90-036 RESOLUTION NO. 90P~-~6
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 289 FOR THE
PROPOSED MARKETFAIRE AT ANAHEIM PROJECT AND
MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED MARKETFAIRE PROJECT
INCLUDING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Anaheim (the
"City") on November 29, 1983 by Ordinance No. 4463 approved a
Redevelopment Plan for the River Valley Redevelopment Project
(the "Project") and designated by such Ordinance that certain
area (the "Project Area") as a redevelopment project area; and
WHEREAS, on December 4, 1989 the Planning Commission of the
City of Anaheim recommended certification of Subsequent EIR
No. 289, including the attached and hereby incorporated
Addendum to Subsequent DEIR No. 289, Exhibit A to this
Resolution, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations as
hereinafter set forth, and a Mitigation Monitoring Program
attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit B
to this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA",
Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the Guidelines
for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
(the "Guidelines," 14 California Administrative Code
Section 15000 et seq.) provide authority for the City to
certify the Environmental Impact Report and adopt findings
regarding the environmental impact of a proposed project and a
statement of overriding considerations; and
WHEREAS, Marketfaire Partners, a California corporation
(the "Developer"), proposes the Marketfaire at Anaheim
development project (the "Development Project") consisting of
seven parcels, located northwest of the intersection of the
Riverside Freeway (Route 91) and Weir Canyon Road within the
Project Area and in the City of Anaheim; and
WHEREAS, EIR No. 230 prepared for and certified by the City
of Anaheim in 1979, addressed the SAVI Ranch General Plan
Amendment, which designated certain portions of a business and
industrial center as General Commercial and other portions of
said area as General Industrial; and
WHEREAS, EIR No. 230 addressed a full range of impacts
associated with the site development, including the Development
Parcel; and
WHEREAS, this Subsequent EIR No. 289 evaluates the effects
associated with various combinations of land uses under several
scenarios for buildout of the property comprising the
Development Project, including such uses as auto center,
commercial-retail, commercial-office, and light industrial; and
WHEREAS, depending on the specific combination of land uses
identified as the proposed Development Project, the project
includes the following discretionary approvals by the City of
Anaheim: General Plan Amendment No. 271, the First Amendment
to the River Valley Redevelopment Plan, Zoning Reclassification
No. 89-90-22, Conditional Use Permit NO. 3206, Development
Agreement No. 83-02 (as amended and restated), and Development
Agreement NO. 89-02; and
WHEREAS, the EIR Review Committee of the City has found
that Draft Subsequent EIR No. 289, together with the comments
and responses and accompanying Addendum (Exhibit A), is in
compliance with CEQA and the State and City CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, Subsequent EIR No. 289 addresses the impacts
associated with the development of a 57 acre commercial/office
project of which the 57 acre total approximately 45 acres
constitutes the Marketfaire at Anaheim project and the
remaining acreage will contain approximately 360,000 square
feet of office space; and
WHEREAS, after considering Subsequent Environmental Impact
Report No. 289 for the proposed Marketfaire at Anaheim project
and after due consideration, inspection, investigation and
study made by itself, and after due consideration of all
evidence and reports offered,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council hereby determines and certifies
that: After considering Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact
Report No. 289 for the proposed Marketfaire at Anaheim project
(Subsequent EIR No. 289 addresses the impacts associated with
the development of a 57 acre commercial/office project, and of
the 57 acre total, approximately 45 acres of this project
constitutes the Marketfaire at Anaheim project, and the
remaining acreage will contain approximately 360,000 square
feet of office space) and reviewing evidence, both written and
oral, presented to supplement Subsequent EIR No. 289, the City
Council finds that:
1/11/90
7904n/2621/017 -2-
(a) Subsequent EIR No. 289 is in compliance with the
California Environmental Air Quality Act and the State and City
Guidelines;
(b) Subsequent EIR No. 289 identifies the following
impacts which are considered to be both unavoidable and adverse
in nature and not fully mitigated to a level of insignificance:
The projected Level of Services (LOS) for SR-91
eastbound ramps for cumulative plus project conditions is
unacceptable (LOS E). This condition, which is partially
mitigated by the proposed improvements, is not fully
mitigated. Note: Cumulative projects included in the
analysis were Sycamore Canyon, The Summit of Anaheim Hills,
the Highlands at Anaheim Hills and SAVI Ranch Business Park
in Yorba Linda.
Air quality emissions for the SR-91 eastbound ramp at
Weir Canyon Road exceed the federal standard of 9.0 ppm of
carbon monoxide for existing, existing plus project, and
cumulative conditions. However, the standard is only
exceeded within 15 meters of the roadway centerline under
all conditions.
(c) Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines requires
that one or more findings be made for each of the significant
environmental effects identified. Three finding categories are
possible. Sections (1), (2) and (3) below state each finding,
and then identify the impact categories for which these
findings are appropriate.
(1) "Changes or alterations have been required
in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR." This finding applies to
the following environmental effects of the project:
- Transportation/Circulation impacts (except for
the eastbound ramp of the SR-91 Freeway)
- Land Use/Relevant Planning
- Air Quality (except for eastbound ramp of the
SR-91 Freeway)
- Acoustic Environment
- Services and Utilities
- Visual and Aesthetic Resources
- Hydrology
- Recreation and Open Space
(Refer to EIR 289 Section 3 and the Addendum,
Section 3 (Exhibit A) for a full discussion of
the above impacts, the mitigation measures
prescribed and a discussion of resultant levels
of significance after mitigation.)
1/11/90
7904n/2621/017 -3-
(2) "Such changes or alterations are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency
and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have
been adopted by such other agency or can and should be
adopted by such other agency."
With regard to Transportation and
Circulation in the project vicinity, all impacts, including
cumulative plus project impacts, to streets and
intersections can be mitigated to acceptable levels except
for the eastbound ramp at the Weir Canyon Road/Riverside
Freeway interchange. The Riverside Freeway (SR-91) falls
under the jurisdiction of the State Department of
Transportation or Caltrans.
(3) "Specific economic, social, or other
considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or
project alternatives identified in the Final EIR," with the
Statement of Overriding Considerations. The following
discussion identifies the various alternatives considered
in the EIR, followed by an explanation of the rationale for
finding said alternatives infeasible.
NO Proiect/No Development Alternative. Under the No
Project/No Development Alternative the site would remain in its
present condition, vacant. The project site has been
previously graded for development and street and storm drain
improvements have been made pursuant to existing ML-Limited
Industrial and CL-Commercial Limited zoning and the current
Development Agreement in effect for the site. The reduction in
traffic demands and related air quality and noise impacts which
would result could make this the environmentally superior
alternative.
Auto Center/Dealership With Some Retail Alternative.
This alternative is similar to the proposed project, except
that under this alternative some of the commercial retail uses
(up to 11 acres) proposed for the Marketfaire would be replaced
with up to three (3) auto dealerships. This alternative would
consist of 121,000 square feet of commercial space for the auto
center, 150,000 square feet of retail/warehouse uses;
2 six-story office buildings (70,000 and 75,000 square feet);
and, 2 six-story office buildings (111,000 and 104,000 square
feet) for a total of 631,000 square feet of development (the
same as the proposed project). This alternative like the
proposed project would create 360,000 square feet of office
space. In addition, this alternative would generate 16,470
average daily trips, 9,400 less than the proposed project, most
occurring during a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
Auto Center/Dealership With No Retail Alternative.
Under this alternative auto dealerships would be developed on
1/11/90
7904n/2621/017 -4-
the majority of the site with the same office configuration as
in the proposed project. Approximately 322,000 square feet
with up to nine (9) dealerships would be developed. This
alternative would produce up to 9,800 average daily trips
representing a reduction from the proposed project of 160,270
average daily trips which in turn would reduce impacts on air
quality and traffic circulation because there would be less
traffic at a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Long-term air quality
impacts would improve slightly over the proposed project with
total emissions being reduced by approximately eight percent
(8%) over the proposed project.
Light Industrial Development Alternative. This
alternative assumes that existing zoning and entitlements
remain in effect for the 57-acre site and that the site is
developed in some combination of light industrial and
commercial uses. For the purposes of this discussion, a figure
of 422,000 square feet of light industrial and 120,000 square
feet of commercial space would be developed. 7,570 average
daily trips would occur with a reduction in a.m./p.m. peak hour
trips. Development under existing zoning would be most
compatible with the existing General Plan designation and, on
the basis of traffic, this alternative may be considered to be
environmentally superior to the proposed project. However,
noise and air quality impacts could be more significant
depending upon the nature of the industrial uses ultimately
introduced.
(d) Findings Relative to Infeasibilitv/Reiection of
Alternatives. The City Council finds that the alternatives are
infeasible or less desirable than the project proposed and
rejects the various alternatives for the following reasons:
(1) The No Project/No Development Alternative
would eliminate the project's contribution toward the
funding of regional transportation improvements. A
comparison of future conditions with the project and its
mitigation shows that required mitigation may create
improvements that benefit the region.
In addition, the site preparation which has
already occurred such as site clearing, grading and levee
building has altered the site's natural features. As such,
should this site remain vacant without continued clearing,
vegetation would ultimate be reestablished but would
consist primarily of vegetation representative of disturbed
habitats, i.e. weeds, and would do little to enhance
habitat values or the aesthetics associated with open space
in general and the adjacent Santa Ana River resource
management area in particular. Instead, the vacant site
may become a nuisance.
1/11/90
7904n/2621/017 -5-
(2) The Auto Center/Dealership With No Retail
Alternative would produce 9,800 average daily trips rather
than the 25,870 average daily trips generated by the
proposed project. However, since this alternative does not
propose any commercial retail uses, present and future
residents of the Hill and Canyon area, when looking for
commercial retail services, would conceivably have to drive
a longer distance to find those retail and commercial
services not supplied under this alternative. This
alternative then, would indirectly affect traffic and air
quality. In addition, Intersection Capacity Utilization
(ICU) for existing plus this alternative and cumulative
traffic has been calculated which shows that even with the
reduction in average daily trips, the Level of Service at
the eastbound $R-91 Freeway ramps would still be LOS E
during the evening peak hours which is the same condition
as under the proposed Project.
(3) The Auto Center/Dealership With Some
Commercial Retail Alternative would generate 16,470 average
daily trips also occurring at a.m. and p.m. peak hours as
does the proposed project. In both this alternative and
the preceding alternative, additional signage (elevated
signs for each dealership visible from the freeway would be
proposed) and the outdoor display areas may increase the
amount of light and glare which may adversely impact the
surrounding residential areas. In addition, this
alternative would have a similar impact to traffic and air
quality as the proposed project. The cumulative effect of
this project and cumulative projects in the area would
exceed the federal standard of 9.0 ppm of carbon monoxide
just as the proposed project would. This alternative would
also have a similar impact on the eastbound freeway ramps
as the proposed project. Finally, as in the alternative
just discussed, when looking for commercial retail
services, residents will have to drive farther to find
those retail and commercial services not supplied under
this alternative so that this alternative would indirectly
affect traffic and air quality.
(4) The Light Industrial Development Alternative
represents a tradeoff in terms of traffic, noise and air
quality impacts. Based on these considerations, trip
reductions to this destination could make this a superior
alternative to the project. However, as discussed
previously, as the Hill and Canyon Area of Anaheim
continues to grow with residential neighborhoods, the types
of commercial retail uses proposed in the pending project
become destination land uses and as such will be built
either at this site or at a point farther away than this
site. This alternative may then be considered to have an
indirect adverse impact on the region because although
1/11/90
7904n/2621/017 -6-
destination trips to the site would be reduced, destination
trips for goods and services not supplied under the
proposed project would still take place at a different
location and thus may be offsetting. In addition, noise
and air quality impacts could be greater depending upon the
nature of the industrial uses ultimate introduced.
(e) Therefore, the City Council further determines
that the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable
environmental impacts, and pursuant to the provisions of
Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the following
Statement of Overriding Considerations is adopted.
(1) The benefits of the project have been
weighed against the unavoidable adverse environmental
impacts and pursuant to Section 15093 of the State CEQA
Guidelines, the occurrence of the significant environmental
impacts identified in EIR 289 as set forth above, may be
permitted without further mitigation due to the overriding
considerations enumerated below.
To the extent that any impacts (including without
limitation, cumulative impacts) attributable to the
proposed project remain unmitigated, such impacts are
acceptable in light of the overriding social, economic, and
other considerations set forth herein. The project
alternatives set forth in the EIR are infeasible for these
reasons and less desirable than the proposed project.
The following social, economic and other
considerations outweigh the unmitigated impacts and justify
approval of this project.
(A) Jobs and Economic Growth. Construction
and operation of the 45-acre Marketfaire project and the
12-acre office project would create numerous construction
and construction-related jobs in the short-term as well as
a variety of office and retail jobs under the long-term
operation of the project. The unmitigated impacts are
justified by the need to create jobs and provide for
economic growth in the City. The creation of additional
permanent jobs will indirectly create an increased demand
for goods and services within the City, thus providing for
employment opportunities and contributing to the overall
economic growth and well-being of the City.
In addition to creating jobs, the
project will also serve the social and economic needs of a
growing community in Anaheim's Hill and Canyon Area by
providing retail shopping opportunities as well as a
theater complex close to existing and proposed
neighborhoods.
1/11/90
7904n/2621/017 -7-
(B) Transportation/Circulation. Further,
the City Council finds that the unmitigated impacts to the
eastbound ramps to the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) are
justified by the benefits of the project, and recognizes
that such impacts are only temporary in nature because of
projects planned by other agencies, such as the Eastern
Transportation Corridor, HOV lanes on SR-91, as well as
on-going street and intersection improvements funded on a
cumulative basis by a variety of projects in the vicinity
in both the cities of Anaheim and Yorba Linda. Development
fees will be applied toward the construction of
improvements needed throughout the vicinity. A review of
Table 3 in Section 3.2 of the Addendum, page 8,
(Exhibit A), demonstrates the improvements in traffic
operation produced by the proposed mitigation measures in
the vicinity of the project.
(C) Air Oualitv. Notwithstanding the
mitigation measures and other conditions which are imposed
on this project, EIR No. 289 identifies emissions of air
pollutants from vehicular traffic which will be generated
by development of the site and concludes that although the
cumulative effect of projects in the study area slightly
exceed federal standards (CO emissions of 9.05 ppm versus
9.0 ppm), the project's contribution to localized CO
emissions is not significant in itself. Nevertheless,
measures for lessening the project-related and cumulative
impacts have been incorporated into the Mitigation
Monitoring Program (Exhibit B).
2. The City Council hereby makes and adopts the foregoing
Findings of Fact and the foregoing Statement of Overriding
Considerations and the Addendum (Exhibit A) and the Mitigation
Monitoring Program (Exhibit B) relating to the environmental
impact of the Marketfaire project. Based on the foregoing
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations,
the City Council hereby finds that potential impact to the
environment, including project related and cumulative impacts
resulting from implementation of the project are addressed in
Subsequent EIR No. 289 under the following headings: Land
Use/Relevant Planning, Transportation/Circulation, Air Quality,
Acoustic Environment, Services and Utilities, Visual and
Aesthetic Resources, Hydrology, and Recreation and Open Space.
Positive impacts and those impacts which can be mitigated to a
level of insignificance with the incorporation of the
recommended mitigation measures as set forth in the attached
Mitigation Monitoring Program (Exhibit B) include land use,
acoustic environment, services and utilities, visual and
aesthetic resources, hydrology, recreation and open space.
With the proposed mitigation measures, all identified
significant adverse impacts of the project are considered
mitigated to a level of insignificance, except for the
following:
1/11/90
7904n/2621/017 -8-
(i) The project Level of Service (LOS) for the SR-91
Freeway eastbound ramps for cumulative plus project
conditions will be at a LOS E at p.m. peak hours. This
condition, which is partially mitigated by the proposed
improvements, is not fully mitigated, and
(ii) Air quality emissions at the SR-91 Freeway
eastbound ramp at Weir Canyon Road exceed the federal
standard of 9.0 ppm for carbon monoxide for existing,
existing plus project and cumulative conditions.
Based on the foregoing, the City Council finds and determines
that the project will have a significant effect upon the
environment.
3. The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation
Monitoring Program in the aforementioned Exhibit B.
4. As to each of the significant environmental effects
identified in Section 2 of this Resolution which are not
eliminated or substantially lessened, the City Council hereby
adopts the foregoing Statement of Overriding Considerations
described in Section 1.
5. City staff is hereby directed to file a Notice of
Determination with the County Clerk of the County of Orange
pursuant to the provisions of Section 21152 of the Public
Resources Code and the State EIR Guidelines adopted pursuant
thereto.
The foregoing Resolution No. __was regularly introduced
and adopted at a meeting of the City Council for the City of
Anaheim duly held on the 2~ day of January , 1990.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of Januarv ,
1990.
ATTEST:
LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK
1/11/90
7904n/2621/017 -9-
CLE~
STATE OF CALIFO~IA )
COUN~ OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ~EIM )
I, LEONO~ N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of An~eim, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 90R-36 was introduced and adopted at a regular
meeting provided by law, of the City Council of the City of Anaheim held on
We 23rd day of January, 1990, by the following vote of the members thereof:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Daly, Ehrle, Ka~ood, Pickler and Hunter
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL ME~ERS: None
~D I ~RTHER certify that the Mayor of the City of An~eim signed said
Resolution No. 90R-36 on the 24th day of January, 1990..
IN WITNESS MEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the
City of Anaheim this 24th day of January, 1990.
CITY CLE~ OF THE CITY OF ~AHEIM
(SEAL)
I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that
the foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 90R-36, duly passed and
adopted by the Anaheim City Council on January 23, 1990.
CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Leonora N. Sohl , City Clerk of the City Council of
the City of Anaheim, hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 90R-36was duly and regularly passed and adopted
by the City Council at a meeting thereof, held on the 2~rd day
of3anuary , 1990.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
the seal of the City of Anaheim this 2Q~h day of 3anuary ,
1990.
City Clerk
1/11/90
7904n/2621/017 -10-
~,~TO: Nancy Ferguson ~
FROM: · Sid lindmark
RE: Executive S, lmmary/SAVl Ranch Business Park - Anaheim: Addendum to
DEIR No. 289
DATE: November 17, 1989
PROJECT HISTORY
The environmental documentation for the proposed Marketfaire at ;,n,hehn project
includes the initial SAVI Ranch B~l~ness Park DBIR (lune 1988), SAVI Ranch Business
Park - Anaheim: Final E1R (September- 1988) and the Addendum to the DEIR, which
is currently before the PI,nnlng Commission for review.
An addendum was prepared to addr~.ss any changed environmental impacts and
recommended mitigation measures related to the revised project. The Marketfaire at
Anaheim project proposes commercial uses onsite for portions of the project area
evaluated in the Init!~! Draft EIR, when corninertial, office and retail/warehouse were
previously proposed. The initial Draft EIR also.evaluated several project alternatives,
one of which was slmi[ar to the proposed project. Since the Final FIR was not certified
b~cause the project uses were revised, it is now necessar~ to consider the entire
environmental doc~,mentatlon; Draft EIR, Final EIP.. and Addendum for the revised
project.
The .'.mi,'Qal Draft I~IR included an extensive traffic ~n.lysis of all project alternatives,
prowcling a thorough assessment of project traffic impac~ in the. project vicinity. A new
traffic study was prepared for the Marketfaire at Anaheim proleer to more specifically
address the projea impacts in ill existing and projected future environment. To assure
that potential tr~c impaas of the entire $a~i Ranch Business Park area are properly
evauated, the remaining areas outside of the Marketfaire project willfin the Savi Ranch
Business Park - Anaheim boundaries were also included.
The revised traffic mitigation measures, resulting from the new traffic study prepared in
2une 1989 by Kunzman & Associates (traffic engineers), Included in the Addendum
provides for the widening of Weir Canyon Road and all other required associated
improvements required for the project. The spedtic traffic mitigation measures proposed
· arc listed in the Inventory of Mitigation Measures, number 6 - 13.
EXHIBIT A
PLANNING · URBAN DESIGN · ENVIRONMI~N'I'AL EVALUATION · MARKET & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS · ENTITLEMENT
18012 SKY PARK CIR · iRVINE CA 92714 · 714/26~-8820 FAX 714/261-2128 · IRVINE · SAN DIEGO · SAN FRANCISCO
P, ECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES
The Addend~m to DEIR No. 289 has been circulated to all city departments and th¢i~
comments and concerns have been incorporated into the environmental analysis and
recommended mitigation measures. Appendix C: The Inventory of Mitigation Measures,
included in the addendum, lists all npplicahie initial mitigation measures identified in the
/n/tial Draft EIR, revisions of prior mitigation measures in the Draft EIR when a greater
specificity was required for the Ma~ketfalre project, and several new mitigation measures
recommended for the Marketfalre project. A total of £dty-three (53) mitigation measures
are required for the project.
¥/ith the proposed mitigatiom, all identified sign~6cant adverse impacts of the project are
co~idered mitigaled to a level of insign~6cance. However, the projected level of service
for $R-91 eastbound ramps for cumulative conditions is unacceptable (Level of Service
E). This condition, wh/ch is part/ally mitigated by the proposed improvements, is not
fully mitigated.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Since the addendum was prepared and drculated ~o city staff, additional techn/cal
information was completed which is consistent with the required mitigation measures.
The site plan has aho been further revised to incorporate concerns raised by city staff.
The new information wh/ch is included in the staff report includes the following items:
1. A revised site plan (F. xhibit 1) which reduces the total building square
footage proposed onsite from 377,650 sf to 351,850 sf; which results from
reducing and relocating the two commercial shop buildings between Major
2 and the theater.
2. The revised site plan indicates 2,199 parking stalls are provided, which
equates to an overall supply of 6.2/1,000 sf.
A final grading plan (Exhibit 2) has been submitted which refines'the mass
gradLug OhSitc. K. W. Lawler & Associates (dvil engineers) has indicated
the proposed final grading ohsitc is balanced, wilh 68,000 cubic yards of cut
and 64,000 cubic yards of fill. With shrinkage, the quantities would balance.
. This submittal responds to Mitigation No. 49 and no significant adverse
environmental impacts are anticipated with the recommended mitigation
measures included in the addendum.
4. The grading plan from K. W. Lawier & Associates identifies the relocated
access road for the access easement to the Southern California Edison
towers located ohsitc. Retaining walls are also indicated along the toe of
the Caltrans slope at the southerly potdon of the property. The project will
not adversely impact the purposes of the easement.
$. The November 13 correspondence from K- W. Lawler 3c Associates (Exhibit
3) identifies the existing drainage facilties ohsitc, identifies their location,
and improvements recommended by cily staff. The earthem channel in the
westerly portion of the site will be replaced with an underground storm
drain system- All subsequent design refinements are subject to the r~view
and approval of the City Engineer.
6. Th~ Lawlet correspondence referenced above also snmmarizes the existing
sewer lines ohsitc and indicated all sanitary sewer plan~ for the project will
be prepared in accordance with City and Omge County Sanitation District
standards.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the latest submittals, discussicons with city staff, review of the euviornmental
analysis and recommended mitigation measures, no additional mitigation me~'ures are
proposed to those included in the Inventory of Mitigation Measures in the addendum.
With thesi mitigation measures, all identified potcntlal environmental impacts of the
project are considered adequate to reduce all potential ezlvlronmellta] impacts of the
project to a level of insignificance.
Attachments
2832 WALNUT AVENUE- STE. A- TUSTIN' OA' 92680 714'730.0401
,,
November 13, 1989
Ms. Nancy Fergueson
Assistant Planner
City of Anaheim
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, California 92803
Subject: Harkstraits at Anaheim ,
Proposed Conditions to Environmental Impact Report
No. 289
Dear Nancy:
Outlined below are an expanded project description and
proposed conditions to the subject Environmental Impact
Report No. 289 currently being reviewed by the City of
Anaheim. We are presenting this information in an effort to
satisfy the concerns identified by Art Dew and Mark Komoto of
the Engineering Division.
1. ~ydrology
The ms-built grading plan prepared by Keith Companies
and approved by the City Engineer on September 6, 1988
(GP-1276) indicates three existing improved drainage
facilities (a 7' x ?' box culvert located st the
easterly portion of the property, a 60".CMP storm drain
located at the westerly portion of the property, and a
60" RCP storm drainage system in Pullman Street). The
drainage facilities located at the easterly project
boundary and in Pullman street drain directly through
the existing levee into the' Santa Aria River and require
no further improvement (see Exhibit eA"). The existing
60" C~P at the westerly portion of the site currently
outlets into an earthen channel that crosses the site
and re-enters an existing 63" RCP exiting through the
levee into the Santa Ana River. This facility will be
improved to convey storm flows in an underground storm
drain system and to intercept the majority of the on-
site drainage (see Exhibit "B") to the satisfaction of
. the City Engineer.
EXHIBIT 3
150-15
City of Anaheim
November 13, 1989
Page Two
The proposed storm drain plans for this development
shall be designed to avoid conflicts between any
existing or proposed storm drain systems' and the
proposed buildings. Final development plansTM shall
include storm drain alignments (vertical and horizontal)
and storm drain easements satisfactory to the City
Engineer.
It is understood that the ~above referenced as-built mass
grading plans were based upon an Orange County Flood
control District Hydrology Manual wh%ch has been
subsequently updated. The proposed development .storm
drain plans shall include a updated hydrology study in
accordance with the latest edition of the orange County
Flood Control Hydzology Hanual.
The e~:isting site drainage as shown on the above
referenced as-built mass grading plans is predominantly
to the west, with approximately eleven acres draining.
easterly to Pullman. The proposed development plans
: redirect approximately six acres of this flow back
toward the west. This change reduces the flows entering
the existing facilities within Pullman Street, and thus,
no changes in this facility are required. The westerly
~ flows will further be directed northerly to the mai~
access drive, where they will enter a proposed storm
drain system conveying the flows to the existing 63" RCP
at the westerly property boundary. The on-site flows,
_ combined with the existing flows from the 60" CMP, will
equal approximately 170 cfs as they reach the existing
63" RCP. This existing facility is adequate to eccept
these flows and no modification will be necessary.
2. Grading
The site is currently graded in accordance with the as-
built mass grading plan prepared by the Keith Companies
~ ' and approved by the City Engineer on September 6, 1988
(GP-1276).
~
City of Anaheim
November 13, 1989 - ·
Page Three
The proposed development shall result in minor
modifications to the as graded landform in order to
prepare building pads and accomplish adequat~ site
drainage. This modification will create approximately
68,000 cubic yards of cut with a maximum depth of 40
feet, and approximately 64,000 cubic yards of fill with
a maximum depth of 18 feet,. thust yielding a balanced
site,
Ret~ining walls are anticipated &long the toe of the
Celttans slope st the southerly portion of the property,
and various other locations, with heights ranging from 0
to 22 feet.
The project precise grading plan sh&11 include retaining
wall details, shall be prepared in accordance with City
standards, and shall meet with the spproval of the City
Engineer.
. 3. Sewer
The site is currently served by an existing 8" sewer
installed in Pullman Street flowing northerly to Crystal
Drive and continuing egsterly to an existing Orange
County Sanitation District trunk sewer in Weir Canyon
Road. In addition, there exists a 10" and 12" sewer ~n
Crystal Drive which also flows to the County trtmk
sewer. Either or both of these two existing systems may
be utilized to accommodate the proposed project
effluents.
Sanitary sewer plans for the proposed development shall
be prepared in accordance with City standards and shall
meet with the approval of the City Engineer.
150-~5
e~ty o~ Anaheim
November 13, 1989
Page Four
4. Easements
The site currently has several easements encumber. ing the
lot. The easements for the Edison transmissio~ lines
and all storm drain easements are to remain and .are
honored by the current site plan. The existing Edison
easement within the theeter area is to be relocated with
the consent of Edison. The existing access road
easement to Celttans is currently being abandoned and
relocated to corresond with a proposed drive isle as
shown on the site plan. This.new location will be to
the satisfaction of both.Caltrans and Edison.
Please be assured that it is The Koll Company's and CSA Real
Estate Development's intent to develop a f~rst-class retail
center and to satisfy all engineering requirements related to
the Marketfaire site.
Please contact ~e should you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Kerry W. Lawlet
xc: Ron Keith
Gary Johnson'
Marshall Krupp
Steve Layton
Art Dew
Mark Komoto
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURES AFTER MITIGATION
L~n~ Use
The proJ.ct. Including t&~ of the
·ent center. lhe proposed project posed project chill proMIda
I~o~ever, the project ~JJJ not
Oevelop~nt of the project kl)} Act
to increase Incre~ntally. l~actt
tel*ted to traffic and nolte gent-
occelerattng further d~velopMnt on
[~e propored project viii glperite The proposed p~oJect ~ltl require
ductIon o( cutletlye projects vehicular clrcolitloa, parking
(
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER MITIGATION
IMPACTS MITIC~TION MEASURES .ltlgsted to a I~vel of 'losl~nUS-
VSsual and Aesthetic gesource~s .~ PriOr to ~pproval o~ site develoP-
~ at 1ant I~ I~lvtdual ~velO~
hill ~ required
icttvlt~ which ulll ~ repliced by the P"~L_Sl~.u~I ~fer bet~e~
the p~J .... ~at st~dirds
developehr. U Is. Site
II~s for t~ project
developed this minimize viSUal
I~Cts to surr~tno I~ useS.
Hltlgited [o I level of Jnsl~nlfl-
bcen& levee c~st~tl~ oleg the C6nce,
i portion of the project ~rea uis
~reaS ~lch voutd be flo~ed during be so ~ted In omp
a 100-year flood.
Recreation a~ iegetitl~ i~ landscaping shall be
As with other develop*nS In the prowled ~ the edge of the project
vicinity, portions or the proposed rovJding · ~ffer beckon
project ', be visible to S-- ~"pr~,,' iF*, ,d ,dJ,cemt open
rionil uses in the idJicent Sinto spaces.
~6 River corridor.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURES AFTER MITIGATION
· ~ Hater Service - Hater coMerration
required by state law and epplJcs~
hie pJLdbtng CO,eS.
~dsteueter ~rvice - The employment
uork t~ reduce the &~unt of
- ~rvJc8 to the proJKt ulJJ be
accorda~e MiLk utility c~anX pol-
icies ~d i~tensl~ rules on fill
gy c~ervl~l~ m~sures uttl be
J~corporitld into t~. project
desip.
Lures .ill h dfllg~d In iceord-
er the ~ifo~ Building Code
considerilion shall ~ siren to
findings contithed Ifi prevtous
dttilJtd 9eotechnlc~l a~ soils
enginering reports. ~dergrouAd
lines set forth In the undergr~nd
ill fire c~a requlre~nts and
shill be subject to ptrmlt approval
IFM the Orange C~nty Health Care
Agency. ~avJro~ntd) NeeJib Depart-
Mnt-~aste ~nag~nt Section,
U~erground Tank f~ogrdl. SILt
deve)a~nt Standirds for the pro-
Ject shall ~ develop~ that
L~rety.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURES AFTER MITIGATION
Air Resources
Construction and per.anent usage of Compliance kith SCAOIG Rule to3 HiStfated to s level of Insl§nlll-
the proposed project ulll result In (fugitive dust e~ltslo~s) .Ill rance,
both short- and long-term IncreMn- assist In mitigating the lapact of
tal air quality I~acts. [missions consL~ctl~-genereted dust genera-
~JJ[ be produced during c~$truc- Sion. Future proJeer uses ~l
stuns include eals~l~s Ir~ space tl~ ~ndited by SC~ i~ co~11-
and ~ater-heetlng devices and p~er once ~lth Orange County ~ard
of electricity for proposed develop-
een~. The proposed ~ra~ect ~ould
Increase total business pl~ emls-
SAVl K*nch Business Par~ and SRA
~6. Such Increases you,d
or county emissions Inventer~ for
the year
Acoustic Environone
Short-te~ l~acts ~lit occur as The pre~ect design should incurper-
building construction activities tta~ards ~111 be Mr. Construe-
proceed. Long-term acoustic i~acts fine activities sh~ld be limited
associated ~l[h poreanent usage of to ~eekdeys dur~n9 diyllgh~ hours.
the proposed project Inc]ude~ I) In ~dttl~, Site develo~nt stand-
project-generated vehicular traffic irds addressing sound attenuation
ustna ohslie and offsite roadways, icestic I~octs to surr~ndlng
land uses,
Services and Utildtiet
Development of the proposed project fire Service . The proposed project Pitifated to a level of Inslglnlf~-
would result in Insignificant .ill IKlude a .seer syste~ of sul. rance.
Increased dmsnds on fire, police, fielent Capacity and pressure for
waste disposal, electric, gas and future buildings .Ill con/urn with
telephone service. local fire safety building codes.
Human Health and Safety - ImpleMn- costs should be Incorporated Into
tation of the proposed project will the project.
people or property to seismic actl- Police Service o ProJect developer
vlty In the region. Potential ulll have so~e fiscal responsibii-
liquefaction and settlement hazards try for e proposed sltelllle police
~ay be present within the project lacility,
ATTACH~h... ~' 3
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
IMPACTS i MITIGATION MEASURES AFTER MITIGATION
£~nd
To I~plea~ent the project e gonetel lhe proposed project shall comply #ILlgered to I level of Inslgnlll-
project w111 further reinforce the to desl~ ~vl~, to itsare that
uses vithln SAVI iinch hslaetS nat. ~ltk c~ty of Or~n9e
F~r~. Pi~s ~d hcre~tt~ to ensure
meet center. the proposed project posed project shill provide for
Pilai Avenue to the ~rth. and to jec~ ~rlaeter it the river {evil
~pen space/recreatloo areas
~evtr. the project uttl not have
~ significant idverst
~evelop~nt of the project ~lll act
to Incraise Incr~ntai~y,
related to triffic ind oolse gene-
racron and ~y h~ve the I~act of
~cctler~ttng further deveJop~nt on
surrounding Jan~oldlng%.
lr~nsportltlon/~lrculatton
The proposed project .Ill etntr~t. lb. proposed project .ill require
*ppro~lmdteiy 2~,~70 daily trips. Interte~tl~ l~ro~nt% it fieJr NitleaSed to i level pt Inil~nt/t-
lhe proposed prpfect mould not Canyon Road and SO*91 freeway clare.
st~ntftclntly cn~nqe th~ quietly of r~s. Site developer stdndards
operations in the ertl. lhe loire- addressing pedestrian tiremilLion.
ductIon of c~lative projects vehicular circulitl~, pirkleg
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER MITIGATION
MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACTS Nltlgated to e level of' tnslgntflo
Visual and Aesthetic Resourc~ .... Prior to spPrevit of site divetop- csnce.
" Beat plons for tndlvldust develop-
portions of the project sitedill be Bent propOsitS, irchttecturll, lendo
scape and --'-d. Native vege-
v~stble from the, Riverside FreedaY. other design features
residential areas and open spice mill be tnco?_O~-~ consist of for-
surrounding the site. Short-term tatlea screone-~
visual lipacts Include construction esteSIon along the oarthere edge of
activity which will be replaced by the project site shall be required
the Iong-te~l I~picts of urb.n to
the project e,~ - -
development. useS. Site devsIol~ont StinGarCS
. .~.~ minimize visual
devilopen
I~lcts to surrOUnding land uses.
HIttgited ~O I terel of Inslgntft-
H dro..,Z.....~2,,9~ Recent 1even construction sling the canoe.
A portion of t~e project area was Snots /~ae River his re~ved the
previously In the limits defined as
areas ~tch would he flooded during ski free ~he flood zone end dill
a [00*year flood,
Recreation a~ ¥egetstton and landscaping shat1 be Mitigated to I levei of toslgnlfl-
As dlth other development In the ovtded ea the edge of ths project
vicinity, portions of the proposed pr ..,a~n. ~ buffer between
Ire pry.,., ·
project may be visible to sme lbs 'proJsct ares and nd~lceot open
tinnil uses In the sdJscee~ ~nti SpiCes.
Ann River corridor.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFIC^~CE
IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURES AFTER MITIGATION
Uater ~f'vice,o ~eter ceaserYe[Jun
4ccord4~a utah utility c~y pol-
uJtb t~ CiIi(O~i4 ~JJc ~ltt-
Incorporoted late, ~ project
~11c ~llJtlls C~lsslon.
H~in XeiI~ ~d ~ifety - All struc-
tures bill ~ deslg~d Jn iceord-
er the' unffom ~J~dtng C~e 4nd
enginering repels. ~erg~nd
fr~ the OreriCe C~nt~ ~alth Care
~nt-~iste ~ao~nt SeCtion,
Underground Tint Proofs. Site
Ject shdll ~ developed that mlnl-
mt~e i~ictJ to h~n health I~
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
IMPACTS I MITIGATION MEASURES AFTER MITIGATION
Air Resources
Construction and permanent usage of Compliance with SEA014) Rule 403 HiStgored to a level of Insl~nlll-
the proposed project will result.In [fugitive dust e~lsstons) will concm.
both short- and long-term Increnee- assist In mitigating the lapact of
tal air quality lapacts. Emissions construction-generated dust genera:
will he produced during c~struc- tf~. Future project uses ~111 c~
sion activltlks, Stationary emls- ply fully ~lth ~l ~les ~4 ~gula-
stuns Include emissions gr~ space tl~s ~ndated by SC~ a~
an~ ~ater-hea:lng devices and p~er once with Orange ~unty ~ard
plant emissions from the generatt~ latlo~ ~-604.
of electricity for proposed de~elop-
cent. 1he proposed project
Increase total business park eats-
stuns prevlousl~ calculated for the
SA~I Ranch Business POf~ and san
X6. Such Increases would
ho.ever, be significant within the
conSex[ of the tot*l proJect~
or county emissions inventory ~or
the year
Acoustic Envtro~ent
Short-te~ impacts will occur as The ~roJect design should Incurpar- Insignificant adverse
building construction activities sta~ards ~111 be ~t. Construe-
proceed. Long-term acoustic t~acts tl~ activities sh~id be Itelted
associated wt[h permanent usage of to eee[da~s durtn~ daylight hours.
the proposed project lncl~e: l) I~ ~dttton~ site developer stand-
pro~ect-genera~ed vehicular traffic ards ~ddtessIn~ so~d atte~atlon
us~nq ohslie and offsite r~d~axs, shall be developed that elateItc
acestic I~acts to surr~ndlng
land uses.
Services end Utilities
Oevelopnent of the proposed project Fire Service - The proposed project Pitigored to a level of insiglnlfl-
would result In Insignificant will Ioclude a water system of sue- canoe.
Increased dmands on fire. police, flctent capacity end pressure for
voter syst~s, Nestneater, SOlid the necessary fire protection. All
waste disposal, electric. gas and future buildings will conform with
telephone service. local fire safety building codes.
Rel'hursement for re-occurring
Human Health and Safety - laplemon- costs should be Incorporated Into
tation ol the proposed project will the project.
result In the Increased exposure of
people or property to seismic actl- Police Service - ProJect developer
vity in the region. Potential ulll have suave fiscal respon$1bil-
liquefaction and settlenonS hazards lty for a proposed satellite police
may be present within the project facility.
~QA A~iQR: Subsequent BIR 289 .
Development of a commercial retail (Marketfaire) and office pro~ect on 57 acres of a 277-acre
ErQiect De_~ription~ site known as the SAVI R.anch Business Park.
SAVI Ranch Associates
CSA Real Estate DevelOpment and ~ho loll Company
the Santa Ann River,
rE~l~ect Location~ North of SR-9I (Riverside Freeway), west og Heir Canyon Road, south of
accessible from SAV! Ranch par~Way
EIR ~289, GPA ~271; Reclassl~lcatiOn J89-90-22~ ~sivor of Code Requirement, CUP #3206, D.A. 83-02
~itv~Acti~-gi (Restated an~ amended), D.A* 89-02 and City Council review of Roclassification, Code waiver and
CUP.
Responsible Agency
~esolutiou NO.I Mitigation MeasureS ~o Monitor - -
__ Ti~lPg ~ Planning Department
~ public ~orks Department
Prior to issuance of Building and landscape plans for conformance with the city'a
building permits devolopmen~ standards and regulations and policies of the
Anaheim Redovol°L~nent Agency shall be ILkmitred, Said plans Redevelopment A9ency
shall include the following meanures~
a. ~ecilities should be clustered and uses linked to promOte
pedestrian circulation from one facility to another.
h. Site development plans shall provide for safe an~ efficient
vehicle and pedestrian access.
prior to issuance of Review of site and landscape submittals to assure that offsAte plenning Department
building permits visual impacts of the project are minimized.
and
prior to issuance of Review of the ~ro~ec~ for inclusion o~ an urban edge treatment parks, Recreation
occupancy permits to buffer the pro~eC~ from the adjacent Santa Ana River natural Co~unity Services Dept.
open space, Yorba Regional Park and the regional trail system. Planning Department
This program shall include landscaping along the northern County Environmental
pro~eCt perimeter adjacent to the river~ with native tree and Management AgenCy
shrub species consisten~ with recommendations contained in the
Santa Aria River Resource ~4an~emon~ Plan. The City of Anaheim
shall review and approve the final landscape plan for the area.
Responsible Agency
~Q Monitor -
Measure
Timing
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCUlATION Public works Department
Implement an Improvement program proposed by Traffic
of the
Prior to issuance of
first building permit Engine~ring to widen ~air Canyon Road to six lanes north
Riverside Ireeva~ and restripe the SAVX Ranch parkway
northbound off-ramp and southbound on-ramp to two lanes. #air
Canyon Road vlli reinire widening to the following sinbum
a. From the Santa LuaRiver bridge to the southerly gores of
SAVI Ranch access road, widen to 96 gout plus sidewalks on
both sides, This viii accommodate six travel lanes, bike
lanes and a 4'-0# wide ~edian island.
b. From the southerly gores of SAV! Ranch access road to the
westbound $R-91 freeway off-ramp widen to. 112 foot pins
sidewalks on both sides to accom~aodate ~ight travel lanes,
bike lanes and &'-0' ~edian islaa~.
c. Fro~ the westbound SR-91 freeway o~£-ramp to Santa
Canyon Road widen to 10& ~eot plus sidewalks on both sides
to accordate six travel lanes, bike lanes
lslan~.
a. Rs traffic el9~al nor left-turn provision shall be
permitted either initially or in the future for ingress or
egress to or free any portion of SkVX Ranch property at
Weir Canyon Roa~.
Fire Department
Prior to issuance of Review and approve the internal circulation for emergancy
building permit access. .
Prior to issuance of Intersection improvements for cumulative trazfic conditions Public works Department
building permit shall be approved and implemented.
public works Department
Prior to issuance of Traffic signals shall be installed at the following
occupancy permit for intersections and shall be interconnected to the Clty's
first building signal
Weir Canyon Road/in Palma AvenUe
Wain Canyon Road/Route 91 freeway WB ramps
Walk Canyon Road/Route 9i freeway ~B Tamps
Responsible Agency
Timipg Measure ~p Monitor
Prior to issuance of Applicant shall Install a median on ~eir Canyon Road from SR-91 Public Works and Parks
first occupancy permits to Le Palma Avenue, Depar~men~
Prior to issuance of Review t/~e slCe plan for ~he following ~esures~ Planning and P~llc Work~
pedestr~veh~cle couflACCS. NO ~dest=~ crossing
be allowed on Weir C~yon road.
b. ~r~fflc aisles, which s~ul~ not oxcoo~ 400 foot, shoul~
have 8uffic~onC turns so ~t "~ough street" effects do
noZ exist. ~ng m~etches of ~tfa~gh~ Zravelway invite
higher a~eeds.
relatively free tlow o~ vehicular trgflc wl~ ~o
constrictions.
d. Aisles should be placed so ~a~ 1~
Prior to i~uance of Review ~e si~e pl~ for couform~ce to ~e ~011owing Planning Dep~r~en~
a. Access roa~a ~d/or driveways for ~o
developeate should be located a~ loas~ ~00 ~ee~ apart.
Driveways ~o retail co~rclol should be curb-rotur~
wt~ at leas~ 35-Ioo~ radius. Co~rclal driveways shall
be constructed to ~o satisfaction of ~e Ctt~ Traffic
Engineer using Cl~y St~daFd 137 as a re~oronco.
Driveways should ~ at loa8~ 28 fee~ w~de,
30 ~o 35 fee~ wade. Co~orcial driveways shell be
constructed ~o ~e satisfaction of
Engineer using Clt~ St~dard 137 as a reference.
d. The firs~ parking ~Call which ~s ~rpendlcular to a
driveway, or first aisle ~cture, should be at least 20
fee~ beck fr~ ~e curb.
e. Join~ sate access wi~ ad}~en~ sates should be encouraged
In the si~e ply.
f. L~dscape piecings and signs should be lAmA~ed An height
In the vicinity Of pro}oct driveways to ansu~e ~ood
Timipg Measure
[thin 6 mouths after The CIty Traffic Engineer shall determine, whether a traffic Traffic Engineer
Parkway ~nd Pullman Street, based on a study to be su13ml, tted by
the developer.
~IE
u~ing period of The impact of ehortotarm construction-generated amissions shall Planning Department
one,ruction be reduced to the extent feasible by the followin~
a. Scheduling construction and grading around the
eu~or months, by periodically sprinkling with water, and
by paving the area proposed faT'parking as soon as possible;
b. Phasing and schodulin~J construction activities ~o level
emission peaks~
c. Discontinuing construction during socomi stage smo~ alerts.
?~ior to issuance of ~eviow and approve the gr~lngplan amlmonitor compliance with City Enqineer
~ading permits these measures.
Prior to issuance el Develol~aent shall comply with all $CA~D rules a~d requlations
occupancy permit [or for co~ne~cial and office uses tncluding~ Department and OCTD
first building
a. Project shall support a full-t~no Transportation Systems
)eanagomont coordinator to oversee a TSM progr~ to
and coordinate employor-provided ~ncentAves.
b. Employer-provided incentives for ridesharing, preferential
carpeel parking, modified work schedules such as
'flex-tiM," and utilization of public trsnsportation~
Developer-provided bus turnouts installed per requests by
the Oranqe County Transit District and the
Knginaer, bus shelters, bicycle racks7
d. Energy-conserving itrucZuraa, heating/cooling Systems,
lighting systems, appliances, etc. as required by the
Unifor~ Building Code and Title 24~ and,
o. The project proponent should encourage ~he use of bicycles
as an alternate mode of transportation to reduce air
Pollution, vehicular noise and vehicular traffic.
Responsible Agency
Timing Measure to Monitor
a. Vibration, heat, glare or electrical disturbances
detectable by human Senses without the aid o~ instruments
beyond the boundaries of each lot or lots except ~or a
temporary construction
t b. Air pollution and odors detectable by the human senses
without the aid of instruments beyond the boundaries
each lot or lots.
c. Kmisslons of any kind, whether detectable by human senses
or state-of-the-art lastrussets which spill beyond the
boundaries o~ a lot or lots end cause or have ~be ~otantial
to endanger the health, ~nd/or condition of human beings,
animals, vegetation o~ property.
which do not contom to city, county, state or
regulations ~nd standards,
Storage of wastes, chemicals or solvents which are
~ederal re~Juletion or standards nithaut the express
permission o~ the City o~ Anaheim.
Use of radioactive materials other than those used in
measuring, gauging and calibration devices.
g. Storage o~ lnfl~nable and explosive materials without
adsgusts safety and fire-fighting devices approved by the
County Fire )4~rehal.
h. lnclnoration of any nature which is specifically prohibited.
Prior to issuance to Recycling progrmus to reduce disposal costs and impacts on ~aintenance Department
occupancy permit landfills will be implemented. Project design shall provide
space Zor recycling containers in close proxJ~nity to other
refuse containers.
AESTHETIC RESOURCES
Prior to issuance of Review building plans to assure that architectural design Planning Department
building permits themes are compatible with other developments in the
co~unity. Said CAdme shall integrate mass, height, materials,
colors, textures and character.
~.j~. W~ Responsible Agency
Measure
TimiPg p19nning
~ hnXX incorporate measures required by ~he
riot to issuance Of Planaiu~-Dapar~aen= .u 'Tii,-ao barriers,
ructu~al des~g~ ~e~-~- ~ -
~ st L~scap~ngpl~s ihall ~ 8~te°'
needed. plying
)wring construction Cons~ruc~ion activities 8~uld be l~ito~ to weekdays during
daMl~gh~ ~ur8 (e.g., 7 a.m. ~o 7 p.m.).
plying & Fire Departeat
)riot issu~Ca of Review utlll~ Pi~ ~ec~ion. ~1 ~u~u~l bulldl~a wzi
to ~o necessary %%~0 pro . ~. ~.
Review buildi~ pl~S for con~o~co wl~ wa~er conservation pl~ing Depa~e~t
Prior to issuance o~ measures including low water use plying ~lxtu~eS, lo~ use_
building permits automatic landscape ir~lga~i°n systemS, ~d d~o~ht-~oAer~
l~dsco~ vegetation* p~lic utilities Dept.
act wall be'in accord~ce wl~ ~eim
prior to issuance of Service to ~e p~l - -..-*..- Rules ~a Kegulati°as' . . ~d pla~i~g Dept.
p~lic Utilities vepar~e=~.~i'~asures. as ~e9~ea by TItAS
building permits ener~ conse~vo~- --
AppropriaCe . -- --~ 'n~o ~e project
24, will ~ incor~gau~ *
plying
, res wall be designed in accord~ce wi~ seAsSic
prior to issuance of ~1 s~ruc~u .... ~- Uniform Building Co~.~
buildin~ permits design prowLsLens o~ ~
nsXdera~Xon shall be given ~o findings contained An project
~*.. 1 ~d soils e~ineoring
~.~..~lca ' Planning Depar~ent
k s~orage shall a~ere
Undorgro~ t~ .... .~. ltle 23 Of S~to and Fire Depar~e~t
Prior to issuance Of e~ Zor~ w&~*-
law guidelines as.I ..... ~ 7 Heal~ ~d Safety Law.
building permits A~lnistrativo Code ~ec~ou v. -
Police pepar~ent
Prior to issuance of Revie~ the site pl~ ~ building
building permits during daylight ~d evening hourS. Departeat
Fire Depar~ent
Ongoing during operation ~o use 8hall be pormitto~ which p~oducoS ~ of ~o ~ollowing~ planning
Timing Measure to Monitor
ior to issuance of Review project lighting and signage plens. No light shall Planning Department
ilding permits direct'or deflect glare to streets, freeways, or ad}¢ uses
and r~ldgntia! properties. Special attent~ou shall be
provided to ensure ~hat Illumination shull not have e negative
environmental impact on existing or pro,seed residential
t developments and open space ereas surrounding ~ pro}act.
£or to issuance Of Review the landscape plan for harmony and integration of land Planning Departmeo~
ilding permits uses, an~architectural design.
,going operation of A property owners association shall provide regular Pl~,tng Department
~e pro}set maintenance, irrigation, fartills&ties, cultivation and tree
pruning for the project.
ago£~g operation of The outdoor storage of items including, but not limited to Pl~iug Departmen~
he Frogact wares, merchandise, ~ateriala, eiuipaeat, crates, bottles or
other similar items, %hall be adequately screened from view,
Landscape screening alone shall not he deemed sufficient.
riot to issuance of Open service bays associated with service facilities shall be Pl~lng Department
allying permits located in such a ma,~er as to minimiss their visual impact on
residential areas to the north and the freeway to the south.
The Planning Department shall review sites plans for those
provisions.
'flor to issuance of All outdoor trash and refuse storage shall be enclosed by a Planning Department
~uilding permits decorative block or masonry wall, ~d decorative solid gates at Maintenance Department
least six feet in height or one foot above the highest refuse
stored, and shall be located in an area that is screened from
public view.
Prior to Issuance of A signage program shall be submitted using the following Planning Department
ouilding permits/ongotn~ tritefiat No sign shall move, have visible moving parts, or
during project operation aimelate movement by means of fluttering, spinning or
reflective devices. Me sign shall have blanking or flashing
lights or other llluninating devices vhich have cha~lng light
intensity, brightness or color. In addition, no temporary
advertising devices shall be displayed at a height higher than
25 feet.
H;i~;~i~. v~ Resp~ ~ble Agency
~ res of~ 'the sign,
[~om either Ir.~e
All satellite ~ocOtV[~g an~e~S ~e ~o~[b[~e~ w[~[~ ~o
ocCUpancY permits a~k[ug [acili~ies_[°~-~-~e co~[~8~ p~lic ~o~kS Depar~en~
requ[ ..... -1 oZ ~e ~ency.. P_=k-. shall ~ pave, ~
written ~vu'~-- _ ~ -red. park~ ~a~-- . . _ f~ p~rCe18
located tn a se~'~ sur~a-e waters d~a~n~n~ _
so ~nc s ~ ~k~no spaces v~sible t~om
Mi31 ~0~ CF050 ~'~ ~ i~ mCCOT~CO WA~ ~
~oning ordin~CO ~o w ..... pla~tng Dep~r~ent
prior ~o i~suance o, O,,_.,ro., 1o.d'ng ''c~1'2;:c'~1y.~;::::~"~ ;~' ,o Rodovelopmen~ AgenCy
d intergo=onCe w[~ F~_ u...~c~nal Code. Of~-8~oo~ .
buildlug permits avo~ --=-ca wi~ ~o ~o~m ---- ~-~ed by 1~cOPing tO ~o
loadin~ facilf[ie~ mu.~ ''~--~red by ~e
p~lic Works
~ 1 s~t a f~nal grading ~d drs~nego
The ro~ec~ appl[c~ 8h~[_.. n eauired by ~o C[~y el
Prior ~o issuance of - P--- -ev~eW a~ each ~-- a- r _
grading permits ~eim, p~lic Works Depar~en~
by ~mplement[ng e~os~on con~rOl measures such as ~e tollow[ng~ ~d plain9 Depar~ent
Oi OfiS~to r~ofi away f~om ~e const~uc~[O~ 8~to~
Perimeter l~8gq ~
C,
d. Regular sp~inkliug o~ ezposed soils du~ing construction
phases ·