC Development Services, dated July 9, 2015. A2-1 Comment noted. Page 5.7-6 of the DEIR was revised to add Chantilly Storm Channel to the list of Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) channels within or tributary to the Project Area and the facility number for Carbon Creek Channel was corrected. The revisions would not change the conclusion of the DEIR. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-2 Comment noted. Text was added to page 5.7-6 and page 5.7-18 of the DEIR to acknowledge that improvements to local drainage facilities that may impact OCFCD facilities shall be analyzed by the City and Manager of the OC Public Works/Infrastructure Program. The revisions would not change the conclusion of the DEIR. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-3 Comment noted. Text was added to page 5.7-17 of the DEIR to address the City’s review of hydrology and hydraulic analyses and measures to minimize potential impacts to OCFCD facilities. The revisions would not change the conclusion of the DEIR. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-4 Comment noted. Change from OC Flood to OCFCD has been made. The statement that Orange County Public Works/Operations and Maintenance (O&M) maintains the flood control facilities owned by OCFCD has been added to page 5.7-6 of the DEIR. The revisions would not change the conclusion of the DEIR. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-5 Comment noted. The text on page 5.7-6 of the DEIR has been edited in accordance with the commenter’s suggestion and reference to new hydrologic parameters has been removed. The revisions would not change the conclusion of the DEIR. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-6 Comment noted. The change to Carbon Canyon Channel (E03) has been made on page 5.7-6 of the DEIR. The revision would not change the conclusion of the DEIR. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-7 Comment noted. Page 5.7-6 of the DEIR was revised to reference correct stormwater facilities as stated by the comment. The revision would not change the conclusion of the DEIR. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-8 Comment noted. A statement about encroachment permits has been added to page 5.7- 6 of the DEIR. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-9 Comment is noted and the text has been revised on page 3-27 of the DEIR. The revision would not change the conclusion of the DEIR analysis. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-16 PlaceWorks A2-10 Comment is noted and the text has been revised on page 5.7-1 of the DEIR. The revision would not change the conclusion of the DIER analysis. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-11 Comment is noted and the text has been revised on page 5.7-1 of the DEIR. The revision would not change the conclusion of the DIER analysis. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A2-12 Page 5.7-23 correctly identified less than significant impacts related to Impact 5.7-1 through 5.7-6 and does not contain a typo as stated by the comment. No response is necessary. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-17 LETTER A3 – Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (2 page[s]) ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-18 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-19 A3. Response to Comments from Kari A. Rigoni, Executive Officer, dated July 10, 2015. A3-1 The comment indicates that development proposals which include the construction or alteration of a structure more than 200 feet above ground level require filing with the Federal Aviation Administration. The maximum structural height allowed under the ACSP is 100 feet in DA 3. Maximum height for DA 1, DA 2, DA 4, and DA 5 are 60 feet, and 30 feet for DA 6. Therefore, no impact would occur. Furthermore, the construction or alteration of any structure meeting this threshold in the future will comply with procedures provided by Federal and State law, with the referral requirements of ALUC as commented. A3-2 Project’s potential impacts to area heliports were discussed in Chapter 5.6, Hazardous and Hazardous Materials, Impact 5.6-3. Development of helipads and heliports are permitted in DA 1 and DA 2, and conditionally permitted in DA 5. As stated in the comment, development of helipads or heliports would be submitted through the City to the ALUC for review and action pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21661.5. Proposed heliports or helipads projects will be required comply with the state permit procedure and conditions of approval imposed or recommended by FAA, by the ALUS for Orange County and by Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-20 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-21 LETTER A4 – Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (2 page[s]) ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-22 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-23 A4. Response to Comments from Deborah Drezner, Interim Team Manager, Environmental Planning Team, dated July 10, 2015. A4-1 Comments noted. Page 5.15-15 of the DEIR has been revised to include the East Orange County Feeder No. 1. Figure 5.15-2, Anaheim Public Utilities Major Facilities & Service Area, has been revised to state “MWD Pipelines” instead of “MND Mains” and the revised figure shows the MWD pipelines within the Project Area. Page 5.15-16 of the DEIR has been revised to delete statement related to Metropolitan’s water supply capacity. The revisions would not change the conclusion of the DEIR analysis. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A4-2 Comment noted. As required, any projects in the area of Metropolitan’s pipelines or facilities will be submitted for Metropolitan’s review to the attention of Metropolitan’s Substructures Team. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-24 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-25 LETTER A5 – California Department of Transportation (6 page[s]) ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-26 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-27 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-28 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-29 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-30 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-31 A5. Response to Comments from Maureen El Harake, Branch Chief, Regional-Community-Transit Planning, District, California Transportation Department, dated July 14, 2015. A5-1 Comment noted. No response is necessary. A5-2 Comment noted. The City will continue to coordinate with Caltrans on bikeway and trail plans within or adjacent to Caltrans right-of-way. A5-3 Mitigation measure T-1 is derived from the City’s Municipal Code requirements for TDM programs. The Municipal Code places any funding requirements for TDM program implementation on future project applicants. A5-4 Comment noted. Direct and cumulative impacts to the State Highway System as a result of project implementation will be mitigated through implementation of Mitigation Measures T-5 and T-8 included in the DEIR. A5-5 Comment noted. Mitigation Measure T-8, subsection (f) requires fair share contributions to traffic mitigation for Caltrans facilities through a mutually acceptable agreement by Caltrans and the City of Anaheim. A5-6 See Response A5-4. A5-7 Comment noted. As noted in the DEIR, impacts have been identified at these locations and appropriate mitigation has been identified. A5-8 Comment noted. The City acknowledges that any intersection modifications with Caltrans right-of-way will be subject to the Caltrans Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) policy. The following provision has been added to Mitigation Measure T-8: g) Future traffic improvement phasing analyses for Caltrans facilities shall utilize the latest adopted HCM methodology. In addition, proposed intersection modifications within Caltrans right-of-way shall be consistent with Caltrans Traffic Operations Policy Directive 13-02: Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE). A5-9 Comment noted. The City acknowledges that all construction within Caltrans right-of- way must be ADA compliant. A5-10 Per your request, the following change has been made to Page 5.14-107 of the DEIR: Impact 5.14-3 State highway facilities within the study area are not within the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim. Rather, those improvements are planned, funded, and constructed by the State of California through a legislative and political process involving the State Legislature; the California Transportation Commission (CTC); the California State ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-32 PlaceWorks Existing GP Trips/Day Sq. Ft.DU Trips/Day DA1 Industrial 6.97 21,770,629 151,741 8,229,962 57,363 DA2 Recycling 0.792 700,267 555 1,232,032 976 DA3 Transit Oriented 11.03 589,049 6,497 5,360,574 59,127 Residential 4.18 - 2,607 10,897 DA4 Local Commercial 42.7 1,563,364 66,756 (310,091) (13,241) DA5 General Commercial 42.7 2,171,054 92,704 923,154 39,419 DA6 Open Space 10,571 - 3,568,351 - DA7 Flex Area 12.44 1,101,222 13,699 165,231 2,055 Existing GP ADT:331,952 156,596 Increased ADT: Area Use Increase/ChangeDaily Rate Transportation AgencyBusiness, Transportation, and Housing Agency; the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans); and OCTA. Recent funding opportunities designated by OCTA’s Renewed Measure M provide the vehicle for designated improvements on the freeway facilities within the study area and were analyzed at their recommended build-out in the ACSP. A5-11 Per your request, the following change has been made to Page 3-28 of the DEIR: Responsible Agencies Action Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Approve necessary sewer upgrades to OCSD facilities. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Coordinate with the City on any necessary roadway improvements to Caltrans facilities and issue any required encroachment permits within Caltrans right-of-way. Provide necessary roadway improvements. A5-12 “Proposed Project Only” trip generation for ACSP is shown in Table 1 to total an additional 156,596 average daily trips (ADT), using ITE 9th edition Trip Generation rates. It is important to note that these rates are based upon data collected for suburban, free-standing, single use development with no transit or active transportation. These assumptions are not consistent with the ACSP intentions for urban, mixed use development with facilitation of transit, pedestrian and bicycle activity. Nevertheless, application of ITE rates shows the existing General Plan (GP) 331,952 average daily traffic (ADT) increasing by 156,596 ADT. Table 1. ITE 9th Edition Trip Generation This growth compares to the 124,792 ADT growth forecast with the ATAM. Trip assignment was derived from ATAM through select zone analysis. It forecasts the following freeway traffic: • SR91 traffic to/from the east is 7.0%, or 8,735 Project ADT. • SR91 traffic to/from the west is 11.3%, or 14,101 Project ADT. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-33 • SR55 traffic to/from the south is 11.4%, or 14,226 Project ADT. • SR57 traffic to/from the north is 4.6%, or 5,740 Project ADT. • SR57 traffic to/from the south is 5.0%, or 6,240 Project ADT. • SR90 traffic to/from the north is 3.8%, or 4,742 Project ADT. The smart growth trip generation materials prepared by UC Davis were reviewed, as requested by Caltrans. One of its designers, Dr. Brian Bochner, was consulted regarding why this tool concluded that the ACSP land uses did not qualify for smart growth trip generation. He advised that both the 2,600 acre size of the project area and the significant industrial component of the ACSP precludes its recognition as smart growth by this tool. A5-13 Per the City’s meeting with Caltrans on July 29, 2015, use of HCM 2000 methodology will be allowed for use in the Program EIR. However, future traffic studies required in compliance with Mitigation Measure T-8 will utilize the latest HCM methodology. The following provision has been added to Mitigation Measure T-8: g) Future traffic improvement phasing analyses for Caltrans facilities shall utilize the latest adopted HCM methodology. In addition, proposed intersection modifications within Caltrans right-of-way shall be consistent with Caltrans Traffic Operations Policy Directive 13-02: Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE). A5-14 The ACSP fair share for signalizing the SR91 eastbound off ramp at Kraemer Boulevard is 45.7% (based on year 2040 forecasts showing the ACSP adding 493 peak hour trips of the 1078 new peak hour trips). It should be noted that Measure M2 Project I fully funds the reconstruction of this interchange, which includes a new traffic signal at this ramp location. A5-15 The ACSP fair share for widening the SR91 westbound off ramp to Lakeview Avenue is 31.3% (based on year 2040 forecasts showing the ACSP adding 68 peak hour trips of the 149 new peak hour trips). It should be noted that Measure M2 Project I includes the addition of a 1,400 foot long deceleration lane as part of the Lakeview Interchange reconstruction, which will also mitigate the deficient level of service at this off ramp. A5-16 A significant area of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan had its General Plan designation changed from Low Office to Industrial. This change was made to reflect the zoning and type of developments that currently exist today, as well as reflect the industrial uses that are desired in this area. As a result of this change, the traffic generated from these areas will reduce under the General Plan Buildout with Project scenario compared to the without project scenario. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-34 PlaceWorks A5-17 It was agreed by Caltrans at our July 29, 2015 meeting that the requested queue analysis of on/off-ramps will be conducted as part of the SR91 PAED, with ACSP land uses included. The current analysis is acceptable for this DEIR. A5-18 It was agreed by Caltrans at our July 29, 2015 meeting that the recycling truck trips will consist of standard size waste collection vehicles, and that truck trips serving the flex area development will generally be UPS and FedEx types of vehicles. These sizes of trucks do not require a truck volume increase factor. A5-19 The City requires a construction operations plan for any construction projects within the City. No hauling of construction materials shall occur during AM and PM peak periods of travel on State facilities during demolition and/or reconstruction of the ACSP project. All vehicle loads shall be covered so that materials do not blow over or onto the Caltrans rights of way. No changes to the DEIR are necessary. A5-20 Comment noted. The Anaheim Canyon Master Sign Plan will forwarded to Caltrans for review and coordination. A5-21 Off-site business advertising is not permitted by the proposed Specific Plan. No additional response is necessary. A5-22 The City acknowledges that any work performed within Caltrans right-of-way will require discretionary review and approval by Caltrans, as well as issuance of an encroachment permit by Caltrans prior to construction. A5-23 Per your request, a meeting between Caltrans and the City was conducted on July 29, 2015. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-35 LETTER A6 – California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance (1 page[s]) ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-36 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-37 A6. Response to Comments from Patricia Martz, Ph.D., President, California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, dated June 12, 2015. A6-1 Comment noted. In the event that cultural deposits are discovered during construction, appropriate agencies will be notified and resources will be treated accordingly pursuant to California Code Regulations 15126.4 (b)(3)(B) so that no significant prehistoric archaeological resources are adversely impacted. Your comment will be forwarded to the appropriate City of Anaheim decision-makers for their review and consideration. No further response is necessary. A6-2 Page 8-4 of the DEIR indicates that in the event that human remains are discovered within the project site, they will be subject to California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. No further response is necessary. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-38 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-39 LETTER A7 – The PRS Group (5 page[s]) ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-40 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-41 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-42 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-43 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-44 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-45 A7. Response to Comments from Phillip R. Schwartze, President, The PRS Group, dated July 13, 2015. A7-1 Comment noted. Figure 3-6, Existing Zoning, has been revised to show the Scenic Corridor Overlay. Page 4-12 of the DEIR has been revised to state that the Scenic Corridor Overlay covers the eastern, not western half of the ACSP. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A7-2 The ACSP would update and consolidate two specific plans, the Northeast Area Specific Plan and the PacifiCenter Anaheim Specific Plan, that encompasses majority of ACSP boundaries. The Project Area has been previously disturbed and no significant cultural resources were identified according to the City of Anaheim General Plan Environmental Impact Report and the Northeast Area Specific Plan Cultural Resources Study. As stated in Chapter 8 of the DEIR, archaeological sites are known to occur east of Imperial Highway in the Hill and Canyon area in the City of Anaheim. The Native American Heritage Commission was notified of the proposed project and the Native American contacts list for consultation was received and each of the listed tribes was contacted. Any impacts to archaeological/paleontological resources during grading would be subject to Guidelines §21083.2. In addition, the City has complied with Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) and has sent out letters on October 23, 2014 to applicable tribal representatives for consultation request. A7-3 As stated, Increased Residential Use Alternative has been identified as environmentally superior to the ACSP project but would not meet the project objectives to the extent as the ACSP project. Comment is hereby noted, included in the official environmental record of the proposed project, and will be forwarded to the appropriate City of Anaheim decision-makers for their review and consideration. A7-4 Comments are related to the Draft Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan and not to the DEIR. These comments will be forwarded to the appropriate City of Anaheim decision-makers for their review and consideration. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-46 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-47 LETTER A8 – Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians, Kizh Nation (3 page[s]) ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-48 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-49 ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-50 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-51 A8. Response to Comments from Andrew Sala, Chairman, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians, Kizh Nation, dated July 7, 2015. A8-1 Comment noted. No response is necessary. A8-2 Comment noted. The City has notified and informed the Native American tribal groups per the contact list provided by the Native American Heritage Commission of the proposed ACSP. The proposed project would be subject to Guidelines §21083.2 for archaeological resources and will encourage use of Native American Monitors during the course of archaeological excavations as appropriate and necessary. However, considering disturbed nature of the ACSP Area, requiring a qualified Native American Monitor to be on site during any and all ground disturbances is not warranted. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-52 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-53 LETTER A9 – Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) (2 page[s]) ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-54 PlaceWorks ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments August 2015 Page 2-55 A9. Response to Comments from Ron Mathieu, Sr. Public Project Specialist, SCRRA, dated July 13, 2015. A9-1 Comment noted. No response is necessary. A9-2 Comment noted. Pages xv and xviii of the DEIR have been revised. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A9-3 Comment noted. Future mailings will be addressed to Metrolink Planning Department, P.O. Box 531776, Los Angeles, CA 90053-1776. A9-4 Comment noted. Text was added to include additional information regarding train operations in page 5.14-1 of the DEIR. The revision would not change the conclusion of DEIR analysis. Please refer to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. A9-5 The City understands and concurs with the comment that any development constructed in the vicinity of the La Palma Avenue, Tustin Avenue, Miraloma Avenue, and Jefferson Street grade crossings cannot lower the safety standards that allowed Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to grant Quiet Zone status and diagnostic meetings with City, Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and the California Public Utility Commission may be required to ensure that city retains its Quiet Zone status with modifications to the approaches to the crossings. Therefore, comment is hereby noted, included in the official environmental record of the proposed project, and will be forwarded to the appropriate City of Anaheim decision-makers for their review and consideration. No further response is necessary. A9-6 Comment noted. No response is necessary. A9-7 Comment is hereby noted, included in the official environmental record of the proposed project, and will be forwarded to the appropriate City of Anaheim decision- makers for their review and consideration. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 2. Response to Comments Page 2-56 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. August 2015 Page 3-1 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR 3.1 INTRODUCTION This section contains revisions to the DEIR based upon (1) additional or revised information required to prepare a response to a specific comment; (2) applicable updated information that was not available at the time of DEIR publication; and/or (3) typographical errors. Changes made to the DEIR are identified here in strikeout text to indicate deletions and in underlined text to signify additions. 3.2 DEIR REVISIONS IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN COMMENTS The following text has been revised in response to comments received on the DEIR. Page 5.3-4, Section 5.3.2, Biological Resources, Existing Conditions, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from Orange County Water District (OCWD): The Project Area has several areas designated as Open Space, Parks and Water Uses in the City’s adopted General Plan. These include the Santa Ana River wash, its river banks, and adjoining undeveloped but mostly disturbed areas as well as several Orange County Water District (OCWD) Groundwater Recharge Basins including Santa Ana River lakes, Warner Basin, Little Water Basin, Conrock Basin, Huckleberry Basin, Kraemer Basin, Miraloma Basin, and Anaheim Lake. Page 5.3-7, Section 5.3.2, Biological Resources, Existing Conditions, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from OCWD: The Project Area contains several OCWD groundwater recharge basins, including the Kraemer Basin, Miller Basin, Miraloma Basin, Warner Basin, Santa Ana River Lakes, Little Warner Basin, Conrock Basin, Huckleberry Basin, and Anaheim Lake, and other smaller basins. The basins are surrounded by industrial and commercial areas. The Santa Ana River Lakes, Corona Lake, and Anaheim Lake Warner Basin provides recreational uses to local fishermen. These basins are is stocked with fish, including rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), and are open for public use for a fee. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR Page 3-2 PlaceWorks Page 5.3-11, Section 5.3.2.3, Biological Resources, Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from OCWD : The Santa Ana River and the OCWD groundwater recharge basins, including the Santa Ana river Lakes, Anaheim Lake, Warner Basin, Kraemer Basin, and others within the Project Area contain jurisdictional waters and wetlands. Page 5.8-21, Section 5.8.3 Land Use and Planning, SCAG RCP Consistency Analysis, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from OCWD: Consistent: The Project Area contains riparian vegetation and wetlands in the Santa Ana River and lakes areas in the vicinity of recharge basins. The Santa Ana River lakes, Warner Basin, Little Warner Basin Conrock Basin, Huckleberry Basin, Kraemer Basin, Miraloma Basin, and Anaheim Lake contain open water habitat that is used by migratory and resident waterfowl and other bird species, principally for foraging. Page 5.13-3, Section 5.13.1 Recreation. Santa Ana River Trail, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from OCWD: Several water basins along the Santa Ana River are used for recreation purposes: Anaheim Lakes, Warner Basin, and Burris Basin the Miller Retarding Basin and the Five Coves area, which is located north of Ball Road along the western side of the river outside of the specific planning area. Page 5.7-9, Section 5.7.1 Hydrology and Water Quality, Groundwater, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from OCWD: The Project Area lies within the boundaries of the Orange County Groundwater Basin, which underlies the northern half of Orange County, covering approximately 310 square miles (DWR 2003). The Orange County Groundwater Basin is bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and terminates near the Orange County boundary to the northwest, where it connects to the Central Basin of Los Angeles. The hydrogeology of the Orange County Groundwater Basin is characterized by a deep structural alluvial basin containing a thick accumulation of interbedded sand, silt, and clay. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) has divided the Basin into two zones, the Forebay and the Pressure areas. The Project Area is in the Forebay zone, where the majority of the recharge to the Basin occurs through the percolation of Santa Ana River water in recharge basins. Groundwater in the Basin is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). Groundwater extraction occurs from more than 500 production wells in the basin. The water supply system also includes 800 monitoring wells, more than 1,000 acres of recharge ponds, two seawater intrusion barriers, three ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR August 2015 Page 3-3 desalters, the Groundwater Replenishment System, and the Prado wetlands, and Prado Dam located in San Bernardino County and Riverside County, respectively (OCWD 2013). Page 5.13-3 to 4, Section 5.13.1 Recreation, Environmental Impacts, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from OCWD: In addition to the groundwater recharge activities, implementation of the ACSP would encourage the creation of bicycle and pedestrian trials trails that link Anaheim Canyon to surrounding neighborhoods and the Santa Ana Trail system. The ACSP would also provide options for additional parks, open space, and recreation facilities for area workers and residents through identifying these potential open space improvements:  Basin Turf Conversion: This project would convert approximately 10.8 acres of irrigated and inaccessible turf into California-friendly planting with trails and seating areas around Kraemer Basin, Anaheim Lake, and Water Warner Basin. These improvements would require close coordination with OCWD. Page 5.15-13 to 14, Section 5.15.2.1 Utilities and Service Systems, Groundwater, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from OCWD: The basin holds millions of acre-feet (AF) of water, of which about 1.25 to 1.5 million AF is available for use approximately 300,000 AF is available for production on an annual basis. To ensure that the basin is not overdrawn, OCWD recharges it with local and imported water. Groundwater conditions in the basin are influenced by the natural hydrologic conditions. The basin is recharged primarily by four sources: (1) local rainfall, which varies due to the extent of the annual seasonal precipitation; (2) storm and base flows from the Santa Ana River, which includes recycled wastewater from treatment plants in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties; (3) imported water; and (4) highly treated recycled wastewater. The basin generally operates as a reservoir, and the net amount of water stored is increased in wet years to allow for manageable overdrafts in dry years with water levels maintained within an operating range to assure long-term basin sustainability. According to OCWD’s Engineer’s Report for fiscal year 2012/13, total groundwater production from the basin in OCWD's jurisdiction was 309,295 AF. The production capability of the basin has increased as a result of increased wastewater reclamation and the blending of waters of different qualities a managed aquifer recharge program to produce provide high-quality potable water for public distribution. The basin is a managed basin and not in a state of overdraft. The WSA indicates that the basin is one of the most plentiful sources of largest groundwater basins in the entire state, containing approximately 1.25 to 1.5 million AF of water available for use at the present time, and millions of acre-feet that could possibly be produced in the future. Although the volume of water in storage is large, annual production must be managed at levels that assure long-term basin sustainability. The basin is managed by the OCWD, a special district created by the State Legislature. Although there are no limits to pumping from the basin, OCWD sets a target level of pumping from the basin, referred to as the ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR Page 3-4 PlaceWorks Basin Production Percentage (BPP). Though all pumpers within the basin are permitted to pump from it, OCWD is charged with managing the groundwater basin, largely through the Basin Production Percentage (BPP) that it establishes each water year. The BPP is set annually based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, ideal precipitation, Santa Ana River runoff, and basin management objectives. In essence, the BPP is the set percentage all pumpers in the basin can pump without paying a high “pumping tax” an additional assessment or Basin Equity Assessment (BEA) to OCWD. Page 5.15-14, Section 5.15.2.1 Utilities and Service Systems, Groundwater, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from OCWD: For the water year, a total of 41,653 AF of supplemental water was used for the purpose of groundwater replenishment and barrier maintenance to prevent seawater intrusion from occurring in areas of the groundwater basin adjacent to the Pacific Ocean in Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa, and Fountain Valley. Based on the groundwater basin conditions for the water year ending June 30, 2013, OCWD may purchase up to 120,000 AF for groundwater basin replenishment during the ensuing water year, beginning July 1, 2014. OCWD’s substantial investment in facilities, basin management, and water rights protection resulted in the elimination and prevention of adverse long-term “mining” overdraft conditions in the basin. And OCWD continues to develop new replenishment supplies, recharge capacity, and basin protection measures to meet projected production from the basin during average/normal rainfall and drought periods. OCWD also has invested in seawater intrusion control (injection barriers), recharge facilities, laboratories and basin monitoring to effectively manage the basin. Page 5.15-15, Section 5.15.2.1 Utilities and Service Systems, Recycled Water, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A1 from OCWD: Anaheim indirectly participates in regional water recycling through the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) by a joint project of the OCWD and Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) operated by OCWD. Page 5.7-6, Section 5.7.1.3, Hydrology and Water Quality, ACSP Area Drainage, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A2 from Orange County Public Works (OCPW): Drainage patterns in the Project Area vary, but most runoff is conveyed by surface streets or local storm drains to regional storm drainage facilities owned and maintained by the Orange County Flood Control District (OC Flood OCFCD) and maintained by the Orange County Public Works Department, Operations and Maintenance. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR August 2015 Page 3-5 Page 5.7-6, Section 5.7.1.3, Hydrology and Water Quality, ACSP Area Drainage, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A2 from Orange County Public Works (OCPW): These plans are being developed following the OC Flood’s publication of new hydrologic parameters, which resulted in greater storm runoff projections than previously estimated in accordance with the 1986 Orange County Hydrology Manual, Addendum No. 1 issued in 1995, and the County of Orange Local Drainage Manual. This resulted in most existing storm drain systems in the City of Anaheim, including in the Specific Plan area, to be classified as undersized. Some of the existing storm drains within the Project Area have been characterized as deficient, based on Drainage Master Plan studies. The City of Anaheim’s current standard is to size City owned and maintained drainage systems to fully convey all storm water for a minimum 1025-year storm event, with drainage basins tributary to the Santa Ana River sized to convey water from a 25-year storm event. For OCFCD facilities, the design standard is the 100-year storm as feasible. Where improvements to local drainage facilities have the potential to increase discharges to County facilities, the City analyzes potential impacts to County facilities in consultation with the Manager, Orange County Public Works, Infrastructure Program. Encroachment permits are required from the County’s Public Permits Section for any activity performed within OCFCD’s right of way. A map of the existing storm drain system in the Project Area is provided as Figure 5.7-1, Existing Storm Drain System. In general, the City of Anaheim maintains the local storm drain facilities, which discharge into OC Flood’s OCFCD’s regional channels and the Santa Ana River. The OC Flood OCFCD channels within or tributary to the Project Area include:  Carbon Creek Canyon Channel (E03)  Carbon Creek Diversion Channel (E02B01)  Richfield Channel (E05)  Atwood Channel (E04)  Chantilly Storm Channel (E01S02) The Carbon Creek Canyon Channel and Atwood Channel discharge into the Miller Retarding Basin, which is west of Anaheim Lake., and tThe Carbon Creek Diversion Channel flows from the Miller Retarding Basin through the northwestern portion of the Project Area, collecting additional storm water and eventually discharging into the Santa Ana River (OC Flood OCFCD 2003). Page 5.7-17, Section 5.7.3, Hydrology and Water Quality, Environmental Impacts, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A2 from Orange County Public Works (OCPW): Although the City’s storm drain system has functioned adequately in the past, preliminary information indicates that the existing storm drain system, including the Project Area, may be undersized, due to Orange County’s revision of hydrologic parameters, resulting in greater storm runoff projections than previously estimated. The City of Anaheim is in the process of identifying deficiencies in the system and proposing capital improvements to upgrade the system. All new projects would be required to prove that runoff for ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR Page 3-6 PlaceWorks their site could be fully conveyed by the existing storm drainage system for a minimum 1025-year storm event, with drainage basins tributary to the Santa Ana River sized to convey water from a 25-year storm event into OCFCD facilities designed to convey 100-year flows where feasible (City of Anaheim 2004). The site design and hydrology calculations would be subject to City review Each project applicant within the Project Area would be required to prepare a hydrology/hydraulics study for City review and approval to verify that any increased in project flows could be accommodated by the existing drainage system. Where improvements to local drainage facilities have the potential to increase discharges to OCFCD facilities, the City will analyze these potential impacts in consultation with the Manager of the Orange County Public Works/Infrastructure Program. With implementation of these measures, impacts to City and County storm drain capacities would be less than significant. Page 3-27, Section 3.4, Project Description, Intended Uses of the EIR, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A2 from Orange County Public Works (OCPW): This Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) is a project EIR, which examines the environmental impacts of the proposed residential project. Page 5.7-1, Section 5.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A2 from Orange County Public Works (OCPW):  Orange County Model Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and Supplemental Technical Guidance Document dated August 2011.  Orange County Flood Control District (OC Flood) Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) dated July 2003. Page 5.15-15, Section 5.15.2.1 Utilities and Service Systems, Imported Water, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A4 from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD): The City purchases both treated potable and untreated nonpotable water from Metropolitan. The treated water is delivered through five seven major feeders—East Orange County Feeder Nos. 1 and 2 , Orange County Feeder, Second Lower Feeder, West Orange County Feeder, Santiago Lateral, and Allen-McColloch Pipeline, through Municipal Water District (MWD) connections A-01 through A-07. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR August 2015 Page 3-7 Page 5.15-16, Section 5.15.2.1 Utilities and Service Systems, Current Drought, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A4 from MWD: Although imported water supply is impacted to some degree by the current drought conditions in California, Metropolitan has indicated they have up to two years of supply in storage. Figure 5.15-2, Anaheim Public Utilities Major Facilities & Service Area, is hereby modified in response to Comment A4 from MWD. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR Page 3-8 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. PlaceWorks Source: WSA (Psomas, July 2015) Figure 5.15-2 - Anaheim Public Utilities Major Facilities & Service Area ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIRCITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis 57 90 91 55 0 Scale (Miles) 3 Active Wells as of June 2013 MWD Connections MWD Pipelines Anaheim Water Service Area Boundary Area Not Serviced by Anaheim (Area #1 - #5) Area Serviced by Anaheim (Area #6 - #7) Date: July 27, 2015 Area #1 Area #2Area #3 Area #4 Area #5 Area #6 Area #7 LINDA VISTA RESERVOIR LA PALMA RESERVOIR GARDEN GROVE STANTON BUENA PARK PLACENTIA ORANGE YORBA LINDA FULLERTON Orangethorpe Ave 91 5 241 Be a c h B l v d Da l e A v e Ma g n o l i a A v e Gil b e r t S t Kn o t t S t We s t e r n A v e Ha r b o r B l v d Le m o n S t Br o o k h u r s t S t Eu c l i d S t Ea s t S t St a t e C o l l e g e B l v d Kr a e m e r B l v d Mil l e r S t Tu s t i n A v e Je f f e r s o n S t La k e v i e w A v e Ke l l o g D r Fa i r m o n t B l v d We i r C a n y o n R d Sa n t a A n a C a n y o n Rd Gy p s u m C a n y o n R d Co a l C a n y o n R d Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan Boundary La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave LENAIN FILTRATION PLANT Legend ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR Page 3-10 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR August 2015 Page 3-11 Page 5.14-100, Section 5.14.1.1, Transportation and Traffic, Mitigation Measures, Mitigation Measure T-8, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A5 from Caltrans: g) Future traffic improvement phasing analyses for Caltrans facilities shall utilize the latest adopted HCM methodology. In addition, proposed intersection modifications within Caltrans right-of-way shall be consistent with Caltrans Traffic Operations Policy Directive 13-02: Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE). Page 5.14-107, Section 5.14.8, Transportation and Traffic, Level of Significance After Mitigation, Impact 5.14-3, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A5 from Caltrans: Impact 5.14-3 State highway facilities within the study area are not within the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim. Rather, those improvements are planned, funded, and constructed by the State of California through a legislative and political process involving the State Legislature; the California Transportation Commission (CTC); the California State Transportation AgencyBusiness, Transportation, and Housing Agency; the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans); and OCTA. Recent funding opportunities designated by OCTA’s Renewed Measure M provide the vehicle for designated improvements on the freeway facilities within the study area and were analyzed at their recommended build-out in the ACSP. Page 3-28, Section 3.4 Project Description, Intended Uses of the EIR, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A5 from Caltrans: Responsible Agencies Action Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Approve necessary sewer upgrades to OCSD facilities. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Coordinate with the City on any necessary roadway improvements to Caltrans facilities and issue any required encroachment permits within Caltrans right-of-way. Provide necessary roadway improvements. Figure 3-6, Existing Zoning, is hereby modified in response to Comment A7 from the PRS Group. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR Page 3-12 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. E MIRALOM A A V E E LA PALMA AVE N T U S T I N A V E E NOHL RANCH R D E RIVERDALE A V E N I M P E R I A L H W Y E ORANGETH O R P E A V E E SANTA ANA CANYON RD N K R A E M E R B L V D N L A K E V I E W A V E N M I L L E R S T N B L U E G U M S T S I M P E R I A L H W Y E LINCOLN A V E E CROWTHER AVE N J E F F E R S O N S T S R I C H F I E L D R D N G L A S S E L L S T S R O Y A L O A K R D S R I O V I S T A S T N R I O V I S T A S T N K E L L O G G D R N SAN T I A G O B L V D S ME A T S A V E KE L L O G G D R YO R B A L I N D A F W Y E FRONT E R A S T S R O S E D R ORANGETHO R P E A V E N R I C H F I E L D R D E LA PALMA A V E E ORANGETHORPE AVE E ORANGET H O R P E A V E N K E L L O G G D R E FRONTERA ST N R E D G U M S T E GERDA DR E LA JOLLA S T CHERRY ST E ORCHARD DR E ADDINGTON DR W LA JOLLA S T E JACKSON AVE N F E E A N A S T FE E A N A S T E ALDE R D A L E A V E N K R A E M E R P L E HUNTER AVE N V A N B U R E N S T E BIG SKY L N ORCHARD DR E CRESCENT D R E SA N T A A N A C A N Y O N R D E WH I T E S T A R A V E S K I N G S L E Y S T S T R E V O R S T N G A Y L E S T N G R O V E S T N K O D I A K S T E CERRO VISTA D R OAK ST E LA CRESTA A V E N GLE N V I E W A V E N H A N C O C K S T N R E D R O C K S T N D E E R F I E L D S T N R I C H F I E L D R D VINCENTE AVE E LANDO N D R N C H A N T I L L Y S T S AND O V E R D R E RIVERVIEW A V E N HO L B R O O K S T E CORONADO ST S C A L L E D A G A M A E GLENVIEW AVE N P O S T L N S L A K E V I E W A V E E HOLBROOK ST N P A R K V I S T A S T E TRA P P E R T R L N M A N A S S E R O S T N R A M O N A S T WOODWIND LN SHOR T S T N O C E A N C I R E MCKIN N O N D R E MAYCHELLE D R N B L U E R O C K S T S J E A N I N E W A Y E EAGLE DR E DUTCH AVE S B A R B A R A W A Y N S A N T A L U C I A S T E MAP L E T R E E D R N B R A S H E R S T DE P O T S T N S A N T A A N I T A S T N S W E E T W A T E R S T E GAYANN D R N A R M A N D O S T E BUDLONG ST N P A R T R I D G E S T N K E N T S T E BERGH DR V I S T A L O M A E FOREST GLE N R D E C R E S T H I L L D R E RUR A L R I D G E C I R LIN C O L N S T N F O U N T A I N W A Y E SUNVIEW DR E BLUE STAR S T N V I A C O R T E Z S PERALTA HILLS DR N B U B A C H S T ATWOOD AVE S C A R O U S E L S T N TREV O R S T N S A N T A C E C I L I A S T E AR D M O R E S T E PARK LN N P H E A S A N T S T E GARRICK DR S P E R A L T A W A Y N SKYWOOD S T E EDGEMAR A V E E GRETTA LN LA PALOMA AVE N S T A R F I R E S T S B E T H C I R E MINUET LN E AUTONETIC S W A Y N B E T H S T SIERRA VISTA AVE N C H R I S D E N S T N S H E P A R D S T S G L E N D O N S T E SUNCREST RD S WESTRIDGE C I R BOISSERANC LN E ILA DR E LANI AVE N B A R R Y K N O L L S T S B E L L E Z A L N N D E A N A S T E FAUNA A V E S PR A I R I E P L E BIX B Y A V E N H U N D L E Y S T N L A N C E L N N C O S B Y W A Y S P A S E O C A R M E L S S T A R L I G H T D R E HILLTOP AVE JEA N I N E C I R N M E A D O W L A R K L N E EMBERW O O D L N N M E R R I M A C D R N S U N S H I N E W A Y N S H A K E S P E A R E S T N R O Y A L S T SIERRA MADRE CIR S A L I C E C I R N S T A R L I N G W A Y N A Z U R E S T TANGO AVE E ROGUE DR N L A K E D A L E D R E HONEYWOOD L N E LA MES A S T E RICKER WA Y N S I M O N C I R E SH O R T S T E PAMELA KAY LN N T O R R E N S S T E CEENA CT N O A K W O O D A V E N D Y N A M I C S S T E PURITAN PL S SP L I T R A I L L N N O C E A N V I E W S T E CORONADO S T S B E T H C I R E HUNTER AVE E C R E S T H I L L D R E CORONADO S T N A R M A N D O S T N G A Y L E S T N G R O V E S T 3480 Anaheim Canyon Existing Zoning Key to Features Specific Plan 94-1 Anaheim City Boundary Development Areas for SP 94-1 DA1 - Industrial Area DA1A - Industrial Area - Recycling Overlay DA2 - Expanded Industrial Area DA3 - La Palma Core Area DA4 - Transit Center Area DA5 - Commercial Area DA6 - Open Space Specific Plan 88-3 General Commercial Transition Industrial Map Location °0 1,100 2,200 Feet City of Anaheim Planning DepartmentOctober 14, 2013PlaceWorks Source: City of Anaheim 2013 Figure 3-6 - Existing Zoning ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIRCITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Project Description 0 Scale (Feet) 3,000 57 90 91 91 55 Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR Page 3-14 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR August 2015 Page 3-15 Page xv, Chapter 1, Abbreviations and Acronyms, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A9 from Metrolink: I Interstate JPA Joint Powers Authority LBP lead-based paint Page xviii, Chapter 1, Abbreviations and Acronyms, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A9 from Metrolink: SCG Southern California Gas Company SCRRA Southern California Regional Rail Authority SCS sustainable communities strategy Page 5.14-1, Section 5.14.1.1, Transportation and Traffic, Traffic Impact Analysis Study Area, is hereby modified as follows in response to Comment A9 from Metrolink: In addition to the three state routes (SR-91, SR-90 and SR-57), access is provided by two Metrolink commuter rail lines, the Inland Empire-Orange County Line and the 91 Line. These passenger rail lines have shared use with Union Pacific Railway (UPR) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway freight operations. The Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) is the Joint Powers Authority (JPA) that operates and maintains the commuter rail service known as Metrolink. Metrolink operates 16 commuter trains, 1 non-revenue train and BNSF operates 3 freight trains daily through this area on the Olive Subdivision rail line. Trains can operate 24 hours a day seven days a week. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM 3. Revisions to the Draft EIR Page 3-16 PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix August 2015 Appendix A. Additional Traffic Data ANAHEIM CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR NO. 348 CITY OF ANAHEIM Appendix PlaceWorks This page intentionally left blank. LAKEVIEW/SR91 WESTBOUND RAMPS EXISTING 2040 PLUS PROJECT 2040 GP BUILDOUT AM PM AM PM AM PM WBL 43 62 41 71 50 77 WBT 0 0 0 0 0 0 WBR 485 255 429 463 383 389 528 317 470 534 433 466 TE TB 1004 899 37 68 PROJECT TRIPS ABOVE GP BUILDOUT T WESTBOUND OFFRAMP ONLY 217 GP BUILD - EXISTING FAIR SHARE T/(TB-TE) 31.3%68/(534-317) KRAEMER/SR91 EASTBOUND RAMPS EXISTING 2040 PLUS PROJECT 2040 GP BUILDOUT AM PM AM PM AM PM SBR 446 714 782 759 781 646 SBT 670 833 1308 1245 1165 959 WBR 944 465 752 349 731 349 NBT 830 913 777 1431 659 1275 NBR 335 261 500 309 447 296 EBR 476 606 411 777 443 852 3701 3792 4530 4870 4226 4377 TE TE TB TB 9400 8603 304 493 PROJECT TRIPS ABOVE GP BUILDOUT T T PM PEAK HOUR 829 1078 GP BUILD - EXISTING FAIR SHARE T/(TB-TE) 45.7%493/(4870-3792) AM PEAK HOUR FAIR SHARE T/(TB-TE) 36.7%304/(4530-3701) 41.2%AVERAGE OF PEAK HOURS Freeway Assignments to/from %Project ADT 91 east 7.0%8,735 91 west 11.3%14,101 55 south 11.4%14,226 57 north 4.6%5,740 57 south 5.0%6,240 90 north 3.8%4,742 43.1%56.9% An a h e i m C a n y o n S p e c i f i c P l a n - P e r c e n t o f T r i p D i s t r i b u t i o n o n F r e e w a y s AT A M Y e a r 2 0 3 5 Licensed to Iteris 5 . 5 4 . 4 0 .1 0.3 5 . 4 5 . 8 0 4.9 2 . 1 5 . 3 9 .6 5 . 2 9 .9 5 . 7 4 . 4 4 .2 7 . 4 6 .6 4 .8 3 .3 7 .4 5 .4 2 3 .6 5 5 .65.6 5 .56.6 5 .6 5 .6 0 .1 0 .2 0 0 .3 0 .2 0 .2 5 . 8 4.9 An a h e i m C a n y o n S p e c i f i c P l a n - P e r c e n t o f T r i p D i s t r i b u t i o n o n F r e e w a y s AT A M Y e a r 2 0 3 5 Licensed to Iteris32.6 1 .51.3 1 .4 1.31.2 32 2 .3 2 . 5 2 . 4 2 . 4 2 . 4 2 . 4 1 .72.7.2 0 .30.1 0 .30.2 0 .70.6 1 .5 1 .4 1 .2 1 .21.4 6 31.9 1 .7 1 .6 1 .40.70.6 2 2 0 .1 6.1 1 1 .5 1 .6 0 1 .5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000.1 0 0 .1 000000000 0 00000 00 000000 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .6 0 1 .7 1 .3 1 .7 1 .4 1 .2 1 .4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 1 . 4 1 . 6 1 . 9 1 .6 2 2 2 2 . 4 2 . 1 2 . 5 2 . 2 0 2 . 8 1.3 01.62.3 2.3 2 2 . 4 22.4 2.6 2.4 2 . 8 2 . 5 2 . 5 2 . 5 6 . 4 3 . 2 3 3 . 6 3 . 2 3 . 9 3.7 4 . 9 4 . 2 5.2 4.7 5.7 5.3 5 . 8 0 5 . 3 0 .2 0 .3 0 .3 0 .2 0 .3 0 .2 0 .3 0 .40.4 0 .7 0. 6 0 .8 0. 8 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 . 1 1 . 2 0 . 7 1 . 3 0. 7 0 .7 0 .8 0 .4 0 .4 0 .80.4 1 1 0 .5 1 .6 1 .6 1 .8 1 .9 1 .6 1. 9 2 .12 2 .5 2 2 .3 4 .1 4 .5 2 .3 4 .3 4. 8 4 .7 5 .1 5 .1 5 .2 5 .6 5 .2 5 .6 5 .7 5 .6 5 .8 5 .8 5 .7 9 .6 5 .7 9 .9 5 . 7 7 . 4 6 .6 7 .4 5 . 4 2 5 5 . 6 5 .6 6 .6 2 . 1 2 3 . 7 2 .8 3 .1 2 .632.632.6 3 2 21.8 2 .1 0 .10.1 0 .1 0.1 0 .1 0.1 0 0 .1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.1 00.1 00.1 000.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 .1 0 0 .1 1 .3 1 .4 2 .6 3 0 2 .8 0 3 .2 1 .5 1 .7 0 . 1 0 .2 0 0 . 2 0 0 . 2 0 .1 0 0 0 . 1 0 0 0 00 0 0 5.7 55 2 . 5 2.5 2.6 2 . 5 0. 2 0 .3 0 0 2 3 . 3 3 . 3 August 24, 2015 Michelle Lieberman, Chairwoman Planning Commission City Hall 200 South Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 RE: Requested Amendments to Anaheim Canyon draft Specific Plan Dear Chairwoman Lieberman: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (ACSP) and on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) As you know, this firm represents several property owners in the Canyon. We, and other professionals have carefully reviewed the draft ACSP and DEIR on their behalf. Please accept this letter, and our earlier correspondence to staff, as our request for certain changes to the ACSP. Under separate cover we offered our comments to the DEIR during the official review period. This fact was noted by staff in their presentation to you on the 10th of August. The goals of the draft ACSP as stated, are ideal. We believe that the reutilization of old buildings and therefore the reuse of certain land sites which are presently underutilized, offer a great opportunity for promoting new infill development. One of the Canyon Area Advisory members owns a 51 year old building which sits on a 6.3 acre site that has frontage on the south boundary of La Palma Avenue and Carpenter Street. It is clear the age of the existing building will force consideration of a replacement scenario. Other land uses near the La Palma/Carpenter site are commercial recreation, and across from La Palma/Carpenter site, on the north boundary of La Palma, are relatively new industrial complex buildings NEW CORRESPONDENCE ITEM NO. 5 In reviewing the ACSP it appears that the La Palma/Carpenter property is ideally suited to fulfill a portion of the new residential and retail commercial requirements noted in the ACSP, as needed and necessary to sustain new high quality industrial and office development. As noted in the staff presentation on the 10th, there is no vacant property so reutilization of existing properties will be required to promote new job growth and sustainability. Only a very few properties within the ACSP have the physical characteristics required to deliver a highly functional, residential mixed use development. History has shown that high quality, professionally managed apartment homes need economy of scale. Properties need to be large (240 units - 480 units) to achieve the efficiencies required in order to support professional on-site management, maintenance and deliver the amenities needed to attract a sustainable apartment community. Properties between 4 to 7 acres, which have access on two separate streets, fit the unique desired development criteria for multiple residential. Many of the buildings in the Canyon area which sit on 4 to 7 acres are new, or relatively new, and therefore are uneconomical to redevelop. Other properties fitting the appropriate size requirements have valuable freeway exposure which is more desirable for commercial, hotel or office use. The draft ACSP notes a great need for additional, high quality eating facilities, additional work force housing and useful retail services to accommodate the daily workforce in the ACSP area. Type V apartment homes are able to economically reach the marketplace and this is particularly true when the apartments are mixed use with commercial retail and restaurants. Just picture “The Catch.” The 6.3 acre La Palma/Carpenter site is made even more attractive for potential mixed use-residential development when you see that it is within easy walking distance of the Kaiser Permanente Hospital and on further to the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink station. There is an existing OCTA bus stop at the La Palma/Carpenter site which facilitates that transit opportunity. Kaiser Permanente alone, has almost 2,000 employees at a 24 hour per day facility. Kaiser is continually expanding as evidenced by the new $25,000,000 Cancer Office (radiation oncology building) as announced in October, 2013. New ancillary medical buildings, with business which will service Kaiser, will add new jobs to the area and therefore will replace the many old, small lot industrial buildings which are very close to Kaiser Permanente. This process of old building reuse is underway. Kaiser will/has become the nucleus of change in the Anaheim Canyon and its imperative on the City and property owners to proactively plan for the opportunity it brings to create a new node of complementary uses that include additional nearby residential opportunities. Pursuant to the State of California mandate, jobs in close proximity to housing will reduce traffic and consequently improve air quality. Of note, the Orange County Business Council published its 2015 report on the status of housing in Orange County. According to the report, new single family and multiple residential development in Orange County is not keeping up with job growth. The shortage of approximately 50,000 housing units will only increase in the coming years. The report says that in order for job rich Orange County to maintain its competitiveness, the pace of residential development needs to increase. We can expect new Federal and State Regulations primarily dealing with air quality and reduction in vehicle miles traveled to continually challenge older business practices. The City of Anaheim, via the ACSP, needs to plan for modifications in parking demands, air quality standards and water conservation. The arcane model of distinct zoning districts that segregate land uses by type is no longer congruent with what the state mandates to reduce vehicle miles traveled, reduce energy usage, improve air quality and to bring jobs and housing into greater equilibrium, and in close proximity to each other. Companies looking to expand and/or create new job opportunities seek areas which can deliver housing for their employees in close proximity to the work place. As you know, hundreds of thousands of square feet of new warehouse facilities are under construction on north side La Palma. We strongly believe that multi-family/mixed use residential should be included in the Development Area DA-5, pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit, on parcels between 4 to 7 acres. We would be pleased to go into greater detail on our suggestions for improving the draft ACSP. Respectfully, The PRS Group Phillip R. Schwartze President