ARA2000-10RESOLUTION NO. ARA2000-10
RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
APPROVING ITS REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR THE RIVER VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
AND TRANSMITTING THE REPORT AND AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Anaheim, California (the "City Council") did
duly pass and adopt Ordinance No. 4463 on November 29, 1983, and did thereby adopt and approve
the Redevelopment Plan for the River Valley Redevelopment Project (the "Redevelopment Plan");
and
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan was amended by the City Council by Ordinance No.
5091, duly adopted and approved on January 23, 1990, which revised certain land use alternatives
within the Redevelopment Plan, and by Ordinance No. 5467, duly adopted and approved on
December 13, 1994, which revised certain time limitations within the Redevelopment Plan in order
to comply with certain amendments to the Community Redevelopment Law, California Health and
Safety Code sections 33000 et seq. (the "Community Redevelopment Law"); and
WHEREAS, the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") is considering the
adoption of a proposed amendment ("Amendment No. 3") to the Redevelopment Plan and has
prepared a proposed Amendment No. 3 therefore, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 33457.1 and 33352 of the Community Redevelopment
Law, to the extent warranted by a proposed amendment to a redevelopment plan, every
redevelopment plan submitted by a redevelopment agency to the legislative body shall be
accompanied by a report on the proposed redevelopment plan amendment which shall be made
available to the public prior to the Joint Public Hearing on the proposed amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency as
follows:
Section 1. The Agency hereby approves and adopts the Report to the City Council (the
"Report") on the Proposed Amendment No. 3 to the Redevelopment Plan for the River Valley
Redevelopment Project, in substantially the form of Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part
hereof by this reference.
Section 2. The Agency's Executive Director is hereby authorized and directed to
transmit the Report, the proposed Amendment No. 3, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit
"B" and incorporated herein by this reference, and any other documentation required for the Joint
Public Hearing on Amendment No. 3, to the City Council.
F:\DOCS~DEVSVCS'uRESOLUTN'0~CROB 30C
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12rhday of December, 2000.
' /r~ ' ~ncy
Chalrm~n. ~edevelo
Secretary
Anaheim Redevelopment Agency
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Agency Special Counsel
F:\DOCS~DEVSVCS\RESOLUTNhRCROB 30C
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
, Secretary to the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Anaheim Redevelopment
Agency held on the day of December, 2000, by the following votes:
AYES: AGENCY MEMBERS:
NOES: AGENCY MEMBERS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
F:\DOCS\DEVSVCSkRESOLUTN kRCROB30C
EXHIBIT A
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ON AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE RIVER VALLEY
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PREPARED FOR:
THE ANAHEIM REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
December 1, 2000
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEI~I
ON AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE RIVER
VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. REASONS FOR SELECTION OF THE PROJECT AREA 3
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PHYSICAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 5
IV. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 5
V. ELIlVIINATION OF BLIGHT CANNOT BE ACCOMPLISHED BY PRIVATE
ENTERPRISE ACTING ALONE 6
METHODS OF FINANCING THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT AREA 6
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
PLAN AND METHOD OF RELOCATION
ANALYSIS OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAN
7
7
THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION 7
SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE MEETINGS 8
REPORT ON CONFORMITY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THE
GENERAL PLAN 8
XII. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION 9
XIII. COUNTY BASE YEAR REPORT 10
XIV. NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACT REPORT 10
XV. ANALYSIS OF COUNTY BASE YEAR REPORT 10
Exhibit A: Preliminary Environmental Review
I. INTRODUCTION
This Report (the "Report") to the City Council of the City of Anaheim (the "City") on
Amendment No. 3 to the Redevelopment Plan (the "Plan") for the River Valley Redevelopment
Project (the "Project Area") was prepared for the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency")
pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law, California Health and Safety Code Sections 33000,
et seq., (the "Community Redevelopment Law"))
The Plan was originally adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. 4463 on November
29, 1983 in compliance with the requirements of the Community Redevelopment Law. Thereafter,
the Plan was amended by Ordinance No. 5091, duly adopted on January 23, 1990, which revised
certain land use alternatives within the Plan, and by Ordinance No. 5467, duly adopted on December
13, 1994, which revised certain time limitations within the Plan in order to comply with certain
amendments to the Community Redevelopment Law. The Agency is currently considering and
requesting that the City Council consider the adoption of an additional amendment to the Plan
("Amendment No. 3"). The purpose of the proposed Amendment No. 3 is to ensure that the Plan
conforms with the City's General Plan as required by Section 33331. The Agency has undertaken
the steps required by Sections 33450-33459.8 for the adoption of Amendment No. 3 and the purpose
of this Report is to provide the City Council with the information, documentation, and evidence
which the Agency is required to submit to the City Council along with the proposed Amendment No.
3.
Pursuant to Section 33457.1, to the extent warranted by Amendment No. 3, the Agency is
required to prepare the reports and information required by Section 33352 and make such reports and
information available to the public prior to the hearing on Amendment No. 3. Section 33352 requires
that every redevelopment plan submitted by a redevelopment agency to a legislative body shall be
accompanied by a report containing the following information:
The reasons for the selection of the project area, a description of the
specific projects then proposed by the agency, and a description of
how these projects will improve or alleviate the conditions described
in subdivision (b).
A description of the physical and economic conditions
specified in Section 33031 that exist in the area that cause the
project area to be blighted. The description shall include a list
of the conditions described in Section 33031 that exist within
the project area and a map showing where in the project the
conditions exist.
An implementation plan that describes specific goals and
objectives of the agency, specific projects then proposed by
the agency, including a program of actions and expenditures
proposed to be made within the first five years of the plan,
and a description of how these projects will improve or
alleviate the conditions described in Section 3303 l.
~ All further references are to the Community Redevelopment Law. California Health and
Safety Code Sections 33000. et seq., unless otherwise indicated.
i
F DOCS',DEVSVCS O FH ER REPxR(~()t)CI/[ x, DOC
An explanation of why the elimination of blight and the
redevelopment of the project area cannot reasonably be
expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting
alone or by the legislative body's use of financing alternatives
other than tax increment financing.
The proposed method of financing the redevelopment of the
project area in sufficient detail so that the legislative body
may determine the economic feasibility of the plan.
A method or plan for the relocation of families and persons to
be temporarily or permanently displaced from housing
facilities in the project area, which method or plan shall
include the provision required by Section 33411.1 that no
persons or families of low and moderate income shall be
displaced unless and until there is a suitable housing unit
available and ready for occupancy by the displaced person or
family at rents comparable those at the time of displacement.
An analysis of the preliminary plan.
h. The report and recommendations of the planning cornmission.
i. The summary referred to in Section 33387.
The report required by Section 65402 of the Government
Code.
The report required by Section 21151 of the Public Resources
Code.
The report of the county fiscal officer as required by Section
33328.
If the project area contains low- or moderate-income housing,
a neighborhood impact report which describes in detail the
impact of the project upon the residents of the project area and
the surrounding areas, in terms of relocation, traffic
circulation, environmental quality, availability of community
facilities and services, effect on school population and quality
of education, property assessments and tmxes, and other
matters affecting the physical and social quality of the
neighborhood. The neighborhood impact report shall also
include all of the following:
1. The number of dwelling units housing persons and
families of Iow or moderate income expected to be
destroyed or removed from the low- and
moderate-income housing market as part of a
redevelopment project.
F:',DOCS\DEVS VCS' OTHERR EP~RCOOC01A DOC
The number of persons and families of low or
moderate income expected to be displaced by the
project.
The general location of housing to be rehabilitated,
developed, or constructed pursuant to Section 33413.
The number of dwelling units housing persons and
families of low or moderate income planned for
construction or rehabilitation, other than replacement
housing.
The projected means of financing the proposed
dwelling units for housing persons and families of low
and moderate income planned for construction or
rehabilitation.
A projected timetable for meeting the plan's
relocation, rehabilitation, and replacement housing
objectives.
An analysis by the agency of the report submitted by the
county as required by Section 33328, which shall include a
summary of the consultation of the agency, or attempts to
consult by the agency, with each of the affected taxing entities
as required by Section 33328. If any of the affected taxing
entities have expressed written objections or concerns with
the proposed project area as part of these consultations, the
agency shall include a response to these concerns, additional
information, if any, and, at the discretion of the agency,
proposed or adopted mitigation measures.
Each of the fourteen areas set forth in Section 33352 will be discussed in turn in this Report.
Upon adoption of the Plan in 1983 and each of the amendments to the Plan, all of the repons and
information required by the Community Redevelopment Law at the time were prepared and
submitted to the City Council by the Agency. As the revisions to the Plan under Amendment No. 3
are limited to those changes which are necessary to ensure conformance with the City's General
Plan, it is often the case that no new information is required to be presented at this time. In those
instances, throughout this Report, reference will be made to the provisions of the Plan or other
actions of the Agency which address those particular topics not requiring further evaluation or
analysis in connection with Amendment No. 3, x,~"nere such topics were discussed in connection with
the adoption or previous amendment or' the Plan, those discussions are incorporated herein by
reference. New, additionaI or supplemental information will be presented in this Report to the extent
such information is warranted by the revisions to the Plan under Amendment No. 3.
II. REASONS FOR SELECTION OF TIlE PROJECT AREA
The original boundaries of the Project Area were selected in 1983 upon adoption of the Plan.
A legal description of the original Project Area boundaries is set forth in Exhibit "A" to the Plan.
F:'xDOCS\DEVSVCS OTH ERREP~RCOOC01A DOC
The original report to the city council prepared in conjunction with the adoption of the Plan
provides the rationale for selection of the Project Area.
The Project Area encompasses a total of approximately 160 acres in the eastern boundary of
the City of Anaheim, northwest of the intersection of the Riverside freeway and Weir Canyon Road.
Development of real property in the Project Area had been deterred by the flood hazard created by
the non-channelized Santa Ana River.
The selection of the boundaries of the Project Area was guided by the General Plan, specific
examples of physical and economic blight, as discussed in the original report to the City Council, and
the following:
"The desire to improve the river channel in order to protect the property from flooding,
thereby permitting development to assure economic stability and to promote aesthetic and
environmental actions and improvements in order to make the City of Anaheim a better place to
liver, work, shop, and enjoy leisure time."
Amendment No. 3 does not alter or in any way impact the Project Area boundaries.
Therefore, further analysis of the reasons for selection of the Project Area other than those contained
in previous reports as set forth above, is not required.
In addition to requiring a discussion of the reasons for the selection of the Project Area,
Section 33352(a) requires this Report to contain a description of the specific projects proposed by the
Agency and a discussion of how those projects will improve or alleviate blighting conditions existing
in the Project Area. Section 401 of the Plan currently provides that the Agency will seek to
eliminate blight in the Project Area by:
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
I0.
Constructing public improvements and infrastructure, the lack of which have
prevented development;
Constructing public transportation improvements to provide access to all portions of
the Project Area with improved pedestrian and vehicular circulation;
Replanning, redesigning and developing undeveloped areas which are stagnant or
improperly utilized;
The participation of owners and tenants in the revitalization of their properties;
Acquiring real property;
Managing property under ownership and control of the Agency;
Providing relocation assistance to displace Project :U"ea occupants:
Demolishing or removing buildings and improvements:
Rehabilitating, developing, or constructing low and moderate income housing within
the Project Area and/or the City;
Disposing of property for uses in accordance with the Plan;
Redeveloping land by private enterprise and public agencies for uses in accordance
with the Plan.
In connection with Amendment No. 3, the Agency is not proposing to identify or undertake
any new, additional or more specific projects in order to assist in the Agency's efforts to continue to
4
F ' DOCS' D EVS x. CS OTI tER REP'RCOOC01A.DOC
eliminate blighting conditions in the Project Area. The Agency will continue to implement the Plan
and pursue those projects and activities which meet its goals and objectives as have been previously
discussed and/or approved to eliminate blight and blighting conditions, including those set forth in
Section 401 of the Plan. Furthermore, as is more fully discussed in Section IV of this Report, the
Agency has drafted and approved and will continue to follow an Implementation Plan as required by
Section 33490 of the Community Redevelopment Law.
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PHYSICAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
The current definition of the physical and economic conditions which constitute blight is set
forth in Section 33031 of the Community Redevelopment Law. Upon original adoption of the Plan,
the Agency and the City Council examined and analyzed the physical, economic and social
conditions existing in the Project Area which constituted blight and/or blighting conditions as the
terms were defined at that time.
Section 33354.6(b) sets forth the requirements regarding the inclusion of a discussion of
blight in the report required by Section 33352 upon the amendment ora redevelopment plan. Section
33354.6 provides that:
When an agency proposes to increase the limitation on the number of
dollars to be allocated to the redevelopment agency, it shall describe
and identify, in the report required by Section 33352, the remaining
blight within the project area, identify the portion, if any that is no
longer blighted, the projects that are required to be completed to
eradicate the remaining blight and the relationship between the costs
of those projects and the amount of increase in the limitation on the
number of dollars to be allocated to the agency.
Amendment No. 3 does not increase the limitation on the number of dollars to be allocated to
the Agency, nor does Amendment No. 3 add any new territory to the boundaries of the Project Area.
Furthermore, the Agency is not undertaking any other revisions to the Plan which would require that
the Agency re-examine the conditions of blight existing in the Project Area. Therefore, no further
analysis of the blighting conditions existing in the Project Area is required to be included in this
Report.
IV. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Section 33352(c) requires that every redevelopment plan submitted to the legislative body be
accompanied by a report which includes:
An implementation plan that describes specific goals and objectives
of the agency, specific projects then proposed by the agency,
including a program of actions and expenditures proposed within the
first five years of the plan, and a description of how these projects
will improve or alleviate the conditions described in Section 33031.
Section 33490 imposes requirements identical to those set forth in Section 33352(c) and is applicable
to all redevelopment plans adopted prior to December 31, 1994. Section 33490 provides that:
F ',DOC S',D E ~,'S ¥ C S OTH E R R E P',RC(Y,)C0 l A DOC
On or before December 31, 1994, and each five years thereafter, each
agency that has adopted a redevelopment plan prior to December 31,
1993, shall adopt, after a public hearing, an implementation plan that
shall contain the specific goals and objectives of the agency for the
project area, the specific projects and expenditures proposed to be
made during the next five years, and an explanation of how the goals
and objectives, projects, and expenditures will eliminate blight within
the project area and implement the requirements of Section 33334.2,
33334.4, 33334.6, and 33413.
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 33490, the Agency approved an Implementation Plan
for the Project Area in December 1994, and adopted the Second Implementation Plan in December
1999. Amendment No. 3 is not changing any aspect of the Plan other than as necessary to conform
the Plan to the City's General Plan, no new implementation plan is included in this Report.
ELIMINATION OF BLIGHT CANNOT BE ACCOMPLISHED BY PRIVATE
ENTERPRISE ACTING ALONE
Section 33352(c) requires the report submitted to the legislative body in connection with a
redevelopment plan to include an explanation of why the elimination of blight and the redevelopment
of the project area cannot be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone or by the legislative
body's use of financing alternatives other than tax increment financing. As discussed in Section HI
of this Report, the Agency fully examined the blight and blighting conditions which exist within the
Project Area upon the original adoption of the Plan. In addition, the Agency examined, analyzed and
explained why the elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not
reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone or by the City
Council's use of financing other tax increment financing, to the extent then required by the
Community Redevelopment Law. Amendment No. 3 does not add any additional area to the Project
Area and the Agency is not proposing any other revisions to the Plan which would require that this
element be re-examined at this time. Therefore, no further discussion is required in this Report
regarding the ability of private enterprise acting alone or the use of financing other than tax
increment financing to eliminate blight in the Project Area.
VI. METHODS OF FINANCING THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT AREA
The methods available to the Agency for financing redevelopment of the Project Area are set
forth in Section 600 of the Plan. Specifically, Section 601 of the Plan states that the Agency is
authorized to finance redevelopment activities in the Project Area with financial assistance from the
City. State of California. property tax increment, interest income. Agency bonds, or any other
available source. Section 601 also provides that the Agency is authorized to obtain advances, borro~
funds and create indebtedness in carrying out the Plan.
The Agency is not proposing any changes to the Plan in connection with Amendment No. 3
that will affect the economic feasibility of the Plan or that would add to or alter any of the financing
methods currently available to the Agency under the Plan. Therefore, no further analysis of the
proposed financing method is required in this Report.
F',DOCS',DEVSVCS\O~-tERREPxRCOt)C01 ~, DOC
6
VII. PLAN AND METHOD OF RELOCATION
Section 33352(f) requires that the report of the agency to the legislative body accompanying
a redevelopment plan include a method or plan for the relocation of families and persons to be
temporarily or permanently displaced from housing facilities in the project area. The method or plan
for relocation must include the provision required by Section 33411.1 that no persons or families of
low and moderate income will be displaced unless and until there is a suitable housing unit available
and ready for occupancy by the displaced person or family at rents comparable to those at the time of
their displacement.
Upon adoption of the Plan, the Agency provided the City Council with the guidelines for
relocation to the extent then required by the Community Redevelopment Law. Section 413 of the
Plan contains provisions regarding relocation assistance and payments for persons and businesses
located in the Project Area that are displaced by Agency action. In addition to complying with the
provisions of the Plan and the Community Redevelopment Law regarding relocation, the Agency
currently complies with and will continue to comply with and implement all applicable state and
federal law requirements regarding relocation, including but not limited to, the California Relocation
Assistance Act, California Government Code Sections 7260, et seq., and the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. Section 4601, et seq.) and
the implementing local rules adopted by the community. The Agency is not proposing any additional
activities or projects in connection with Amendment No. 3 which would displace persons, families or
businesses in the Project Area. Therefore, no further analysis of the Agency's method or plan of
relocation is required.
VIII. ANALYSIS OF THE PRELE~IINARY PLAN
Sections 33322 and 33323 of the Community Redevelopment Law authorize the Planning
Commission with the assistance of the Agency to select one or more project areas comprised of all or
part of a redevelopment survey area selected by the City Council and to formulate a preliminary plan
for the redevelopment of each selected project area. Pursuant to Section 33324 of the Community
Redevelopment Law a preliminary plan is sufficient if it contains a description of the boundaries of
the project area, a general statement of the land uses, layout of principal streets, population densities
and building intensities and standards proposed as the basis for the redevelopment of the project area,
shows how the purposes of this part would be attained by such redevelopment, shows that the
proposed redevelopment conforms to the master or general community plan, and describes,
generally, the impact of the project upon residents thereof and upon the surrounding neighborhood.
A Preliminary Plan was prepared and analyzed in connection with the adoption of the Plan to
the extent then required by the Community Redevelopment Law. No preliminary plan is required in
connection xtith the proposed Amendment No. 3 as the Agency is not proposing to expand the
boundaries or' the Project Area. Therefore, there is no need to analyze a preliminary plan in this
Report.
IX. THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Section 33352(h) of the Community Redevelop~nent Law calls for the report and
recommendations of the planning commission regarding the proposed Plan following submittal of the
Plan to the commission pursuant to Section 33346. In the case of an amendment to an existing
redevelopment plan, however, the plan need only be submitted to the planning commission for
review if. after a public hearing held by the redevelopment agency on the plan amendment, the
7
F:~,DOCS DEVS VC S' OTH ER R E P',RCOOC01 ~DOC
agency recommends "substantial changes in the plan which affect the general plan adopted by the
planning commission or the legislative body ....
Amendment No. 3 does not propose any changes to the Plan that would affect the general
plan for the City of Anaheim. Indeed, Amendment No. 3 simply ensures that the land uses permitted
by the Plan are in conformity with the City of Anaheim General Plan. Therefore, submittal of
Amendment No. 3 to the Planning Commission is unnecessary, and no report of the Planning
Commission need be submitted with this report to council.
X. SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT AREA COM~IITTEE MEETINGS
Section 33385.3 of the Community Redevelopment Law provides that if a project area
committee does not exist, and the agency proposes to amend a redevelopment plan, the agency must
establish a project area committee if the proposed amendment to a redevelopment plan would do
either of the following:
Grant the authority to the agency to acquire by eminent domain property on
which persons reside in a project area in which a substantial number of low-
and moderate-income persons reside.
Add territory in which a substantial number of low- and moderate-income
persons reside and grant the authority to the agency to acquire by eminent
domain property on which persons reside in the added territory. The project
area committee may be composed of persons from only the added area or
both the added and the existing project area.
There is no Project Area Committee for the Project Area. The proposed Amendment No. 3
does not further grant or extend the Agency eminent domain power over residential property or add
territory to the Project Area on which a substantial number of low- and moderate-income persons
reside. Therefore, it was not necessary to form a project area committee in connection with the
proposed Amendment No. 3 and no summary of the meetings of a project area committee is required
to be included in this Report.
XI.
REPORT ON CONFORMITY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THE
GENERAL PLAN
Section 33331 of the Cormnunity Redevelopment Law requires that "every redevelopment
plan shall conform to the general plan insofar as the latter applies to the project area." The purpose
of Amendment No. 3 is to comply with Section 33331 and to ensure that the Plan conforms with the
existing requirements of the City's General Plan.
In keeping with this purpose, various provisions of Section 500 of the Platt have been
revised, Specifically, the land use provisions set forth in Section 500 of the Plan have been changed
to reflect the land uses allowed in the Project Area under the City's General Plan. In addition, in
order to ensure on-going compliance with the City's General Plan, new language has been added to
Section 500 of the Plan to provide that in the event that the City's General Plan is amended or
otherwise altered, it is the intent of the Plan that the land uses provided in the Plan be the same as
those set forth in the City's General Plan. Section 511 of the Plan has also been revised to provide
that the Agenc? is authorized to establish certain development standards only to the extent that such
standards are in compliance with the limits, restrictions, and controls established in the City's
8
Fg, DOCS',,DEVSVCS'OTHERRE~RC(~)C01 X. DOC
General Plan. In addition, under Section 524 of the Plan, the Agency is only authorized to grant a
variance from the limits, restrictions, and controls established by the Plan subject to compliance with
the City's General Plan.
XII. ENVIRON3~IENTAL DOCUMENTATION
Section 33352(k) requires that a redevelopment plan submitted to the legislative body be
accompanied by the report required by Section 21151 of the California Public Resources Code.
Section 21151 of the California Public Resources Code provides in part that:
All local agencies shall prepare, or cause to be prepared by contract,
and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on any
project that they intend to carry out or approve which may have a
significant effect on the environment.
Section 21166 of CEQA provides that, where an environmental impact report has been
prepared for a project, as was the case with the adoption of the original Plan, no subsequent or
supplemental environmental impact report is required unless major revisions of the original EIR are
required because substantial changes are proposed in the project; substantial changes occur in the
circumstances under which the project is being undertaken; or new information, not known at the
time of the original EIR certification, becomes available. In the present case, the revisions to the
Plan encompassed in Amendment No. 3 (the "project" for purposes of Section 21166) does not
constitute substantial changes, nor have the circumstances under which the Plan is to be implemented
changed substantially. Finally, there is no new information available beyond that known at the time
of certification of the original EIR. Thus, Section 21166 provides yet another basis under which
Amendment No. 3 is exempt from CEQA.
Finally, Section 15061 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that a public agency may
determine that a project is exempt from the provisions of CEQA if it can be seen with certainty that
there is no possibility that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. In the
present case, an amendment to the City's General Plan changing the zoning designation for property
within the Project Area has already been processed and approved by the City. This General Plan
Amendment was accompanied by a Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA, which was certified
and approved by the City in conjunction with its approval of the General Plan Amendment. The
effect of the General Plan Amendment was to render any use designation inconsistent with such
Amendment set forth in the Plan ineffective, because the City and the Agency may not approve any
redevelopment activity which is inconsistent with the City's General Plan. ,~nendment No. 3, then,
simply serves to coalesce the General Plan and the Redevelopment Plan, but has no environmental
impact because the inconsistent uses set forth in the Plan were already rendered void by the General
Plan Amendment.
A Prelimina0' Review of Environmental Impacts, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and
incorporated herein by reference, was prepared in connection with A~nendm¢nt No. 3 pursuant to
which it was determined that Amendment No. 3 has no potential for causing a significant effect on
the environment based on the above analysis. Because Amendment No. 3 is limited to changes
necessary to ensure the Plan is consistent with the City's General Plan, and does not effectuate any
substantive changes to the Plan beyond this technical revision, ~:here is no reasonable possibility that
Amendment No. 3 will have a significant effect on the environment: therefore no CEQA
documentation is required.
9
F:XDOCS'~DEVS VCS'OTI~{ ER R ED~RCOOC01A DOC
XIII. COUNTY BASE YEAR REPORT
Section 33352(1) requires that the report of the agency to the legislative body include the
report of the county fiscal officer as required by Section 33328. This so called "33328 Report" or the
"Base Year Report" generally contains information regarding the assessed valuation of property
within the project area and identifies all the taxing agencies which levy taxes in the project area.
The requirements regarding the need for a "33328 Report" in connection with a
redevelopment plan an~endment are set forth in Section 33328.3 which provides that:
"If the boundaries of an existing project area for which the
redevelopment plan contains a provision for the division of taxes as
permitted by Section 33670 are changed pursuant to Article 4
(commencing with Section 33330), the redevelopment agency shall
notify rite county officials by tra~tsmitting to them ... the information
required by Section 33327 indicating the areas to be added or
detached. Within 60 days from the date of filing ... the county
officials shall prepare and submit to the redevelopment agency and
the taxing agencies a report containing the information required under
Section 33328, with respect to those areas to be added or detached
from the project area."
Upon original adoption of the Plan, the Agency requested that the county prepare a Base
Year Report to the extent then required under the provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law.
Amendment No. 3 does not add any additional territory to the boundaries of the Project Area.
Therefore, it was not necessary for the Agency to submit the information required by Section 33327
to county officials and county officials are not required to prepare the report referred to in Section
33328 as no such information is included in this Report.
XIV. NEIGHBORHOOD I~'IPACT REPORT
Section 33352(m) requires that if a project area contains Iow- or moderate-income housing, a
neighborhood impact report which describes in detail the impact of the project upon the residents of
the project area and the surrounding areas, in terms of relocation, traffic circulation, environmental
quality, availability of community facilities and services, effect on school population and quality of
education, property assessments and taxes, and other matters affecting the physical and social quality
of the neighborhood be prepared and included in the report submitted to the legislative body by the
agency.
The Project Area. at the time of adoption of the Plan, did not contain arty low or moderate
income housing. The Agency ~as therefore not required to prepare a neighborhood impact report.
Amendment No. 3 does not add any territory or cause any impacts to low and moderate income
housing, and therefore does not trigger the requirement imposed by Section 33352(m).
XV. ANALYSIS OF COUNTY BASE YEAR REPORT
Section 33352(n) requires that the report submitted to the legislative body include an analysis
by the agency of the report submitted by the county as required by Section 33328, including a
summar? of the consultations of the agency, or attempts to consult by the agency~ with each of the
affected taxing entities as required by Section 33328.
~0
F \DOCS',DEVSVCS',OT}{Er~REP',RCOOCOI A DOC
As is set forth more fully in Section xm of this Report, it was not necessary for the Agency
to request that the County prepare the report required by Section 33328, therefore, there is no
analysis of such a report set forth herein. In addition, as Amendment No. 3 merely ensures the
conformance of the Plan with the City's General Plan, there was no need for the Agency to consult
with any affected taxing agencies.
F ',DOCS\DEVSVCS\OTHERREPXRCOOC01A DOC
EXHIBIT A
F \DOCS\DEVSVCS'OTH ERREI~RCOOC0! A DOC
12
City of Anaheim
Environmental Checklist Form
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE RIVER VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
[] Aesthetic/Visual
[] Biological Resources
[] Hazards & Hazardous Materials
[] Mineral Resources
[] Public Services
[-3 Utilities/Service Systems
[] Agricultural Resources
[] Cultural Resources
[] Hydrology~Vater Quality
[] Noise
[] Recreation
[] Air Quality
[] Geology/Soils
[] Land Use/Planning
[] Population/Housing
[] Transportation/Traffic
[] Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the City)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project is exempt from CEQA.
[] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
[] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures have been incorporated into
the project or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the enviromnent, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL EVlPACT REPORT is required.
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL D,4PACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain
to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
ail potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in au em-lief EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
to that earlier EIR or NT. GATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature of City of Anaheim Representative
Printed Name
Date
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
2) A list of "Supporting Information Sources" must be attached and other sources used or individuals
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
3) Response Column Heading Definitions:
a)
Potentially Significant Impact is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may
be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
h)
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less
Than Significant Impact". The mitigation measures must be described, along with a brief
explanation of how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
c) Less Than Significant Impact applies where the project creates no significant impacts, only
Less Than Significant impacts.
d)
No Impact applies where a project does not create an impact in that category. "No Impact"
answers do not require an explanation if they are adequately supported by information sources
cited immediately following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if
the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like
the one proposed (e.g., the project falls outside of a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer
should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards
(e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
4)
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to a tiering, program EIR, Master EIR, or other
CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration
(Section 15062(c)(3)(D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the checklist were within the scope
of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c)
.Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated", describe the mitigation measures which v, ere incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
s)
Incorporate into the checklist any references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., the
General Plan. zoning ordinance). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,
where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
6) ]'he explanation of each issue should identify:
a) [Ixe significance c,-itcria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
(Attach explanation and information sources)
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant
With Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
AESTHETICS-Would the project:
a) Have an effect on a scenic vista or scen[c highway?
b) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
No Impact
e)
Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely by affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
o [] o
Narrative Summary:
I1. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES-Would the project;
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
Narrative Summary:
II1. AIR QUALITY-Would the project:*
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan? E]
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing
or projected air quality violation? []
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard? []
d) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations? []
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people? []
[] []
[] D Er'
'Where applicable, the significance criteria established by the South Coast Air Quality [vlanagement
District (AQMD) may be relied upon to make the determinations.
Narrative Summary:
-4-
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
(Attach explanation and information sources)
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES-Would the project:
a)
b)
c)
Affect any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species by local designation or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
Have an adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified by local designation
or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
Have an adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
d) Interfere with established migratory wildlife corridors?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
D [] D O;/
No Impact
Narrative Summary:
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES-Would the project:
a) Disturb any historic resources as defined in § 15064.5 and
designated on a list of qualified historic structures as
approved by the City?
b) Disturb archaeological resources?
c) Destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
d) Disturb any human resources, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
Narrative Summary:
-5-
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES No Impact
(Attach explanation and information sources)
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS-Would the project:
a)
Expose people o~ structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, iojury, or death
involving:
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Prolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslide?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
o)
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d)
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in the most
current version of the Uniform Building Code, creating
substantial risks to life or property?
e)
Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use o[
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant Significant
With
Impact Mitigation Impact
D m [] ~
[] El D
Narrative Summary:
Vii. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS-Would the_ project:
a) Create a need to routinely transport, use, or dispose of
hazardous materials?
b)
Create a hazard by a reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident condition(s) involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter-mile of an
existing or proposed school?
d)
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code §65962.5 and, as a result, would create
a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
iNiT;AL STUOY FORM OCT
-6-
[] [] G'"
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
(Attach explanatioo and Information sources)
Narrative Summary:
Less Than Less Than
Potentially Significant Significant
Significant With
Impact Mitigation Impact
No Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY-Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge?
c) Alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a
manner which would result in substantial erosion or
silta¢on on-site or o~f-site, or result in flooding on-site or
ohLsite?
d) Create or increase runoff which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional soumes of pollutant runoff?
e) Degrade water quality?
f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area?
g) Place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injuW, er death involving frooding?
Narrative Summary:
D [] D I'~
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING-Would the project:
a)
b)
Physically divide an established community?
Conflict with any applicable land use plans, policy, or
regulation (including, but not limited to the General Plan,
specific plan, and zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
Narrative Summary:
[] [] [] ~
X. MINERAL RESOURCES-Would the project:
Result in the loss of availability delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
-7-
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
(Attach explanation and information sources)
Narrative Summary:
Potentially
Significant
impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Nolmpact
Impact
Xl. NOISE-Would the project:
a)
b)
c)
Result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of the City's noise ordinance or other
applicable standards?
Result in exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
Result in a temporary, periodic or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
Narrative Summa~:
[] [] [] B/
r~ [] [] ~'
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING-Would the project:
a)
b)
Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Remove or displace a substantial number of people or
existing homes, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Narrative Summary:
-8-
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
(Attach explanation and information sources)
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
Xffl. PUBLIC SERVICES-Would the project:
No Impact
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of, or need for, new or physically altered
government facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times, or other performance objectives for any
of these public services, which could cause significant
environmental impacts:
Fire protection? [] [] [] Bix
Police protection? [] [] [] [~
Schools? [] [] [] ~
Parks? [] [] [] E~'
Other public facilities? [] [] [] B~
Narrative Summary:
XIV. RECREATION-Would the project:
a)
b)
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities causing physicar
deterioration of the facility?
Include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
Narrative Summary:
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC-Would the project:
[] [] [] G/
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation
to the existing traffic Icad and capacity of the street system
(i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number
of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or
congestion at intersections)?
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
sen,ice standard established by the County congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in a~r traffic patterns, including el[her an
increase in traffic levels or change in location that results
in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g,, sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ~ [] ~ bi./
e) Resedit ~r~ ~nadequate emergency access? El [] [] Et'/
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
(Attach explanation and information sources)
g)
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
Narrative Summary:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
No impact
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS-Would the p~oject:
a)
b)
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c)
Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
d)
e)
g)
Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
h) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations related to electricity?
i) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations related to natural gas?
j) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or
substaniiai alterations related to telephone service?
k) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations related to television
service/reception?
Narrative Summary:
MANDATORY F[NDIf~2S OF SIGNIFICANCE
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
(Attach explanation and information sources)
Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Narrative Summary:
Less Than
Less Thsn
Potentially Significant Significant No Impact
Significant With
Impact Mitigation Impact
Fish and Game Determination
Based on the information above, there is no evidence that the project has a potential for a change that
would adversely affect wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. The
presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CCR 753.5 (d) has been rebutted by substantial evidence.
Yes (Certificate of Fee Exemption)
__ No (Pay fee)
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Amendment No. 3 to the Redevelopment Plan for the River Valley Redevelopment Project is limited
to changes necessary to ensure that the Redevelopment Plan is consistent with the City's General
Plan, and does not effectuate any substantive changes to the Redevelopment Plan beyond this
technical revision, there is no reasonable possibility that Amendment No. 3 will have a significant effect
on the environment; therefore, no CEQA documentation is required. Pursuant to Section 15061 (b)
(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, A Notice of Exemption will be prepared.
.I1.
EXHIBIT B
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
RIVER VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
The Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the River Valley Redevelopment
Project (the "Redevelopment Project"), which was adopted by the City Council of the City of
Anaheim (the "City") on November 29, 1983 by Ordinance No. 4463, as amended by Ordinance No.
5091 duly adopted by the City on January 23, 1990, and by Ordinance No. 5467 duly adopted by the
City on December 13, 1994, is hereby amended as of the effective date of this Amendment No. 3, in
the following manner:
Sections 501 through 504 of the Redevelopment Plan are hereby deleted, and replaced
with the following text:
"A. [§501] Map
The City of Anaheim General Plan Land Use Map depicts the location of residential,
commercial, industrial and public land uses within the Project Area, which are the land uses
authorized by this Plan, as well as the major streets within the Project Area. The City Council of the
City will from time to time update, amend, or revise the General Plan. It is the intention of this
Redevelopment Plan that the land uses permitted within the Project Area shall be and are as provided
in the City's General Plan, as it currently exists and/or as it may from time to time be amended,
updated, or revised, and as implemented and applied by City ordinances, resolutions, policies, and
other laws. Uses other than those designated in the General Plan and its land use map may be
authorized by the City from time to time by General Plan amendments as authorized by law.
B. [§502]
Limitation on Authority
To the extent the provisions of this Redevelopment Plan authorize the Agency or the
City to permit property within the Project Area to be developed for uses which do not conform to the
Redevelopment Plan, or to establish design guidelines and restrictions, such provisions and the
authority of the Agency or City granted thereby are limited by the provisions of the City's General
Plan, as it may be amended or revised from time to time. Nothing in this Redevelopment Plan shall
be deemed to gant authority to either the Agency or the City to grant a variance from, or approve a
development or use of property which does not conform with, or otherwise take any action not
consistent with, the City's General Plan.
C. [§5031 Reserved.
D. [§504] Reserved."
The fourth paragraph of Section 512 of the Redevelopment Plan shall be revised to
delete the word "commercial" therefrom.
Sections 514 and 515 of the Redevelopment Plan are hereby revised to read as follows:
"3. [§514] Limitation on the Number of Buildings
The approximate number of buildings in the Project Area shall be regulated
by the General Plan.
4. [§515] Approximate Number of Dwelling Units
General Plan."
The number of dwelling units in the Project Area shall be regulated by the
d. Section 517 of the Redevelopment Plan is hereby revised to read as follows:
"6. [§517] Open Spaces, Landscaping, Light, Air and Privacy
The approximate amount of open space to be provided in the Project Area is
the total of all areas designated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and those areas in the
public rights-of-way, the public grounds, the space around buildings, and all other outdoor areas not
permitted to be covered by buildings as established by the City General Plan and this Redevelopment
Plan. Landscaping shall be developed in the Project Area to ensure optimum use of living plant
material in conformance with City standards."
e. All other provisions of the Redevelopment Plan shall remain in full force and effect as
written as of the date of this Amendment.
.-JO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, SHERYLL SCHROEDER, Secretary of the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution No. ARA2000-10 was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of
the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency held on the 12th day of December 2000, by the following
vote of the members thereof:
AYES:
CHAIRMAN/AGENCY: Feldhaus, Kring, Tait, McCracken, Daly
NOES: CHAIRMAN/AGENCY: None
ABSENT: CHAIRMAN/AGENCY: None
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(SEAL)