Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
back from single-family residential a
minimum of 100 ft.
Height Limit 35 ft / 3 stories 30 ft to roof, 34 ft to parapet, 39 ft to apex of roof Site Coverage
40% 33%
Minimum Floor Area Studio – 500 sf
1-Bedroom – 750 sf
2-Bedroom – 950 sf
Studio – 547 sf
1-Bedroom – 750 sf
2-Bedroom – 998 sf
Private Open Space 100 sf per unit with no dimension
smaller than 10 ft
Minimum 65 sf/unit with no dimension smaller
than 7 ft*
Landscaping 15% of lot area (13,845 sf) 20% (18,701 sf) Parking City Code
Studio/1-bedroom unit: 1.5 spaces/unit
with 1 space per unit in a
garage/carport
2-bedroom unit: 2 spaces/unit with 1
space per unit enclosed
Guest Parking: 25% of total required
spaces
Total Required – 151
Density Bonus Law
Studio/1-bedroom unit: 1 space
2-bedroom unit: 1.5 spaces
Total Required – 85
107
Project Affordable Units, Density Bonus, Concession, and Waivers Per FVMC 21.17.040, all new residential development projects shall include Inclusionary Units with at least 15% low-income units. As defined by FVMC 21.17.020(t), “Inclusionary Unit shall mean a dwelling unit intended for sale or rent that is required by Section 21.17.040 to be affordable to Extremely Low-, Very Low-, or Low-Income Households.” As such, the Project is proposed to be built with the inclusion of affordable units and is therefore permitted to request a density bonus, consistent with City and State law. The proposed density level of the Project is permitted with a maximum 30 dwelling units per acre, however, the Project would be built to 34 dwelling units per acre with a Density Bonus. The Projects’ reservation of 15 percent of its base units as affordable to very-low-income households earning less than 50 percent of the County median income, which equates to 10 on-site affordable units, would allow for up to a 50 percent density bonus pursuant to State Density Bonus Law consistent with Government Code Sections 65915-65918. This density bonus allows for a 31-unit density bonus, which would result in a maximum of 94 units. While the proposed Project is entitled to a density bonus of up to 50 percent under the California State Density Bonus Law, the Proposed Project is requesting 13.2 percent for a total of 72 units (63 base units plus 9 density bonus units).
Pursuant to State Density Bonus Law, the Project is also entitled to incentives, concessions and waivers or reduction of development standards and reduced parking ratio in accordance with State Density Bonus Law. Pursuant to Section Government Code Section 65915 (d)(2)(C), the Project is entitled to three (3) concessions. Pursuant to Government Code 65915(p), the Project is also entitled to provide parking in accordance with the standards of Density Bonus Law which is one (1) space for studio and 1-bedroom units, 1.5 spaces for 2–3-bedroom units, and 2.5 spaces for 4+ bedroom units.
Concessions, or incentives, as defined under State law, allow a developer to deviate from design standards and/ or development regulations, such as height, setbacks, parking, on-site open space requirements, etc. when such regulations potentially make the project economically
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
infeasible for the developer to build. Incentives/concessions include a reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordable housing costs.
In accordance with State Density Bonus law, the City must grant a concession that would preclude the construction of the Project entitled to the benefits under State Density Bonus Law unless the City finds that the requested concession does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs; would have a specific, adverse impact upon health, safety, or the physical environment which cannot be mitigated; would have an adverse impact on any property listed in the California Register of Historical Resources; or that the waiver would be contrary to State or federal law.
The applicant is requesting concessions from certain development standards under the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (“FVMC”) for the Project in accordance with California Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code, §§ 65915, et seq.), in order for the Project to be able to accommodate the residential units, including the affordable housing units, planned for the Project. These reductions and waivers are necessary because, without them, the Project would be physically infeasible to implement and construct due to site constraints and certain City development standards, as described in more detail below. The requested concessions are submitted pursuant to subdivisions (e) and (o)(2) of Government Code section 65915.
The proposed concessions would not result in a direct physical impact on the environment due to a conflict with a regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect or be contrary to State or federal law. Additionally, the Project would not have an adverse impact on a property listed in the California Register of Historical Resources.
The applicant has requested three (3) concessions to the zoning standards for the Project including:
Concession #1 – Concession to the City’s Zoning Code (Fountain Valley Municipal Code [FVMC] Section 21.08.040) to allow for a 37-foot nine (9)-inch and 73-foot two (2)-inch third story rear setback in lieu of the required 100-foot setback adjacent to single-family residential development.
Concession #2 – Concession to the City’s Zoning Code (FVMC Section 21.08.040) to allow a reduced balcony size requirement. This concession would reduce the minimum requirement of 100 square feet of private open space per unit with a minimum 10-foot dimension (in width and depth) to a new minimum requirement of 65 square feet of private open space per unit with a minimum seven (7)-foot dimension (in width and depth). Concession #3 – Concession to the City’s Zoning Code (FVMC 21.08.040) to allow for the increase in number of units per 1,452 square feet. This concession would increase the maximum number of units per 1,452 square feet from one (1) unit per 1,452 square feet to 1.13 units per 1,452 square feet.
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
Parking
The proposed Project includes a total of 107 parking spaces for residents and guests. Out of the total 107 spaces, there will be 96 resident parking parking spaces and 11 guest parking spaces.
Also, out of the total 107 spaces, 26 spaces will be provided in enclosed garages, 24 spaces will be covered under a carport, and 19 spaces will be provided outside of the gated entry along the west side of the Project. All parking spaces will meet the minimum parking dimensions of 9’x19’ with a 25-foot backup. The project would include accessible and electric vehicle stalls to meet or exceed local and State regulations.
The Project includes a request for application of the State Density Bonus Law vehicular parking ratio (Government Code Section 65915(p)(1)), although the final number of parking spaces provided are in excess of the State Density Bonus Law parking ratio.
Density Bonus Law prohibits local governments from requiring parking in excess of one (1) space for studio and 1-bedroom units and 1.5 spaces for 2-bedroom units. [Sec. 65915(p)(1)].
No additional parking may be required for guests.
The table below, “Table 2: Overall Parking” details the required parking spaces compared to those provided. State Density Bonus Law requires a minimum of 85 spaces and the applicant is providing 107 spaces (22 spaces more than required by Density Bonus Law).
Table 2: Overall Parking
Unit Type
Numbe
r of
Units
Required
Parking
Rate per
Unit*
Required
Parking*
Provided
Parking
Excess/(Deficit
)
Studio 9 1 space 9 10 +1
1 Bedroom 37 1 space 37 44 +7
2 Bedroom 26 1.5 spaces 39 42 +3
Guest 0 11 +11
TOTAL 72 85 107 22
*Residential parking rate based on Government Code Section 65915(p) Landscaping
Landscaping would be provided on the Project Site totaling 18,701 sf (20% of the site area).
With exception to pedestrian and vehicular pathways to the Project Site and units, the entire front and east side setbacks will be landscaped, and the rear of the property will provide a minimum 10-foot landscape area. Additional landscaping will be provided along the west side of the proposed building and within the parking lot. Landscaping will be comprised of an assortment of 24” and 36” box trees and shrubbery. Additionally, the Project will provide enhanced concrete paving near the gated entrance.
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
Highest and Best Use Analysis
The applicant provided a memo and presentation regarding their opinion on the highest and best real estate use for the Project Site (Attachment #3). The memo states that the Site is structurally flawed for continuing retail use with negative characteristics such as the retail building is too small to compete with larger anchored shopping centers, the site is not bordered by major streets, and the site has poor retail accessibility.
The memo later states that the Fountain Valley apartment market is ripe for new construction of market rate and affordable apartments and no new apartments have been built in Fountain Valley since 1986. However, just recently, the city has entitled 1,044 apartments [657 market rate and affordable apartments at the former Boomers Site, 304 market rate apartments and 83 senior affordable apartments at the Euclid/Heil Site (along with 219 for sale units)].
Environmental Review
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires analysis of agency approvals of discretionary “projects”. A “project,” under CEQA, is defined as “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” The proposed project is considered a project under CEQA. The environmental document prepared for the Project is Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment #4) and serves as the environmental review for the 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) pursuant to CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines.
On April 15, 2025 the City Council approved a contract with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to prepare an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Project. The MND was published for the required 30-day comment period beginning on January 14, 2026 to February 13, 2026.
Nine (9) letters were received regarding the MND during the comment period. One was from the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and the others from nearby residents noting concerns over traffic, parking, and noise. Rincon has prepared a Response to Comments Document that addresses each of the comment letters. In summary, all comments were addressed sufficiently in the Response to Comments document and were not deemed significant enough to warrant the preparation of revisions to the MND, as they will not change the analysis or conclusions of the MND.
MND and Mitigation Measures
The MND determined that the Project may have a potential significant effect on the environment that, however, will be mitigated to a level that is less than significant with the Mitigation Measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Where the application of these measures does not reduce an impact to below a level of significance, a project-specific mitigation measure is introduced. The mitigation measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project to ensure their implementation, and as contained within the Appendix to the MND. These include specific mitigation measures outlined to assure compliance within the following areas of the CEQA review:
Air Quality
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Air Quality
The following measures are recommended to reduce construction emissions during project construction:
Mitigation Measure AQ-1 Construction Emissions Reduction All mobile off-road equipment (wheeled or tracked) greater than 25 horsepower used during construction activities shall meet the United States Environmental Protection Agency Tier 4 interim standards. Tier 4 certification can be for the original equipment or equipment that is retrofitted to meet the Tier 4 interim standards. These requirements shall be incorporated into the contract agreement with the construction contractor. A copy of the equipment’s certification or model year specifications shall be available upon request for all equipment on-site.
Biological Resources
As the existing trees on the Site could provide nesting sites for some bird species, the following measure is recommended to mitigate potential impacts to nesting birds on the Site:
Mitigation Measure BIO-1 Nesting Bird Avoidance
To avoid disturbance of nesting birds, including raptorial species protected by the California Fish and Game Code and Migratory Bird Treaty Act, construction activities related to the project, including, but not limited to, vegetation removal, ground disturbance, and construction and demolition shall occur outside of the bird breeding season (February 1 through August 31). If construction must begin during the breeding season, then a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted no more than seven (7) days prior to initiation of construction activities. The nesting bird preconstruction survey shall be conducted on foot in the project site, including a 50-foot buffer, and in inaccessible areas (e.g., private lands) the use of binoculars should be used to inspect trees and other suitable nesting areas. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist familiar with the identification of avian species known to occur in Southern California.
If nests are found, an avoidance buffer shall be determined and demarcated by a qualified biologist with bright orange construction fencing, flagging, construction lathe, or other means to mark the boundary. All construction personnel shall be notified as to the existence of the buffer zone and to avoid entering the buffer zone until the young have fledged or the nest is otherwise no longer active, as determined by the qualified biologist.
No parking, storage of materials, or construction activities shall occur within this buffer until the biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed, and the young have fledged the nest. Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist.
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
A survey report by the qualified biologist documenting and verifying compliance with the mitigation and with applicable State and federal regulations protecting nesting birds shall be submitted to the City. The qualified biologist shall serve as a construction monitor during those periods when construction activities would occur near active nests to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on nesting birds would occur.
Cultural Resources
While there are currently no recorded archaeological sites within the project area, buried resources could potentially be unearthed during project activities. Therefore, the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce potential cultural resource impacts to less than significant:
Mitigation Measure CUL-1 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources Prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities, the applicant shall retain an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (National Park Service 2020)(Qualified Archaeologist) to respond to and address any inadvertent discoveries identified for the duration of construction activities. The Qualified Archaeologist should possess experience and familiarity with historic-period and prehistoric archaeological resources in the region.
In the event that archaeological resources are unexpectedly encountered during grounddisturbing activities, work within 50 feet of the find shall halt and the Qualified Archaeologist or other designated archaeologist working under the direction of the Qualified Archaeologist shall be contacted immediately to evaluate the resource. If the resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to be prehistoric, then a Native American representative shall also be contacted to participate in the evaluation of the resource. If the Qualified Archaeologist and/or Native American representative determines it to be appropriate, archaeological testing for CRHR eligibility shall be completed. If the resource proves to be eligible for the CRHR and significant impacts to the resource cannot be avoided via Project redesign, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare a data recovery plan tailored to the physical nature and characteristics of the resource, per the requirements of California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C). The data recovery plan shall identify data recovery excavation methods, measurable objectives, and data thresholds to reduce any significant impacts to cultural resources related to the resource. Pursuant to the data recovery plan, the qualified archaeologist and Native American representative, as appropriate, shall recover and document the scientifically consequential information that justifies the resource’s significance. The City shall review and approve the treatment plan and archaeological testing as appropriate. All resulting documentation, including the appropriate State of California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 series forms, shall be submitted to the City and the regional repository of the California Historical Resources Information System, per CCR Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C).
Geology and Soils
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: The following measures are recommended to reduce the impact of the project directly, or indirectly, destroying a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature:
Mitigation Measure GEO-1 Unanticipated Fossil Discovery Paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program
Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall retain a Qualified Professional Paleontologist meeting the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010) standards to respond to and address any inadvertent discoveries identified for the duration of construction activities. Prior to the start of construction, the Qualified Professional Paleontologist or their designee shall conduct a paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program training for construction personnel regarding the appearance of fossils and the procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction personnel. The Worker Environmental Awareness Program shall discuss the potential to discover paleontological resources in the project site, legal obligations to protect paleontological resources, examples of paleontological resources that may be found in the project site, procedures in case a paleontological resource is discovered, and contact information for the Qualified Professional Paleontologist.
Unanticipated Discovery Of Paleontological Resources
The project applicant shall include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. If a potential fossil is discovered during project construction, construction activity within 50 feet of the find shall cease until the discovery is examined by a Qualified Professional Paleontologist. If the find is determined to be significant, the Qualified Professional Paleontologist shall direct all mitigation efforts related to paleontological resources consistent with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010) standards, which may include, but are not limited to:
paleontological monitoring; fossil salvage, preparation, and curation; and reporting to summarize the paleontological mitigation efforts. That report shall include a lists of all fossils recovered and necessary maps and graphics to accurately record their original location(s). The report, when submitted to and accepted by the City, and the curation of all significant fossils in a fossil repository has occurred, shall signify satisfactory completion of the project program to mitigate impacts to any potential nonrenewable paleontological resources (i.e., fossils) that might have been lost or otherwise adversely affected without such a program in place.
Traffic
The proposed Project includes the construction of a 72-unit apartment complex on a site that is currently occupied by an 18,782 sf commercial shopping center. The MND includes a Transportation Screening Assessment (TSA) to determine if a traffic impact analysis with a Level of Service (LOS) or Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis is necessary. The project has been assessed to determine if the preparation of a traffic impact analysis with level of service (LOS) analysis and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis is necessary using the City-established criteria as specified in the City of Fountain Valley Transportation Impact Assessment Guidelines for Land Use Projects in CEQA and for General Plan Consistency (June 2020) [“City TIA Guidelines”].
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
As specified in the City TIA Guidelines, the requirement to prepare a transportation impact study (with Level of Service analysis) should be based on the following criteria:
1. When either the AM or PM peak hour project trip generation exceeds 100 vehicle trips.
2. Projects that generate 1,600 or more average daily trips (ADT) on the Arterial Highway System.
3. Projects that generate 51 or more vehicle trips during either the AM or PM peak hour to any intersection.
The TSA determined that the proposed project would generate fewer than 50 peak hour trips and would not warrant the preparation of an LOS analysis. According to the TSA, the proposed project would generate approximately 471 daily trips, including 31 AM peak hour trips, and 37 PM peak hour trips. The TSA also concluded there would be approximately 547 fewer net daily trips, 13 fewer AM peak hour trips, and 86 fewer PM peak hour trips, associated with the proposed project compared to the current land use. Moreover, the proposed project is forecast to generate fewer than 50 peak hour trips to any intersection of two streets designated as Collector or higher on the City’s General Plan circulation system. Therefore, the project does not warrant the preparation of a transportation impact study with LOS analysis based on the Cityestablished screening criteria and LOS impacts may be presumed to be negligible.
The Transportation Screening Assessment also provided a VMT screening assessment in accordance with City TIA Guidelines, which were developed based on guidance from the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (State of California, December 2018) [“OPR Technical Advisory”].
VMT, signed into law in 2013 through SB 743, has changed the way transportation impacts are identified and analyzed. VMT refers to the total number of miles driven by all vehicles within a specific area and timeframe. It's essentially a measure of the amount of travel by private vehicles like cars, trucks, and motorcycles, regardless of the number of passengers. VMT is used to assess the impact of transportation on the environment, climate, and human health, as well as to evaluate the accessibility of destinations. VMT looks at metrics other than level of service (LOS) for identifying transportation impacts in CEQA documents. VMT is a key metric in transportation planning and policy-making, providing insights into travel demand and behavior.
The City TIA Guidelines identify screening criteria for certain types of projects that typically reduce VMT and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. To qualify for VMT screening, the project need only satisfy one of the following screening criteria:
Projects located within a Transit Priority Area (TPA) Projects located within a low VMT area
Project Type Screening
The VMT Analysis for the Project concluded that the Project would screen out as it is within a low VMT-generating area. As noted in the City Guidelines, “When a residential or office project is located within a low VMT-generating area it may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. In addition, other employment-related and mixed-use land use projects may qualify for the use of this screening if the project can
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
reasonably be expected to generate VMT per resident, per worker, or per service population that is similar to the existing land uses in the low VMT area.” City Guidelines include a map, shown below, (Appendix B: Low VMT-Generating Areas map from the City’s Transportation Impact Assessment Guidelines) indicating areas of low VMT within the City of Fountain Valley to assist in identifying such areas. The proposed residential land use type for the Project aligns with the existing land uses in the Project's transportation analysis zone (TAZ), and the Project is not expected to alter existing trip lengths or travel patterns within the TAZ. Furthermore, the Project is situated in an area where VMT per service population is 15% below the City's average.
Therefore, in accordance with the City of Fountain Valley’s guidelines, the proposed Project is exempt from the preparation of any further VMT analysis and is presumed to have a less than significant CEQA-related transportation impact.
The TSA also includes an Active Transportation and Public Transit Analysis. The Analysis notes that the project site is located on the south side of Warner Avenue and Warner Avenue is classified as a Major Arterial (6-lanes divided) on the City of Fountain Valley General Plan Mobility Element. On-street parking is restricted along the project frontage and there are no designated bike facilities currently on Warner Avenue east of Newland Street; however, there is
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
a Class I bike path to the east of the project site in the existing green belt from Warner Avenue to south of Ellis Avenue. Sidewalks are provided along the project frontage. There is an existing OCTA (Orange County Transit Authority) bus stop with bench/shelter for Route 72 in front of the project site, and the site plan calls for coordination with OCTA to relocate the bus stop approximately 115 feet to the east of its existing location.
Community Outreach and Public Input
Outside of the MND Public Comment period, over the last two years or so, staff has received 14 public comment letters in opposition to the Project. Concerns raised in the letters include concerns over traffic, density, homeless and trash, and privacy concerns. The letters are provided for Planning Commissions consideration under Attachment #5.
Applicant’s Public Outreach
The property owner conducted two community meetings to preview and discuss the proposed Project. One in December 2022 and another in November 2024. The 2022 meeting was held at the Project Site with four residents attending. The 2024 meeting was held at Heritage Park with three residents attending. Concerns raised by the residents at these meetings include:
Traffic impacts to Warner Avenue and Newland Street
Ingress and egress to the project
Potential noise impacts from air conditioner units
Overflow parking into the neighborhoods
Privacy impacts to El Rancho Avenue households
Short term construction impacts
Height of the walls along the eastern and southern property line.
Conclusion
If the General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment are approved, the proposed project would comply with all development standards of the Zoning Code with the exception of density, 3rd story setbacks, private open space, and parking. The applicant has applied for concessions to these standards which are permitted by Density Bonus Law. Additionally, the applicant has stated that a change to residential is the highest and best use for the site. A change in use for the site from commercial to residential is often considered a permanent change without the possibility of reversal. Additionally, the Project Site is not one of those listed in the Housing Element to meet the RHNA allocation of 4,839 units within the 2021-2029 Planning Period.
Rezoning a property for housing that is not listed as an opportunity site or within the sites inventory of a city’s approved Housing Element presents significant challenges as there is no “by-right” path to approval, the Zoning and General Plan changes are subject to City Council discretion, and the proposed change disrupts the city's pre-approved plan for meeting Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) requirements. The existing Housing Element sufficiently plans for the RHNA Allocation of 4,839 units without the Project Site. After 2029, the Project site could be considered as an opportunity site for the next RHNA Cycle. Moreover, in the case of the Proposed Project, removal of a commercial use for a residential use eliminates the site from future commercial tax revenue. The applicant notes that the current site produces little, to no, tax revenue, however a zone change from commercial to residential eliminates all potential for
Planning Commission Action – 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) – GPA 23-01, ZMA 436, PP 577, CUP 1929, and MND and MMRP
March 25, 2026
future commercial tax revenue through revitalization of the site. At the time of application, there was interest from commercial developers for the site, however, the property owner is not interested in selling the site or reinvesting to upgrade the center.
Notice Furnished
The item was published in the Orange County Register and public notices were posted at City Hall, Recreation Center, and Fountain Valley Library. Additionally, per the City’s new Public Notification Policy, the item was advertised on the Public Cable Television Authority channel, was posted on the City’s website, and notification was sent to all residents and occupants within 1,000 feet of the Project Site.
Alternatives
1. Direct staff to return with Resolutions approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration, recommending the City Council approve General Plan Amendment 23-01 and Zoning Map Amendment 436, and approving Precise Plan 577 and Conditional Use Permit 1929.
2. Direct staff to return with Resolutions denying the Mitigated Negative Declaration, recommending the City Council deny General Plan Amendment 23-01 and Zoning Map Amendment 436, and denying Precise Plan 577 and Conditional Use Permit 1929.
3. Continue this request for additional information.
Recommended Action:
Pleasure of the Planning Commission.
Prepared By: Steven Ayers, Principal Planner
Approved By: Omar Dadabhoy, Deputy City Manager/Community Development Director
Attachments:
1. Project Plans that include all Project Information, Plan Information Tables, Site Plans, Floor Plans, Elevation Plans, Tentative Tract Map Plans, Grading and Utility Plans, Lighting Plans, and Landscape Plans
2. Project Description Letter
3. Highest and Best Use Analysis
4. Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, Appendix J “Response to Comments on the Draft IS-MND”, and Appendix K “Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.” All other Appendices to the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration can be found on the Parkside FV Project webpage located at https://www.fountainvalley.gov/1531/Parkside-FV
5. Comment Letters Submitted to City Prior to MND Review Period
COVER SHEET G0.0 APPLICANT/OWNER: STELLRECHT CO., FV CENTER LP 1526 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 (714)898-7557 Contact: ROBERT STELLRECHT SHEET INDEX Project Team CIVIL: CIVIL ENGINEER Jones, Cahl & Associates Inc. 18090 Beach Blvd., Suite #12 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 848-0566 Contact:DANIEL RUBIO ARCHITECTURE G0.0 COVER SHEET G1.1 PROJECT SUMMARY G1.2 PROJECT RENDERINGS A1.1 SITE PLAN A1.1-1 SITE PLAN FACING RECESSES & PROJECTIONS A1.2 FIRE ACCESS PLAN A1.3 WASTE MANAGE SITE PLAN A1.3-1 TRASH ENCLOSURE#1 A1.3-2 TRASH ENCLOSURE#2 A2.1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN A2.2 SECOND FLOOR PLAN A2.3 THIRD FLOOR PLAN A2.4 ROOF PLANS A3.0 UNIT FLOOR PLANS A4.0 BUILDING ELEVATIONS A4.1 BUILDING ELEVATIONS A4.2 AMENITY ELEVATIONS A4.3 AMENITY ELEVATIONS A5.0 BUILDING SECTIONS A5.1 BUILDING SECTIONS A5.2 ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCULATION A6.0 MATERIAL BOARD LANDSCAPE L.1 EXISTING LANDSCAPE PLAN L.2 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN L.3 COURTYARD ENLARGEMENT PLAN L.4 IRRIGATION HYDROZONES PLAN L.5 TREE PLAN L.6 SHRUB PLAN L.7 SHRUB PLAN L.8 SHRUB PLAN L.9 SHRUB PLAN L.10 PLANTING IMAGERY L.11 WALL & FENCE PLANS L.12 WALL & FENCE ELEVATIONS CIVIL C.1 EXISTING SITE TOPOGRAPHY C.2 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN C.3 SECTIONS C.4 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN LIGHTING LT 1.1 SITE LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC LT 1.2 FIXTURE CUTSHEETS ARCHITECT: Architects Orange 144 N. Orange Street Orange, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 Contact: SCOTT RUTLEDGE LANDSCAPE: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AO (ARCHITECTS ORANGE) 144 N. ORANGE ST. ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 Contact: DIEGO ALESSI THE STELLRECHT COMPANY 15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 714-898-7557 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS 8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 01.06.2025 JOB NO.: 2021-401 VICINITY MAP NORTH N.T.S. SITE 405 F R E E W A Y
NEWLAND STREET WARNER AVENUE SLATER AVENUE
MAGNOLIA STREET 39 LIGHTING: KGM ARCHITECTURAL LIGHTING 270 Coral Circle El Segundo, C A 90 245 (310)753-7596 Contact: DAVE McCARROLL 2ND SUBMITTAL 3RD SUBMITTAL 1ST SUBMITTAL 03/05/2024 06/28/2024 1 07/20/2023 23 07/03/2024 4 4TH SUBMITTAL 10/18/2024 5 5TH SUBMITTAL 01/06/2025 Page 265 G1.1 THE STELLRECHT COMPANY 15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 714-898-7557 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS 8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 01.06.2025 JOB NO.: 2021-401 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROJECT DESCRIPTION GROSS LAND AREA: A 72 UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF 3-STORY TYPE - V RESIDENTIAL BUILDING WRAPPED AROUND A 2 - STORY TYPE - V AMENITY STRUCTURE 2.119 ACRES TOTAL UNITS: 72 UNITS DENSITY: 34 DUAC CONCESSIONS AND WAIVERS TABLE 72 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH A 14% DENSITY BONUS AND 15% AFFORDABLE UNITS (10 UNITS) 1.THIRD STORY 100' REAR SETBACK ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 2. PATIOS AND BALCONIES MINIMUM 100 SQ FT AND NO DIMENSION SMALLER THAN 10 FEET TWO (2) CONCESSIONS AND ONE (1) WAIVER FROM EXISTING R4 - HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BASED ON DENSITY BONUS FOR VERY LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS 1. ALLOW 37'-9” AND 73'-2” THIRD STORY SETBACK IN LIEU OF 100' REAR SETBACK 2. ALLOW 65 SQ FT IN LIEU OF 100 SQ FT FOR PATIOS AND BALCONIES AND NO DIMENSION SMALLER THAN SEVEN (7) FEET PROJECT SUMMARY THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL NO.1, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 131, PAGE 46 AND 47 OF PARCEL MAPS, ON THE OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPTING THEREFROM AN UNDIVIDED ONE-HALF INSERT IN ALL OIL, GAS, MINERALS AND HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES LYING BELOW THE DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, BUT WITHOUT THE RIGHT OF ENTRY UPON ANY PORTION OF THE SURFACE OF THE SAID LAND FOR REMOVING OR MARKETING OF THE SAID SUBSTANCES, AS RESERVED IN THE DEED FROM C.C. BREADING AND WIFE, RECORDED JULY 15, 1955 IN BOOK 3139, PAGE 583, OFFICIAL RECORDS. FOR CONVEYANCING PURPOSE ONLY: APN 167-361-17 GROSS LAND AREA: 92,325 S.F. R4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REQUESTED CONCESSIONS REQUIRED DENSITY REQUESTED WAIVER 1. 1 UNIT PER 1,452 SQ FT OF SITE AREA (30 UNITS PER ACRE) 1. ALLOW 1.13 UNIT PER 1,452 SQ FT OF SITE AREA (34 UNITS PER ACRE - 14% DENSITY BONUS)
PROJECT RENDERINGS DATE : 07.03.2024
NORTH / WEST ELEVATION: WARNER AVE.
NORTH / EAST ELEVATION: WARNER AVE. SOUTH / WEST ARIEL VIEW
NORTH / WEST ARIEL VIEW
G1.2 01.06.2025 10.18.2024
NORTH /WEST AERIAL VIEW SOUTH /WEST AERIAL VIEW
275'-0" TO CENTERLINE OF NEWLAND ST.
HB
A2 ABOVE
B4 ABOVE
A2 ABOVE 21'-2"
5'-0"
A2 ABOVE
25'-0" 25'-0"
15'-0" 14'-4"
25'-0" 25'-0" 10'-0" GATE
15 7
17 (3)
GARAGES
2 E X I S T I N G S I N G L E - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L A1
PL 240'-0"
384'-9"
PL
PL
PL 47'-0" 13'-0"
19'-6"
PATIO
PATIO
EV EV
EV EV EV EV 17'-0" 25'-0"
EXISTING
WESTMONT PARK
(SCE ROW) EXISTING
COMMERCIAL
EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
(E) 36" HT. CMU WALL TO
REMAIN W/ NEW 36" HT.
WI FENCE
3'-0"x 5'-0" WI FENCE & GATES
1BR EXISTING DRIVEWAY
TE-2
5'-0" HT. WI FENCE &
GATES 25'-0"
275'-0" TO CENTERLINE OF NEWLAND ST.
STO.
STO.
EV EV
TRANSFORMER
EXISTING
1-STORY
EXISTING BUILDING
2-STORY
BUILDING
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
25'-0"
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
BIKE STOR.
UTIL. 20'-0" 20'-0"
EV
HB 6'-0"
6'-2"
18'-4" 17'-4"
12'-3" 17'-4"
A2
11'-5"
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
#2
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
#1
13'-8"
EXISTING BUILDING
BATH
11'-4" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
LIVING/DINING
12'-2" X 8'-4" PATIO/BALC.
W.I.C. CB CB
12'-0" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
W.I.C. BATH
KITCHEN
B1
BATH
ENTRY
KITCHEN/LIVING
17'-7" X 12'-0"
10'-8" X 10'-0" DEN BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" CB CB CB CB 6'-6"
24'-4"
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
(6)
GARAGES
B4 ABOVE A2 ABOVE A2 ABOVE
(4)
GARAGES
20'-0"
A2 ABOVE
EV EV EV
E X I S T I N G S I N G L E - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L A1
B1
A1
A1
PL
PL
PL
PL
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
2BR
1BR
2BR
1BR
1BR
B3 EXISTING DRIVEWAY
TE-2
5'-0" HT. WI FENCE &
GATES
STO.
STO.
STO.
STO.
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
TE-1
TRELLIS STRUCTURE &
PATIO
STAIR #1
STAIR #2
STAIR #7
STAIR #8
7 17
2 9
EV EV
EV EV EV EV EV EV
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
EV
A2 ABOVE
B4 ABOVE
A2 ABOVE
(3)
GARAGES
(5)
GARAGES
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
A1 A1 B2
PATIO PATIO PATIO
1BR 1BR 2BR STO. STO. STO.
B1 B1
PATIO PATIO
2BR 2BR STO. STO.
A1 A1
PATIO PATIO
1BR 1BR STO. STO.
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
(6)
GARAGES
B4 ABOVE A2 ABOVE A2 ABOVE
(4)
GARAGES
B2
2BR
A2 ABOVE
EV EV EV
A1
C2
C2
C3
1BR
S
S
S
BALC
STO.
BALC
STO.
BALC
STO.
B4 ABOVE
PATIO STO.
PATIO
STO.
MAINT.
ROOM
UTILITY
ROOM
2 PAIR ROLLING
ENTRY GATE
HALL
HALL
HALL
PAIR EXIT GATE
10' W x 6' H
6'-0" 5'-0"
MAIL BOXES
5'-0"
13 12
OPEN SPACE/
AMENITY AREA 17'-0" 32'-9
1 2" 19'-0"
25'-6" 30'-9"
15'-6"
19'-0" 5'-0"
TRELLIS STRUCTURE
& PATIO
5'-0"
2 VAN
EV
2 BIKE STO.
ADA EV
EV
B4 ABOVE
(5)
GARAGES
BIKE STO.
ELECT. 5'-0"
(3)
GARAGES
EV
EV 4'-3"
EV
5'-0"
A2 ABOVE
HALL
B4 ABOVE
FIRE APPARATUS
TURNING RADIUS 17'-9" 5'-0" 5'-0"
19'-6"
AMENITY
CLUB HOUSE
663 SF
OFFICE
122 SF
10'-8" 18'-0"
19'-6"
6'-0" 15'-0
1 2" 166'-1"
2'-61
2"
139'-0"
124'-10" 9'-0"
121'-0" 2'-4"
27'-9" 21'-3" 9'-0"
83'-0"
63'-0"
17'-0" STAIR #3 STAIR #4 STAIR #5 STAIR #6
19'-0"
5'-0"
6" WIDE CURBS
5'-0"
5'-0"
9'-0"
5'-0"
6'-6" 5'-3"
5'-0" HT.GATE
18'-0" 5'-0" BIKE STO. 17'-0" 27'-0"
9'-0" TYP.
9'-0" TYP. 2'-0"
5'-0"
5'-0" 17'-0" 2'-0"5'-0"
30X48 CLEAR
FLOOR SPACE 30X48 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE 5'-0" 9'-0" 8'-0" 9'-0" 52'-3" 52'-3"
44'-8"9'-0" 8'-0" 9'-0" 27'-0"
EMERGENCY ACCESS FOR
ENTRANCE & EXIT 73'-2"
25'-0"
PATTERNED
CONCRETE
23'-0" TYP. 10'-0" TYP.
21'-0" TYP. 10'-0" TYP. 21'-0"TYP.
10'-0"TYP. 21'-0" TYP.
10'-0"TYP. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO.
STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. 2'-0"
2'-0" 10'-0"
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
01.06.2025
JOB NO.: 2021-401
SITE PLAN
A1.1
0 2' 10' 20' 30' 5' 40'
20'
N
VICINITY MAP
SITE
405 F R E E W A Y NEWLAND STREET
WARNER AVENUE
SLATER AVENUE MAGNOLIA STREET
39 1. THIS ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN IS PROVIDED FOR OVERALL SITE REFERENCE. THE LOCATION OF ITEMS INCLUDED IN THIS SET OF PLANS IS FOR AGENCY DEPARTMENT USE ONLY.
2. THIS SITE PLAN IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY, AS AN ARCHITECTURAL
PLAN FOR GENERAL LAYOUT AND IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES ONLY
3. FOR LOT LINE DIMENSIONS & HORIZONTAL CONTROL, SEE CIVIL
DRAWINGS
4. FOR HARDSCAPE AND ALL SITE IMPROVEMENTS, SEE LANDSCAPE
DRAWINGS
5. FOR "FIRE LANE" DESIGN, SEE CIVIL AND LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS
6. FOR PERIMETER FENCING, SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS
7. REFER TO CIVIL AND LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR SPECIFIC SITE
REQUIREMENTS
8. ALL PROPERTY LINES, EASEMENTS, AND BUILDINGS, EXISTING AND
PROPOSED ARE SHOWN ON THIS PLAN BUT MUST BE VERIFIED WITH
THE CIVIL PLANS
9. BUILDING SIGNAGE IS DESIGNED BY OTHERS AND INSTALLED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR.
10. SITE SIGNAGE IS DESIGNED BY OTHERS AND INSTALLED BY THE CONTRACTOR.
11. SITE WALLS ARE DESIGNED BY OTHERS
12. DECORATIVE SITE LIGHTING IS DESIGNED BY OTHERS.
13. SURFACE WATER MUST DRAIN AWAY FROM BUILDING SEE CIVIL AND LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR DRAINAGE DESIGN.
14. 15% OF THE UNITS ON THE SITE TO BE DEVELOPED AND OPERATED AS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
SITE PLAN NOTES
HB
E X I S T I N G S I N G L E - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L 1BR
HB
BATH
11'-4" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
LIVING/DINING
12'-2" X 8'-4" PATIO/BALC.
W.I.C. CB CB
12'-0" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
W.I.C. BATH
KITCHEN
BATH
ENTRY
KITCHEN/LIVING
17'-7" X 12'-0"
10'-8" X 10'-0" DEN BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" CB CB CB CB
E X I S T I N G S I N G L E - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L 2BR
1BR
2BR
1BR
1BR
1BR 1BR 2BR 2BR 2BR 1BR 1BR
2BR
1BR
S
S
S
30X48 CLEAR
FLOOR SPACE 30X48 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
01.06.2025
JOB NO.: 2021-401
A1.1-1
0 2' 10' 20' 30' 5' 40'
20'
N
12'-7" 26'-2" 24'-6" 23'-6" 45'-8" 25'-6" 7839'-11" 25'-6" 22'-9" 21'-2" 1'-7"12'-0" 9'-10" 26'-2" 12'-8" 14'-6" 24'-3" 11'-6" 12'-10" 11'-8" 34'-2" 11'-8" 14'-0" 11'-4" 21'-2" 12'-8" 4'-0" 8'-3" 14'-6" 24'-3" 21'-4" 25'-6" 21'-4" 24'-8" 11'-8" 3'-10" 3'-10" 3'-10"7'-10" 3'-11" 1'-6" 2'-5" 2'-10"
3'-10"
3'-10"
8'-4"
4'-8"
3'-10"
3'-2"
1'-2"
4'-0"
3'-10"
5'-5"
2'-10" 2'-6" 3'-10" 3'-10"3'-10"
8"
8'-4"
25'-4" 23'-10" 14'-8"
25'-0" 27'-0" 21'-2"
44'-8"
11'-5"
15'-0" 19'-0" 10'-8"
SITE PLAN FACING RECESSES & PROJECTIONS 5'-0"5'-0" 10'-0" 6'-5"
50'-0" 50'-0" 50'-0" 50'-0" 50'-0" 50'-0" 28'-6" 50'-0" 50'-0" 43'-3" 50'-0" 50'-0" 50'-0" 29'-8" 2'-5" 1'-6"
20'-0" WIDE FIRE
APPARATUS
ACCESS ROAD
20'-0" WIDE FIRE
APPARATUS
ACCESS ROAD
20'-0" WIDE FIRE
APPARATUS
ACCESS ROAD
15'-0" WIDE FIRE
APPARATUS
ACCESS ROAD
(E) FIRE HYDRANT 21'-2"
25'-0" 25'-0"
15'-0" 16'-10"
25'-0" 25'-0" 10'-0"
BIKE STO.
E X I S T I N G S I N G L E - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L A1
B1
A1
A1
PL 240'-0"
384'-9"
PL
PL
PL 13'-0"
19'-6"
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO 17'-0" 25'-0"
2BR
1BR
2BR
1BR
1BR
B3 EXISTING DRIVEWAY
5'-0" HT. WI FENCE &
GATES 25'-0"
STO.
STO.
STO.
STO.
25'-0"
BIKE STO.
ELECT. 6'-0"
7'-0"
BATH
11'-4" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
LIVING/DINING
12'-2" X 8'-4" PATIO/BALC.
W.I.C. CB CB
12'-0" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
W.I.C. BATH
KITCHEN
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
#1
13'-8"
12 17'-0" 19'-0"
9'-0" 5'-6" 19'-0"
STAIR #1
UTILITY
STAIR #2
STAIR #7
STAIR #8
15 7
17 2
9 EV EV
EV EV EV EV EV EV
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
EV
13 A2 ABOVE 2
B4 ABOVE
A2 ABOVE
(3)
GARAGES
(5)
GARAGES
(3)
GARAGES
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
A1 A1 B2
PATIO
PATIO PATIO
1BR 1BR 2BR STO. STO.
B1 B1
PATIO PATIO
2BR 2BR STO. STO.
A1 A1
PATIO PATIO
1BR 1BR STO. STO. BIKE STOR.
6'-6"STAIR #4
24'-4"
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
(6)
GARAGES
B4 ABOVE A2 ABOVE A2 ABOVE
(4)
GARAGES BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" 2 20'-1"
10'-8" CB CB CB CB BIKE STO.
B2
2BR
A2 ABOVE
EV EV EV
A1
C2
C2
C3
1BR
S
S
S
STO.
STO.
STO.
STO.
B4 ABOVE
PATIO STO.
PATIO
STO. STO.
ADA EV
EV
5'-0"
EV
5'-0"
A2 ABOVE
B4 ABOVE
(5)
GARAGES
PAIR ROLLING
ENTRY GATE
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
(E) 6'-0" HT. CMU WALL TO
REMAIN, RE-STUCCO
(E) 36" HT. CMU WALL TO REMAIN W/ NEW 36" HT. WI FENCE
6'-0"
MAINT.
ROOM
UTILITY
ROOM5'-0"
MAIL BOXES 5'-0"4'-3" 17'-9"
2 18'-0" 2'-4"
HB TE-2
18'-4" 17'-4"
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
#2
TE-2 5'-0"
HB
12'-3" 17'-4"
TE-1 5'-0" STAIR #3 STAIR #5 STAIR #6
30X48 CLEAR
FLOOR SPACE 30X48 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE
PAIR EXIT GATE
10' W x 6' H 27'-0"
11'-5"
44'-8"
OPEN SPACE/
AMENITY AREA 5'-0"
TRELLIS STRUCTURE
& PATIO
VAN
EV
3'-0"x 5'-0" WI FENCE & GATES
5'-0" HT.GATE
EMERGENCY ACCESS FOR
ENTRANCE & EXIT
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
AMENITY
CLUB HOUSE
663 SF
OFFICE
122 SF STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO.
STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. 3'-0"
NEW FIRE HYDRANT 213'-10" HOSE PULL -LAY
177'-10"
140'-8" 150'-0" HOSE PULL -LAY 80'-0" HOSE PULL- LAY
70'-0"
HOSE PULL-LAY
117'-0"
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
01.06.2025
JOB NO.: 2021-401
A1.2
N
1. FIRE LANE SIGNAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED IN LUIE OF RED-STRIPING AT CURBS, SEE SAMPLE THIS PAGE.
2. A CLASS 1 STANDPIPE SYSTEM SHALL BE PROVIDED IN ALL
STAIRWELLS ON ALL LEVELS INCLUDING THE ROOF AS SET FORTH BY BUILDING CODE AND FIRE CODE 905. STANDPIPES LOCATED
BETWEEN STAIRWELLS MAY ALSO BE REQUIRED.
3. AN AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND FIRE ALARM AS SET FORTH BY FIRE CODE 903 AND 907.SHALL BE PROVIDED.
4. DWELLING UNITS AND COMMON AREAS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH VISIBLE ALARM NOTIFICATION APPLIANCES.
5. SMOKE ALARMS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN EACH ROOM FOR SLEEPING
PURPOSES AND AT A POINT CENTRALLY LOCATED IN THE
CORRIDOR OR AREA GIVING ACCESS TO EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA.
6. CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS SHALL BE PROVIDED EITHER WITHIN
ALL SLEEPING UNITS OR ELSE THE BUILDING SHALL BE PROVIDED
WITH A CARBON MONOXIDE ALARM SYSTEM THAT PROTECTS ALL
COMMON AREAS.
7. A MINIMUM OF ONE RATED STAIRWELL SHALL EXTEND TO THE ROOF FOR EACH BUILDING.
8. ALL RATED EXIT STAIRWELLS SHALL HAVE KEYED EXTERIOR DOORS ON THE GROUND LEVEL. KNOX BOXES SHALL BE PROVIDED
ADJACENT TO ALL EXIT STAIRWELL EXTERIOR DOORS AT APPROVED LOCATIONS. A KNOX BOX SHALL ALSO BE PROVIDED ADJACENT TO
THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF ALL BUILDINGS AT AN APPROVED
LOCATION.
9. AN APPROVED NUMBER OR ADDRESS SHALL BE PROVIDED ON ALL
NEW BUILDINGS IN SUCH A POSITION AS TO BE PLAINLY VISIBLE AND LEGIBLE FROM THE STREET OR ROAD FRONTING THE PROPERTY.
NUMBERS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 6-INCH HIGH BY 1/2-INCH
STROKE AND BE A CONTRASTING BACKGROUND.
10. PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CFC.
11. A MINIMUM OF ONE STANDPIPE SYSTEM FOR USE DURING
CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROVIDED. SUCH STANDPIPE SHALL BE
INSTALLED WHEN THE PROGRESS OF CONSTRUCTION IS NOT MORE THAN 40 FEET IN HEIGHT ABOVE THE LOWEST LEVEL OF FIRE
DEPARTMENT ACCESS.
SHEET NOTES
LEGEND
NOTE:
BCDV TO CIVIL NEW HYDRANT
1.0 PROVIDE KNOX BOXES AT ALL GATES AND
PASSAGEWAYS WITH A GRAND MASTER KEY
FIRE ACCESS LANE
(28' WIDE)
EXISTING STREET
FIRE HYDRANT
REFER TO CIVIL
FIRE ACCESS PLAN
LADDER PAD 4'-0"x5'-0"
AND 6" DEEP
21'-2"
25'-0" 25'-0"
15'-0" 16'-10"
25'-0" 25'-0" 10'-0"
BIKE STO.
E X I S T I N G S I N G L E - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L A1
B1
A1
A1
PL 240'-0"
384'-9"
PL
PL
PL 13'-0"
19'-6"
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO 17'-0" 25'-0" W.I.C. W.I.C. DW KITCHEN BATH BATH 11'-9" X 10'-8" LIVING 11'-11" X 12'-0" BEDROOM 11'-0" X 13'-0" BEDROOM SHWR. REF. 11'-7" X 10'-1" PATIO/BALC. ENTRYCOATS L. L. SHWR. 2BR
1BR
2BR
1BR
1BR
B3 EXISTING DRIVEWAY
5'-0" HT. WI FENCE &
GATES 25'-0"
STO.
STO.
STO.
STO.
25'-0"
BIKE STO.
ELECT. 6'-0"
7'-0"
BATH
11'-4" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
LIVING/DINING
12'-2" X 8'-4" PATIO/BALC.
W.I.C. CB CB
12'-0" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
W.I.C. BATH
KITCHEN
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
#1
13'-8"
12 17'-0" 19'-0"
9'-0" 5'-6" 19'-0"
STAIR #1
UTILITY
STAIR #2
STAIR #7
STAIR #8
15 7
17 2
9 EV EV
EV EV EV EV EV EV
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
EV
13 A2 ABOVE 2
B4 ABOVE
A2 ABOVE
(3)
GARAGES
(5)
GARAGES
(3)
GARAGES
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
A1 A1 B2
PATIO
PATIO PATIO
1BR 1BR 2BR STO. STO.
B1 B1
PATIO PATIO
2BR 2BR STO. STO.
A1 A1
PATIO PATIO
1BR 1BR STO. STO. BIKE STOR.
6'-6"STAIR #4
24'-4"
W.I.C.
W.I.C.
DW
KITCHEN
BATH
BATH
11'-9" X 10'-8" LIVING
11'-11" X 12'-0" BEDROOM
11'-0" X 13'-0" BEDROOM
SHWR.
REF.
11'-7" X 10'-1" PATIO/BALC.
ENTRY
COATS
L.
L. SHWR.
W.I.C.
W.I.C.
DW
KITCHEN
BATH
BATH
11'-9" X 10'-8" LIVING
11'-11" X 12'-0" BEDROOM
11'-0" X 13'-0" BEDROOM
SHWR.
REF.
11'-7" X 10'-1" PATIO/BALC.
ENTRY
COATS
L.
L. SHWR.
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
(6)
GARAGES
B4 ABOVE A2 ABOVE A2 ABOVE
(4)
GARAGES BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" 2 20'-1"
10'-8"
BATH
11'-4" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
LIVING/DINING
12'-2" X 8'-4" PATIO/BALC.
W.I.C. CB CB
12'-0" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
W.I.C. BATH
KITCHEN
BATH
11'-4" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
LIVING/DINING
12'-2" X 8'-4" PATIO/BALC.
W.I.C. CB CB
12'-0" X 11'-8" BEDROOM
W.I.C. BATH
KITCHEN BIKE STO.
B2
2BR
A2 ABOVE
EV EV EV
A1
C2
C2
C3
1BR
S
S
S
STO.
STO.
STO.
STO.
B4 ABOVE
PATIO STO.
PATIO
STO. STO.
ADA EV
EV
5'-0"
EV
5'-0"
A2 ABOVE
B4 ABOVE
(5)
GARAGES
PAIR ROLLING
ENTRY GATE
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
(E) 6'-0" HT. CMU WALL TO
REMAIN, RE-STUCCO
(E) 36" HT. CMU WALL TO REMAIN W/ NEW 36" HT. WI FENCE
6'-0"
MAINT.
ROOM
UTILITY
ROOM5'-0"
MAIL BOXES 5'-0"4'-3" 17'-9"
2 18'-0" 2'-4"
HB TE-2
18'-4" 17'-4"
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
#2
TE-2 5'-0"
HB
12'-3" 17'-4"
TE-1 5'-0" STAIR #3 STAIR #5 STAIR #6
30X48 CLEAR
FLOOR SPACE 30X48 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE
PAIR EXIT GATE
10' W x 6' H 27'-0"
11'-5"
44'-8"
OPEN SPACE/
AMENITY AREA 5'-0"
TRELLIS STRUCTURE
& PATIO
VAN
EV
3'-0"x 5'-0" WI FENCE & GATES
5'-0" HT.GATE
EMERGENCY ACCESS FOR
ENTRANCE & EXIT
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
AMENITY
CLUB HOUSE
663 SF
OFFICE
122 SF STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO.
STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. 3'-0"
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
01.06.2025
JOB NO.: 2021-401
A1.3
N
1. RESIDENTS SHALL MANUALLY TRANSPORT TRASH TO ENCLOSURES
HAULER TO PULL CONTAINERS OUT OF STAGING AREA FOR
COLLECTION AND PUSH BACK AFTER EMPTYING
2. HAULER TO PULL CONTAINERS OUT OF STAGING AREA FOR
COLLECTION AND PUSH BACK AFTER EMPTYING.
3. NOTE THAT TOTER CARTS WILL BE SERVICED BY SIDE-LOAD
COLLECTION VEHICLE AND CONTAINERS WILL BE SERVICED BY
FRONT-LOAD COLLECTION VEHICLE.
4. RECYCLING, WASTE, AND COMPOST TO BE STAGED AND
COLLECTED ON SEPARATE DAYS.
SHEET NOTES
TRASH ROUTE / STAGING PLAN.
1. ANY DESIGNS OR SOLUTIONS SHOWN IN DRAWING, EITHER DIRECT
OR IMPLIED, ARE HEREBY CLARIFIED AS EXAMPLES AND SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE DESIGNS FOR CONSTRUCTION. THESE
DRAWINGS ARE INTENDED TO SUPPLEMENT THE SUBMITTAL
PACKAGE FROM ARCHITECT.
2. ANY PARTIAL INFORMATION, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURATE
DESCRIPTIONS OF WORK SHOWN IN DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE
NECESSARY TO PERFORM THE SCOPE OF WORK, SHALL NOT
RELIEVE THE CONTRACTOR FROM COMPLETION OF WORK. ALL
WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED TO SATISFY THE MINIMUM
REQUIREMENTS OF THE CURRENT APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND
CONDITIONS PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE ARCHITECT
SHALL BE PROMPTLY NOTIFIED OF ANY INCONSISTENCIES AND/OR DISCREPANCIES.
GENERAL NOTES
RESIDENT PATH OF TRAVEL FROM RESIDENCE TO TRASH ENCLOSURE LEGEND
COLLECTION VEHICLE PATH OF TRAVEL FROM ENTRY, THRU
PROPERTY AND TO AND FROM TRASH ENCLOSURE AREAS
FRONT-LOAD
CONTAINER
HEIL 28CY FRONT-LOAD
COLLECTION VEHICLE
FRONT-LOAD COLLECTION VEHICLE
SHOWN LOADING CONTAINERS (NTS)
WASTE MANAGE PLAN
HB 3- 4- 5-6- 7- 3- 4- 5-6- 7-
6'-0" 1'-6"
7'-6" F. GRADE T. OF WALL T. OF POST (F.F.) T. OF ADJ. SIDEWALK 3'-9""
46" MAX. 24" MAX. True North 9 3'-8" 6'-3" 3 8" 12'-3" 5 12" C-CHANNELS ALL AROUND TRASH ENCLOSURE FASCIA K E Y N O T E S 12 1 1/2" GALVANIZED CORRUGATED METAL DECK ROOF SLOPE 1/8" PER FT. 3 HSS WIDE FLANGE COLUMNS SEE STRUCTURAL 4 HSS WIDE FLANGE BEAMS, SEE STRUCTURAL 56 4X4 HSS POSTS AT GATE JAMB TYPICAL, SEE STRUCTURAL 7 3X3 HSS GATE FRAMES AND CORRUGATE PANEL INFILLED STL. FRAMES 8 BOLT CANES, SEE DETAIL 16/- AND 17/- 9 2" PRECAST CONCRETE CAP LOCK AS REQUIRED PER CITY ZONING ORDINANCE 10 7/8" SKIM COAT STUCCO OVER PRECISION BLOCK 8X8X16, PAINT TO MATCH BLDG. COLOR 11 8X8X16 PRECISION BLOCK 12 6" CONCRETE CURB 13 CONRETE SLAB OVER COMPACTED BASE PER SOIL REPORT, SEE STRUCT. DWG. G E N E R A L N O T E S 1. EXTERIOR STUCCO SHALL MATCH MAIN BUILDING COLOR UNLESS NOTICED OTHERWISE. 2. CORRUGATE METAL DECK ROOF SHALL BE PAINTED AT ROOF AND UNDERSIDE CEILING; COLOR TO BE SELECTED BY THE ARCHITECT. 3. ALL EXPOSED STEEL BASE PLATES, COLUMNS, BEAM, GATES, CANES, LOCKS AND HINGES SHALL BE PAINTED; COLOR TO BE SELECTED BY THE ARCHITECT. 4. CONCRETE SLAB, CURBS AND APRON SHALL MEET CITY STANDARD AND TRASH COMPANY REQUIREMENT. 5. PRECAST CONCRETE CAP SHALL BE INTEGRAL COLOR DAVIDS' COLOR AND SMOOTH GRADE. 6. G.C. TO PROVIDE BOLLARDS AS REQUIRED TO PREVENT STRUCTURAL DAMAGE. 14 BASE PLATES, SEE STRUCTURAL 15 DRILL 8" DEPTH FOR CANE SLEEVE, SEE DETAIL 17/- 16 8" DIA X 4FT HEIGHT CONCRETE BOLLARD WITH TRAFFIC IMPACT DESIGN, SEE STRUCT. DWG 17 CONCRETE APRON PER CITY STANDARD REQUIREMENT, SEE SITE PLAN FOR MORE INFORMATION 18 SOLAR PANELS TO BE MOUNTED TO METAL DECK ROOF PER FVMC 21.18.100 (4) (D), THE PROPOSED TRASH ENCLOSURE AREAS SHALL BE WELL LIT WITH A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) FOOTCANDLE. lIGHTING WILL BE PROVIDED PER THIS CODE REQUIREMENT. 19 ENLARGED TRASH ENCLOSURE #1 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 TRASH ENCLOSURE ROOF 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 TRASH ENCLOSURE EAST ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" 3 TRASH ENCLOSURE WEST ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" 4 TRASH NORTH ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" 5 TRASH SOUTH ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" 6 TRASH ENCLOSURE SECTION 1/4" = 1'-0" 7 THE STELLRECHT COMPANY 15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 714-898-7557 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS 8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 01.06.2025 JOB NO.: 2021-401 A1.3-1 True North 1 38 7 1 38 7 1 38 7 1 38 7 11104 A-1.4-3 8 A-1.4-3TYP. TYP. 12 18 6 17'-4"
HB 3- 4- 5-6- 7-
6'-0" 3'-0"
9'-0"
6'-0"
3'-0"
9'-0" 3- 4- 5-6- 7-
6'-0" 1'-6"
7'-6" F. GRADE T. OF WALL T. OF POST (F.F.) T. OF ADJ. SIDEWALK 3'-9""
46" MAX. 24" MAX. 12" C-CHANNELS ALL AROUND TRASH ENCLOSURE FASCIA K E Y N O T E S 12 1 1/2" GALVANIZED CORRUGATED METAL DECK ROOF SLOPE 1/8" PER FT. 3 HSS WIDE FLANGE COLUMNS SEE STRUCTURAL 4 HSS WIDE FLANGE BEAMS, SEE STRUCTURAL 56 4X4 HSS POSTS AT GATE JAMB TYPICAL, SEE STRUCTURAL 7 3X3 HSS GATE FRAMES AND CORRUGATE PANEL INFILLED STL. FRAMES 8 BOLT CANES, SEE DETAIL 16/- AND 17/- 9 2" PRECAST CONCRETE CAP LOCK AS REQUIRED PER CITY ZONING ORDINANCE 10 7/8" SKIM COAT STUCCO OVER PRECISION BLOCK 8X8X16, PAINT TO MATCH BLDG. COLOR 11 8X8X16 PRECISION BLOCK 12 6" CONCRETE CURB 13 CONRETE SLAB OVER COMPACTED BASE PER SOIL REPORT, SEE STRUCT. DWG. G E N E R A L N O T E S 1. EXTERIOR STUCCO SHALL MATCH MAIN BUILDING COLOR UNLESS NOTICED OTHERWISE. 2. CORRUGATE METAL DECK ROOF SHALL BE PAINTED AT ROOF AND UNDERSIDE CEILING; COLOR TO BE SELECTED BY THE ARCHITECT. 3. ALL EXPOSED STEEL BASE PLATES, COLUMNS, BEAM, GATES, CANES, LOCKS AND HINGES SHALL BE PAINTED; COLOR TO BE SELECTED BY THE ARCHITECT. 4. CONCRETE SLAB, CURBS AND APRON SHALL MEET CITY STANDARD AND TRASH COMPANY REQUIREMENT. 5. PRECAST CONCRETE CAP SHALL BE INTEGRAL COLOR DAVIDS' COLOR AND SMOOTH GRADE. 6. G.C. TO PROVIDE BOLLARDS AS REQUIRED TO PREVENT STRUCTURAL DAMAGE. 14 BASE PLATES, SEE STRUCTURAL 15 DRILL 8" DEPTH FOR CANE SLEEVE, SEE DETAIL 17/- 16 8" DIA X 4FT HEIGHT CONCRETE BOLLARD WITH TRAFFIC IMPACT DESIGN, SEE STRUCT. DWG 17 CONCRETE APRON PER CITY STANDARD REQUIREMENT, SEE SITE PLAN FOR MORE INFORMATION 18 SOLAR PANELS TO BE MOUNTED TO METAL DECK ROOF PER FVMC 21.18.100 (4) (D), THE PROPOSED TRASH ENCLOSURE AREAS SHALL BE WELL LIT WITH A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) FOOTCANDLE. lIGHTING WILL BE PROVIDED PER THIS CODE REQUIREMENT. 19 True North ENLARGED TRASH ENCLOSURE #2 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 TRASH ENCLOSURE ROOF 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 TRASH ENCLOSURE EAST ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" 3 TRASH ENCLOSURE WEST ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" 4 TRASH NORTH ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" 5 TRASH SOUTH ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" 6 True North TRASH ENCLOSURE SECTION 1/4" = 1'-0" 7 9 8 10 511 5 6'-3" 3 6'-3" 1 3 3'-8" 2" 12" 18'-4" 1 3 THE STELLRECHT COMPANY 15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 714-898-7557 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS 8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 01.06.2025 JOB NO.: 2021-401 A1.3-2 1 1 1 3 3388 8 7 7 7 7 8 4 A-1.4-3 8 A-1.4-3TYP. TYP. 12 18 18 17'-4"
21'-2"
25'-0" 25'-0"
15'-0" 16'-10"
25'-0" 25'-0" 10'-0"
BIKE STO.
E X I S T I N G S I N G L E - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L A1
B1
A1
A1
PL 240'-0"
384'-9"
PL
PL
PL 13'-0"
19'-6"
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO 17'-0" 25'-0"
2BR
1BR
2BR
1BR
1BR
B3 EXISTING DRIVEWAY
5'-0" HT. WI FENCE &
GATES 25'-0"
STO.
STO.
STO.
STO.
25'-0"
BIKE STO.
ELECT. 6'-0"
7'-0" CB CB
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
#1
13'-8"
12 17'-0" 19'-0"
9'-0" 5'-6" 19'-0"
STAIR #1
UTILITY
STAIR #2
STAIR #7
STAIR #8
15 7
17 2
9 EV EV
EV EV EV EV EV EV
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
EV
13 A2 ABOVE 2
B4 ABOVE
A2 ABOVE
(3)
GARAGES
(5)
GARAGES
(3)
GARAGES
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
EV
A1 A1 B2
PATIO
PATIO PATIO
1BR 1BR 2BR STO. STO.
B1 B1
PATIO PATIO
2BR 2BR STO. STO.
A1 A1
PATIO PATIO
1BR 1BR STO. STO. BIKE STOR.
6'-6"STAIR #4
24'-4"
EV EV EV EV EV EV EV
(6)
GARAGES
B4 ABOVE A2 ABOVE A2 ABOVE
(4)
GARAGES BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" 2 20'-1"
10'-8" CB CB CB CB BIKE STO.
B2
2BR
A2 ABOVE
EV EV EV
A1
C2
C2
C3
1BR
S
S
S
STO.
STO.
STO.
STO.
B4 ABOVE
PATIO STO.
PATIO
STO. STO.
ADA EV
EV
5'-0"
EV
5'-0"
A2 ABOVE
B4 ABOVE
(5)
GARAGES
PAIR ROLLING
ENTRY GATE
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
HALL
(E) 6'-0" HT. CMU WALL TO
REMAIN, RE-STUCCO
(E) 36" HT. CMU WALL TO REMAIN W/ NEW 36" HT. WI FENCE
6'-0"
MAINT.
ROOM
UTILITY
ROOM5'-0"
MAIL BOXES 5'-0"4'-3" 17'-9"
2 18'-0" 2'-4"
HB TE-2
18'-4" 17'-4"
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
#2
TE-2 5'-0"
HB
12'-3" 17'-4"
TE-1 5'-0" STAIR #3 STAIR #5 STAIR #6
30X48 CLEAR
FLOOR SPACE 30X48 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE
PAIR EXIT GATE
10' W x 6' H 27'-0"
11'-5"
44'-8"
OPEN SPACE/
AMENITY AREA 5'-0"
TRELLIS STRUCTURE
& PATIO
VAN
EV
3'-0"x 5'-0" WI FENCE & GATES
5'-0" HT.GATE
EMERGENCY ACCESS FOR
ENTRANCE & EXIT
PATIO
PATIO
PATIO
AMENITY
CLUB HOUSE
663 SF
OFFICE
122 SF STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO.
STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. 3'-0"
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
01.06.2025
JOB NO.: 2021-401 FIRST FLOOR PLAN
A2.1
0 2' 10' 20' 30' 5' 40'
20'
N
21'-2" 11'-5"
39'-2"
73'-2"
25'-0" 44'-8" ROOF CANOPY W/ SOLAR PANELS ROOF CANOPY ROOF CANOPY ROOF CANOPY W/ SOLAR PANELS CB BATH
ENTRY
KITCHEN/LIVING
17'-7" X 12'-0" BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" 10'-8" X 10'-0" DEN BATH
ENTRY
KITCHEN/LIVING
17'-7" X 12'-0" CBCB
CB
CB
CB ROOF ROOF
CB CB
CB CB BALC BALC A1 B1 A1A1 B3 B4 BALC BALC A2A2 BALC BALC BALC STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. BALC STO. BALC BALC BALC B4 A2 A2 STO.
STO.
STO. A1 A3
STO.
STO. B1
STO.
STO. A1 A1 STAIR #3 STAIR #4
STO.
STO. BALC
STO. A2 BALC STO. BALCSTO. BALCSTO. BALCSTO. BALC STO. BALC STO. BALC STO. BALC STO. B4B4 A2 A1 B2 B1 B2C1 C2 C3 2BR 2BR 1BR 2BR1BR 1BR 1BR 1BR 2BR 1BR 1BR 2BR 1BR 1BR 1BR 1BR 1BR 2BR 2BR 1BR 1BR 2BR 2BR 2BR SS S 27'-0" UTILITY
CB CB BALC BALC BALC BALC BALC BALC
STO. TRELLIS ROOF LEAN-TO ROOF LEAN-TO ROOF 15' - 4" 15' - 4" 20' - 0" SOFFIT HEIGHT CEILING HEIGHT SOFFIT HEIGHT BALC 10'-0" THE STELLRECHT COMPANY 15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 714-898-7557 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS 8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 01.06.2025 JOB NO.: 2021-401 SECOND. FLOOR PLAN A2.2 0 2' 10' 20' 30' 5' 40' 20' N Page 275 CBCB BALC 2BR A1 B1 A1A1 2BR 1BR 2BR1BR 1BR B3 B4 BALC BALC A2 1BRA2 1BR BALC 21'-2" 11'-5"
39'-2"
73'-2"
25'-0" 14'-10" BALC BALC ROOF CANOPY W/ SOLAR PANELS STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. STO. ROOF CANOPY ROOF CANOPY ROOF CANOPY W/ SOLAR PANELS BALC STO.
CB
CB 2BR BALC B4 A2 1BR A2 1BR
STO.
STO.
STO. A1 A1 1BR 1BR
STO.
STO. B12BR
STO.
STO. A1 A1 1BR 1BR STAIR #3 STAIR #4
STO.
STO.
CB
STO. A2 1BR A11BR
STO. 10'-8" CB
BATH
ENTRY
KITCHEN/LIVING
17'-7" X 12'-0"
CB CB
CB BALC CB STO. BALC STO. BALCSTO. BALCSTO. BALCSTO. BALC STO. BALC STO. BALC STO. 2BR B42BR B41BRA2 1BRA12BRB2 2BRB2 B1 2BR SC1SC2 SC3 UTILITY STAIR #5 STAIR #6 STAIR #7 STAIR #8 STO.
CB CB BALC BALC BALC BALC BALC BALC BALC LEAN-TO ROOF LEAN-TO ROOF ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW 27'-0" TRELLIS ROOF
37'-9" BALC BALC BALC BALC BALC THE STELLRECHT COMPANY 15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 714-898-7557 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS 8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 01.06.2025 JOB NO.: 2021-401 THIRD FLOOR PLAN A2.3 0 2' 10' 20' 30' 5' 40' 20' N Page 276 18'-10"
27'-0"
73'-2" ROOF CANOPY W/ SOLAR PANELS ROOF CANOPY ROOF CANOPY ROOF CANOPY W/ SOLAR PANELS TPO ROOFING STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF TPO ROOFING TPO ROOFING TPO ROOFING STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF STAIR ENTRY STOOP AWNING STAIR ENTRY STOOP AWNING STAIR ENTRY STOOP AWNING STAIR ENTRY STOOP AWNING HIGH ROOF HIGH ROOF HIGH ROOF TPO ROOFING OPEN TRELLIS ROOF OPEN TRELLIS ROOF STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF STAIR ENTRY STOOP AWNING STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF LEAN-TO ROOF LEAN-TO ROOF SLOPE TO DRAIN 1/4" PER FT. MIN.
SLOPE TO DRAIN
1/4" PER FT. MIN.
SLOPE TO DRAIN
1/4" PER FT. MIN. ROOF TOP MECHANICAL UNITS ROOF TOP MECHANICAL UNITS, ROOF TOP MECHANICAL UNITS SLOPE TO DRAIN 1/4" PER FT. MIN.
SLOPE TO DRAIN
1/4" PER FT. MIN. ROOF TOP MECHANICAL UNITS THE STELLRECHT COMPANY 15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 714-898-7557 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS 8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 01.06.2025 ROOF PLAN JOB NO.: 2021-401 A2.4 0 2' 10' 20' 30' 5' 40' 20' N G E N E R A L N O T E S 1. ALL MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS AND ROOF SYSTEMS TO BE INSTALLED PER MANUF. INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS AND PRODUCT LISTINGS. 2. ALL ELEVATIONS INDICATED ON THE ROOF PLAN ARE TAKEN FROM THE TOP OF ROOF SHEATHING OF THE DWELLING UNIT IMMEDIATELY BELOW UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3. REFER TO BUILDING ELEVATIONS OR SECTIONS FOR ROOF TO WALL INTERSECTION FLASHING DETAILS. 4. NO ROOF PENETRATIONS SUCH AS: ATTIC VENTS, PLUMBING VENT PIPES, CHIMNEY, HVAC LINE SETS, MECHANICAL CURBS, SOLAR PANELS RACK SUPPORTS, ETC. ARE TO BE LOCATED WITHIN 1'-6" FROM ROOF SWALES OR VALLEYS. 5. LOCATION OF ROOF VENTS ARE APPROXIMATE. FIELD CONDITIONS MAY REQUIRE RELOCATION. 6. INSTALL ROOFING MATERIALS OVER 1/4" DENSDECK PER MANF'S PRINTED INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS. 7. DRAFTSTOPS SHALL BE CONTINUOUS TO UNDER SIDE OF ROOF SHEATHING INCLUDING BUILD-UP CRICKETS, AND TO FACE OF EXTERIOR WALL. 8. ROOFER TO PRIME AND PAINT ALL NON-ARCHITECTURAL ROOF PENETRATIONS, SUCH AS: ROOF VENTS, PLUMBING VENTS, MECHANICAL VENTS, ETC. TO MATCH ADJACENT ROOFING, (U.N.O.) 9. IF REQUIRED, CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING BIRD WIRE ON BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO POOL. 10. ATTIC VENTS LOCATED IN WALLS RECEIVING EXTERIOR PLASTER, OR MANUFACTURED SIDING ARE TO BE INSTALLED WITH S.A.B.F IN CONFORMANCE WITH WINDOW OPENING FLEXIBLE SUB-FLASHING DETAIL. 11. ATTIC VENTILATION TO BE PROVIDED AT ALL FLAT, PITCHED AND CATHEDRAL FRAMED ROOF, PER CBC CHAPTER 12 ATTIC VENTILATION RATIO WILL BE: a. SQUARE FOOT OF ATTIC AREA b. 1/300 OF ROOF AREA WHEN 50% OF REQUIRED VENTS OCCUR AT EAVE OR CORNICE ELEVATIONS AND REMAINING VENTS OCCUR 3'-0" OR GREATER ABOVE EAVE OR CORNICE ELEVATION. c. CROSS VENTILATION IS REQUIRED AT ALL ROOF AREAS. AT ROOF WHERE ONLY ONE (1) VENT IS REQUIRED, TWO (2) VENTS WILL OCCUR TO MEET CROSS VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS. d. THE REQUIRED FREE FLOW AREA IN THE LOWER PORTION OF THE ATTIC SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A DORMER VENT LOCATED A MAXIMUM OF 6'-0" FROM EAVE IN ORDER FOR THEM TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENT THAT THEY BE LESS THAN 3'-0" VERTICAL ABOVE THE EAVE. 12. IN CONFORMANCE WITH C.B.C SECTION 1203.2.1 ALL ATTIC VENTS TO BE COVERED WITH: 1/4" GRID CORROSION RESISTANT WIRE MESH. 13. WHERE MANUFACTURED FLASHING SYSTEMS ARE INDICATED, PROVIDE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE CORNER PIECES, SPLICE PIECES, STOPS, ETC. FROM THE FLASHING MANUFACTURER WHEN INDICATED TO BE PART OF SYSTEM FOR A COMPLETE WARRANTY SYSTEM. 14. PROVIDE SPUN CAP FLASHING AT ALL VENT STACKS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 15. ROOF MEMBRANE TO EXTEND UP ATTIC VENTS, VENT PIPES, CURBS, WALLS, PLATFORMS, ETC., A MINIMUM 8", UNLESS PHYSICALLY ATTACHED TO A MANUFACTURED PRODUCT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ROOF MEMBRANE. 16. PER THE N.F.P.A., SPRINKLER INSTALLATION HANDBOOK, VOID SPACES WHERE SPRINKLERS ARE REQUIRED MAY BE PACKED WITH GLASS FIBER INSULATION IN LIEU OF PROVIDING SPRINKLERS. WHERE INSULATION IS INSTALLED, PROVIDE A 1" CLEARANCE FROM UNDERSIDE OR ROOF SHEATHING WITH CONNECTIVITY TO ATTIC VENTS FOR ATTIC VENTILATION PER 120. 17. CONCEALED ROOF/ATTIC VOID SPACES WITH HEAD CLEARANCE GREATER THAN 30" BETWEEN BOTTOM OF RAFTERS AND TOP OF CEILING JOISTS, OR BETWEEN TOP AND BOTTOM EDGES OF TRUSS CHORDS TO BE PROVIDED WITH MIN. 20" x 30" CLEAR ATTIC ACCESS PER C.B.C. SECTION 1209.2. WHERE ATTIC ACCESS OCCURS IN FIRE RATED ASSEMBLY, PROVIDE RATED, SELF-CLOSING ACCESS EQUIVALENT TO ASSEMBLY RATING. 18. CALIFORNIA FRAMED ROOF, CRICKETS AND BRACED WALL AREAS WHERE THE SUB ROOF SHEATHING ISOLATES THE VOID SPACE FROM THE VENTILATED ATTIC SPACE TO BE PROVIDED WITH MINIMUM 2" SQ. HOLES THROUGH SUB ROOF SHEATHING PER VOID SPACE AND MINIMUM (1) HOLE AT 10'-0" O.C. AT LARGE SPACES. SEE DIAGRAM BELOW. 19. CRICKET SWALES LINES TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT MIN. 33.69 DEGREE ANGLES (UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE). SEE DIAGRAM BELOW. 20. THE PARAPET HEIGHTS MAY BE INCREASED TO SUFFICIENTLY SCREEN ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT PER FVMC 21.18.050 21. ALL ROOF DRAINS TO BE DIRECTED TO THE DRYWELL. 22. NO MECHANICAL ENGINEER IS INVOLVED IN PROJECT AT THIS TIME. AO IS ESTIMATING FUTURE PROPOSED MECHANICAL UNIT HEIGHTS Page 277 CB PATIO/BALC PATIO/BALC PATIO/BALC PATIO/BALC BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" PATIO/BALC UNIT B1: 2BR/ 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 1140 SQ.FT. PATIO/BALC.: 85 SQ.FT. STORAGE: 184 CU.FT. 9 UNITS UNIT A1: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 755 SQ. FT. PATIO/BALC: 98 SQ. FT.STORAGE:192 CU.FT. 23 UNITS 35'-0" 36'-0"
36'-4" 36'-0"
27'-10" 42'-8"
31'-0" 18'-3"
27'-10" 31'-10"
35'-0" 24'-0" UNIT B3: 2BR / 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 1148 SQ.FT. PATIO/BALC: 101 SQ.FT. STORAGE: 224 CU.FT. 3 UNITS UNIT A2: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 750 SQ. FT. PATIO/BALC: 106 SQ. FT. STORAGE: 160 CU.FT. 12 UNITS UNIT B4:2BR / 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 998 SQ.FT. PATIO/BALC: 100 SQ.FT. STORAGE: 90 CU.FT. 8 UNITS PATIO/BALC
STORAGE
STORAGE
STORAGE STORAGE
STORAGE
STORAGE UNIT C1: STUDIO UNIT LIVABLE AREA: 547 SQ.FT. PATIO/BALC: 66 SQ.FT. STORAGE: 152 CU.FT. 2 UNITS CB CB PATIO/BALC UNIT C2: STUDIO UNIT LIVABLE AREA: 565 SQ.FT. PATIO/BALC: 66 SQ.FT. STORAGE: 152 CU.FT. 4 UNITS 31'-0" 18'-3"
STORAGE UNIT C3: STUDIO UNIT LIVABLE AREA: 565 SQ.FT. PATIO/BALC: 67 SQ.FT.STORAGE: 144 CU.FT. 3 UNITS 31'-0" 18'-3" PATIO/BALC
STORAGE PATIO/BALC UNIT A3: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 752 SQ. FT. PATIO/BALC: 85 SQ. FT. STORAGE: 192 CU.FT. 2 UNITS 35'-0" 24'-0"
STORAGE BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" 8'-6" 10'-1"
8'-4" 12'-2" 14'-10"
7'-0" 9'-6"
10'-4" 12'-2"
8'-8" 8'-6"
10'-0" 8'-4"
8'-0" 8'-4"
8'-0" 9'-2"
7'-6"
CB CB UNIT B2: 2BR / 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 1160 SQ.FT. PATIO/BALC: 130 SQ.FT. STORAGE: 216 CU.FT. 6 UNITS PATIO/BALC STORAGE 11'-7" 11'-2" 38'-10"
38'-9" W/D W/D W/D W/D W/D W/D W/D W/D W/D W/D
6'-0"
6'-0"
6'-0" THE STELLRECHT COMPANY 15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 714-898-7557 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS 8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE - FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 01.06.2025 JOB NO.: 2021-401 UNIT FLOOR PLANS A3.0 0 1' 2' 4' 8' 12' 16' 18" N Page 278 BUILDING ELEVATIONS DATE : 07.03.2024
A4.0
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
MRL
MRL
MA
MA
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
34’-0”
30’-0”
20’-0”
10’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. PARAPET
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
34’-0”
30’-0”
20’-0”
10’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. PARAPET
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
P1
SW 7640
FAW BRINDLE
P2
SW 9541
WHITE SNOW
P3
SW 9563
BEDROCK
P4
SW 7512
PAVILION BEIGE
P5
SW 7022
ALPACA
P6
SW 7032
WARM STONE
ST
CORONADO STONE
EASTERH MOUNTAIN
LODGE - HURON
AC
TIMBER TECH
BY AZEK
OPEN JOINT
CLADDING
AMERICAN WALNUT
MR
BERRIDGE
TEE-PANEL
STANDING SEAM
ROOF SYSTEM
CHARCOAL
RA
AMERICAN TRIM
EPS RAFTER TAILS
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
FINISHES MATERIALS
MF
AMERICAN FENCE COMPANY
METAL FENCE
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
MA
B&C AWNINGS
METAL CANOPY
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE
CHARCOAL
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0” 0 8’ 16’ 24’ 32’
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0”
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0”
P2
P4 P4
AC P4
AC
AC AC
AC
ST ST
ST
P5 RA ST ST
RA
P5 P5 P4 RA
P5 P5
P1
P1
P3 P3
P3 P3
P2 P3
P2 P2
MF MF MR P2 MF
MR MR
MR
P2
EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 38’-6” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 38’-6” ROOF APEX EL. 38’-6” ROOF APEX 01.06.2025 10.18.2024
BUILDING ELEVATIONS BUILDING ELEVATIONS DATE : 07.03.2024 A4.1
WEST ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION
34’-0”
30’-0”
20’-0”
10’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. PARAPET
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
34’-0”
30’-0”
20’-0”
10’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. PARAPET
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
P1
SW 7640
FAW BRINDLE
P2
SW 9541
WHITE SNOW
P3
SW 9563
BEDROCK
P4
SW 7512
PAVILION BEIGE
P5
SW 7022
ALPACA
P6
SW 7032
WARM STONE
ST
CORONADO STONE
EASTERH MOUNTAIN
LODGE - HURON
AC
TIMBER TECH
BY AZEK
OPEN JOINT
CLADDING
AMERICAN WALNUT
MR
BERRIDGE
TEE-PANEL
STANDING SEAM
ROOF SYSTEM
CHARCOAL
RA
AMERICAN TRIM
EPS RAFTER TAILS
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
FINISHES MATERIALS
MF
AMERICAN FENCE COMPANY
METAL FENCE
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
MA
B&C AWNINGS
METAL CANOPY
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE
CHARCOAL
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0” 0 8’ 16’ 24’ 32’
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0”
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0”
AC MF AC P4 AC
MF
P1 P5 P5 ST P2 ST P1
MA P2 ST
MA
AC P4 ST ST P3 ST AC P5 AC RA P1
EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX
EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX 01.06.2025 10.18.2024
BUILDING ELEVATIONS BUILDING ELEVATIONS DATE : 07.03.2024 A4.2
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
12’-0”
12’-0”
0’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. ROOF
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 1
LEVEL 1
ST
P1
P3
P6
RA MR P2
AC ST AC P2 MA AC
AC AC
ST
ST ST
P1
SW 7640
FAW BRINDLE
P2
SW 9541
WHITE SNOW
P3
SW 9563
BEDROCK
P4
SW 7512
PAVILION BEIGE
P5
SW 7022
ALPACA
P6
SW 7032
WARM STONE
ST
CORONADO STONE
EASTERH MOUNTAIN
LODGE - HURON
AC
TIMBER TECH
BY AZEK
OPEN JOINT
CLADDING
AMERICAN WALNUT
MR
BERRIDGE
TEE-PANEL
STANDING SEAM
ROOF SYSTEM
CHARCOAL
RA
AMERICAN TRIM
EPS RAFTER TAILS
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
FINISHES MATERIALS
MF
AMERICAN FENCE COMPANY
METAL FENCE
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
MA
B&C AWNINGS
METAL CANOPY
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE
CHARCOAL
SCALE : 3/16” = 1’-0” 0 4’ 8’ 12’ 16’
SCALE : 3/16” = 1’-0”
SCALE : 3/16” = 1’-0”
EL. 13’-0” T.O.P.
EL. 14’-0” T.O.P.
EL. 10’-0” T.O. TRELLIS EL. 10’-0” T.O. TRELLIS
EL. 13’-0” T.O.P.
EL. 10’-0” T.O. TRELLIS EL. 10’-0” T.O. TRELLIS
EL. 9’-0” T.O. CANOPY
EL. 19’-3” ROOF APEX
EL. 19’-3” ROOF APEX 01.06.2025 10.18.2024
BUILDING ELEVATIONS BUILDING ELEVATIONS DATE : 07.03.2024 A4.3
EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
12’-0”
12’-0”
0’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. ROOF
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 1
LEVEL 1
ST
P1
P3
P6
P2 RA MR
ST AC P2
AC MA
MF
EL. 13’-0” T.O.P.
EL. 14’-0” T.O.P. EL. 13’-0” T.O.P.
EL. 9’-0” T.O. TRELLIS
P1
SW 7640
FAW BRINDLE
P2
SW 9541
WHITE SNOW
P3
SW 9563
BEDROCK
P4
SW 7512
PAVILION BEIGE
P5
SW 7022
ALPACA
P6
SW 7032
WARM STONE
ST
CORONADO STONE
EASTERH MOUNTAIN
LODGE - HURON
AC
TIMBER TECH
BY AZEK
OPEN JOINT
CLADDING
AMERICAN WALNUT
MR
BERRIDGE
TEE-PANEL
STANDING SEAM
ROOF SYSTEM
CHARCOAL
RA
AMERICAN TRIM
EPS RAFTER TAILS
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
FINISHES MATERIALS
MF
AMERICAN FENCE COMPANY
METAL FENCE
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
MA
B&C AWNINGS
METAL CANOPY
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE
CHARCOAL
SCALE : 3/16” = 1’-0” 0 4’ 8’ 12’ 16’
SCALE : 3/16” = 1’-0”
SCALE : 3/16” = 1’-0”
EL. 19’-3” ROOF APEX 01.06.2025 10.18.2024
BUILDING SECTIONS DATE : 07.03.2024
A5.0
LEGEND
UNIT A1
UNIT B1
UNIT C2
UNIT B5
UNIT C1
UNIT C3
STAIRS
SECTION - AA
SECTION - BB
KEY MAP
WARNER AVE.
WESTMONT PARK
AA AA BB BB
34’-0”
30’-0”
20’-0”
10’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. PARAPET
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
UNIT B5 44’-5” SETBACK
UNIT B5
UNIT B1 UNIT B1
UNIT B1
UNIT A1
UNIT A1
UNIT C3 UNIT A1 UNIT A1 UNIT A1 UNIT A1
UNIT C3 UNIT C3
11’-6” UNIT B5
SETBACK
26’-11”
SETBACK
UNIT A1 21’-2” SETBACK
PL PL
34’-0”
30’-0”
20’-0”
10’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. PARAPET
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0” 0 8’ 16’ 24’ 32’
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0”
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0”
PL PL
27'-0"
EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX 11'-5" 44'-8"
EL. 38’-6” ROOF APEX
EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 38’-6” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX 01.06.2025 10.18.2024
BUILDING SECTIONS DATE : 07.03.2024
A5.1
SECTION - CC
SECTION - EE
SECTION - DD CARPORT
LEGEND
UNIT A1
UNIT B1
UNIT C2
UNIT B5
UNIT C1
UNIT C3
STAIRS
KEY MAP
UNIT B5
UNIT B5 CLUBHOUSE UNIT B1 UNIT A1 CARPORT
PL
PL
PL
PL
34’-0”
30’-0”
20’-0”
10’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. PARAPET
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
34’-0”
30’-0”
20’-0”
10’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. PARAPET
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0” 0 8’ 16’ 24’ 32’
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0”
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0”
EE
DD
EE
DD
WARNER AVE.
WESTMONT PARK
CC CC
UNIT B5 CLUBHOUSE UNIT B1 UNIT A1
7'-6" F. GRADE (F.F.) T. OF ADJ. SIDEWALK PL 30' TO CLOSEST RESIDENT 3'-0" 4'-0"
9'-0"
18'-0" 10'-0"
UNIT B5
UNIT A1
15'-4"
PL EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX 7'-6" F. GRADE (F.F.) T. OF ADJ. SIDEWALK PL 30' TO CLOSEST RESIDENT 3'-0" 4'-0"
9'-0"
18'-0" 10'-0" 10.18.2024
7'-6" F. GRADE (F.F.) T. OF ADJ. SIDEWALK PL 30' TO CLOSEST RESIDENT 3'-0" 4'-0"
9'-0"
18'-0" 10'-0" 01.06.2025
ENLARGED SECTION - GARAGE 4'-0" 10'-0"
21'-0" TYP. 2'-0"
4'-0"
9'-0" 21'-0" TYP. 2'-0"
7'-0"
SCALE : NTS SCALE : NTS
TYP. GARAGE SECTION A5.1
ELEVATION MATERIAL CALCULATION DATE : 07.03.2024
SCALE : 1/16” = 1’-0” 0 16’ 24’ A5.2
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION
SCALE : 1/16” = 1’-0”
SCALE : 1/16” = 1’-0”
SCALE : 1/16” = 1’-0”
SCALE : 1/16” = 1’-0”
STUCCO
STUCCO
STUCCO
STUCCO
TOTAL AREA
TOTAL AREA
TOTAL AREA
TOTAL AREA
5,386 SF
5,461 SF
2,070 SF
2,443 SF
79%
80%
78%
72%
6,782 SF
6,827 SF
2,705 SF
3,410 SF
AREA
AREA
AREA
AREA
NORTH ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
100 %
100 %
100 %
100 %
%
%
%
%
STONE/SIDING
STONE/SIDING
STONE/SIDING
STONE/SIDING
1,396 SF
1,366SF
635 SF
967 SF
21%
20%
22%
28%01.06.2025 10.18.2024
MATERIAL BOARD DATE : 07.03.2024
A6.0
PAINT SWATCHES MATERIALS
34’-0”
30’-0”
20’-0”
10’-0”
0’-0”
T.0. PARAPET
T.0. ROOF
LEVEL 3
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 1
NORTH ELEVATION
MA MF
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0”
P1 P5 AC DR P4 P3 MF WN P2 ST RA MF ST P3 MR AC WN DR P5 ST P3 MF P5 P4 MR AC ST RA EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX EL. 38’-6” ROOF APEX EL. 39’-0” ROOF APEX P1
SW 7640
FAW BRINDLE
P2
SW 9541
WHITE SNOW
P3
SW 9563
BEDROCK
P4
SW 7512
PAVILION BEIGE
P5
SW 7517
RIVERS EDGE
P6
SW 7032
WARM STONE
ST
CORONADO STONE
EASTERH MOUNTAIN
LODGE - HURON
AC
TIMBER TECH BY AZEK
OPEN JOINT CLADDING
AMERICAN WALNUT
WN
ARCADIA
WINDOW SYSTEM
MR
BERRIDGE
TEE-PANEL STANDING SEAM
ROOF SYSTEM
CHARCOAL
MF
AMERICAN FENCE COMPANY
METAL FENCE
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
MA
B&C AWNINGS
METAL CANOPY
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
DR
METAL DOOR
RA
AMERICAN TRIM
EPS RAFTER TAILS
COLOR TO MATCH
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
SCALE : 3/32” = 1’-0” 0 8’ 16’ 24’ 32’ 01.06.2025 10.18.2024
L.1
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
EXISTING LANDSCAPE PLAN
0 20’ 40’
TURF
DIETES GRANDIFLORA
STRELITZIA REGINAE
LIGUSTRUM
SANSEVIERIA
P1 P2
P3 P4 P5
P6 P7
P8 P9 P10 P13 P14
P11 P12
T1 T2 T3
P15
T6 T5 T4
WARNER AVENUE
ANIMAL HOSPITAL
EXISTING TREE LEGEND
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME NOTES
T1 PINUS SPP.
PINE TO BE REMOVED
T2 PINUS SPP.
PINE TO BE REMOVED
T3 PINUS SPP.
PINE TO BE REMOVED
T4 PINUS SPP.
PINE TO BE REMOVED
T5 PINUS SPP.
PINE TO BE REMOVED
T6 PINUS SPP.
PINE TO BE REMOVED
P1 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA
QUEEN PALM TO BE REMOVED
P2 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA
QUEEN PALM TO BE REMOVED
P3 BRAHEA ARMATA
MEXICAN BLUE PALM TO BE REMOVED
P4 BRAHEA ARMATA
MEXICAN BLUE PALM TO BE REMOVED
P5 BRAHEA ARMATA
MEXICAN BLUE PALM TO BE REMOVED
P6 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA
QUEEN PALM TO BE REMOVED
P7 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA
QUEEN PALM TO BE REMOVED
P8 BRAHEA ARMATA
MEXICAN BLUE PALM TO BE REMOVED
P9 BRAHEA ARMATA
MEXICAN BLUE PALM TO BE REMOVED
P10 BRAHEA ARMATA
MEXICAN BLUE PALM TO BE REMOVED
P11 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA
QUEEN PALM TO BE REMOVED
P12 SYAGRUS ROMANZOFFIANA
QUEEN PALM TO BE REMOVED
P13 BRAHEA ARMATA
MEXICAN BLUE PALM TO BE REMOVED
P14 BRAHEA ARMATA
MEXICAN BLUE PALM TO BE REMOVED
P15 WASHINGTONIA ROBUSTA
MEXICAN FAN PALM
(TRIPLE-TRUNK)
TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING SHRUB LEGEND
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME NOTES
DIETES GRANDIFLORA
FORTNIGHT LILY TO BE REMOVED
LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM
'TEXANUM
WAXLEAF PRIVET
TO BE REMOVED
STRELITZIA REGINAE
BIRD OF PARADISE TO BE REMOVED
SANSEVIERIA SPP.
SNAKEPLANT TO BE REMOVED
TURF
- TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING LIGHT STANDARD
TO BE REMOVED, TYP.
WESTMONT PARK
(EDISON RIGHT OF WAY)
WARNER AVENUE
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES
EXISTING LIGHT STANDARD
TO BE REMOVED, TYP.
L.2
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
02.06.2025
LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN
0 20’ 40’
KEYNOTE LEGEND
1 PROPERTY LINE 2 EXISTING SIDEWALK TO REMAIN - PROTECT IN PLACE 3 STANDARD CONCRETE PAVING 4 STRIPPED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING - PER CIVIL ENGINEER 5 NEW ASPHALT PAVING - PER CIVIL ENGINEER 6 PROPOSED PLANTING AREA -TYP. 7 PROPOSED CURBCUT AT PARKING ENTRANCE 8 TRASH ENCLOSURE - PER ARCHITECT 9 TRUNCATED DOMES AT CURB RAMPS 10 PRIVACY FENCE AND GATE
11 SLIDING GATES
12 SOLAR ROOF CANOPY. TYPICAL AT CARPORTS - PER ARCHITECT 13 DECORATIVE CANOPY AND STOOP AT STAIRS - PER ARCHITECT 14 ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER - PER CIVIL ENGINEER
15 EXISTING PERIMETER WALL WITH FENCE
16 RELOCATED BUS SHELTER PER ARCHITECT
17 MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM - PER CIVIL
18 FIRE HYDRANT - PER CIVIL
19 ENHANCED PATTERNED CONCRETE PAVING WITH CAST-IN-PLACE CONRETE BAND AT
GATED ENTRY
20 ADJACENT GUTTER PER CIVIL
PROPOSED LANDSCAPE LOT COVERAGE
OVERALL SITE AREA 92,325 S.F. (2.119 AC)
PROPOSED LANDSCAPE S.F.
(ONSITE) 18,701 S.F.
LANDSCAPE COVERAGE: 20 %
1 172
1 3
349
6 5
8 6
10 11
10 IRRIGATION DESIGN NOTES
THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL BE A FULLY AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND SYSTEM. BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICES WILL BE INSTALLED TO MEET APPLICABLE CODES. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM
WILL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED TO BE AS EFFICIENT IN TERMS OF WATER USAGE AS POSSIBLE. WATER CONSERVATION PRODUCTS (HIGH EFFICIENCY / LOW PRECIPITATION) AND AN
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION (ET) WEATHER BASED CONTROL SYSTEM WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE SYSTEM DESIGN.
PLANTING DESIGN NOTES
THE SELECTION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS BASED ON CULTURAL, AESTHETIC, AND MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED WITH APPROPRIATE SOIL
AMENDMENTS, FERTILIZERS, AND APPROPRIATE SUPPLEMENTS BASED UPON A SOILS REPORT FROM AN AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN FROM THE SITE. GROUND COVERS
OR BARK MULCH SHALL FILL IN BETWEEN THE SHRUBS TO SHIELD THE SOIL FROM THE SUN, EVAPOTRANSPORATION AND RUN-OFF. ALL THE FLOWER AND SHRUB BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A 3” DEPTH TO HELP CONSERVE WATER, LOWER THE SOIL TEMPERATURE AND REDUCE WEED GROWTH. THE SHRUBS SHALL BE ALLOWED TO GROW IN THEIR NATURAL FORMS. ALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL FOLLOW THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY GUIDELINES. LANDSCAPE PLANTER
LESS THAN TEN FEET IN WIDTH OR LOCATED CLOSER THAN FIVE FEET FROM A PERMANENT STRUCTURE SHALL BE PROVIDE WITH ROOT BARRIERS PER FVMC 21.20.050(b)(1)(D).
GENERAL DESIGN NOTES
1. FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL ACCURATELY SHOW PLACEMENT OF TREES, SHRUBS, AND GROUNDCOVERS.
2. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHALL BE AWARE OF UTILITY, SEWER, STORM DRAIN EASEMENT AND PLACE PLANTING LOCATIONS ACCORDINGLY TO MEET CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY REQUIREMENTS.
3. ALL REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREAS (INCLUDING PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY) SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY OWNER. THE LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE MAINTAINED PER CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY REQUIREMENTS.
4. ALL IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, INCLUDING STREET TREES, SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS.
12 13
13 9
15 39
16 7
18 18
19 20
20 14
8 WARNER AVENUE
AMENITY AREA ENLARGEMENT
REFER TO NEXT SHEET
WESTMONT PARK
(EDISON RIGHT OF WAY)
WARNER AVENUE
ANIMAL HOSPITAL
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES
L.3
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
COURTYARD ENLARGEMENT
0 8’ 16'
KEYNOTE LEGEND
1 STANDARD CONCRETE PAVING
2 STRIPED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING - PER CIVIL ENGINEER
3 PROPOSED PLANTING AREA -TYP.
4 ENHANCED PAVING
5 SHADE STRUCTURE - PER ARCHITECT
6 DECORATIVE POTTERY - TYP.
7 LOUNGE SEATING AREA
8 GAS BBQ AND COUNTERTOP
9 FESTOON LIGHTING
10 LARGE FIRE PLACE
11 TRUNCATED DOMES AT CURB RAMPS
12 18" HIGH RAISED PLANTER WALL
13 4' HIGH BBQ. SCREEN WALL
14 FIRE HYDRANT PER CIVIL
11 1
5 7
8 11
3 2
8 10
12 4
6 7
11 6 5
11 13
14 9
L.4
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
IRRIGATION HYDROZONE PLAN
0 20’ 40’
IRRIGATION HYDROZONE LEGEND
SYMBOL HYDROZONE AREA WATER
USAGE
PLANT
FACTOR
HYDROZONE 1
DRIP IRRIGATION 8,821 S.F. L 0.2
HYDROZONE 2
DRIP IRRIGATION 1,761 S.F. L 0.2
HYDROZONE 3
DRIP IRRIGATION 1,756 S.F. L 0.2
HYDROZONE 4
DRIP IRRIGATION 4,854 S.F. L 0.2
HYDROZONE 5
DRIP IRRIGATION 1,509 S.F. L 0.2
WARNER AVENUE
WESTMONT PARK
(EDISON RIGHT OF WAY)
WARNER AVENUE
ANIMAL HOSPITAL
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES
Select your city:
Fountain
Valley Project name or address:
Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo): 46.0 Landscape Area Sector Type:
Hydrozone #/Planting
Description Location
Plant Factor
(PF) Irrigation Method
Irrigation
Efficiency
(IE)
ETAF
(PF/IE)
Landscape
Area (sq-ft) ETAF x Area
Estimated Total
Water Use (ETWU)
1 Low water use plant Front 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 8,821 2178 62,182 2 Low water use plant Left Side 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 1,761 435 12,414 3 Low water use plant Right Side 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 1,756 434 12,379 4 Low water use plant Back 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 4,854 1199 34,218 5 Low water use plant Other 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 1,509 373 10,638 6 --- --- --- --- ---
7 --- --- --- --- ---
8 --- --- --- --- ---
9 --- --- --- --- ---
10 --- --- --- --- ---
11 --- --- --- --- ---
12 --- --- --- --- ---
13 --- --- --- --- ---
14 --- --- --- --- ---
15 --- --- --- --- ---
Average Total Total
add dropdown self depcription location 0.25 18,701 4618 Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas: In Compliance SLA-1 Select Select
SLA-2 --- ---
SLA-3 --- ---
SLA-4 --- ---
SLA-5 --- ---
Totals - -
Total Landscape Area 18,701
Sitewide ETAF 0.25
ETWU Total 131,830
Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA) 293,652
* If muliple points of connection worksheets are submitted either 1) each must be in compliance or 2) a worksheet for the total project area must be in compliance.
WATER EFFICIENCT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET
Ǥ
Water Efficienct Landscape Worksheet
Fill in all colored cells.
Special Landscape Area
Regular Landscpae Area
Residential
ȋȌǤȗ
8550 Warner Avenue
L.5
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
TREE PLAN
0 20’ 40’
CLIMATE ZONES FACTOR
WATER USE ABBREVIATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
H = HIGH WATER NEEDS
M = MEDIUM WATER NEEDS
L = LOW WATER NEEDS
VL = VERY LOW WATER NEEDS
SUNSET ZONE: 24
USDA HARDINESS ZONE: 10
WUCOLS REGION: SOUTH COASTAL, REGION 3
TREE LEGEND
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME SIZE QTY. WUCOLS
(PLANT FACTOR) DESCRIPTION
ARBUTUS 'MARINA'
MARINA STRAWBERRY 24” BOX 2
L
(0.10-0.30)
STANDARD,
MATCHING
ARBUTUS UNEDO
STRAWBERRY TREE 36" BOX 3 MULTI-TRUNK,
MATCHING
CUPRESSUS SEMPERVIRENS
ITALIAN CYPRESS 24” BOX 5 MATCHING
GEIJERA PARVIFLORA
AUSTRALIAN WILLOW 24” BOX 5 COLUMN FORM
LAURUS NOBILIS
SWEET BAY 24” BOX 9 STANDARD,
MATCHING
MAGNOLIA 'LITTLE GEM'
DWARF SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA 24” BOX 4 STANDARD,
MATCHING
PARKINSONIA X 'DESERT MUSEUM'
DESERT MUSEUM PALO VERDE 24” BOX 8
VL
(<0.10)
MULTI-TRUNK,
MATCHING
PINUS BRUTIA SPP. ELDARICA
AFGHAN PINE 24” BOX 13 STANDARD,
MATCHING TRUNK
QUERCUS VIRGINIANA
COAST LIVE OAK 24” BOX 7 STANDARD,
MATCHING TRUNK
PLANTING DESIGN NOTES
THE SELECTION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS BASED ON CULTURAL, AESTHETIC, AND MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS.
ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED WITH APPROPRIATE SOIL AMENDMENTS, FERTILIZERS, AND APPROPRIATE
SUPPLEMENTS BASED UPON A SOILS REPORT FROM AN AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN FROM THE SITE. GROUND COVERS OR BARK MULCH SHALL FILL IN BETWEEN THE SHRUBS TO SHIELD THE SOIL FROM THE SUN, EVAPOTRANSPORATION AND RUN-OFF. ALL THE FLOWER AND SHRUB BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A 3” DEPTH TO HELP CONSERVE WATER, LOWER THE SOIL TEMPERATURE AND REDUCE WEED GROWTH. THE SHRUBS SHALL BE ALLOWED TO GROW IN THEIR NATURAL FORMS. ALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL FOLLOW THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY GUIDELINES. LANDSCAPE PLANTER LESS THAN TEN FEET IN WIDTH OR LOCATED CLOSER THAN FIVE FEET FROM A PERMANENT STRUCTURE SHALL BE PROVIDE WITH ROOT BARRIERS PER FVMC 21.20.050(b)(1)(D).
WARNER AVENUE
WESTMONT PARK
(EDISON RIGHT OF WAY)
WARNER AVENUE
ANIMAL HOSPITAL
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES
L.6
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
SHRUB PLAN
0 10’ 20’
CLIMATE ZONES FACTOR
WATER USE ABBREVIATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: H = HIGH WATER NEEDS M = MEDIUM WATER NEEDS L = LOW WATER NEEDS VL = VERY LOW WATER NEEDS
SUNSET ZONE: 24
USDA HARDINESS ZONE: 10
WUCOLS REGION: SOUTH COASTAL, REGION 3
SHRUB LEGEND
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME SIZE QTY WUCOLS
(PLANT FACTOR) DESCRIPTION
AGAVE AMERICANA
CENTURY PLANT 15 GAL 36
L
(0.10-0.30)
ACCENT SHRUB
SPACING PER PLAN
BOUGAINVILLEA ‘MONKA’
OO-LA-LA BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GAL 459 36" O.C. SPACING
CARISSA GRANDIFLORA
NATAL PLUM 5 GAL. 484 24" O.C. SPACING
DIETES BICOLOR 'LEMON DROPS'
IRIS 5 GAL 175 36" O.C. SPACING
DODONAEA VISCOSA PURPUREA
PURPLE HOPSEED BUSH 15 GAL 106 48" O.C. SPACING
FESTUCA GLAUCA
BLUE FESCUE 5 GAL 2592 12" O.C. SPACING
FURCRAEA FOETIDA MEDIOPICTA
MAURITIUS HEMP 15 GAL 13 ACCENT SHRUBSPACING PER PLAN
LAVANDULA ANGUSTIFOLIA
ENGLISH LAVENDER 5 GAL 79 30" O.C. SPACING
MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS
DEERGRASS 5 GAL 39 30" O.C. SPACING
RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA ‘PINKIE’
PINKIE INDIAN HAWTHORN 5 GAL 409 30" O.C. SPACING
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS
ICEBERG ROSE 15 GAL 4 ACCENT SHRUB SPACING PER PLAN
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’
PROSTRATE ROSEMARY 5 GAL 351 36" O.C. SPACING
SENECIO SERPENS
BLUE CHALKSTICKS 5 GAL 643 12" O.C. SPACING
THYMUS VULGARIS
COMMON THYME 5 GAL 97 12" O.C. SPACING
WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA
COAST ROSEMARY 5 GAL 123 24" O.C. SPACING
ANNUAL COLOR
PLANTING DESIGN NOTES
THE SELECTION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS BASED ON CULTURAL, AESTHETIC, AND MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS.
ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED WITH APPROPRIATE SOIL AMENDMENTS, FERTILIZERS, AND
APPROPRIATE SUPPLEMENTS BASED UPON A SOILS REPORT FROM AN AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN FROM THE SITE. GROUND COVERS OR BARK MULCH SHALL FILL IN BETWEEN THE SHRUBS TO SHIELD THE SOIL FROM THE SUN, EVAPOTRANSPORATION AND RUN-OFF. ALL THE FLOWER AND SHRUB BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A 3” DEPTH TO HELP CONSERVE WATER, LOWER THE SOIL TEMPERATURE AND REDUCE WEED GROWTH. THE SHRUBS SHALL BE ALLOWED TO GROW IN THEIR NATURAL FORMS. ALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL FOLLOW THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY GUIDELINES. LANDSCAPE PLANTER LESS THAN TEN FEET IN WIDTH
OR LOCATED CLOSER THAN FIVE FEET FROM A PERMANENT STRUCTURE SHALL BE PROVIDE WITH ROOT BARRIERS PER FVMC 21.20.050(b)(1)(D).
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L7
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L7
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L9
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L9
WARNER AVENUE
WARNER AVENUE
ANIMAL HOSPITAL
L.7
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
SHRUB PLAN
0 10’ 20’
CLIMATE ZONES FACTOR
WATER USE ABBREVIATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: H = HIGH WATER NEEDS M = MEDIUM WATER NEEDS L = LOW WATER NEEDS VL = VERY LOW WATER NEEDS
SUNSET ZONE: 24
USDA HARDINESS ZONE: 10
WUCOLS REGION: SOUTH COASTAL, REGION 3
SHRUB LEGEND
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME SIZE QTY WUCOLS
(PLANT FACTOR) DESCRIPTION
AGAVE AMERICANA
CENTURY PLANT 15 GAL 36
L
(0.10-0.30)
ACCENT SHRUB
SPACING PER PLAN
BOUGAINVILLEA ‘MONKA’
OO-LA-LA BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GAL 459 36" O.C. SPACING
CARISSA GRANDIFLORA
NATAL PLUM 5 GAL. 484 24" O.C. SPACING
DIETES BICOLOR 'LEMON DROPS'
IRIS 5 GAL 175 36" O.C. SPACING
DODONAEA VISCOSA PURPUREA
PURPLE HOPSEED BUSH 15 GAL 106 48" O.C. SPACING
FESTUCA GLAUCA
BLUE FESCUE 5 GAL 2592 12" O.C. SPACING
FURCRAEA FOETIDA MEDIOPICTA
MAURITIUS HEMP 15 GAL 13 ACCENT SHRUBSPACING PER PLAN
LAVANDULA ANGUSTIFOLIA
ENGLISH LAVENDER 5 GAL 79 30" O.C. SPACING
MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS
DEERGRASS 5 GAL 39 30" O.C. SPACING
RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA ‘PINKIE’
PINKIE INDIAN HAWTHORN 5 GAL 409 30" O.C. SPACING
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS
ICEBERG ROSE 15 GAL 4 ACCENT SHRUB SPACING PER PLAN
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’
PROSTRATE ROSEMARY 5 GAL 351 36" O.C. SPACING
SENECIO SERPENS
BLUE CHALKSTICKS 5 GAL 643 12" O.C. SPACING
THYMUS VULGARIS
COMMON THYME 5 GAL 97 12" O.C. SPACING
WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA
COAST ROSEMARY 5 GAL 123 24" O.C. SPACING
ANNUAL COLOR
PLANTING DESIGN NOTES
THE SELECTION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS BASED ON CULTURAL, AESTHETIC, AND MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS.
ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED WITH APPROPRIATE SOIL AMENDMENTS, FERTILIZERS, AND
APPROPRIATE SUPPLEMENTS BASED UPON A SOILS REPORT FROM AN AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN FROM THE SITE. GROUND COVERS OR BARK MULCH SHALL FILL IN BETWEEN THE SHRUBS TO SHIELD THE SOIL FROM THE SUN, EVAPOTRANSPORATION AND RUN-OFF. ALL THE FLOWER AND SHRUB BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A 3” DEPTH TO HELP CONSERVE WATER, LOWER THE SOIL TEMPERATURE AND REDUCE WEED GROWTH. THE SHRUBS SHALL BE ALLOWED TO GROW IN THEIR NATURAL FORMS. ALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL FOLLOW THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY GUIDELINES. LANDSCAPE PLANTER LESS THAN TEN FEET IN WIDTH
OR LOCATED CLOSER THAN FIVE FEET FROM A PERMANENT STRUCTURE SHALL BE PROVIDE WITH ROOT BARRIERS PER FVMC 21.20.050(b)(1)(D).
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L6
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L8
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L6
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L8
WARNER AVENUE
WESTMONT PARK
(EDISON RIGHT OF WAY)
L.8
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
SHRUB PLAN
0 10’ 20’
CLIMATE ZONES FACTOR
WATER USE ABBREVIATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: H = HIGH WATER NEEDS M = MEDIUM WATER NEEDS L = LOW WATER NEEDS VL = VERY LOW WATER NEEDS
SUNSET ZONE: 24
USDA HARDINESS ZONE: 10
WUCOLS REGION: SOUTH COASTAL, REGION 3 PROPERTY LINE
6'-0"
PER CIVIL PLANS
T.O.C.
T.O.W.
9'-6"
PER CIVIL PLANS
5"
PER CIVIL PLANS
B.O.C.
F.O.W.
6"
F.S.
SHRUB LEGEND
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME SIZE QTY WUCOLS
(PLANT FACTOR) DESCRIPTION
AGAVE AMERICANA
CENTURY PLANT 15 GAL 36
L
(0.10-0.30)
ACCENT SHRUB
SPACING PER PLAN
BOUGAINVILLEA ‘MONKA’
OO-LA-LA BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GAL 459 36" O.C. SPACING
CARISSA GRANDIFLORA
NATAL PLUM 5 GAL. 484 24" O.C. SPACING
DIETES BICOLOR 'LEMON DROPS'
IRIS 5 GAL 175 36" O.C. SPACING
DODONAEA VISCOSA PURPUREA
PURPLE HOPSEED BUSH 15 GAL 106 48" O.C. SPACING
FESTUCA GLAUCA
BLUE FESCUE 5 GAL 2592 12" O.C. SPACING
FURCRAEA FOETIDA MEDIOPICTA
MAURITIUS HEMP 15 GAL 13 ACCENT SHRUBSPACING PER PLAN
LAVANDULA ANGUSTIFOLIA
ENGLISH LAVENDER 5 GAL 79 30" O.C. SPACING
MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS
DEERGRASS 5 GAL 39 30" O.C. SPACING
RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA ‘PINKIE’
PINKIE INDIAN HAWTHORN 5 GAL 409 30" O.C. SPACING
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS
ICEBERG ROSE 15 GAL 4 ACCENT SHRUB SPACING PER PLAN
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’
PROSTRATE ROSEMARY 5 GAL 351 36" O.C. SPACING
SENECIO SERPENS
BLUE CHALKSTICKS 5 GAL 643 12" O.C. SPACING
THYMUS VULGARIS
COMMON THYME 5 GAL 97 12" O.C. SPACING
WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA
COAST ROSEMARY 5 GAL 123 24" O.C. SPACING
ANNUAL COLOR
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L7
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L9
WESTMONT PARK
(EDISON RIGHT OF WAY)
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES
SECTION A: PERIMETER WALL PLANTING
EXISTING PERIMETER
WALL TO REMAIN.
PROTECT IN-PLACE
TALL SCREENING PLANT.
(D. VISCOSA)
GOUNDCOVER PLANT.
(R. OFFICINALIS 'PROSTRATUS')
PROPOSED CURB
PER CIVIL
APage 294
L.9
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
SHRUB PLAN
0 10’ 20’
CLIMATE ZONES FACTOR
WATER USE ABBREVIATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
H = HIGH WATER NEEDS
M = MEDIUM WATER NEEDS
L = LOW WATER NEEDS
VL = VERY LOW WATER NEEDS
SUNSET ZONE: 24
USDA HARDINESS ZONE: 10
WUCOLS REGION: SOUTH COASTAL, REGION 3
SHRUB LEGEND
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME SIZE QTY WUCOLS
(PLANT FACTOR) DESCRIPTION
AGAVE AMERICANA
CENTURY PLANT 15 GAL 36
L
(0.10-0.30)
ACCENT SHRUB
SPACING PER PLAN
BOUGAINVILLEA ‘MONKA’
OO-LA-LA BOUGAINVILLEA 5 GAL 459 36" O.C. SPACING
CARISSA GRANDIFLORA
NATAL PLUM 5 GAL. 484 24" O.C. SPACING
DIETES BICOLOR 'LEMON DROPS'
IRIS 5 GAL 175 36" O.C. SPACING
DODONAEA VISCOSA PURPUREA
PURPLE HOPSEED BUSH 15 GAL 106 48" O.C. SPACING
FESTUCA GLAUCA
BLUE FESCUE 5 GAL 2592 12" O.C. SPACING
FURCRAEA FOETIDA MEDIOPICTA
MAURITIUS HEMP 15 GAL 13 ACCENT SHRUBSPACING PER PLAN
LAVANDULA ANGUSTIFOLIA
ENGLISH LAVENDER 5 GAL 79 30" O.C. SPACING
MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS
DEERGRASS 5 GAL 39 30" O.C. SPACING
RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA ‘PINKIE’
PINKIE INDIAN HAWTHORN 5 GAL 409 30" O.C. SPACING
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS
ICEBERG ROSE 15 GAL 4 ACCENT SHRUB SPACING PER PLAN
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’
PROSTRATE ROSEMARY 5 GAL 351 36" O.C. SPACING
SENECIO SERPENS
BLUE CHALKSTICKS 5 GAL 643 12" O.C. SPACING
THYMUS VULGARIS
COMMON THYME 5 GAL 97 12" O.C. SPACING
WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA
COAST ROSEMARY 5 GAL 123 24" O.C. SPACING
ANNUAL COLOR
PLANTING DESIGN NOTES
THE SELECTION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS BASED ON CULTURAL, AESTHETIC, AND MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS.
ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE PREPARED WITH APPROPRIATE SOIL AMENDMENTS, FERTILIZERS, AND
APPROPRIATE SUPPLEMENTS BASED UPON A SOILS REPORT FROM AN AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN FROM THE SITE. GROUND COVERS OR BARK MULCH SHALL FILL IN BETWEEN THE SHRUBS TO SHIELD THE SOIL FROM THE SUN, EVAPOTRANSPORATION AND RUN-OFF. ALL THE FLOWER AND SHRUB BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A 3” DEPTH TO HELP CONSERVE WATER, LOWER THE SOIL TEMPERATURE AND REDUCE WEED GROWTH. THE SHRUBS SHALL BE ALLOWED TO GROW IN THEIR NATURAL FORMS. ALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL FOLLOW THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY GUIDELINES. LANDSCAPE PLANTER LESS THAN TEN FEET IN WIDTH
OR LOCATED CLOSER THAN FIVE FEET FROM A PERMANENT STRUCTURE SHALL BE PROVIDE WITH ROOT BARRIERS PER FVMC 21.20.050(b)(1)(D).
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L6
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L6
MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET: L8
WARNER AVENUE
ANIMAL HOSPITAL
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES
A
L.8
L.10
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
TREE IMAGES
SHRUB IMAGES
PLANTING IMAGERY
BOUGAINVILLEA ‘MONKA’
(OO-LA-LA BOUGAINVILLEA)
HEIGHT: 18”
SPREAD: 6’ - 8’
WUCOLS: L
RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA ‘PINKIE’
(PINKIE INDIAN HAWTHORN)
HEIGHT: 4’ - 6’
SPREAD: 4’ - 6’
WUCOLS: L
CARISSA GRANDIFLORA
(NATAL PLUM)
HEIGHT: 7’
SPREAD: 7’
WUCOLS: M
WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA
(COAST ROSEMARY)
HEIGHT: 4’ - 6’
SPREAD: 6’ - 12’
WUCOLS: L
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’
(PROSTRATE ROSEMARY)
HEIGHT: 2’
SPREAD: 4’ - 8’
WUCOLS: M
AGAVE AMERICANA
(CENTURY PLANT)
HEIGHT: 10’
SPREAD: 15’
WUCOLS: L
DIETES BICOLOR ‘LEMON DROPS’
(IRIS)
HEIGHT: 3’ - 4’
SPREAD: 3’ - 4’
WUCOLS: L
MAGNOLIA 'LITTLE GEM'
(DWARF SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)
HEIGHT: 25’ - 30’
SPREAD: 25’ - 30’
WUCOLS: L
SUN OR SHADE
QUERCUS VIRGINIANA
(SOUTHERN LIVE OAK)
HEIGHT: 40’ - 80’
SPREAD: 60’ - 100’
WUCOLS: L
FULL SUN
ARBUTUS 'MARINA'
(MARINA STRAWBERRY)
HEIGHT: 40' - 50’
SPREAD: 25’ - 40'
WUCOLS: L
FULL SUN
CUPRESSUS SEMPERVIRENS
(ITALIAN CYPRESS)
HEIGHT: 40’ - 70’
SPREAD: 10’ - 20’
WUCOLS: L
PARTIAL SHADE. FULL SUN
GEIJERA PARVIFLORA
(AUSTRALIAN WILLOW)
HEIGHT: 20’ - 30’
SPREAD: 15’ - 20’
WUCOLS: L
FULL SUN
PARKINSONIA X 'DESERT MUSEUM'
(DESERT MUSEUM PALO VERDE)
HEIGHT: 25’
SPREAD: 25’
WUCOLS: VL
FULL SUN
LAURUS NOBILIS
(SWEET BAY)
HEIGHT: 20’ - 25’
SPREAD: 10’ - 15’
WUCOLS: M
FULL SUN TO PARTIAL SUN
PINUS BRUTIA SSP. ELDARICA
(AFGHAN PINE)
HEIGHT: 30’ - 80'
SPREAD: 15' - 25’
WUCOLS: VL
FULL SUN
DODONAEA VISCOSA ‘PURPUREA’
PURPLE-LEAFED HOP-BUSH
HEIGHT: 12’
SPREAD: 6’ - 8’
WUCOLS: L
FESTUCA GLAUCA
(BLUE FESCUE)
HEIGHT: 4’ - 5’
SPREAD: 6’ - 8’
WUCOLS: L
MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS
(DEER GRASS)
HEIGHT: 4’ - 5’
SPREAD: 4’ - 5’
WUCOLS: L
SENECIO SERPENS
(BLUE CHALKSTICKS )
HEIGHT: 1’
SPREAD: 2’ - 3’
WUCOLS: L
ARBUTUS UNEDO
(STRAWBERRY TREE)
HEIGHT: 10' - 15’
SPREAD: 10’ - 15'
WUCOLS: L
FULL SUN
LAVANDULA ANGUSTIFOLIA
(ENGLISH LAVENDER)
HEIGHT: 1’ - 3’
SPREAD: 1’ - 3’
WUCOLS: L
FURCRAEA FOETIDA ‘MEDIOPICTA’
(MAURITIUS HEMP)
HEIGHT: 4’ - 5’
SPREAD: 6’ - 8’
WUCOLS: L
THYMUS VULGARIS
(THYME)
HEIGHT: 6" - 1’
SPREAD: 1’
WUCOLS: L
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS
(ROSEMARY)
HEIGHT: 2’ - 6'
SPREAD: 2’ - 5’
WUCOLS: M
L.11
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
WALL AND FENCE PLAN
0 20’ 40’
WALL AND FENCE LEGEND
SYMBOL TYPE
EXISTING 6’ HIGH CMU WALL
EXISTING 2’ HIGH CMU WALL
EXISTING 2’ HIGH CMU WALL WITH PROPOSED 4’ HIGH TUBE
STEEL FENCE.
PROPOSED 6’ HIGH SLIDING VEHICULAR TUBE STEEL GATE
PROPOSED 6’ HIGH PEDESTRIAN TUBE STEEL
FENCE AND GATE
PROPOSED 8’-6" HIGH SWINGING VEHICULAR TUBE STEEL WARNER AVENUE GATE WESTMONT PARK (EDISON RIGHT OF WAY)
WARNER AVENUE
ANIMAL HOSPITAL
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES
L.12
THE STELLRECHT COMPANY
15261 TRANSISTOR LANE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649
714-898-7557
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860
AO ARCHITECTS
8550 WARNER AVENUE PARKSIDE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA
DATE: 07.20.2023
JOB NO.: 2021-401
01.07.2025
2'-0" 4'-0"
6'-0"
6'-0"
CL
POST
CL
POST
4"
F.S.
T.O.
FENCE
T.O.W.
WALL AND FENCE ELEVATIONS
4'-0"
6'-0"
4"
F.S.
T.O.
FENCE
T.O.W.
±12'-0"
PROPERTY LINE
20' SETBACK
20'-0"
6'-0"
26'-0"
F.S.
T.O.
GATE
6'-8"
T.O.
PILASTER
F.O.C.
25'-0"
F.O.C.
F.O.PILASTERF.O.PILASTER
1'-4"
TYP.
SLIDING PANEL SLIDING PANEL
20'-4"
8'-6"
16'-0"
PER ARCHITECT
E.O. POSTE.O. POST
20'-8"
F.O.W.F.O.W.
EXISTING 6’ HIGH CMU WALL
FENCE ON CMU WALL
SLIDING VEHICULAR GATE
3'-0"
4'-0" 2'-0"
6'-0"
EQ.
6'-0" MAX
EQ.
6'-0" MAX
6'-0"
MAX.
F.S.
T.O.
FENCE
PEDESTRIAN GATE AND FENCE
FENCE ON CMU WALL AT SETBACK
SWINGING VEHICULAR GATE
EXISTING CMU WALL WITH NEW PLASTER
FINISH.
COLOR: ALPACA - SW 7022
EXISTING CMU WALL
POWDERCOATED TUBE STEEL FENCE.
COLOR TO MATCH ARCHITECTURAL METALS
3'-0" WIDE TUBE STEEL GATE
ARCHITECTURAL OPENING. REFER TO
ARCHITECURAL DRAWINGS
PILASTER WITH PLASTER FINISH.
COLOR: BEDROCK - SW 9563 (SIM. TO ARCH.)
PRECAST CONCRETE CAP.
COLOR: NATURAL GRAY
POWDERCOATED TUBE STEEL FENCE.
COLOR TO MATCH ARCHITECTURAL METALS
WALL SCONCE PER
LIGHTING DESIGNER
PILASTER COLOR
BEDROCK (SW 9563)
SHERWIN WILLIAMS
FENCING COLOR
BERRIDGE CHARCOAL
TUBE STEEL FENCE.
COLOR TO MATCH ARCHITECTURAL METALS
POWDERCOATED TUBE STEEL FENCE.
COLOR TO MATCH ARCHITECTURAL METALS
POWDERCOATED TUBE STEEL FENCE.
COLOR TO MATCH ARCHITECTURAL METALS
PLASTER COLOR AT
PERIMETER WALL
ALPACA (SW 7022)
SHERWIN WILLIAMS
PILASTER CAP COLOR
NATURAL GREY
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 2.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.4 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.2 0.5 0.4 0.6 1.5 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.3 0.5 0.5 1.6 5.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.9 2.5 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.2 2.0 0.8 0.5 1.0 2.5 2.7 3.1 3.0 3.1 2.7 3.0 2.9 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.9 2.0 0.6 0.8 3.0 3.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.2 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.3 1.6 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.0 1.8 1.1 0.6 1.0 2.6 3.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 1.2 1.9 2.6 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.2 1.6 1.1 0.9 1.3 1.9 2.4 2.4 2.2 1.7 1.5 1.7 2.2 2.3 2.2 1.8 1.1 0.7 1.1 2.4 3.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.9 3.0 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.2 2.5 1.5 1.1 1.6 2.6 3.2 3.2 3.0 2.3 1.9 2.2 2.9 3.0 2.9 2.4 1.5 0.9 1.1 2.4 2.9 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.4 2.5 3.9 4.5 3.9 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.1 2.9 3.2 3.0 1.7 1.1 1.6 2.4 2.8 2.5 2.5 2.2 1.9 2.3 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.5 1.5 0.9 1.1 2.4 4.4 5.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.7 3.1 4.4 2.7 1.5 0.7 0.8 1.3 0.8 1.1 2.4 5.6 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.9 3.3 4.3 2.2 1.2 0.3 0.5 1.0 0.7 1.1 2.4 2.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.1 2.1 3.5 4.4 2.2 1.2 0.5 0.8 1.1 0.8 1.2 2.4 3.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.1 2.2 3.8 5.0 2.2 1.3 0.9 1.2 2.5 2.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.1 2.2 3.8 4.9 2.4 1.4 1.0 1.7 2.7 3.2 3.2 3.0 2.3 1.9 2.4 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.6 1.6 1.0 1.3 2.6 1.4 3.7 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.2 2.2 3.7 4.5 2.5 1.6 1.1 1.6 2.3 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.0 1.7 2.1 2.6 2.8 2.8 2.3 1.5 1.1 1.4 2.6 2.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.2 2.2 3.8 4.8 2.6 1.7 1.2 1.5 1.9 2.3 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.1 1.7 1.7 2.1 2.9 2.2 1.2 3.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.2 2.2 3.9 5.2 2.6 1.9 1.7 2.2 2.6 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.9 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.8 3.4 3.5 3.3 3.2 2.7 2.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.1 2.2 3.7 4.7 2.4 1.8 1.5 3.3 2.5 3.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.1 2.1 3.4 4.2 1.8 1.5 1.0 2.6 1.5 2.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.0 2.0 3.3 4.3 2.2 1.1 3.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.9 3.2 4.3 1.6 0.8 2.5 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.8 3.2 4.0 0.8 0.5 3.6 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.9 1.7 2.9 3.6 0.4 0.3 2.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.5 2.5 3.2 2.0 2.4 0.2 0.1 2.9 3.7 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.1 2.8 3.0 1.8 0.1 0.1 3.5 2.5 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 3.2 3.6 2.3 0.1 0.0 4.1 3.9 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 2.1 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 HB E X I S T I N G S I N G L E - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L 1BR HB BATH 11'-4" X 11'-8" BEDROOM LIVING/DINING 12'-2" X 8'-4" PATIO/BALC. W.I.C.
CB CB 12'-0" X 11'-8" BEDROOM W.I.C. BATH KITCHEN BATH ENTRY KITCHEN/LIVING 17'-7" X 12'-0" 10'-8" X 10'-0" DEN BATH
ENTRY
KITCHEN/LIVING
17'-7" X 12'-0"
BATH
ENTRY
KITCHEN/LIVING
17'-7" X 12'-0"
CB CB CB CB E X I S T I N G S I N G L E - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L 2BR 1BR 2BR1BR 1BR 1BR 1BR 2BR 2BR 2BR 1BR 1BR 2BR 1BR SS
S 30X48 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE
30X48 CLEAR
FLOOR SPACE 30X48 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE
30X48 CLEAR
FLOOR SPACE FX1 FX1 FX1FX1 FX1 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX2 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX4 FX4 FX4 FX4 FX1 FX1 FX1 FX2 FX2 FX1 FX1 30X48 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE 30X48 CLEAR
FLOOR SPACE 30X48 CLEAR FLOOR SPACE
30X48 CLEAR
FLOOR SPACE FX4 FX4 FX4 FX4 FX4 FX4 FX4 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 FX3 SHEET IDENTIFICATION SCALE OWNER: KGM # 24.0009 PROJECT NO. REVISIONS: 8550 WARNER AVENUE PROJECT DRAWN BY. CHECKED BY. APPROVED BY. J.C. J.C. D.M. DATE ISSUE ARCHITECT 2024-05-16 LIGHTING CALC SET 2024-06-24 LIGHTING CALC SET 2025-01-08 PLAN SET LT 1.1 SITE LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC 1/16"=1'-0" Page 303 SHEET IDENTIFICATION SCALE OWNER: KGM # 24.0009 PROJECT NO. REVISIONS: 8550 WARNER AVENUE PROJECT DRAWN BY. CHECKED BY. APPROVED BY. J.C. J.C. D.M. DATE ISSUE ARCHITECT 2024-05-16 LIGHTING CALC SET 2024-06-24 LIGHTING CALC SET 2025-01-08 PLAN SET LT 1.2 FIXTURE CUTSHEETS NOT TO SCALE Page 304 Revised Project Description
Parkside Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue
January 12, 2025
As requested in the letter dated December 16, 2024, the following is a revised project description
General Information
The owner of the existing commercial center located at 8550 Warner Avenue in Fountain Valley is requesting a General Plan Amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential and a Zoning Map Amendment from C1 Local Business to R4 High Density Residential in order to construct a 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% Density Bonus with 15% affordable units for very low income households.
The site is 2.119 acres and fronts directly onto Warner Avenue located approximately 500 feet east of Newland Street. Adjacent uses include: an existing veterinarian, an ARCO gasoline station, a former drive-thru dairy to the west; Westmont Park (Edison right-of-way) to the east; single family dwellings to the south; and single family dwellings across Warner Avenue (Huntington Beach) to the north.
The existing 18,782 sq ft commercial center, constructed in the mid 1970's, has approximately 14,782 sq ft devoted to general commercial uses and 4,000 sq ft designated as a restaurant pad which is currently vacant. Over the past ten years, in response to increased competition from national chains such as Walmart, Best Buy, and Target; big box retailers (such as Sam's Club and Costco); and increased online sales.
Community Outreach
The property owner has conducted two (2) community meetings to preview and discuss the proposed project. In November of 2022, adjacent single family property owners and tenants located on El Rancho Avenue were provided notice for a forthcoming community meeting. On December 17, 2022 the property owner met with adjacent neighbors at the site to preview the project. Of the seven (7) households on El Rancho Avenue, only four (4) residents attended the community meeting and did not have a major concern with the proposed project.
Another community meeting was held on Wednesday, November 6, 2024 from 6:30 to 8 pm at Heritage Park. Over 450 notices were mailed out to property owners and tenants which conforms with the 1,000 ft radius recently adopted by the FV City Council. Only two (2) households (3 people) showed attended the meeting. One household lives on El Rancho Avenue and the other person resides in the tract located across Warner Ave in Huntington Beach. The stated concerns were:
Traffic impacts to Warner Avenue and Newland Street
Ingress and egress to the project
Potential noise impacts from air conditioner units
Overflow parking into the neighborhoods
Privacy impacts to El Rancho Avenue households
Short term construction impacts
Height of the walls along the eastern and southern property line
During the community meeting it was emphasized to all the attendees that their concerns plus others will be thoroughly analyzed by staff as part of the environmental review and public hearing process.
Proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential to allow the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will ensure ensures and maintain internal consistency with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan, and will not create any inconsistencies with the City of Fountain Valley General Plan.
The economic trend for the majority of the floor area in the center has experienced a decline in retail uses and an increase in service related uses. Currently only 36% of the floor area is occupied. Only12% of the occupied floor area is devoted to retail uses (thrift store and a fishing tackle shop). Approximately 24% of the floor area is devoted to service uses (nail salon, weight clinic, hair salon, chiropractor, and video repair). The balance of the floor area in the center 64% (including the restaurant pad) is vacant.
Over the years a number of restaurant businesses have come and gone in the commercial center. The last restaurant (Azteca Mexican Food) only lasted less than a year. The consequences of the recent pandemic plus the constraints of the location of the commercial center (not located on the corner of primary arterial streets, mid-block location, coupled with an outdated building design) and market forces (competition with existing retail uses in the vicinity) make it very difficult for retail and restaurant uses to succeed.
In response to a concern expressed by staff regarding the request to change the existing general plan designation from Local Commercial to High Density Residential and the zoning designation from C1 Local Business to R4 High Density Residential, the property owner retained the services of Congelton and Associates, economic feasibility consultants, to prepare a “Highest and Best Use Study” for the site.
Congelton and Associates (see Highest and Best Use study Summary and PowerPoint) analyzed the current tenant mix and based on empirical research and field notes in Fountain Valley and adjacent jurisdictions, it was determined that based on the location of the site, the condition of the existing commercial center building, and competition from existing commercial businesses in the vicinity, the location will not support viable commercial uses, especially retail uses, at the site.
In light of the decline in the quality and quantity of retail and restaurant uses seeking to lease space in the commercial center plus the impact of the consequences of the recent pandemic (reduced and owed rent from tenants) the property owner has explored changing the use from commercial to residential uses.
Since 2021, the property owner has reviewed a number of alternative residential uses for the site ranging from mixed-use with limited retail to various multi-story residential layouts with a parking garage. These alternatives were deemed too intense for the site based on location and surrounding uses.
The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential is compatible and viable based on the following factors: The 2.119 acre site is located adjacent
to Warner Avenue which is a major arterial street and is an appropriate site for high density residential projects; higher density multifamily housing should be located in proximity to transit service; retail; and service businesses. The site compiles with the above criteria identified in the recently updated general plan.
Further, although the city has satisfied the required RHNA obligation with the designed opportunity sites, the proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential to allow the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households represents actual production units for very low income households. The ten (10) affordable units will go towards meeting the accepted RHNA for the City of Fountain Valley by the State of California when reviewed during the next review cycle.
We feel the 2.119 ace site is appropriate for an R4 High Density Residential apartment project based on declining economic trends for Local Business mid-block commercial centers in the area. The proposed R4 High Density Multiple Dwelling District applies to areas appropriate for higher intensity, multifamily residential units. The maximum density is thirty (30) dwelling units per net acre. The requested 14% density bonus will increase the density to 34 units per acre.
The R4 High Density Residential zoning district is consistent with the High Density Residential land use designation of the general plan.
The General Plan presents the City’s planning land use and planning framework through a set of five elements: land use, mobility, housing, open space and conservation, and public facilities and safety. The recently updated Fountain Valley General Plan will ensure proposed development will add value to the community in terms of function, design, and fiscal return, and ensure that Fountain Valley is nice place to live for people of all ages and incomes today and in the future.
2045 Fountain Valley General Plan
The Land Use Element provides guidance to ensure that future growth in Fountain Valley expands opportunities and emulates community values while protecting existing neighborhoods and enhancing overall quality of life. (LU) The Mobility Element provides guidance and support to meet the needs of residents, businesses, emergency service providers, and other roadway users. (CM) The Housing Element provides a strategy based on a comprehensive evaluation of existing and previous housing programs and policies; an analysis of the City’s population, economy, and housing characteristics; an assessment of fair housing issues; and a discussion of the physical and regulatory resources and constraints for housing production. (H)
The Open Space and Conservation Element provides goals and policies promoting the maintenance and development of high quality parks that meets the physical, mental, and social needs of the Fountain Valley Community and their varying life stages and lifestyles, and preserve the City’s finite historic, cultural, and natural resources. (OSC) The Public Facilities and Safety Element provides goals and policies regarding public services, health, safety, and protection from the risks of natural and human-caused disasters, emergencies, and hazards are vital in establishing a safe and healthy environment for Fountain Valley residents, visitors, and workers. (PFS)
General Plan Amendment No. 23-01 - Findings
The following is a summary the stated polices in the recently updated general plan and responses establish support for the proposed general plan amendment. Per FVMC
21.34.050, an amendment to the general plan may be approved only if the following findings of fact can be made in a positive manner, as applicable to the type of amendment. It is the responsibility of the applicant to establish evidence in support of the required findings:
a. Mandatory findings required for all amendments (e.g., general plan, zoning map):
1. The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential to allow the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households amendment ensures and maintains internal consistency with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan, and would not create any inconsistencies with this title, in the case of a title amendment; as follows:
Policy LU-1.1 Land use compatibility and viability.
Require that new development is located, scaled, buffered, and designed to minimize negative impacts on existing conforming uses and adjacent neighborhoods. Require that new residential developments are located, scaled, buffered, and designed so as to not hinder the economic viability and continuity of areas planned for nonresidential uses.
The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential is compatible and viable based on the following factors: The 2.119 acre site is located adjacent to Warner Avenue which is a major arterial street and is an appropriate site for high density residential projects; higher density multifamily housing should be located in proximity to transit service; retail; and service businesses. The site compiles with the above criteria identified in the recently updated general plan.
The proposed three-story walk-up residential project complies with the maximum 35 foot height required in the R4 High Density Residential development standards. To buffer potential privacy impacts, no balconies or windows above the second story along the rear setback will directly face the existing single family residential located to the south. The proposed general plan amendment will not hinder the operation of the existing veterinarian use on the west and Westmont Park located to the east of the site. The site is relatively flat and the proposed residential buildings will not require additional earth material to provide proper drainage.
Policy LU-1.2 Land Use Plan consistency.
Consider proposed development that is consistent with the Land Use Plan to be generally compatible and consistent with surrounding land uses and a community’s identity. Other policies in the General Plan and development standards in the Development Code may require additional site, building, and landscape design treatment to ensure compatibility.
The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential will be compatible and consistent with surrounding uses by implementing the R4 High Density Residential Development standards which requires ample front, side and rear yard setbacks in addition, the maximum height of 35 feet which is 15 feet lower than the maximum 50 foot height allowed in the existing C1 Local Business zoning district.
Policy LU-1.3 Mix of land uses.
Maintain a balanced mix of high quality residential, retail, employment, industrial, open space, and public facility land uses to ensure a range of living options, fiscal sustainability, and convenient access to shops, restaurants, services, and well-paid and highly skilled jobs.
The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential will allow the construction of the proposed 72 unit residential project and will add to the mix of high quality residential land uses. The site is also has convenient access to retail shops, offices, restaurants and services for future residents.
Policy LU-2.1 Fiscal impacts.
Require proposed new development to demonstrate that it can and will be adequately served by public facilities without negatively impacting existing capacities and levels of service.
Require new development and changes in use requiring discretionary City approval to be fiscally neutral or beneficial.
The proposed general plan amendment will allow the construction of a 72 unit residential project and will replace an under performing, outdated 18,782 sq ft. commercial center with a low amount of viable retail uses with a residential complex. Currently the existing commercial center has approximately 12% retail uses and 24% service uses. The balance of the commercial center, including the 4,000 sq ft. restaurant pad, is vacant.
Based on conversations with the leasing agent, prospective tenants are not interested in a mid-block location and an outdated structure built in the 1970's. The conversion of the land use designation from Local Commercial to High Density Residential will result in a significant increase in the commercial property tax which represents a steady, consistent revenue source for the city. Future residents will also support existing retail, services, and restaurant land uses which adds to direct increased sales tax revenue.
Policy H-1.1 Construction of new units.
Promote the construction of additional dwelling units to accommodate Fountain Valley’s share of regional housing needs in accordance with adopted land use policies.
Although the city has satisfied the required RHNA obligation with the designed opportunity sites, the proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential to allow the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households represents actual production units for very low income households. The ten (10) affordable units will go towards meeting the accepted RHNA for the City of Fountain Valley by the State of California when reviewed during the next review cycle.
Policy H-1.2 Variety of housing options.
Provide a variety of housing opportunities for all income levels through different land uses and densities.
The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential will allow the construction of the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households. The requested 14% density bonus will increase the density on the 2.119 acre site from 30 units per acre to 34 units per acre.
b. The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential to allow the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety or welfare of the city as follows:
Policy LU-3.1 Pride and identity.
Enhance the sense of identity and increase the feeling of pride among residents, business owners, employees, and visitors by encouraging excellent physical design and continual property maintenance and improvements.
Approving the proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential will allow the construction of a well-designed 72 unit residential complex which has been designed by a very high end architectural firm in conjunction with staff input. The architect has strived to implement direction from staff and create a “timeless design” with contemporary architectural features, offsets, protections, a balance of building materials utilizing stucco and brick veneers, colors, articulated pavement, and enhanced landscaping.
Policy LU-3.2 Scale and character.
Ensure that all new development is compatible with the scale and character of the surrounding neighborhoods in Fountain Valley.
The proposed general plan amendment will allow the construction of a 72 unit residential project which will conform to the R4 High Density Residential development standards except for a minor reduction in the third story rear setback which is mitigated by minimizing privacy impacts from balconies and windows and a reduction in privet open space patios and balconies.
The proposed residential project is a good fit for the site by orienting the mass of the building to the north side of the prototype which alleviates impacts to the existing single family residential located on the south side. In addition, the enhanced architectural integrity and landscape plans will maintain high quality character for the site and surrounding neighborhoods.
Policy LU-3.5 Corridor design.
Buildings, streetscapes, landscaping, and associated improvements along the City’s arterial streets should be attractive and promote a cohesive sense of place.
The architect has designed the elevation for the proposed building facing Warner Avenue with offsets and projections which reflect interest and rhythm on the major arterial street. The architectural enhancements combined with enhances landscaping will be very attractive and provide a sense of place for future residents and for the city in general.
Policy CM-1.1 Level of service.
Maintain a citywide level of service (LOS) not exceeding LOS D for intersections during the peak hours. Require new development projects to mitigate off-site traffic impacts to the maximum extent feasible to maintain the City’s LOS standard.
The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential will not significantly affect the existing LOS on Warner Avenue nor on Newland Avenue. The existing commercial center in over 50% vacant and generates very low vehicular trips.
The proposed 72 unit residential project will generate additional vehicle trips but it is not anticipated vehicular trips will significantly impact the LOS on Warner Avenue and Newland Avenue. Plus the Traffic impact Fee will assist in mitigating traffic impacts to the city's circulation system.
Policy H-2.1 Infill housing.
Promote infill housing development through the adaptive reuse of underutilized parcels.
The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential will permit the construction of the proposed 72 unit residential project and replace an under performing, outdated commercial center with a low amount of viable retail uses and an extremely high vacancy rate with low prospects, based on competition from major commercial centers, national chains such as Walmart, Best Buy, and Target; big box retailers, and internet sales, to add new commercial tenants in the future.
Policy H-2.3 Range of rental and ownership options.
Encourage new housing construction for rental and ownership housing in a mixture of price ranges.
The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential will allow the construction of the proposed 72 unit residential project with 15% of the units (two (2) studio, five (5) 1 bedroom , and two (2) 2 bedroom units) set aside for very low income households for the duration of the required 55 year term.
Policy OSC-1.1 Parks standards.
Require developers of new residential or mixed-use residential projects to provide or pay fees equivalent to a ratio of three acres of park lands and recreation space facilities for every 1,000 residents added.
The proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will pay the Park Lands and Recreation In-lieu fee as adopted by the Fountain Valley City Council.
Policy PFS-5.1 Land use compatibility.
Approve development and require mitigation measures to ensure existing and future land use compatibility as shown in the City’s Noise Control Ordinance and state interior and exterior noise standards.
The proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will incorporate all noise mitigation measures as required by the environmental review process and the Uniform Building Code.
Policy PFS-5.2 New residential.
When new residential development is proposed adjacent to land designated for industrial or commercial uses, require the developer to assess the potential noise impacts and fund feasible noise-related mitigation measures.
The proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will incorporate all noise mitigation measures as required by the environmental review process and the Uniform Building Code. c. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city’s environmental review procedures.
The proposed general plan amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential to allow the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will be reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city's environmental review procedures.
Zoning Map Amendment No. 436 - Findings
Per FVMC 21.34.050, an amendment to the zoning map may be approved only if the following findings of fact can be made in a positive manner, as applicable to the type of amendment. It is the responsibility of the applicant to establish evidence in support of the required findings.
1. Mandatory findings required for all amendments (e.g., general plan, zoning map and title):
a. The proposed amendment ensures and maintains internal consistency with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan, and would not create any inconsistencies with this title, in the case of a title amendment.
The proposed zoning map amendment from C1 Local Business to R4 High Density Residential is compatible and viable based on the following factors: The 2.119 acre site is located adjacent to Warner Avenue which is a major arterial street and is an appropriate site for high density residential projects; higher density multifamily housing should be located in proximity to transit service; retail; and service businesses. The site compiles with the above criteria identified in the recently updated general plan.
The proposed three-story walk-up residential project complies with the maximum 35 foot height required in the R4 High Density Residential development standards. To buffer potential privacy impacts, no balconies or windows above the second story along the rear setback will directly face the existing single family residential located to the south. The proposed general plan amendment will not hinder the operation of the existing veterinarian use on the west and Westmont Park located to the east of the site. The site is relatively flat and the proposed residential buildings will not require additional earth material to provide proper drainage. b. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety or welfare of the city; and
Approving the proposed zoning map amendment from C1 Local Business to R4 High Density Residential will allow the construction of a well-designed 72 unit residential complex which
has been designed by a very high end architectural firm in conjunction with staff input. The architect has strived to implement direction from staff and create a “timeless design” with contemporary architectural features, offsets, protections, a balance of building materials utilizing stucco and brick veneers, colors, articulated pavement, and enhanced landscaping.
The proposed zoning map amendment will allow the construction of a 72 unit residential project and will replace an under performing, outdated 18,782 sq ft. commercial center with a low amount of viable retail uses with a residential complex. Currently the existing commercial center has approximately 12% retail uses and 24% service uses. The balance of the commercial center, including the 4,000 sq ft. restaurant pad, is vacant.
Based on conversations with the leasing agent, prospective tenants are not interested in a mid-block location and an outdated structure built in the 1970's. The conversion of the land use designation from C1 Local Business to R4 High Density Residential will result in a significant increase in the commercial property tax which represents a steady, consistent revenue source for the city. Future residents will also support existing retail, services, and restaurant land uses which adds to direct increased sales tax revenue. c. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city’s environmental review procedures.
The proposed zoning map amendment from C1 Local Business to R4 High Density Residential to allow the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will be reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city's environmental review procedures.
d. Additional Finding for Zoning Map Amendments: The site is physically suitable (including access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses and absence of physical constraints) for the requested zoning designation and anticipated land use development.
The 2.119 acre site is relatively flat and the proposed residential buildings will not require additional earth material to provide proper drainage. The proposed three-story walk-up residential project complies with the maximum 35 foot height required in the R4 High Density Residential development standards. To buffer potential privacy impacts, no balconies or windows above the second story along the rear setback will directly face the existing single family residential located to the south. The proposed zoning map amendment will not hinder the operation of the existing veterinarian use on the west and Westmont Park located to the east of the site.
The proposed residential project is a good fit for the site by orienting the mass of the building to the north side of the prototype which alleviates impacts to the existing single family residential located on the south side. In addition, the enhanced architectural integrity and landscape plans will maintain high quality character for the site and surrounding neighborhoods.
The architect has designed the elevation facing Warner Avenue proposed building with offsets and projections which reflect interest and rhythm on the major arterial street. The architectural enhancements combined with enhances landscaping will be very attractive and provide a sense of place for future residents and for the city in general. The proposed 72 unit
apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will incorporate all noise mitigation measures as required by the environmental review process and the Uniform Building Code.
Conditional Use Permit No. 1929 - Findings
Per FVMC 21.36.050, the commission, or the council on appeal, shall record the decision in writing with the findings on which the decision is based. The conditional use permit shall be approved, with or without conditions, only if the following findings of fact can be made in a positive manner.
a. The proposed use is allowed within the respective zoning district with the approval of a conditional use permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of this title and this code;
Contingent on the approval of General Plan Amazement No. 23.01 and Zoning Map Amendment No. 436, the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households amendment ensures and maintains internal consistency with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan, and would not create any inconsistencies as set forth in the findings for General Plan Amendment No 23-01 and Zoning Map Amendment No. 436.
b. The proposed use would be consistent with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan and any applicable specific plan;
Contingent on the approval of General Plan Amazement No. 23.01 and Zoning Map Amendment No. 436, the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households amendment ensures and maintains internal consistency with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan, and would not create any inconsistencies as set forth in the findings for General Plan Amendment No 23-01 and Zoning Map Amendment No. 436.
c. The design, location, shape, size and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity; The 2.119 acre site is relatively flat and the proposed residential buildings will not require additional earth material to provide proper drainage. The proposed three-story walk-up residential project complies with the maximum 35 foot height required in the R4 High Density Residential development standards. To buffer potential privacy impacts, no balconies or windows above the second story along the rear setback will directly face the existing single family residential located to the south. The proposed zoning map amendment will not hinder the operation of the existing veterinarian use on the west and Westmont Park located to the east of the site.
d. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including the provision of public access (e.g., width and pavement type), facilities and utilities (e.g., drainage, fire protection, sewers, water), shape, size, the absence of physical constraints and compatibility with adjoining land uses; The proposed residential project is a good fit for the site by orienting the mass of the building to the north side of the prototype which alleviates impacts to the existing single family
residential located on the south side. In addition, the enhanced architectural integrity and landscape plans will maintain high quality character for the site and surrounding neighborhoods.
The architect has designed the elevation facing Warner Avenue proposed building with offsets and projections which reflect interest and rhythm on the major arterial street. The architectural enhancements combined with enhances landscaping will be very attractive and provide a sense of place for future residents and for the city in general. The proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will incorporate all noise mitigation measures as required by the environmental review process and the Uniform Building Code. e. Granting the conditional use permit would not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety or welfare, or injurious to persons, property or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located; and The proposed 72 unit residential project will add to the mix of high quality residential land uses. The site is also has convenient access to retail shops, offices, restaurants and services for future residents. It will not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety,or welfare of persons or property in the vicinity because the project layout, ingress and egress , and the preliminary grading plans have been reviewed by Public Works Engineering, Fire and Police Departments.
f. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city’s environmental review procedures.
The proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will be reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city's environmental review procedures.
g. The applicant has demonstrated his understanding of the conditions imposed in any conditional use permit granted to him and has agreed on the record to abide by those conditions.
The applicant understands the conditions of approval imposed in Conditional Use Permit No. 1929 and will agree on the record to abide by the conditions.
Precise Plan of Design No. 577 – Findings
71. Per FVMC 21.44.050, the commission, or the council on appeal, shall record the decision in writing with the findings on which the decision is based. The precise plan of design application shall be approved, with or without conditions, only if the following findings of fact can be made in a positive manner.
b. The design and layout of the proposed development would:
i. Be consistent with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan, any applicable specific plan and the development and design standards/guidelines of the applicable zoning district;
Contingent on the approval of General Plan Amazement No. 23.01 and Zoning Map Amendment No. 436, the proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households amendment ensures and maintains internal consistency with the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan, and would not create any inconsistencies as set forth in the findings for General Plan Amendment No 23-01 and Zoning Map Amendment No. 436.
ii. Not interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring existing or future developments, and would not create traffic or pedestrian hazards; and The proposed 72 unit residential project will add to the mix of high quality residential land uses. The site is also has convenient access to retail shops, offices, restaurants and services for future residents. It will not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety,or welfare of persons or property in the vicinity because the project layout, ingress and egress , and the preliminary grading plans have been reviewed by Public Works Engineering, Fire and Police Departments.
iii. Provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors through good/proper aesthetic use of materials, texture and color, and would remain aesthetically appealing and retain an appropriate level of maintenance.
The 2.119 acre site is relatively flat and the proposed residential buildings will not require additional earth material to provide proper drainage. The proposed three-story walk-up residential project complies with the maximum 35 foot height required in the R4 High Density Residential development standards. To buffer potential privacy impacts, no balconies or windows above the second story along the rear setback will directly face the existing single family residential located to the south.
The proposed residential project is a good fit for the site by orienting the mass of the building to the north side of the prototype which alleviates impacts to the existing single family residential located on the south side. In addition, the enhanced architectural integrity and landscape plans will maintain high quality character for the site and surrounding neighborhoods.
c. The architectural design of the proposed structure(s) would be compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and would maintain and enhance the attractive, harmonious and orderly development contemplated by the actions, goals, objectives and policies of the general plan, any applicable specific plan and this chapter; d. The proposed development would not:
I. Be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the immediate vicinity; or The proposed 72 unit will not be detrimental to the public convenience,, health, interest, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the immediate vicinity. The proposed residential project is a good fit for the site by orienting the mass of the building to the north side of the property along Warner Avenue which alleviates impacts to the existing single family residential located on the south side. In addition, the enhanced architectural integrity and landscape plans will maintain high quality character for the site and surrounding neighborhoods.
ii. Substantially depreciate property values in the immediate vicinity or interfere with the use or enjoyment of property in the surrounding neighborhood, because of excessive dissimilarity or inappropriateness of design in relation to the surrounding neighborhood.
The proposed three-story walk-up residential project complies with the maximum 35 foot height required in the R4 High Density Residential development standards. To buffer potential privacy impacts, no balconies or windows above the second story along the rear setback will directly face the existing single family residential located to the south. The proposed general plan amendment will not hinder the operation of the existing veterinarian use on the west and Westmont Park located to the east of the site. The site is relatively flat and the proposed residential buildings will not require additional earth material to provide proper drainage. d. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city’s environmental review procedures.
The proposed 72 unit apartment complex with a 14% density bonus and 15% affordable housing units for very low income households will be reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city's environmental review procedures.
Residential Project Description
The proposed apartment complex is designed as a three (3) story walk-up with nine (9) studio units, 37 one bedroom units, and 26 two bedroom units. The architecture of the proposed project incorporates a mix of texture finishes and colors to reflect a contemporary “timeless” architectural design. Each floor will have nine (9) foot ceiling heights to provide a sense of heightened space. Also individual storage space is provided in the patio and balcony area of each unit in addition to bike lockers located throughout the complex.
The proposed landscaping and hardscape features will comply with water-saving design and enhance the quality of life for future residents. All required parking is provided on-site with 57 open parking spaces, 24 carports, and 26 garages for a total of 107 on-site parking spaces of which 45 parking spaces are EV charging capable. In addition, the carports along the southern property line will have solar panels on the roof which will supplement common electrical needs.
Based on the surrounding uses and the shape of the site, it was decided that a three (3) story walk-up with a spacious private recreation area would be the best fit for the site and reduce impact to the adjacent single family dwellings located to the south of the site. Our goal is to minimize land use impacts and provide “beds and heads” to support existing retail and other commercial uses in Fountain Valley and a significant increase in a steady stream of annual property tax revenue to the the City of Fountain Valley.
Proposed Project Density
The proposed 72 unit residential project relies on a general plan amendment and a zoning map amendment to move forward. In addition, a Precise Plan of Design is required to allow the construction of the proposed project. The proposed change to R4 High Density Residential permits a maximum density of 30 units/acre. This would yield 63 units on the
2.119 acre site.
Consistent with Density Bonus planning law, the property owner is requesting a 14% density bonus to allow the density to increase to 34 units/acre. This will yield and additional nine (9) units for a total of 72 units. Based on the desire of the property owner to comply with minimum floor area, setbacks, provide ample private open space, and provide ample on-site parking. We feel the increase in ten (10) units from 62 units at 30 units per acre to 72 units at 34 units per acre is the best fit without overbuilding the site.
Affordable Housing
The proposed residential project will designate 15% of the total number of units units set aside for very low income households. The proposed affordable unit mix is as follows: one (1) studio unit; five (5) one bedroom units; and four (4) two bedroom units. The ten (10) affordable units will be designated for the duration of a minimum of 55 years which is consistent with the City of Fountain Valley Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
Although the State of California Housing and Community Department has approved the recent City of Fountain Valley Housing Element, adding tangible affordable units in the very low category will be a benefit to the City when the current Housing Element and compliance the the RHNA numbers are reviewed for the next cycle. The following tables illustrate the affordable unit mix and floor area:
Proposed Affordable Unit Mix
Unit Quantity Sq. Ft.
Studio - C1 1 547
1 BD - A2 5 750
2 BD - B4 4 1,000
Total 10
Studio, 1 BD, and 2 BD - Very Low (31-50%)
Household Size Annual Income Limit Maximum Rent
1 Person $55,250 $1,381
2 Persons $63,100 $1,577
3 Persons $71,050 $1,776
4 Persons $78,900 $1,972
1. Annual Income Limit based on HCD income limits 2024.
2. Maximum rent calculated as 30% of gross income divided by 12 months.
3. Median Income $129,000 for 4 persons.
On-site Parking
The proposed on-site parking is consistent with Also it should be noted the project provides more on-site parking compare to the minimum Density Bonus provisions. As the table below illustrates, although the proposed project does not provide the total number required on-site parking spaces required by the Fountain Valley Development Code, the proposed project provides substantially more on-site parking spaces above the Density Bonus provisions.
In addition, although not major transit stop, two (2) OCTA bus stops on Warner Avenue (east bound and west bound) are located within 150 feet of the site. If so inclined, residents and guests may utilize the bus which would result in reduced on-site parking demand.
The following is an overview comparing required parking in the R4 High Density Residential provisions in the Fountain Valley Development Code and the Density Bonus provisions in State law.
Parking Summary
Parking FV Required Density Bonus Required
Studio/1 BD 1.5 spaces (1 space covered) 1 Space
2 BD 2 spaces (1 space garage) 1.5 Spaces
Guest 25% of total required spaces 0
Proposed 72 Unit Project Parking Summary
Unit Type Quantity FV Required Density Bonus
Required
Provided
Studio 9 13.5 9 10
1 BD 37 55.5 37 44
2 BD 26 52 39 42
Subtotal 72 121 85 96
Guest 30.25 0 11
Total 72 151.25 (152) 85 107
Garages 26 0 26
Carports 46 0 24
In concert with the Density Bonus provisions and the Affordable Housing provisions for very low income households, State Density Bonus law makes allowances for incentives, concessions, and waivers to required development standards in order to make the affordable housing project feasible.
Requested Concessions
As an incentive to provide affordable housing units, as stated above, the proposed project incorporates a 14% density bonus and provides 15% of the total units for very low income households. Based on State law, three (3) concessions are allowed if a project provides 15% of the total units for very low income households. The property owner is requesting two (2) concessions to the R4 High Density Development Standards.
R4 High Density Residential Development Standards
1. Rear setback - Third story 100 ft rear setback adjacent to single family residential.
2. Patios and balconies minimum 100 sq ft with a minimum dimension of 10 ft
3. Units per acre - 1.12 units per 1,452 sq. ft. of site area to comply with the maximum 30 units per acre
Requested Concessions
1. Allow 37'-9” and 73-2” third story rear setback in lieu of required 100' setback adjacent to single family residential.
2. Allow 65 sq ft in lieu of minimum 100 sq ft and 7 ft minimum dimension in lieu of a minimum 10 ft
Requested Waiver
1. Allow 1.13 units per 1,452 sq. ft. of site area for a maximum 34 units per acre With regard to the request to reduce the 100' third story setback to the existing single family dwellings located to the south of the proposed project, only 130 (lineal) ft of the building above the second story (of the entire 385 ft rear property line) will be located within the 100' setback area. Plus all balconies and windows within the third story setback area are designed to minimize privacy impacts to residents of the single family dwellings. We feel this is a reasonable request.
The R4 High Density Residential provisions require a minimum 100 sq ft of patio and balcony area for each unit with a minimum 10 ft dimension in width and depth. The proposed floor plans range in private open space area from 65 sq. ft. to 130 sq. ft. with a minimum seven (7) ft dimension.
Quantity Unit Type Range of Private
Open Space Area
Minimum Dimension
9 Studio 65 - 67 sq. ft. 7'-6” or greater
37 1 Bedroom 85 - 106 sq. ft. 8'-6” or greater
26 2 Bedroom 85 - 130 sq. ft. 7'-0” or greater
Total = 72
The architect has shadowed in two (2) patio chairs and a small patio table on the floor plans which demonstrates the proposed private open space areas are ample and very functional.
We believe this request to reduce the private open space areas is a reasonable trade-off to maintain usable living area in each unit. In addition to the balconies and patios, the proposed project provides an 800 sq. ft club house and an approximately 2,700 sq. ft. of common open space area for residents and guests.
Requested Waiver
The R4 High Density Residential development standard is 30 units per acre which requires
1.12 units per 1,452 sq. ft. of site area. The 14% density bonus request for the 2.119 acre site will increase the density to 34 units per acre. The increase in density requires a waiver to permit 1.13 units per 1,452 sq. ft. of site area.
The request to allow 1.13 units per 1,452 sq. ft. of site area is inherent in the density bonus request and makes the proposed 72 unit project with 15% affordable units for very low income households feasible. If the proposed project complied with the minimum 1.12 units per 1,452 sq. ft. of site area development standard, the proposed project could not achieve 34 units per acre which is the density (14% density bonus) required to achieve 72 units on the 2.119 acre site.
Summary
As requested in the December 16, 2024 letter from staff, we have prepared a revised Density Bonus Affordable Housing summary which provides an overview of the proposed project, density bonus request, an affordable housing unit mix; a summary justifying the the requested concessions and waiver based on land costs; and language pertaining to the affordable housing unit management plan.
A traffic Impact Study will be prepared in concert with the preparation of the environmental review document. The Public Works concern with a private sewer easement located on the west side of the property is in discussions and the Fire Department's concern with providing a secondary access has also been resolved. A Water Quality Management Plan has been prepared for Public Works review.
In conclusion, we feel the request to change the general plan designation from Local Commercial to High Density Residential and a zoning map amendment from C1 Local Business to R4 High Density Residential is justified because the site has unique geographic hardships which makes long term commercial viability questionable.
Reinforced by the findings in the Highest and Best Use Study, the commercial center is under-performing for the property owner in terms of rent receipts and the City in terms of significant sales tax revenue. The high vacancy rate and majority service uses currently do not lend to a robust commercial center nor for the long-term. Based on the collective effort and advice of commercial brokers, our economic consultant, leasing agents, and common sense, we feel the the existing commercial center has outlived its usefulness.
We also feel the cost of renovating or rehabilitating the existing building, landscaping, and parking area cannot be recouped with existing or future rents. It just does not make sound financial sense. Plus we feel the proposed residential project is the best use for the site in terms of providing high quality residential units for a variety of residents such as singles and young couples starting out and for active seniors that wish to live in Fountain Valley. Further, the proposed residential project will provide a significant increase in property tax revenue which will be a long-term, steady revenue stream for the City of Fountain Valley.
________L.S. CONGLETON & ASSOCIATES____________________________________________ Strategic Real Estate Retail Market Consultation & Research 5325 Alton Parkway www.congletonconsulting.com Suite C-347
Irvine, CA 92604
Office: (949) 206-1049
Cell: (949) 533-6443
E-mail: [email protected]
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 18, 2023
TO: Bob Stellrecht and Bob Franklin
FROM: Linda S. Congleton of L.S. Congleton & Associates (“LSCA”) SUBJECT: Highest And Best Real Estate Feasibility Analysis: 8550 Warner Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA
_____________________________________________________________________________ The purpose of this Memo is to provide an Executive Summary of our key conclusions regarding the highest and best real estate use for the 2.12-acre site at 8550 Warner in Fountain Valley.
1. RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS ARE THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE; NO OTHER USE IS VIABLE GIVEN THE SITE’S PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS.
The 8550 Warner site is structurally flawed for continuing retail use, with many negative characteristics for that use, including the following:
• In today’s highly competitive retail market, the site’s 18,782 square feet of retail/service uses are too small to compete effectively against larger, anchored shopping centers that can accommodate anchor and/or mini-anchor retailers. (See PowerPoint pages 4-10, highlighting Site Analysis and Competition.)
• The site is not bordered by major streets, a key requirement for today’s prime retailers, including fast food and dining outlets. (See PowerPoint page 4.) • The site has poor retail accessibility, with no lighted left turn lanes in or out of the site. (See PowerPoint page 4.)
No amount of physical beautification or leasing efforts will cure the site’s structural flaws for viable retail, particularly given the extremely strong competitive market with larger, anchored shopping centers nearby in both Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach. (See PowerPoint pages 5-10.)
Scraping the site and re-building new office or medical square footage is not a viable commercial alternative. Local office and medical rents are too low to support new construction. The West County office market (e.g., cities of Fountain Valley, Huntington beach, Westminster, Garden Grove, Los Alamitos/Stanton, and Seal Beach) is extremely over-supplied, with a First Quarter 2023 vacancy rate of 19% and a stunning amount of vacant space of 823,097 square feet.
Medical office space also reports weak rents, too low to warrant new construction costs. (See PowerPoint page 11.)
L, S. Congleton & Associates
West County medical office space reports a 4% vacancy rate; no new construction; and only 971 square feet of year-to-date leasing activity. The 8550 Warner site is also not immediately close to a hospital, a key requirement for many medical users. Younger, new medical users desire to be in faster home-growth locations, such as South Orange County. (See PowerPoint page 12.) In contrast to commercial uses, the local Fountain Valley apartment market is ripe for new construction of market-rate and affordable apartments. No new (non-seniors) apartments have been built in Fountain Valley since 1986. As reported in the Fountain Valley draft Housing Element (August 2022), apartment vacancy rates are extremely low at 1.3%, indicating strong demand for new product. (A healthy vacancy rate, as reported in the Housing Element, page 14, would be 5%.) (See PowerPoint pages 13, 15 to 19.)
Positive site traits for new apartments include: adjacent to long linear park; adjacent to veterinary clinic slated for rehabilitation (for pet owners); close to Freeway 405 for easy access to work locations; rare, desirable, west-side-of Freeway 405 residential location; and small size and lower development complexity will be easier to finance, build and lease quickly in today’s higher interest rate environment. In contrast to larger, more complex, proposed apartment projects, the 8550 Warner site can quickly add to the City’s stock of affordable housing (See PowerPoint page 19.) The 8550 Warner site would be a highly doable, near-term apartment project that would satisfy one of the key stated goals of the Fountain Valley Housing Element:
“Construction of additional rental units represents a key step in providing affordable housing opportunities for current and future moderate-income households.” (See page 16 of August, 2022 draft Housing Element.) The redevelopment of 8550 Warner into an attractive, 72-unit apartment project would add an important new residential development to the City’s affordable housing mix. (See architectural renderings and proposed mix, PowerPoint page 18.)
2. THE SITE’S SMALL SIZE OF 18,872 S.F. SEVERELY LIMITS THE CUSTOMER DRAWING POWER OF 8550 WARNER RETAIL.
It is a shopping center industry tenet that anchored centers, such as those with grocery stores, out-perform unanchored centers. Small, unanchored centers such as 8550 Warner (18,782 square feet) are the weakest retail industry product due to their constrained retail customer trade area (i.e., the area from which the center draws 66% to 85% of its sales). Top investors, such as Real Estate Investment Trusts and Pension Funds, will not invest in these unanchored retail products due to their small size, lack of anchor stores, and lower sales and rent productivity. (See PowerPoint page 4.)
The primary reason small, unanchored retail centers are not desired by top investors is that the customer drawing power is dramatically lower than an anchored shopping center, such as one with a grocery store. Because anchored shopping centers have large, powerful-drawing stores of 35,000 to 50,000+ square feet with sizable marketing/advertising budgets, these centers can draw customers from farther away than tiny strip centers. These larger shopping centers have larger customer retail trade areas than small unanchored centers.
Being very generous, the 8550 Warner site’s trade area for its 18,872-square-foot center is, at most, bounded by the Freeway 405 to the east; McFadden Avenue to the north; Goldenwest Avenue to the west; and Ellis Avenue to the south (shown outlined in blue on PowerPoint pages 5-6).
L, S. Congleton & Associates
With a retail trade area partially in Fountain Valley, and partially in Huntington Beach, the 8550 Warner retail has been devastated by fierce, anchored center competition—particularly since 2008. Ten new anchor stores have opened over this 15-year period, posing fierce competition that has killed the retail leasing viability for 8550 Warner. Most competitive centers are 3 to 30 times larger in size. The 8550 Center’s small size cannot effectively compete against these stronger, often refurbished centers anchored by stores that reflect the most contemporary buying trends. These large anchored centers are also the primary attractors of restaurants and fast food pads because dining outlets also want to benefit from the sizable marketing success of large anchored shopping centers. (See PowerPoint pages 7-10.) The 8550 Warner site lacks critical site requirements for fast food pads, as well. New fast food operators typically require arterial street access, lengthy drive-thru lane space and lighted left turn lanes. (See, for example, the new Chick-Fil-A site at the Amazon Fresh Center at Warner and Goldenwest, PowerPoint page 8.)
The Warner site is weak for new restaurants, as well. It lacks the minimum access, visibility and street adjacencies required by financially strong restaurants. Moreover, powerhouse restaurant competition already exists nearby: notably, restaurants in and around Bella Terra in Huntington Beach have become extremely strong in recent years. In Fountain Valley, the 8550 Warner site cannnot effectively compete against the regional-drawing node of Asian (mostly Vietnamese) restaurants located around the popular Mile Square Regional Park. Fountain Valley’s Asian node of dining is highly unusual due to several factors: the 8,000-square-foot Vietnamese Brodard restaurant at the Town Center has been a regional-drawing restaurant for many years— pulling in Asian customers from a wide region (30 to 45-minutes + drive times). Kei Concepts, an Asian restaurant company, has recently filled three formerly-vacant spots at the Town Center and added a new restaurant across from Mile Square Park. The powerful synergy of the countywide popularity of Mile Square Park, and the numerous Asian offerings clustered in and around the Town Center, are too well established to compete against—particularly in a city without fast housing growth. Other well-established fast food and restaurants already exist along South Brookhurst in Fountain Valley, and along Beach Boulevard in Huntington Beach. (See PowerPoint pages 7-10.)
3. NO AMOUNT OF LEASING EFFORTS OR BUILDING BEAUTIFICATION WILL SAVE 8550 WARNER RETAIL.
It is a common occurrence in the retail industry for strong, large shopping centers to “kill off” weaker, smaller, unanchored centers over the years—especially in neighborhoods like Fountain Valley, where residential growth is low (i.e., only .1% in Fountain Valley since the recession per City’s Placeworks 7/19 Market Study, see PowerPoint page 14). As stated in the City’s Market Study, “there is little demand for new retail development in the city (page 1) and there has been a negative impact of e-commerce on bricks and mortar shopping (pages 3, and pages 10-11). The City’s market study states that the lack of retail demand cannot be saved by (Fountain Valley’s) new household growth (page 15).
No amount of intensely refocused property management; extensive site beautification; or strong releasing efforts can save the structurally weak, competitive retail position of the 8550 Warner site. The site’s small size; no adjacency to major streets; and lack of lighted left turn lanes accessing the property, are all permanent structural flaws severely limiting the leasability of tenant space and the financial success of any future retail redevelopment effort.
FOUNTAIN VALLEY
8550 WARNER CENTER
HIGHEST-AND-BEST USE
ANALYSIS
LINDA S. CONGLETON & ASSOCIATES
LINDA S. CONGLETON, PRINCIPAL
ASSIGNMENT
1. EVALUATE CURRENT RETAIL USE AT
WARNER CENTER SITE
2. EVALUATE LOCAL MARKET CONDITIONS
A. RETAIL COMPETITIVE MARKET
B. FAST-FOOD PAD USES
C. FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT USES
D. BUSINESS OFFICE USE
E. MEDICAL OFFICE USE
F. RESIDENTIAL/APARTMENT USE
3. DETERMINE HIGHEST-AND-BEST FUTURE
USE OF WARNER CENTER SITE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. THERE IS A LACK OF LOCAL DEMAND
FOR MORE RETAIL/OFFICE SPACE.
2. OFFICE/MEDICAL SPACE IS NOT
DEVELOPABLE BECAUSE LOCAL
MARKET RENTS ARE TOO LOW.
3. SITE CANNOT COMPETE WITH
STRONGER, ANCHORED RETAIL
COMPETITION.
4. SITE’S FLAWS ARE PERMANENT AND
STRUCTURAL: NO AMOUNT OF
“BEAUTIFICATION” CAN CURE ITS
SMALL SIZE, POOR ACCESS, LACK OF
BORDERING BY MAJOR STREETS.
5. SITE DOES NOT SATISFY FAST-FOOD OR
RESTAURANT SITE REQUIREMENTS.
6. SITE’S HIGHEST-AND-BEST FUTURE USE
WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS.
4 8550 WARNER SITE ANALYSIS
1. Site too small for anchor stores:
2.12 acres, 18,782 sf.
2. Weakest retail industry product:
tiny unanchored strip center.
3. Not investor worthy (e.g., REITs
or pension funds).
4. No top company would build
this as investment today.
5. Not adjacent to major streets.
6. Warner/Newland corner
blocked by ARCO station,
AMPM, vacant Alta Dena Dairy.
7. No lighted left turn lanes.
8. On wrong side of street—not
going home side from freeway.
5 MAJOR COMPETITION: MANY NEW ANCHORS
YEAR STORE MAP
2022 Amazon
Fresh
15 2022 Sprouts 8
2018 Grocery
Outlet
4 2016 Aldi 7
2016 Smart &
Final
6 2015 Grocery
Outlet
17 2014 Sprouts 14
2012 Costco 2
2010 Whole
Foods
2 2008 Trader
Joe's
11 TEN NEW ANCHOR
STORE OPENINGS
SINCE 2008
6 8550 WARNER IS NOT COMPETITIVE TODAY
1. Fierce anchored center
competition has devastated
the small 8550 Warner Ctr.
2. Most centers are 3 to 30 times
larger at 60K-850K sf.
3. Ten (10) anchor store
openings nearby in last 15
years.
4. Since 2008: Trader Joe’s,
Costco, Whole Foods, Sprouts,
Aldi, Grocery Outlet, Smart &
Final Extra, Amazon Fresh.
5. 8550 Warner cannot compete
in new retail environment.
6. No physical beautification can
remedy 8550 Warner flaws:
small size and lack of anchor
stores.
7 8550 WARNER NOT SUITED FOR FAST-FOOD PADS
1. No lighted left turn
lanes.
2. Not immediately
next to major
streets.
3. Cannot do drivethrough pads
desired by new fastfood stores.
4. Stacking lane issues
cannot be satisfied
on site.
5. Site does not meet
basic, new fast-food
broker
requirements (see
new Chick-fil-A site,
next slide).
6. Wide selection
already of fast-food
outlets nearby.
8 NEW PLANNED CHICK-FIL-A, AMAZON FRESH CENTER, HUNTINGTON BEACH
SITE PLAN ILLUSTRATES
WHAT TOP OPERATORS
WANT:
1. NEAR TWO MAIN
STREETS.
2. SUBSTANTIAL
TRAFFIC FLOWS AT
ALL HOURS.
3. VISIBILITY ALONG
MAJOR STREET,
GOLDENWEST, WITH
DIRECT ACCESS.
4. ADEQUATE PARKING
FIELD.
5. LENGTHY DRIVE-THRU
LANE.
6. SYNERGY WITH
BUSINESS NEXTDOOR
– GROCERY STORE.
7. LIGHTED LEFT TURN
LANE OFF WARNER.
9 8550 WARNER SITE NOT SUITED FOR NEW FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANTS
STRONG COMPETITION FROM FOUNTAIN VALLEY RESTAURANTS
1. Brookhurst Ave. is City’s main arterial for dining.
2. High quality, popular Asian/Vietnamese dining
concentrated on N. Brookhurst and around Mile
Square Park.
3. Since Covid-19, Vietnamese dining company, Kei
Concepts, has opened four new restaurants: three
at the N. Brookhurst, Town Center (Albertson’s
anchored), and Nep Café (day) and Gem (evenings)
on Warner Ave. across from Mile Square Park.
4. Regional-draw Vietnamese restaurant, Brodard,
(8,000 sf) at Town Center serves as catalyst for
attracting other Asian concepts.
5. Chain restaurants on S. Brookhurst: e.g., Mimi’s
Café, Stonefire Grill, Islands, and Urban Plates,
opening soon, just S. of 405 Freeway.
6. 8550 Warner Center cannot compete with
powerful regional, Asian dining draw of N.
Brookhurst: high customer spin-off from Mile
Square Park.
7. Both N. and S. Brookhurst provide superior
restaurant sites in Fountain Valley.
9. Restaurant brokers seek well-established,
anchored center locations, as found on Brookhurst.
10. 8550 Warner site too small—not even any
mini-anchors (8K-20K sf).
B
R
O
O
K
H
U
R
S
T
N
O
R
T
H
B
R
O
O
K
H
U
R
S
T
S
O
U
T
H
NORTH RESTAURANTS MAP
Brodard 1
INI Ristorante by Kei Concepts 2/ 2
KIN Izakaya by Kei Concepts 2/ 3
ROL Hand Roll Bar by Kei Concepts 2/ 4
The Vox Kitchen by Kei Concepts 3/ 5
Mel's Diner 6
Ikram Grill 7
Moonlight Pizza & Chicken 8
Lamppost Pizza 9
Nep Café and Gem Dining by Kei Concepts 10
Hot C Pot 11
Sabrosada 12
Lau Tom 5 Ri 13
Silky Sullivan's Restaurant & Irish Pub (Moving) 14
Pholicious 15
Bon Tofu & Grill 16
SOUTH RESTAURANTS MAP
Istanbull Grill California 17
California Fish Grill 18
Chicken Maison 19
Urban Plates (Opening Soon) 20
Sushi Koto 21
Fire Wings Fountain Valley 22
Shabuya 23
Shin-Sen-Gumi Robata & Yakitori - Fountain Valley 24
The Recess Room 25
Mimi's Café 26
Full Moon Sushi 27
Naugles 28
Rubio's Costal Grill 29
85°C Bakery - Fountain Valley 30
Stonefire Grill 31
Fortune Cookies 32
Tsuruhashi 33
Sushi Plus 34
Kitakata Ramen Ban Nai - Fountain Valley 35
Mountain Mike's Pizza 36
HUNGRY BOY Thai Café' 37
Cal Shabu - Fountain Valley 38
BOK Kitchen 39
Plant Power Fast Food 40
Artisan - 7 Leaves & Crema Bakery 41
FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANTS 1/
1/ Restaurants Rated Yelp 3.5+; Islands not included due to Yelp rating below 3.5. 2/ New restaurants located within Fountain Valley Town Center since 2020. 3/ Open about 5 yrs. in FV Town Center
10 8550 WARNER SITE NOT SUITED FOR NEW FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANTS
STRONG COMPETITION FROM HUNTINGTON BEACH RESTAURANTS
1. Many national chain
restaurants are closing outlets.
2. Built vacant locations at
stronger sites are fiercely
competitive (e.g., Bella Terra
Center, vacant Marie
Callender’s at Pavilions Target
Center).
3. Many chains recovering Covid19 lost revenues.
4. Severe labor shortages
impeding expansions.
5. Higher construction and
financing costs reducing
restaurant expansions.
6. Restaurant brokers seek large,
anchored centers for customer
draw.
7. High number of restaurants
nearby. Bella Terra Center
(Fogo de Chao, Snooze open
soon) and Beach Blvd. are
stronger dining districts.
8. 8550 Warner site too small—
not even any mini-anchors
(8K-20K sf).
RESTAURANT MAP
BELLA TERRA: CPK, Puestos, The
Cheesecake Factory, Islands, King's Fish
House, Kabuki, Buffalo Wild Wings,
Chronic Tacos, Luna Grill
1 Don Ramon's Mexican Restaurant 2
Green Tomato Grill 3
Curry and Kabab Bistro 4
Morena's Mexican Cusine 5
STACKED 6
Lazy Dog Restaurant & Bar 7
NORMS Restaurant 8
Olive Garden Italian Restaurant 9
Slice Shabu 10
ROL Hand Roll Bar by Kei Concepts 11
Slater's 50/50 12
Habachihana Japanese Grill 13
The Mamba Sports Bar & Grill 14
Steadfast Café 15
Ahipoke 16
Matsu 17
Pho Lab 18
Triple-T 19
The Fresh Green Olive HB 20
Heirloom a Modern Farmhouse 21
Loving Hut Vegan Banh Mi 22
Denny's 23
1/ Restaurants Rated Yelp 3.5+
FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANTS 1/
11 OC OFFICE MARKET TOO WEAK TO SUPPORT NEW SPACE
1. No demand for new Orange
County Office space.
2. West County, Greater Airport
and all Orange County area
suffering: 19%-20% vacancy.
3. Market rents too low to warrant
new construction.
4. West County market rents only
$2.63—need $3.50+/sf to cover
construction costs.
5. Office users are reducing space
permanently due to remote
work.
6. West County total vacant space
is high: 823,097 sf (19% vacant).
7. Entire Orange County has 17.2
M sf space vacant.
8. Prime Orange County Airport
Area with highest rents ($3.14
Class A) has about 8.0 M sf
vacant.
Categories West County Greater Airport OC Totals
Inventory SF 4,366,205 39,544,819 90,465,241
Direct Vacant SF 788,273 7,002,000 15,267,869
Sublet Vacant SF 34,824 951,458 2,023,700
Overall Vacant SF 823,097 7,953,458 17,291,569
Overall Vacancy Rate % 18.9% 20.1% 19.1%
Overall Avg. Asking Rent (All
Classes) $2.63 $3.04 $2.83
Overall Avg. Asking Rent (Class A
Only) $2.93 $3.14 N.A.
Current Qtr. Net Absorption -112,547 -382,537 -1,146,635 YTD Leasing Activity 41,396 619,918 1,127,279
YTD Construction Completions 0 0 258,194
Under Construction 0 0 0
1/ Source: Cushman & Wakefield Q1 2023. Owner-user buildings are not included in the survey.
Orange County Key Office Market Data: Q1 2023 1/
West County includes Cities of Fountain Valley, Huntington Beach, Westminster, Garden Grove, Los Alamitos/Stanton, Seal Beach.
12 OC MEDICAL OFFICE MARKET TOO WEAK AS WELL
1. 8550 Warner site not
close to hospitals for
medical users.
2. Nearly a million sf of
vacant medical space in
Orange County, or 10.5%
vacancy rate.
3. West Orange County
rents too low at $2.67—
need $3.50 - $4.00+ to
cover construction costs.
4. Medical professions seek
modest/low rents due to
high overhead costs.
5. Younger, new medical
users want to be in
growing neighborhoods,
not Fountain Valley.
6. South Orange County
only area with positive
absorption of 28,634 sf
and $3.59/sf rents.
Categories West County Greater Airport OC Totals
Inventory SF 1,314,626 1,414,058 9,101,002
Direct Vacant SF 48,357 135,252 741,002
Sublet Vacant SF 4,085 700 216,463
Overall Vacant SF 52,442 135,952 957,465
Overall Vacancy Rate % 4.0% 9.6% 10.5%
Overall Avg. Asking Rent (All
Classes) $2.67 $4.05 $3.18
Current Qtr. Net Absorption -20,245 -13,504 -12,462
YTD Leasing Activity 971 5,213 60,781
YTD Construction Completions 0 0 0
Under Construction 0 0 0
1/ Source: Cushman & Wakefield Q1 2023. Owner-user buildings are not included in the survey.
Orange County Key Medical Office Market Data: Q1 2023 1/ West County includes Cities of Fountain Valley, Huntington Beach, Westminster, Garden Grove, Los Alamitos/Stanton, Seal Beach.
13 LACK OF NEW FOUNTAIN VALLEY APARTMENTS
1. No new apartments have been
built in Fountain Valley since 1986.
2. Only a seniors’, age-restricted,
three-story apartment across from
hospital is newer: 456 units built
2000.
3. Only one older apartment (1969)
on West side of Frwy 405.
4. For young and move-down older
Fountain Valley residents seeking
apartment living, no new supply.
5. Only nearby quality, contemporary,
new apartments are in Huntington
Beach.
6. No known planned apartments in
Fountain Valley are currently under
construction.
7. Proposed five-level, Slater Avenue
Apartments (270 units) not started;
old office bldg. not yet demolished.
8. Slater Avenue five-level wrap
design is costly to build.
FOUNTAIN VALLEY GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
MARKET STUDY BY PLACEWORKS (7/19)
REPORTS LACK OF RETAIL AND OFFICE DEMAND
14 1. “There is little demand for new retail development in the city.” (p. 1).
2. Study states General Plan “should focus on providing options for alternative uses for the transition of some existing retail centers if continuing changes in the nature of retail reduce the value of retail properties over the long-term.” (p. 1).
3. Study highlights the negative impact of e-commerce on bricks and mortar shopping, with shopping center vacancies increasing. (pp. 3, 10-11).
4. Lack of retail demand cannot be saved by new household growth — growth has been only 0.1 percent in Fountain Valley since the recession. (p. 15).
FOUNTAIN VALLEY GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
MARKET STUDY BY PLACEWORKS (7/19) CONCLUDES THERE IS
“ABUNDANT” DEMAND FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
15 1. “Fountain Valley’s taxable retail sales have not recovered to prerecession levels and have declined since 2012.” (p. 22).
2. Study states: “Fountain Valley is generally not viewed advantageously for speculative office space development….” (p. 2).
3. Office “lease rates are too low (in Central OC) to support new development” at $2.48/s.f. “compared to countywide average of $2.96 and $3.21 in the airport area.” (p. 36).
4. In contrast to weak retail/office demand, “there is abundant market demand for additional housing in Fountain Valley.” (p. 33).
FOUNTAIN VALLEY DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
(DATED 8/22) SUPPORTS NEW APARTMENTS
16 1. Rentals report 1.3% vacancy—a severely low rate. (p. 14).
2. Only 53 Multi-Family units built in over 11 years. (p. 11).
3. A healthy rental vacancy would be 5%. (p. 14).
4. Out of a total of 18,469 housing units in 10+ unit buildings, only 2,358 were housed by rentals in 2019, or 12.7% of the total — a low supply. (Table H-7, p. 12).
5. “Construction of additional rental units represents a key step in providing affordable housing opportunities for
current and future moderate-income households.” (p. 16).
CONCLUSIONS
HIGHEST-AND-BEST REAL ESTATE USE
FOR 8550 WARNER SITE
17 1. SITE IS NO LONGER SUITABLE FOR RETAIL USE.
2. SITE IS PLAGUED BY STRUCTURAL FLAWS: TOO SMALL FOR ANCHOR STORES; NOT BORDERED BY MAJOR STREETS; POOR ACCESS WITH NO LIGHTED TURN LANE.
3. SITE IS WEAKEST FORM OF RETAIL: NOT INVESTOR-DESIRED.
4. CITY’S RETAIL SALES HAVE NOT RECOVERED FROM PRE-RECESSION LEVELS PER CITY’S MARKET STUDY.
5. CITY IS NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY E-COMMERCE SALES.
6. SITE HAS BEEN HAMMERED BY STRONGER, NEARBY COMPETITION—WITH 10+ NEW ANCHOR STORES IN 15 YEARS.
7. WEST COUNTY OFFICE VACANCIES AND RENTS DO NOT SUPPORT NEW DEVELOPMENT:
19% VACANT (823,097 SF VACANT) AND LOW AVERAGE ASKING RENT OF $2.63/SF.
8. WEST COUNTY MEDICAL OFFICE RENTS ALSO WEAK AT $2.67/SF; SITE NOT NEAR HOSPITAL.
9. ONLY USE VIABLE AT 8550 WARNER SITE IS HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL: APARTMENTS, WITH LOW VACANCY (1.3%) AND LOW SUPPLY.
18 NEW QUALITY APARTMENTS ONLY USE WITH ENOUGH
LOCAL DEMAND SUITABLE FOR 8550 WARNER SITE
Quantity Square
Feet
Studio - C1 6 550
1 BD - A2 4 750
10 Annual
Income
Limit
Maximum
Rent
$47,450 $1,186
$54,200 $1,355
1. 2.
3. Annual Income Limit based on HCD income
limits 2022.
Maximum rent calculated as 30% of gross
income divided by 12 months.
Median Income $119,100 for 4 persons.
PARKSIDE
FOUNTAIN VALLEY
TENANT MIX
2 Persons
PROPOSED
Total
Studio and 1 Bedroom
Very Low (31-50%)
Household
Size
1 Person
72 Unit Apartment Complex
13% Density Bonus
15% Affordable Units (10 units)
Unit
Type
FINAL COMMENTS
8550 WARNER SITE’S POSITIVE TRAITS FOR APARTMENTS
1. ADJACENT TO LONG LINEAR PARK.
2. ADJACENT TO VETERINARY CLINIC SLATED FOR
REHABILITATION.
3. CLOSE TO FREEWAY 405 FOR EASY ACCESS TO WORK.
4. WEST SIDE OF FREEWAY 405 IS DESIRABLE LOCATION —
VERY FEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS ON
WEST SIDE OF CITY.
5. SMALLER SIZE AND LOWER COMPLEXITY WILL LIKELY BE
EASIER TO FINANCE, BUILD, AND LEASE QUICKLY, THEREBY
ADDING TO CITY’S AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK.
QUESTIONS?
LINDA S. CONGLETON & ASSOCIATES
LINDA S. CONGLETON, PRINCIPAL
20 FOUNTAIN VALLEY
8550 WARNER AVENUE
SITE REVIEW
Mitigated Negative Declaration
8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV)
The 8550 Warner Avenue Project (Parkside FV) Mitigated Negative Declaration and all Appendices can be found under the following link:
https://www.fountainvalley.gov/1531/Parkside-FV
Included in the link above are the following:
Appendix A: CalEEMod Results
Appendix B: Transportation Screening Assessment
Appendix C: Construction Health Risk Assessment
Appendix D: Cultural Resources Assessment
Appendix E: Geotech Engineering Investigation
Appendix F: Water Quality Management Plan
Appendix G: Noise Measurement and Modeling Data
Appendix H: Fountain Valley School District Will Serve Letter Appendix I: Republic Services Will Serve Letter
Appendix J: Response to Comments on the Draft IS-MND
Appendix K: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
8550 Warner Avenue Project
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463
prepared by
City of Fountain Valley
Community Development Department
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, California 92708
Contact: Steven Ayers, Principal Planner
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
250 East 1st Street, Suite 1400
Los Angeles, California 90012
March 2026
Table of Contents
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 i
Table of Contents
Initial Study............................................................................................................................................. 1
1. Project Title ............................................................................................................................ 1
2. Lead Agency Name and Address............................................................................................ 1
3. Contact Person and Phone Number....................................................................................... 1
4. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address.................................................................................... 1
5. Project Location...................................................................................................................... 1
6. Surrounding Land Uses........................................................................................................... 4
7. Land Use and Zoning .............................................................................................................. 4
8. Description of Project............................................................................................................. 4
9. Construction and Grading ....................................................................................................12
10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required............................................................12
11. Have California Native American Tribes Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated with the Project Area Requested Consultation Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1?...............................................................................................................13 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected.........................................................................................15 Determination ......................................................................................................................................15 Environmental Checklist.......................................................................................................................17 1 Aesthetics.............................................................................................................................17 2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources.....................................................................................21 3 Air Quality.............................................................................................................................23 4 Biological Resources.............................................................................................................35 5 Cultural Resources................................................................................................................41 6 Energy...................................................................................................................................45 7 Geology and Soils.................................................................................................................49 8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions..................................................................................................57 9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials........................................................................................63 10 Hydrology and Water Quality...............................................................................................69 11 Land Use and Planning .........................................................................................................75 12 Mineral Resources................................................................................................................77 13 Noise.....................................................................................................................................79 14 Population and Housing .......................................................................................................91 15 Public Services......................................................................................................................93 16 Recreation ............................................................................................................................97 17 Transportation......................................................................................................................99 18 Tribal Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................103 19 Utilities and Service Systems..............................................................................................105 20 Wildfire...............................................................................................................................111 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ...................................................................................115 References..........................................................................................................................................123 Bibliography................................................................................................................................123 List of Preparers..........................................................................................................................127
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
ii
Tables
Table 1 Existing Utility Service Providers......................................................................................... 8 Table 2 Health Effects Associated with Criteria Pollutants ...........................................................25 Table 3 Air Quality Thresholds of Significance ..............................................................................26 Table 4 SCAQMD LSTs for Construction/Operation (SRA-17)........................................................27 Table 5 Proposed Project Construction Emissions........................................................................29 Table 6 Proposed Project Operational Emissions..........................................................................30 Table 7 Proposed Project LST Construction Emissions..................................................................31 Table 8 Estimated Construction GHG Emissions ...........................................................................60 Table 9 Combined Annual Emissions of Greenhouse Gases .........................................................60 Table 10 Short-Term Noise Measurement Results..........................................................................81 Table 11 Long-Term Noise Measurement Results (LT 1).................................................................83 Table 12 Long-Term Noise Measurement Results (LT 2).................................................................83 Table 13 FTA Construction Noise Criteria........................................................................................84 Table 14 Fountain Valley Municipal Code Exterior Noise Standards ..............................................85 Table 15 FTA Vibration Damage Criteria .........................................................................................85 Table 16 Estimated Noise Levels at Sensitive Receptors by Construction Phase............................87 Table 17 Proposed Project Student Generation..............................................................................95 Table 18 Normal Year Water Supply and Demand Comparison (AFY)..........................................107 Table 19 Single Dry Year Water Supply and Demand Comparison (AFY)......................................107 Table 20 Multiple Dry Year Water Supply and Demand Comparison (AFY)..................................108 Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location................................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2 Project Site.......................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3 Conceptual Plan .................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 4 Visual Renderings of the Proposed Project......................................................................... 7 Figure 5 Landscape Plan – Overall Project Site...............................................................................10 Figure 6 Landscape Plan – Amenity Building ..................................................................................11 Figure 7 Approximate Noise Measurement Locations...................................................................82
Table of Contents
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 iii
Appendices
Appendix A CalEEMod Results
Appendix B Transportation Screening Assessment
Appendix C Construction Health Risk Assessment
Appendix D Cultural Resources Assessment
Appendix E Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
Appendix F Water Quality Management Plan
Appendix G Noise Measurement Data and Modeling
Appendix H Fountain Valley School District Will-Serve Letter Appendix I Republic Services Will-Serve Letter
Appendix J Responses to Comments on the Draft IS-MND
Appendix K Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
iv
This page intentionally left blank.
Initial Study
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 1
Initial Study
This Final Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) consists of the Draft IS‑MND (circulated January 14, 2026 through February 13, 2026 for a 30-day public review period; SCH No. 2026010463) and this document containing responses to comments received from the public (Appendix J) and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Appendix K). Mitigation measures are incorporated into the project and will be enforced through the MMRP pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15097.
1. Project Title
8550 Warner Avenue Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Fountain Valley
Community Development Department
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, California 92708
3. Contact Person and Phone Number
Steven Ayers, Principal Planner
714-593-4431
4. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address
The Stellrecht Company, FV Center LP
15261 Transistor Lane
Huntington Beach, California 92649
5. Project Location
The approximately 2.119-acre (or 92,325-square-foot) project site is located at 8550 Warner Avenue in Fountain Valley, California, and is situated on the south side of Warner Avenue approximately 500 feet east of Newland Street. The site consists of one (1) legal parcel (Assessor’s Parcel Number 167-361-17) and is currently developed with an 18,782-square-foot, one (1)-story commercial center and surface parking, constructed in the mid-1970s. The commercial center consists of 14,782 square feet of general commercial uses and 4,000 square feet designated for restaurant use; however, the restaurant space is currently vacant. The project site is almost entirely developed or paved with some landscaping on the northern and southern borders of the project site, including trees and shrubs. Three (3) ingress/egress driveways on Warner Avenue currently provide vehicle access to the site. Figure 1 shows the project site in a regional context. Figure 2 shows the project site boundary.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
2 Figure 1 Regional Location
[ Rosecrans Ave
fiJ Compton Blvd
Norwalk ~
Paramount ~ :I_
la Mirada @) §@) ~ sastanchu"J., ~• Bastanch yRd
Chino Hills
State Park
VOE Alondra Blvd Bellflower i Alondra Blvd ~
~:E ii1 .a J
}- ~ g 'l'I ~ « Artesia Cerritos
Rosecrans Ave
w Fullerton Placentia ., Malvern Alie E Chapman Ave : ($" W Commonwealth Ave ~ II
Yorba Linda
g f South St 3; South St
¥ s Buena Park W Orangethorpe Ave
t &(\1,ett,otpe Ave ! J
47 Del Amo Bl\141
.[_Wardlow Rd
Signal Hill
Lakewood
f°Sprlng St
WlUowSt
la Palma
C ibon St Lincoln Ave
-
• Cypress ti
J Cerritos Ave $
>
Los Alamitos ~
~herton St Rossmoor > E Anaheim St
r
iB i - i W Ball Rd z
W la Palma Ave § e uncoln P."e !
Anaheim
W Cerritos Ave
Stanton Katella Ave
Chapman Ave Orange
;;
long Beach
E8r0r3e1Wdy
Westminster .2:
., W 17Th St i
!!
,=
North Tustin §
Seal Beach
Naval Weapons
Station
Seal Beach
J> al ift C
* Fountain
I Valley
Thlb..rtA
Huntington Beach Ellis Ave
Yorktown Ave
0 "t4Th s j .,., WlStSt ! 1st St tin l',a,\,ch Rd ,._..,, z ~ Santa Ana
~
8011 a Ce Or
.. Newport Beach t.
f e016 J 0dlJAtd t
j
#
Tustin ,,;"'
Laguna Coast
Wilderness Park
Laguna Beach
0 2.5 5 Miles
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2025.
* Project Location
N
A Los Padres National
Forest
g
Oxnard
Edward~ Air
14 Force Ba~
Lancaster
Palmdale
Santa Clarita
Simi Valley V
Angeles
National
Forest
Aliso and ood
Canyons Park
58 Barstow
Victorville
Los Ontario
Angeles Riverside 60
~ 91 Corona ~* ¥ Murrieta
Oceanside
v
San
Diego
) n"
Cathedral
City
e X j C 0
Initial Study
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 3
Figure 2 Project Site
Imagery provided by Microsoft Bing and its licensors © 2025. 25-... 7226 EPS Fig X Project Location
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
4 6. Surrounding Land Uses
The project site is bordered by Warner Avenue to the north and single-family residential development across Warner Avenue further north in the City of Huntington Beach; Westmont Park and electricity utility lines to the east; single-family residential development to the south; and an animal hospital (Warner Avenue Animal Hospital), gas station (ARCO), and café (Valencia Shop) to the west. Figure 2 shows the land uses surrounding the project site.
7. Land Use and Zoning
The project site currently is designated as Local Commercial by the Fountain Valley General Plan and currently zoned as C1 (Local Business). As part of the 8550 Warner Avenue Project (proposed project), the project applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential and a Zoning Map Amendment from C1 (Local Business) to R4 (High Density Multiple Dwelling). The High Density Residential land use allows for 15 to 30 dwelling units per acre, and, correspondingly, the R4 zone permits a residential density of 30 dwelling units per acre.
Pursuant to California Density Bonus Law, 15 percent of the total residential units would be reserved as affordable units. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(a), when an applicant seeks a density bonus for housing development within the jurisdiction of a city, the local government shall provide the applicant with incentives or concessions for the production of housing units, waivers or reductions of development standards, and modified parking ratios.
To facilitate the development of the proposed 72 residential units on-site (discussed further under Description of Project), and because the project applicant is proposing to designate 15 percent of the base density as affordable housing units for very-low income households, the project applicant is requesting the following three (3) concessions to the R4 zone development standards:
Concession to the City’s Zoning Code (Fountain Valley Municipal Code [FVMC] Section 21.08.040) to allow for a 37-foot nine (9)-inch and 73-foot two (2)-inch third story rear setback in lieu of the required 100-foot setback adjacent to single-family residential development.
Concession to the City’s Zoning Code (FVMC Section 21.08.040) to allow a reduced balcony size requirement. This concession would reduce the minimum requirement of 100 square feet of private open space per unit with a minimum 10-foot dimension (in width and depth) to a new minimum requirement of 65 square feet of private open space per unit with a minimum seven (7)-foot dimension (in width and depth).
Concession to the City’s Zoning Code (FVMC 21.08.040) to allow for the increase in number of units per 1,452 square feet. This concession would increase the maximum number of units per 1,452 square feet from one (1) unit per 1,452 square feet to 1.13 units per 1,452 square feet.
8. Description of Project
The 8550 Warner Avenue Project (proposed project or project) involves the construction of a three (3)-story, 72-unit apartment complex and a one (1)-story amenity building on the 2.11-acre project site. The proposed apartment complex would consist of one (1) residential building and one (1) amenity building totaling 76,876 square feet that form a U-shape on the project site. The residential building would be located on the eastern, northern, and western portions of the project site and
Initial Study
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 5
would have a height of 30 feet to the roof, 34 feet to the top of parapet, and a maximum height of 39 feet to the roof apex. The residential units would consist of nine (9) studio units, 37 one (1)- bedroom units, and 26 two (2)-bedroom units totaling 68,507 square feet with 6,941 square feet of private open space in the form of balconies and patios. Of the total residential units, 15 percent, or 10 units total, would be set aside for very-low income households and would consist of one (1) studio unit, five (5) one (1)-bedroom unit, and four (4) two (2)-bedroom units. The one (1)-story amenity building would be located in the center of the apartment complex property and include a 122-square-foot leasing office, 663-square-foot clubhouse, and an adjacent trellis structure with a patio area. The architecture of the project incorporates a contemporary design with neutral color tones.
Figure 3 shows the proposed project’s conceptual site plan. Figure 4 shows visual renderings of the proposed project from various points of view, including from Warner Avenue.
Site Access and Parking
Site Access
Under existing conditions, the project site is accessible by vehicle via three (3) ingress/egress driveways on Warner Avenue. The project would eliminate one (1) driveway, relocate another driveway, and end up with two (2) driveways from Warner Avenue for the proposed project in lieu of the three (3) existing driveways on-site. One (1) driveway would be located at the northwest corner of the project site and would route vehicles to the southern portion of the project site where an entry gate would provide further access to the apartment complex. The other driveway would be located at the northeast portion of the project site and would connect to a separate entry gate into the apartment complex. Both driveways would also provide ingress and egress access for emergency vehicles. As part of the driveway construction, the proposed project would relocate an existing Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) bus stop for Route 72 approximately 115 feet to the east, which would be coordinated with OCTA. On-site vehicle circulation would consist of a looped roadway that surrounds the amenity building and connects to both project site driveways.
Pedestrian access would be provided by the existing sidewalk parallel to Warner Avenue connecting to on-site pathways and access points.
Parking
The proposed project would provide a total of 107 parking spaces on-site,1 consisting of 96 resident parking spaces and 11 guest parking spaces, including five (5) ADA-accessible spaces. A total of 45 parking spaces would be electric vehicle (EV) charging capable, including six (6) spaces equipped with EV chargers. Parking would be offered in a mix of car garages, carports (with solar panel roofs), and outdoor unsheltered parking. The project would also include four (4) bicycle lockers with capacity to store six (6) bikes per locker. Bicycle lockers would include “e-bike” charging infrastructure.
1 The City requires a parking ratio of 1.5 parking spaces per studio and one (1)-bedroom unit, and two (2) spaces per two (2)-bedroom unit per FVMC Chapter 21.22, which translates to a minimum requirement of 152 parking spaces for the project. However, in accordance with California Density Bonus Law, the project applicant can incorporate a reduced parking count by using State parking requirements, which require one (1) parking space per studio and one (1)-bedroom unit, and 1.5 parking spaces per two (2)-bedroom unit. In accordance with these requirements, the project would be required to provide a minimum of 85 parking spaces.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
6 Figure 3 Conceptual Plan
Source: Architects Orange, 2025
• . - ----------!------------------===-= -------------------------- ] EXISTNG
2-STORY
SUILDING
EXISTING
' I ------ --- - ------------.-----.
IILY
I
I
I
I I
I I
EXJSffiG
'M:STMONT PARK I (SCERCJN)
Initial Study
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 7
Figure 4 Visual Renderings of the Proposed Project
Source: Architects Orange, 2025
NORTH/ WEST ELEVATION: WARNER AVE. NORTH /WEST AERIAL VIEW NORTH/ EAST ELEVATION: WARNER AVE. SOUTH /WEST AERlAL VIEW
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
8 Utility Connections
Table 1 summarizes the utility service providers for the project.
Table 1 Existing Utility Service Providers
Utility Service Provider
Water Service City of Fountain Valley
Sewer City of Fountain Valley
Natural Gas Southern California Gas Company
Electricity Southern California Edison
Cable Spectrum/Charter Communications
Telecommunications AT&T, Verizon, Frontier, Spectrum/Charter Communications Solid Waste Republic Services
The following discussion summarizes the utility infrastructure that would be maintained or installed as part of the project.
Water
The proposed project would include infrastructure to provide water to the project site. Proposed water infrastructure includes:
Installation of two (2) eight (8)-inch fire water services with backflow preventers that would connect to three (3) new fire hydrants on the project site. Both water services would connect to the existing water main beneath Warner Avenue.
Installation of two (2) four (4)-inch domestic water services that would connect to a water meter behind the sidewalk within the private landscaping. Both water services would connect to the existing water main beneath Warner Avenue.
Wastewater
The proposed water improvements would include infrastructure to collect wastewater from the project site. The proposed wastewater infrastructure includes the installation of a six (6)-inch sanitary sewer line that would run underneath the internal roadway of the project site and connect to an existing six (6)-inch sewer lateral for disposal to the City’s sewer system.
Energy and Telecommunications
Southern California Edison (SCE) would provide electricity to the project site. Southern California Gas Company (SCG) would provide natural gas to the project site. AT&T, Verizon, Frontier, and Spectrum/Charter Communications would provide telecommunications services. The proposed project includes installation of a new transformer at the southwest corner of the project site.
Solid Waste, Recycling, and Green Waste
The proposed project would include two (2) roofed trash enclosures at the southern border of the project site. All locations would provide adequate maneuvering space for solid waste, recycling, and green waste vehicles.
Initial Study
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 9
Stormwater and Drainage
The current project site is primarily developed with impervious surfaces. Under existing conditions, stormwater runoff flows into concrete V-gutters located north, south, and west of the existing building which carry runoff toward the existing right-of-way along Warner Avenue where stormwater drains west to the nearest catch basin. The proposed stormwater infrastructure for the project site includes the installation of concrete gutters around the amenity building which would carry stormwater to an underground drainage system that would then lead to a biofiltration system at the northwestern corner of the project site. The biofiltration system would treat stormwater prior to discharge at a concrete curb and gutter on Warner Avenue. The proposed stormwater infrastructure has been designed in accordance with Orange County’s Model Water Quality Management Plan to treat and filter the 85th percentile, 24-hour storm event.2
Landscaping
The current project site is almost entirely developed or paved with some landscaping on the northern and southern borders of the project site, including trees and shrubs, which would all be removed as part of project construction (discussed further under Construction and Grading). The project would include 18,701 square feet of landscaped area, including a mixture of large trees, medium sized trees, flowering trees, shrubs, and perennials, that would cover 20 percent of the project site. The planting palette would be consistent with the region’s climate. On-site landscaping would be used for a mixture of shading, screening, and erosion-control. Drip irrigation would be used to minimize water use for landscaping. The proposed landscape plans, including a closer view of the amenity building, are shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6.
Exterior Lighting
Proposed exterior lighting on the project site would consist of bollard lighting, wall mount lighting, and pole mount lighting. Pole lighting would be shielded and directed downward. Lighting would be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of FVMC Section 21.18.060. 2 The 85th percentile 24-hour storm event refers to the amount of rainfall equal to or greater than produced by 85 percent of storms that have occurred in the area, based on historic rainfall records.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
10 Figure 5 Landscape Plan – Overall Project Site
Source: Architects Orange, 2025
•
Ill ..I
::, :5 Z- Iii 0.
~~ a: ~ Ill ..I
z c(
a: J:
c( -
~~
WARNER AVENUE
Initial Study
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 11
Figure 6 Landscape Plan – Amenity Building
Source: Architects Orange, 2025
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
12 9. Construction and Grading
Construction activities would include demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, architectural coating, and landscaping. Construction is anticipated to take 18 months, starting in March 2026 and concluding in September 2027. Construction would occur Monday through Friday between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. and Saturday between 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., pursuant to FVMC Section 6.28.070(5). No construction would occur on Sundays or legal Holidays.
Construction staging and parking would occur on-site. Although the project site shares access with the adjacent animal hospital (Warner Avenue Animal Hospital at 8546 Warner Avenue); temporary construction fencing during project construction would comply with FVMC Section 21.22.070 requirements for aisle dimensions to allow adequate backup distances for any vehicle accessing adjacent off-site uses, including emergency vehicles in the event of an emergency event. Demolition activities would include removal of the existing 18,782-square-foot commercial center. The project would also include removal of six (6) stone pine trees (Pinus pinea) and 15 palms (Syagrus romanzofiana, Brahea armata, Washingtonia robusta) existing along the northern and southern boundaries of the site. Project grading would require approximately 400 cubic yards of soil cut which would be reused on-site as soil fill. The maximum anticipated depth of ground disturbance would be five (5) feet below grade. Construction debris would be hauled to the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill located at 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road, Irvine, California 92602. Construction vehicles and equipment would access the project site and staging areas via Warner Avenue. Partial lane closures on eastbound Warner Avenue would be required for utility installation and driveway construction. As part of the driveway construction, the proposed project would also relocate an existing OCTA bus stop for Route 72 approximately 115 feet to the east, which would be coordinated with OCTA.
10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
The proposed project requires the following approvals from the City:
General Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment
Building Permit
Density Bonus and Affordable Housing Agreement
Precise Plan
Conditional Use Permit
Other public agencies whose approval may be required include the following:
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Prior to construction, coverage would be obtained under the SWRCB’s General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, Order No. 2022-0057-DWQ, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) No. CAS000002 (Construction Stormwater General Permit).
Initial Study
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 13
11. Have California Native American Tribes Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated with the Project Area
Requested Consultation Pursuant to Public Resources
Code Section 21080.3.1?
The City contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on April 24, 2024 to request a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF), as well as a contact list of Native American tribes culturally affiliated with the project site vicinity to pursue government-to-government consultation in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18. On May 10, 2024, the NAHC responded to the request, providing a contact list and confirming that the results of the SLF search were negative. Pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.3.1, the City mailed consultation letters to the 17 listed Native American contacts on June 7, 2024. The City has not received a request for Tribal consultation under AB 52 and SB 18.
For further discussion of tribal cultural resources in this IS-MND please refer to Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
14 This page intentionally left blank.
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 15
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
This project would potentially affect the environmental factors checked below, involving at least one (1) impact that is “Potentially Significant” or “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. □ Aesthetics □ Agriculture and
Forestry Resources
■ Air Quality
■ Biological Resources ■ Cultural Resources □ Energy
■ Geology and Soils □ Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
□ Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
□ Hydrology and Water
Quality
□ Land Use and Planning □ Mineral Resources
□ Noise □ Population and
Housing
□ Public Services
□ Recreation □ Transportation □ Tribal Cultural Resources □ Utilities and Service
Systems
□ Wildfire ■ Mandatory Findings
of Significance
Determination
Based on this initial evaluation:
□ 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 revisions to the project have been made by 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 environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
□ I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “less than significant with mitigation incorporated” 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 IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potential significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signaffj& Date
Printed Name Title
16
Environmental Checklist
Aesthetics
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 17
Environmental Checklist
1 Aesthetics
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista? □ □ ■ □
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway? □ □ □ ■
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from a publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is
in an urbanized area, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality? □ □ ■ □
d. Create a new source of substantial light or
glare that would adversely affect daytime
or nighttime views in the area? □ □ ■ □
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? A scenic vista is defined as a public viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the public. Fountain Valley does not identify specific scenic vistas or visual resources. The Santa Ana and San Gabriel Mountains are located over 30 miles and 15 miles north and east of Fountain Valley, respectively; however, these views are limited due to distance and the built out nature of Fountain Valley and other surrounding communities (Fountain Valley 2023a). The project site is adjacent to the City of Huntington Beach city limits to the north along Warner Avenue. Huntington Beach includes scenic views of the Pacific Ocean. However, the Pacific Ocean is located approximately four (4) miles southwest of the project site. As such, views of the ocean from the site are already obstructed due to the distance and existing development within and outside of Fountain Valley.
The project site is located in an urban area that includes one (1)- to two (2)-story residential and commercial development and a public park. The proposed project would change the appearance of the project site by demolishing the existing one (1)-story commercial center and constructing a three (3)-story, 72-unit apartment complex and a one (1)-story amenity building on the project site.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
18 As a three (3)-story development, the project would be slightly taller than the heights of surrounding development which consists of one (1)- to two (2)-story buildings. However, the proposed project would not obstruct views of scenic vistas as views are currently obstructed due to distance and existing development. Moreover, because the project site is not within, adjacent to, or in the vicinity of any identified scenic vistas within or immediately outside of the city, the proposed project would not obscure (or otherwise result in a substantial adverse effect on) scenic vistas.
Impacts would be less than significant.
LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
b. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) manages the California State Scenic Highway Program, which designates State scenic highways. Scenic highways are located in areas of natural beauty. A scenic highway becomes officially designated when the local governing body applies to and is approved by Caltrans for scenic highway designation and adopts a Corridor Protection Program that preserves the scenic quality of the land that is visible from the highway right-of-way.
The project site is not within or adjacent to a designated State scenic highway, as identified by Caltrans. The nearest designated State scenic highway is a portion of State Route (SR) 91 located approximately 12.5 miles northeast of the project site (Caltrans 2025). The nearest eligible State scenic highway is a portion of SR-1 located approximately 3.75 miles southwest of the project site (Caltrans 2025). Due to the distance from the project site and intervening development, the project site is not visible from SR-91. Furthermore, the project site does not contain any scenic resources such as natural habitats or rock outcroppings, nor is it in proximity to any such resources. In addition, as described in Section 5, Cultural Resources, the project site does not contain any historic buildings. Therefore, there would be no impacts related to scenic resources within a State scenic highway.
NO IMPACT
c. Would the project, in non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
The project site is in an urban area surrounded by one (1)- to two (2)-story residential and commercial development and a public park. The project site currently is designated as Local Commercial by the Fountain Valley General Plan and currently zoned as C1 (Local Business). As part of the project, the project applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment from Local Commercial to High Density Residential and a Zoning Map Amendment from C1 (Local Business) to R4 (High Density Multiple Dwelling). The High Density Residential land use allows for 15 to 30 dwelling units per acre, and, correspondingly, the R4 zone permits a residential density of 30 dwelling units per acre. To facilitate the development of the proposed 72 residential units on-site, and per the California Density Bonus Law (discussed further under Land Use and Zoning) the project applicant is requesting three (3) concessions to 1) reduce the required rear setback adjacent to single-family residential development, 2) allow a reduced balcony size requirement, and 3) allow for the increase in number of units per 1,452 square feet. The proposed uses would be permitted upon
Environmental Checklist
Aesthetics
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 19
approval of the requested zoning/land use changes, a conditional use permit per FVMC Section
21.08.030, and concessions, and would remain consistent with the surrounding area.
Furthermore, the project would be designed to comply with all applicable development standards regulating scenic quality within the FVMC. Title 18 and 21 of the FVMC contains additional building codes and regulations (Title 18) and development code standards (Title 21) for developments within the city. While development of the project would change the appearance and use of the project site relative to its existing conditions, it would not degrade the visual character or quality of the site. The architecture of the project incorporates a contemporary design with neutral color tones.
Furthermore, the project would enhance the character of the existing developed lot by developing a unified community with high-quality visual features such as new open space, shade trees, and landscaping. As described in Section 4, Biological Resources, the proposed project would also adhere to FVMC Chapter 12.04, which requires a permit from the director of public works for planting, maintenance, pruning, trimming, and removal of all trees in or upon any street, parkway, or public right-of-way area in or upon any street, parkway, or public right-of-way area within the city. The project would not conflict with applicable zoning or other regulations regarding scenic quality and impacts would be less than significant.
LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area?
The main sources of light and glare in the project area are streetlights and exterior lighting associated with commercial or residential development. In addition, vehicle headlights generate light and glare on Warner Avenue and Bressel Lane, and the nearby major roadway, Newland Street.
The project would add new sources of light and glare from exterior lighting for the proposed residences and amenity building, and from the increase in vehicles accessing the project site.
Proposed exterior lighting on the project site would consist of bollard lighting, wall mount lighting, and pole mount lighting. Pole lighting would be shielded and directed downward. Proposed solar photovoltaic panels on top of carports on the project site may generate glare during the daytime; however, any glare would be directed upward and would not adversely affect daytime views in the area of the project site, particularly those from pedestrians or drivers at ground level. Moreover, solar photovoltaic panels are typically designed with anti-reflective glass to maximize light absorption and minimize reflection.
Proposed exterior light sources would not substantially increase the overall levels of day or nighttime lighting in the area because they would be comparable to existing light levels from the commercial and residential development in the urban surrounding area. Of note, exterior lighting would be important aid to public safety and navigation during nighttime hours. In addition, lighting would be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of FVMC Section 21.18.060. Furthermore, Warner Avenue, Bressel Lane, Newland Street, and nearby commercial centers, are already illuminated by street lighting. For these reasons, the proposed project would not result in a substantial new source of light such that day or nighttime views in the area would be adversely affected. Therefore, the project would have a less-than-significant impact related to light and glare in the area.
LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
20 This page intentionally left blank.
Environmental Checklist
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 21
2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on 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? □ □ □ ■
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 12220(g));
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code Section 4526); or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code Section 51104(g))? □ □ □ ■
d. Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use? □ □ □ ■
e. Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? The project site is not located on or near land mapped as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance mapped by the California Department of Conservation’s (DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (DOC 2025a). The project site is currently used as a commercial center and would be redeveloped with an apartment complex and amenity building.
Therefore, the proposed project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use. No impact would occur.
NO IMPACT
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
22 b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?
The project site is currently zoned as C1 (Local Business). The proposed project involves a Zoning Map Amendment from C1 (Local Business) to R4 (High Density Multiple Dwelling). The existing and proposed zoning are not intended for agricultural use. In addition, the project site is not on land enrolled under the Williamson Act or zoned for agricultural use (DOC 2025b). Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur.
NO IMPACT
c. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)); timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526); or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
As described under discussion b. of this section, the project site is currently zoned as C1 (Local Business) and the proposed project involves a Zoning Map Amendment from C1 (Local Business) to R4 (High Density Multiple Dwelling). The existing and proposed zoning are not intended for forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for forestland. No impact would occur.
NO IMPACT
d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? As described under discussion a. of this section, the project site is currently used as a commercial center and would be redeveloped with an apartment complex and amenity building. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of forest land or convert forest land to a non-forest use. No impact would occur.
NO IMPACT
e. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
As described under discussions a. and d. of this section, the project site is currently used as a commercial center and would be redeveloped with an apartment complex and amenity building.
Therefore, the proposed project would not involve changes in the existing environment which would convert farmland to a non-agricultural use or forest land to a non-forest use. No impact would occur.
NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 23
3 Air Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan? □ □ ■ □
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? □ □ ■ □
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? □ ■ □ □
d. Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people? □ □ ■ □
Overview of Air Pollution
The federal and State Clean Air Acts (CAA) mandate the control and reduction of certain air pollutants. Under these laws, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for “criteria pollutants” and other pollutants. Some pollutants are emitted directly from a source (e.g., vehicle tailpipe, an exhaust stack of a factory, etc.) into the atmosphere, including carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds (VOC)/reactive organic gases (ROG),3 nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter with diameters of ten microns or less (PM10) and 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide, and lead.
Other pollutants are created indirectly through chemical reactions in the atmosphere, such as ozone, which is created by atmospheric chemical and photochemical reactions primarily between ROG and NOX. Air pollutants can also be generated by the natural environment, such as when high winds suspend fine dust particles. Secondary pollutants include oxidants, ozone, and sulfate and nitrate particulates (smog).
3 CARB defines VOC and ROG similarly as, “any compound of carbon excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate,” with the exception that VOC are compounds that participate in atmospheric photochemical reactions. For the purposes of this analysis, ROG and VOC are considered comparable in terms of mass emissions, and the term VOC is used in this IS-MND.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
24 Air pollutant emissions are generated primarily by stationary and mobile sources. Stationary sources can be divided into two (2) major subcategories:
Point sources occur at a specific location and are often identified by an exhaust vent or stack.
Examples include boilers or combustion equipment that produce electricity or generate heat. Area sources are widely distributed and include such sources as residential and commercial water heaters, painting operations, lawn mowers, agricultural fields, landfills, and some consumer products.
Mobile sources refer to emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions, and can also be divided into two (2) major subcategories:
On-road sources that may be legally operated on roadways and highways. Off-road sources include aircraft, ships, trains, and self-propelled construction equipment.
Air Quality Standards and Attainment
The project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties, and all of Orange County. The SCAB is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). As the local air quality management agency, SCAQMD must monitor air pollutant levels to ensure that the NAAQS and CAAQS are met, if they are not met, to develop strategies to meet the standards.
Depending on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the SCAB is classified as being in “attainment” or “nonattainment.” In areas designated as nonattainment for one (1) or more air pollutants, a cumulative air quality impact exists for those air pollutants. The human health associated with these criteria pollutants, presented in Table 2 on the following page, is already occurring in those areas as part of the environmental baseline condition. Under state law, air districts are required to prepare a plan for air quality improvement for pollutants for which the district is in non-compliance. The SCAB is in nonattainment for ozone and PM2.5 federal standards.
Also, the SCAB is in nonattainment for the state standard for PM10 and designated unclassifiable or in attainment for all other federal and state standards (CARB 2023). The nonattainment statuses result from several factors. These factors include the combination of emissions from a large urban area, the regional meteorological conditions adverse to the dispersion of air pollution emissions, and the mountainous terrain surrounding the SCAB that traps pollutants (SCAQMD 2022).
Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 25
Table 2 Health Effects Associated with Criteria Pollutants Pollutant Adverse Effects
Ozone (1) Short-term exposures: (a) pulmonary function decrements and localized lung edema in humans and animals and (b) risk to public health implied by alterations in pulmonary morphology and host defense in animals; (2) long-term exposures: risk to public health implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and altered pulmonary morphology in animals after long-term exposures and pulmonary function decrements in chronically exposed humans; (3) vegetation damage; and (4) property damage.
Carbon
monoxide (CO)
Reduces oxygen delivery leading to: (1) aggravation of chest pain (angina pectoris) and other aspects of coronary heart disease; (2) decreased exercise tolerance in persons with peripheral vascular disease and lung disease; (3) impairment of central nervous system functions; and (4) possible increased risk to fetuses.
Nitrogen
dioxide (NO2)
(1) Potential to aggravate chronic respiratory disease and respiratory symptoms in sensitive groups; (2) risk to public health implied by pulmonary and extra-pulmonary biochemical and cellular changes and pulmonary structural changes; and (3) contribution to atmospheric discoloration.
Sulfur dioxide
(SO2)
(1) Bronchoconstriction accompanied by symptoms that may include wheezing, shortness of breath, and chest tightness during exercise or physical activity in persons with asthma.
Suspended
particulate
matter (PM10)
(1) Excess deaths from short-term and long-term exposures; (2) excess seasonal declines in pulmonary function, especially in children; (3) asthma exacerbation and possibly induction; (4) adverse birth outcomes including low birth weight; (5) increased infant mortality; (6) increased respiratory symptoms in children such as cough and bronchitis; and (7) increased hospitalization for both cardiovascular and respiratory disease (including asthma).
Suspended
particulate
matter (PM2.5)
(1) Excess deaths from short- and long-term exposures; (2) excess seasonal declines in pulmonary function, especially in children; (3) asthma exacerbation and possibly induction; (4) adverse birth outcomes, including low birth weight; (5) increased infant mortality; (6) increased respiratory symptoms in children, such as cough and bronchitis; and (7) increased hospitalization for both cardiovascular and respiratory disease, including asthma.
Lead (1) Short-term overexposures: lead poisoning can cause (a) anemia, (b) weakness, (c) kidney damage, and (d) brain damage; (2) long-term exposures: long-term exposure to lead increases risk for (a) high blood pressure, (b) heart disease, (c) kidney failure, and (d) reduced fertility.
Source: USEPA 2025
Air Quality Management
Since the SCAB currently exceeds ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS standard, the SCAQMD is required to implement strategies to reduce pollutant levels to achieve attainment of the NAAQS. The SCAQMD 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (2022 AQMP) is a regional blueprint designed to meet the NAAQS and demonstrate how attainment will be reached. The 2022 AQMP represents a thorough analysis of existing and potential regulatory control options, includes available, proven, and costeffective strategies, and seeks to achieve multiple goals in partnership with other entities promoting reductions in greenhouse gases and toxic risk, as well as efficiencies in energy use, transportation, and goods movement. The prior AQMP, published in 2016, determined that, with implementation of the proposed control strategy, the SCAB could expect to reach attainment of the 1997 eight (8)-hour ozone standard by July 15, 2024, and the 2012 annual PM2.5 by 2025. The 2006 24-hour PM2.5 did not meet the attainment date of December 31, 2019, which required SCAQMD to revise the plan to meet standard as early as possible. SCAQMD’s 2022 AQMP, an update to the 2016 AQMP, was developed to identify and implement strategies and control measures to meet the 2015 eight (8)- hour ozone NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the statutory attainment deadline of August 3, 2038 for the SCAB (SCAQMD 2022).
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
26 Air Emission Thresholds
The SCAQMD approved the CEQA Air Quality Handbook in 1993. Since then, the SCAQMD has provided supplemental guidance on their website to address changes to the methodology and nature of CEQA since the publication of the Handbook. Some of these changes include recommended thresholds for emissions associated with both construction and operation of the project are used to evaluate a project’s potential regional and localized air quality impacts (SCAQMD 2023).
Regional Thresholds
Table 3 presents the significance thresholds for regional construction and operational-related criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions being used for the purposes of this analysis.
Table 3 Air Quality Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant Construction (pounds per day) Operation (pounds per day) NOx 100 55
VOC 75 55
PM10 150 150
PM2.5 55 55
SOx 150 150
CO 550 550
NOx = Nitrogen Oxides; VOC = Volatile Organic Compounds; PM10 = Particulate Matter with a diameter no more than 10 microns; PM2.5 = Particulate Matter with a diameter no more than 2.5 microns; SOx = Sulfur Oxide; CO = Carbon Monoxide Source: SCAQMD 2023
Localized Significance Thresholds
In addition to the above regional thresholds, the SCAQMD has developed Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) in response to the Governing Board’s Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (1-4). LSTs were devised in response to concern regarding exposure of individuals to criteria pollutants in local communities and have been developed for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that will not cause or contribute to an air quality exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard at the nearest sensitive receptor by taking into consideration ambient concentrations in each SRA, distance to the sensitive receptor, and project size. LSTs have been developed for emissions generated in construction areas up to five (5) acres in size. However, LSTs only apply to emissions in a fixed stationary location and are not applicable to mobile sources, such as cars on a roadway (SCAQMD 2008).
The project site is located within SRA 17 (Central Orange County). SCAQMD provides LST lookup tables for project sites that measure one (1), two (2), or five (5) acres. The construction area of the project site is approximately 2.11 acres. Therefore, the LST analysis conservatively uses two (2)-acre LSTs. LSTs are provided for receptors at a distance of 82 feet (25 meters), 164 feet (50 meters), 328 feet (100 meters), 656 (200 meters), 1,640 feet (500 meters) from the project disturbance boundary to the sensitive receptors. The construction activities would occur approximately 10 feet away from single-family residences located south of the project site. According to the SCAQMD’s publication, Final LST Methodology, projects with boundaries located closer than 82 feet to the nearest receptor should use the LSTs for receptors located at 82 feet (SCAQMD 2009). Therefore, the analysis below
Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 27
uses the LST values for 82 feet. LSTs for construction and operation in SRA 17 on a two (2)-acre site with a receptor 82 feet away are shown in Table 4.
Table 4 SCAQMD LSTs for Construction/Operation (SRA-17) Pollutant
Allowable Emissions for a Two (2)-Acre Site in SRA-17
for a Receptor 82 Feet Away (pounds per day)
Construction Operation
Gradual conversion of NOX to NO2 115 203
CO 715 1,733
PM10 6 2
PM2.5 4 1
NOx = Nitrogen Oxides; NO2 = Nitrogen Dioxide; CO = Carbon Monoxide; PM10 = Particulate Matter with a diameter no more than 10 microns; PM2.5 = Particulate Matter with a diameter no more than 2.5 microns Source: SCAQMD 2009
Toxic Air Contaminants
SCAQMD has developed significance thresholds for the emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) based on health risks associated with elevated exposure to such compounds. For carcinogenic compounds, cancer risk is assessed in terms of incremental excess cancer risk. A project would result in a potentially significant impact if it would generate an incremental excess cancer risk of 10 in one (1) million (1 x 10-6) or a cancer burden of 0.5 excess cancer cases in areas exceeding a one (1)-in-a-million risk. In addition, non-carcinogenic health risks are assessed in terms of a hazard index. A project would result in a potentially significant impact if it would result in a chronic and acute hazard index greater than one (1) (SCAQMD 2023).
Methodology
Air pollutant emissions generated by project construction and operation were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2022.1. CalEEMod uses project-specific information, including the project’s land uses, square footage for different uses (e.g., apartments and parking), and location, to model a project’s construction and operational emissions. The analysis reflects the construction and operation of the proposed project as described under Description of Project. CalEEMod results are included as Appendix A.
Project construction would primarily generate temporary criteria pollutant emissions from construction equipment operation on-site, construction worker vehicle trips to and from the site, and import of materials off-site. Construction of the proposed project was analyzed based on the land use types, building square footage, and construction timeline provided by the applicant.
Construction of the proposed project would begin in March 2026 and end in September 2027, over approximately 18 months. Based on the applicant-provided land uses, CalEEMod provides assumptions for construction phase schedule, equipment lists, and vehicle trips. The proposed project would include the demolition of the existing 18,782-square-foot commercial center.
Excavated soil during the grading phase would be backfilled on-site. It is assumed construction equipment used would be diesel-powered and the proposed project would comply with applicable regulatory standards such as SCAQMD Rule 403 for dust control measures and Rule 1113 for architectural coating VOC limits.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
28 Operational emissions modeled include mobile and area source emissions. The proposed project would include an all-electric design and would not utilize natural gas. As a result, emissions attributed to energy use include electricity consumption by appliances as well as for space and water heating. Mobile source emissions are generated by vehicle trips to and from the project site.
The proposed project would result in a reduction by approximately 547 net daily vehicle trips, based the Transportation Screening Assessment prepared for the proposed project by Ganddini Group, Inc. (Ganddini Group 2025). The Transportation Screening Assessment is included as Appendix B.
The mobile trip generation rates were adjusted to reflect the Transportation Screening Assessment results. Area source emissions are generated by landscape maintenance equipment, consumer products and architectural coatings. The proposed project would also not include wood fireplaces under SCAQMD Rule 445.
a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? A project may be inconsistent with the AQMP if it would generate population, housing, or employment growth exceeding forecasts used in the development of the AQMP. The 2022 AQMP, the most recent AQMP adopted by the SCAQMD, incorporates local city general plans and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)’s 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population, housing, and employment growth (SCAQMD 2022, SCAG 2020).4 According to the California Department of Finance (DOF), the City of Fountain Valley has an estimated population of 56,560, a household count of 19,583, and an average person per household size of 2.86 (DOF 2025). The proposed project involves demolition of the existing commercial center and construction of 72 residential units. Based on the DOF’s average household size, the proposed project would increase the local population by up to 206 persons (72 units x 2.86 persons per unit).
The population growth forecasts from SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS estimate that Fountain Valley’s population would increase to 59,000 in 2045, which is an increase of 2,300 people from the city’s population in 2016 (SCAG 2020). As a residential development, the project would account for approximately nine (9) percent of the City’s total projected population growth through year 2045.
Therefore, the potential population growth generated by the proposed project would be within the SCAG growth forecast for the City of Fountain Valley.
The AQMP also provides strategies and measures to reach attainment with the thresholds for eight (8)-hour and one (1)-hour ozone and PM2.5. As shown in Table 5 and Table 6 in the analysis under discussion b. of this section, the proposed project would not generate criteria pollutant emissions that would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ozone precursors (VOC and NOX) and PM2.5. Since the proposed project would also be consistent with population growth projections for Fountain Valley, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and impacts would be less than significant.
LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
4 On April 4, 2024, SCAG’s Regional Council formally adopted the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS (titled Connect SoCal 2024). However, the SIPs were adopted prior to this date and relies on the demographic and growth forecasts of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS; therefore, these forecasts are utilized in the analysis of the project’s consistency with the AQMP.
Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 29
b. Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
The SCAB has been designated as a federal nonattainment area for ozone and PM2.5 and a State nonattainment area for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAB is designated unclassifiable or in attainment for all other federal and State standards.
Construction Emissions
Project construction would generate temporary air pollutant emissions associated with fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) and exhaust emissions from heavy construction equipment and construction vehicles in addition to VOC emissions that would be released during the drying of architectural coating and paving phases. Table 5 summarizes the estimated maximum daily emissions of pollutants during project construction.
Table 5 Proposed Project Construction Emissions
Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day)
Year VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2026 2 21 29 <1 2 1
2027 18 22 29 <1 2 1
SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed SCAQMD Thresholds? No No No No No No
lbs/day = pounds per day; TOG = total organic gases; NOx = nitrogen oxide; CO = carbon monoxide; PM10 = particulate matter with a diameter no more than 10 microns; PM2.5 = particulate matter with a diameter no more than 2.5 microns; SOx = sulfur oxide For a conservative estimate of project emissions, construction emissions were modeled during winter and summer, then reported for the maximum day during the winter or summer, whichever was highest. Maximum daily emission estimates were then compared to the SCAQMD thresholds measured in pounds-per-day.
Notes: Some numbers may not add up precisely due to rounding. Refer to Appendix A for complete modeling results.
As shown in Table 5, construction-related emissions would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds.
Therefore, project construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard. Impacts would be less than significant.
Operational Emissions
Operation of the project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions associated with area sources (e.g., architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscaping equipment) and mobile sources (i.e., vehicle trips to and from the project site). As the proposed apartments would be allelectric, they would not generate criteria pollutant emissions from energy sources, which come from consumption of natural gas. Table 6 on the following page summarizes the proposed project’s maximum daily operational emissions by emission source.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
30 Table 6 Proposed Project Operational Emissions
Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day)
Emission Source VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile -2 -1 -11 <1 -3 -1
Area 2 <1 4 <1 <1 <1
Energy 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed Project Emissions 1 -1 -7 <1 -3 -1
SCAQMD Regional Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceed SCAQMD Thresholds? No No No No No No
lbs/day = pounds per day; TOG = total organic gases; NOx = nitrogen oxide; CO = carbon monoxide; PM10 = particulate matter with a diameter no more than 10 microns; PM2.5 = particulate matter with a diameter no more than 2.5 microns; SOx = sulfur oxide For a conservative estimate of project emissions, operation emissions were modeled during winter and summer, then reported for the maximum day during the winter or summer, whichever was highest. Maximum daily emission estimates were then compared to the SCAQMD thresholds measured in pounds-per-day.
Notes: Some numbers may not add up precisely due to rounding considerations. Refer to Appendix A for CalEEMod results.
As shown in Table 6, operational emissions would not exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds for criteria pollutants. Therefore, proposed project operation would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment, and impacts would be less than significant.
LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
c. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The closest sensitive receptors are single-family residences along El Rancho Avenue that share a property boundary line on the south of the project site. Localized air quality impacts to sensitive receptors typically result from criteria pollutants and TACs, which are discussed in the following subsections.
Localized Significance Thresholds
SCAQMD’s Final LST Methodology was developed to be used as a tool to analyze localized air quality impacts associated with project-level development. If the calculated emissions for construction or operation of the proposed project are below the LST emission levels found on the LST mass rate look-up tables (Appendix C of Final LST Methodology; SCAQMD 2009) and no potentially significant impacts to air quality are found to be associated with other environmental issues, then the proposed construction or operation activity is not significant for air quality. The project site is in SRA 17 (Central Orange County) and the allowable emissions for the proposed project utilizes the 82 feet receptor distance.5 Table 7 on the following page summarizes the proposed project’s maximum localized daily construction emissions which would occur during overlapping demolition, site preparation, and grading activities in 2026.
5 The project site is approximately 2.1 acres; therefore, the LST analysis uses two (2)-acre LSTs. LSTs are provided for receptors at 82 feet (25 meters) 164 feet (50 meters), 328 feet (100 meters), 656 (200 meters), 1,640 feet (500 meters) from the project disturbance boundary to the sensitive receptors. The southern border of construction activity would occur adjacent to single-family residences; therefore, the analysis uses the LST values for 82 feet (25 meters) to conservatively evaluate emissions.
Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 31
Table 7 Proposed Project LST Construction Emissions
Year
Pollutant (lbs./day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Construction On-site Emissions 21 27 1 1
SCAQMD LST 115 715 6 4
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No
lbs/day = pounds per day; VOC = volatile organic compounds; NOx = nitrogen oxide; CO = carbon monoxide; PM10 = particulate matter with a diameter no more than 10 microns; PM2.5 = particulate matter with a diameter no more than 2.5 microns; SOx = sulfur oxide Notes: Some numbers may not add up precisely due to rounding considerations. Maximum on-site emissions are the highest emissions that would occur on the project site from on-site sources, such as heavy construction equipment and architectural coatings, and excludes off-site emissions from sources such as construction worker vehicle trips and haul truck trips. Refer to Appendix A for CalEEMod results.
As shown in Table 7, localized construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD LST thresholds.
Therefore, localized criteria pollutant emissions impacts from project construction would be less than significant.
Toxic Air Contaminants
Construction Health Risk Assessment
A construction Health Risk Assessment (HRA) was prepared for the construction activities associated with proposed project. Construction-related activities would result in temporary project-generated DPM exhaust emissions from off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation, grading, building construction, and other construction activities. DPM was identified as a TAC by CARB in 1998. Results of the analysis were compared to SCAQMD thresholds for a cancer risk threshold of 10 in one (1) million persons, and a chronic hazard index significance threshold of one (1). Since DPM is not associated with acute health risks (OEHHA 2023), acute risk was not evaluated in this construction HRA. Construction HRA technical data is included as Appendix C.
The maximum unmitigated risk from construction of the proposed project was identified for sensitive receptors north of the project site on the corner of Warner Avenue and Bressel Lane. The maximum off-site cancer risk would be 53.33 in one (1) million and the maximum off-site residential chronic risk would have a hazard index of 0.12 at the residential receptor. The chronic risk numbers would not exceed the hazard index significance threshold of one (1) for chronic risk. However, the cancer risk at maximally exposed off-site residential receptor would exceed SCAQMD’s 10 in one (1) million cancer risk thresholds. Therefore, construction TAC impacts are potentially significant.
CO Hotspots
A CO hotspot is a localized concentration of CO that is above a CO ambient air quality standard. The SCAB has been in attainment of federal CO standards since 2007, and most air quality monitoring stations no longer report CO levels (SCAQMD 2017). The nearest monitoring station from the project site that monitors CO within SRA 17 (Central Orange County) measured a maximum 1-hour and eight (8)-hour CO concentrations of 2.5 parts per million (ppm) and 1.6 ppm, respectively, in 2023 (SCAQMD 2024). These concentrations are well below the respective one (1)-hour and eight (8)-hour standards of 20 ppm and 9 ppm. In addition, typical development projects, such as the project, do not emit the levels of CO necessary to result in a localized hot spot.
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
32 As an example, a detailed carbon monoxide analysis was conducted during the preparation of the SCAQMD’s 2003 AQMP. The locations selected for microscale modeling in the 2003 AQMP included high average daily traffic (ADT) intersections in the SCAB that are expected to experience the highest CO concentrations. The highest CO concentration observed was at the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue on the west side of Los Angeles near Interstate 405, approximately 42 miles northwest of the project site. The concentration of CO at this intersection was 4.6 ppm, which is well below the State and federal standards. The Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection had an ADT of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day at the time of the study (SCAQMD 2003). The proposed project would result in a decrease in daily vehicle trip by 547 trips and would not increase traffic volumes on Warner Avenue to more than 100,000 ADT. This is significantly below the 100,000 ADT at the intersection studied by SCAQMD in the 2003 AQMP, which found that CO emissions at that intersection were below the federal standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial CO pollutant concentrations and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
AQ-1 Construction Emissions Reduction
Prior to issuance of grading permits, the following measures shall be noted on all construction plans:
All mobile off-road equipment (wheeled or tracked) greater than 25 horsepower used during construction activities shall meet the United States Environmental Protection Agency Tier 4 interim standards. Tier 4 certification can be for the original equipment or equipment that is retrofitted to meet the Tier 4 interim standards.
Electric signal boards, cement and mortar mixers, and forklifts shall be used during construction of the proposed project. These requirements shall be incorporated into the contract agreement with the construction contractor. A copy of the equipment’s certification or model year specifications shall be available upon request for all equipment on-site.
Significance After Mitigation
With incorporation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the proposed project would be required to use offroad diesel-powered construction equipment that meets or exceeds the most stringent and environmentally protective CARB and USEPA Tier 4 off-road emissions standards, or alternatively fueled equipment which would substantially reduce DPM emissions. The Tier 4 standards reduce DPM emissions by approximately 81 to 96 percent as compared to equipment that meet the Tier 2 off-road emissions standards, depending on the specific horsepower rating of each piece of equipment. Electric signal boards, cement and mortar mixers, and forklifts would also further reduce DPM emissions during construction. With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the maximum off-site residential cancer risk would be 8.59 in one (1) million. Therefore, construction activities would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial TAC concentrations that would potentially exceed cancer risk greater than 10 per one (1) million population. Construction-related health impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED
Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 33
d. Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
During construction activities, heavy equipment and vehicles would emit odors associated with vehicle and engine exhaust and during idling. However, these odors would be intermittent and temporary and would cease upon completion, and odors disperse with distance. In addition, project construction would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, which specifies that a person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public. Overall, project construction would not generate other emissions, such as those leading to odors, affecting a substantial number of people. Construction-related impacts would be less than significant.
With respect to operation, the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook identifies land uses associated with odor complaints as agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, chemical and food processing plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding (SCAQMD 1993). The proposed project would not include any of the land uses that have been identified by the SCAQMD as odor sources. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate other emissions such as those leading to odors affecting a substantial number of people, and no operational impact would occur.
LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
City of Fountain Valley
8550 Warner Avenue Project
34 This page intentionally left blank.
Environmental Checklist
Biological Resources
Final Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
SCH No. 2026010463 35
4 Biological Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or
by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? □ ■ □ □
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? □ □ □ ■
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means? □ □ □ ■
d. Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites? □ □ □ ■
e. Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance? □ □ ■ □
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan? □ □ □ ■