Placentia City Council
September 3, 2024

348

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Most interviewed jurisdictions collaborate with haulers to create and distribute educational materials. Others also use consulting services for that purpose. Outreach strategies, the number of outreach events and communications, as well as participation rates vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but most rely heavily on paper mailings, which may not be the most effective way of reaching the public. If combined with junk mail, the educational material may go unread into a recycling bin, if not the trash. Frequently, the information flyers are mailed together with hard -copy utility bills, which may overlook those who subscribe to electronic billing.

As part of their outreach/education campaigns, some of the interviewed jurisdictions purchased kitchen pails for recycling food scraps to distribute to some or all households.

These purchases were funded through SB 1383 assistance grants from CalRecycle, which most of the Orange County jurisdictions applied for and received.

The OCGJ reviewed a sampling of educational materials being distributed by several cities and concluded that the quality of these materials can range from highly informative publications with accessible and attractive designs to flimsy "newsletters" issued by haulers for their respective jurisdictions with graphics and instructions that are barely legible.

Paper mailings have their role but represent only one of many possible outreach methods. The recycling industry itself is embracing technological advancements, including the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), in waste sorting, predicting trends, the use of smart hauler trucks and smart bins, as well as in outreach and education (Recycling Inside, 2023).

According to Recycling Inside, "Al can play a pivotal role in educating the public about recycling practices. Chatbots and virtual assistants powered by Al can provide real-time guidance on waste disposal, recycling guidelines, and collection schedules. By engaging with individuals through personalized interactions, Al -driven platforms can raise awareness, promote recycling behavior, and facilitate proper waste management at the consumer level."
According to research by the Recycling Partnership, "People have a misconception that what is recyclable doesn't change. They are recycling incorrectly in some cases because they are basing decisions on past guidelines and recycling knowledge such as believing milk cartons are wax coated and should not be recycled, or envelopes with windows should not be recycled. They think they know what they need to know about recycling because that's what they've always known." (Center for Sustainable Behavior & Impact, 2022)
More than seventy percent of people surveyed wish there was an easier way to get information on what can and can't be recycled in their community. (Center for Sustainable Behavior & Impact, 2022)
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 13
349

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Determining the success of their outreach efforts is another challenge that Orange County jurisdictions are facing in the near future. Most jurisdictions need to determine how to measure outreach efforts, as the enforcement started January 1, 2024. Having common standards and methods to measure the success of public education and compliance, and regularly posting this information on the jurisdiction's website related to SB 1383 goals, will give the public an incentive to comply with SB 1383. However, in the interim, there is a significant amount of visual evidence regarding the level of residents' confusion as evidenced by the photo below. The photo is the amount of waste in the first five hours of a workday that was improperly included in residential recyclable containers and delivered to a MRF, where it had to be hand sorted out.

Figure 8: Waste improperly included in recyclable containers Photo: OCGJ • Procurement of Recovered Organic Waste Products
Representatives from most of the jurisdictions the OCGJ interviewed indicated that meeting the procurement requirements of SB 1383 is challenging. This is due to their jurisdictions' State -calculated procurement targets far exceeding the quantity of recovered organic waste products that they can utilize.

To comply with SB 1383, jurisdictions must procure recovered organic waste products to meet an annual procurement target. Recovered organic waste products include:
o Compost
o Mulch
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 14
350

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
o Renewable energy (transportation fuel, electricity, and gas for heating) from anaerobic digestion
o Electricity from biomass conversion
Each jurisdiction's procurement target is calculated by multiplying its population, as reported by the California Department of Finance, by the per capita procurement target (0.08 tons of organic waste per California resident per year).

The resulting procurement target can then be multiplied by product conversion factors (as established by the regulations) to determine the annual procurement requirements for recovered organic waste products.

Source: CalRecycle
As one of the survey respondents stated:
"Meeting the annual procurement target presents a significant challenge. In addition, the formula used to calculate a jurisdiction's procurement target does not account for density or square miles. Denser areas equal less space to distribute mulch or compost.

More people equals higher procurement target."
As a result, a number of jurisdictions with high procurement targets had to use grant funding to purchase the required amounts of compost/mulch. Because the required target procurement amounts exceeded what they can utilize in their communities, they had to distribute the compost/mulch (via hauler) to agricultural communities outside Orange County. They also admitted that without grant funding, meeting the targets will be even more difficult and will require diverting resources from their own communities or raising rates.

The regulations limit procurement to "use or giveaway, and do not include the sale of products [14CCR Section 18993.1(e)(1)] so jurisdictions cannot sell the procured recovered organic waste products, such as compost, via a third party." (CalRecycle, 2022)
Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) is one of the products that can be counted towards meeting a jurisdiction's procurement goal. Haulers operating in Orange County, including Republic, CR&R, and Waste Management, utilize trucks powered by RNG.

However, in most cases the RNG they use is not purchased from an approved facility so it cannot be counted towards the required procurement goal. CalRecycle maintains a list of anaerobic digestion facilities in California to help jurisdictions find renewable gas that may be eligible towards their SB 1383 procurement obligations.

Currently, this list contains only six facilities that produce Compressed Natural Gas (CNG), which in this case is presumably compressed RNG. None of these facilities is located in Orange County. The closest are located in Riverside County (Perris), San Bernardino County (Victorville and Rialto), and San Diego County (Escondido).

The issue of RNG is further complicated by the fact that some sewage treatment plants also produce RNG, which (according to CalRecycle) is mostly ineligible. Below is the 2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 15
351

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
information included in "Frequently Asked Questions" on RNG on the CalRecycle website (CalRecycle, 2022):

Renewable gas derived solely from sewage is ineligible for meeting the procurement target because a Publicly Owned Treatment Work (POTW) is not a solid waste facility and therefore not in the scope of the legislative intent of SB 1383. Sewage is also not typically destined for a landfill, so its use does not help achieve the landfill diversion goals.

However, Title 14 explicitly authorizes POTWs to accept food waste without a solid waste facility permit, making it functionally similar to incentivizing biomethane from a solid waste facility. Therefore, it is justifiable to allow the portion of renewable gas resulting from the digestion of food waste at POTWs to count toward the procurement targets, provided the POTW accepts food waste from specified facilities or operations [see 14 CCR Section 18993.1(h)(1)] and meets all other applicable regulatory requirements. For more information, please see the Statement of Purpose and Necessity (pages 178-180).

The issue of procurement difficulties encountered by California jurisdictions is mentioned in the Little Hoover Commission 2023 report on the implementation of SB 1383. The Commission recommended that "the state should expand the list of compliance pathways and products eligible to count toward a jurisdiction's procurement requirements." (Little Hoover Commission, 2023)
• Coordination and Vision for the Future
In a county with thirty-four cities and several other jurisdictions, coordination, collaboration, and sharing resources and best practices can be a challenge. The OCGJ learned that county -wide groups meet on a regular basis, including a waste management coordinators' group, a haulers' group, and a market development group.

Additionally, the OCGJ learned that OCW&R has assumed a leadership role in positioning Orange County for a greener, more sustainable future.

OCW&R has a clear vision for a regional, county -wide approach to the implementation of SB 1383, which includes not only organics and edible food strategies, but also market creation and development, procurement and compliance, and regional standardization and collaboration.

The details of their vision are outlined in the 2024 presentation to the legislative group, which is available on the OCW&R website (OC Waste & Recycling, 2024).

The following slide has been taken from this presentation. 2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 16
352

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
ORNGE is the New Green — System Concep41111
t
HOW
ORNGE
WORKS
CIRCULAR Miple
ECONOMY —
1k4 44
Residential
Organic Waste
Commercial
Organic Waste
In final draft stages for long term plan.
is ■ .1i{
Anaerobic
Co-Digestio D▪ igestion
Phase2 Phase3
■
i
■
y■
T
■
I
or
Waste
Recycf n i t;
Organics to Renewable Natural Gas and Energy
Solids
3 Compost Facilities Built
Next stages of growth
Healthy Soil
�4
Renewable Natural Gas and Energy
Solar Farm
System FS
10 Figure 9. Circular economy concept for Orange County Source: OCW&R • Other Issues
Multi -family housing units: While not within the scope of this report, it should be noted that services to multi -family units still pose a significant challenge. Jurisdictions are required to provide organic waste collection to multi -family units. Many find it difficult to provide a three -bin source -separated service to these units due to limited space.

Creative solutions, such as providing smaller organics containers or containers that are placed in a common area to serve multiple units, have been utilized by Orange County cities, but full compliance is difficult to achieve.

The cost of SB 1383 implementation: The Little Hoover Commission Report states that the gross cost of implementation was determined to be $40 billion between 2019 and 2030. (CalRecycle, 2019) "About 5 percent of this figure represents soft costs (i.e. the work local jurisdictions must do to create organic waste programs, educate the public, and ensure health, safety, and quality control measures are met). The other 95 percent represents the cost of disposing of organic waste, including constructing infrastructure" (Little Hoover Commission, 2023). Most Orange County jurisdictions interviewed by the OCGJ indicated that they had to increase their residential and/or business waste collection rates to cover the cost of expanded services mandated by SB 1383. 2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 17
353

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste

COMMENDATIONS
• County of Orange, OC Waste & Recycling is commended for having successfully met SB 1383 mandates, developing new composting infrastructure, a model education and outreach program, moving towards robust and repurposing recycling programs, and developing gas -to -energy facilities to produce renewable energy.
• City of Mission Viejo, Solid Waste Program is commended for their proactive implementation of SB 1383 mandates, distributing compliant waste containers to all residents, and producing a robust outreach and education program using numerous delivery methods.
• City of Santa Ana Public Works, Trash and Recycling Program is commended for proactively revising their hauler contract to meet SB 1383 requirements, producing a notable and ongoing outreach and education program, distributing compliant waste containers to all residents, and fostering a highly collaborative relationship with their hauler.

FINDINGS
In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2023-2024 Grand Jury requires responses from each agency affected by the findings presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.

Based on its investigation titled "Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste," the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury has arrived at the following principal findings:

Container Standardization
F1. The majority of Orange County jurisdictions have not yet required their haulers to distribute residential containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors, leaving legacy and often incorrect or illegible labeling and embossing in place.

Funding and Enforcement
F2. While a jurisdiction may not delegate its overall responsibility for compliance with State requirements to a hauler, some jurisdictions have designated the task of imposing and collecting fines from residents to the hauler in accordance with State law. However, not all jurisdictions are clear on who ultimately receives and retains the collected fines.

F3. All jurisdictions will eventually start collecting fines from residents for non- compliance, but some have not yet determined whether the revenues will go into a waste and recycling enterprise fund or into the jurisdiction's general fund. 2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 18
354

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Education and Outreach
F4. In most jurisdictions, education and outreach is a joint effort between jurisdiction, hauler, and sometimes consultants, with the jurisdiction reviewing the materials before publication. The methods of dissemination vary by jurisdiction and hauler but frequently rely on a resident actively seeking the information, which requires the resident to have some awareness of the new mandates in the first place.

Most efforts primarily revolve around intermittent hard -copy paper mailings.

F5. Most jurisdictions currently have no way to accurately determine the effectiveness of their respective education and outreach efforts other than the eventual inspections or audits that will take place.

Procurement of Recovered Organic Waste Products
F6. There is some concern that there are not enough composting facilities in Orange County to process all organic waste, forcing some jurisdictions/haulers to transport it long distances for processing.

F7. There is currently no infrastructure in the county that is a State -approved source of Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) and energy from organic waste. Jurisdictions that use vehicles running on RNG procured from non -approved sources cannot count that RNG towards fulfillment of their procurement requirement.

F8. The formula used by the State to calculate a jurisdiction's procurement target does not account for a jurisdiction's population density or geographic size (square miles). As such, meeting the annual procurement target presents a significant challenge for most jurisdictions.

F9. Many Orange County jurisdictions were unable to meet the requirement in SB 1383 to reduce organic waste sent to landfills by the 2020 deadline. It is unlikely the required seventy-five percent reduction will be achieved by the 2025 deadline.

F10. The current procurement requirements mandated by SB 1383 are unrealistic and likely unachievable by most jurisdictions.

RECOMMENDATIONS
In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2023-2024 Grand Jury requires responses from each agency affected by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 19
355

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Based on its investigation titled "Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste," the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following recommendations:

Container Standardization
R1. All jurisdictions should expedite the acquisition and distribution of residential containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors. Additionally, until the compliant containers can be distributed, all jurisdictions should ensure the distribution of labeling for non -compliant containers that explain the current SB 1383 requirements applicable to their jurisdiction by June 30, 2025.

Funding and Enforcement
R2. By December 31, 2024, all jurisdictions should ensure their waste hauling agreements are in compliance with State statute so that haulers may be designated to perform certain required tasks but are not improperly delegated overall responsibility for compliance. Additionally, all jurisdictions should ensure that any fines collected by a hauler are forwarded to the jurisdiction.

R3. The OCGJ recommends that all jurisdictions utilize a dedicated waste and recycling enterprise fund for collection of fines for non-compliance with SB 1383 by December 31, 2024.

Education and Outreach
R4. By December 31, 2024, all jurisdictions should diversify the methods and media used for education and outreach to include, among others, various social media platforms, emails to residents, newspaper, television, flyer mailings, community events, and appearances at other public gatherings.

R5. By December 31, 2024, and in order to gauge the effectiveness of their education and outreach efforts, all jurisdictions should develop new methods to engage residents directly to help determine their awareness of the requirements associated with SB 1383, such as surveys, online quizzes, and door-to-door polling.

Procurement of Recovered Organic Waste Products
R6. By June 30, 2025, the OCGJ recommends that all jurisdictions participate in the OCW&R-led efforts to develop a coordinated county -wide approach to the organics recycling infrastructure and programs as well as procurement requirements associated with SB 1383, working towards creating circular economy as a long-term goal.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 20
356

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
R7. By December 31, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and all Orange County cities should lobby appropriate members of the State Legislature and/or CalRecycle to revise the organic waste diversion targets to better reflect Orange County's waste amounts, revise the jurisdictions' procurement requirements to better represent the limited options currently available for procurement, the jurisdictions' varying populations, population densities, and geographic size, and to delay associated enforcement actions by the State.

RESPONSES
The following excerpts from the California Penal Code provide the requirements for public agencies to respond to the Findings and Recommendations of this Grand Jury report:

Section 933
(c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years.

Section 933.05.
(a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons thereof.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 21
357

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
(b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, thereof.

Responses Required
Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code Section 933.05 are required from:

Findings — 90 Day Response Required
OC Board of Supervisors:

City Councils of:

Aliso Viejo
Anaheim
Brea
Buena Park
Costa Mesa
Cypress
Dana Point
Fountain Valley
Fullerton
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 22
358

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Garden Grove
Huntington Beach
Irvine
La Habra
La Palma
Laguna Beach
Laguna Hills
Laguna Niguel
Laguna Woods
Lake Forest
Los Alamitos
Mission Viejo
Newport Beach
Orange
Placentia
Rancho Santa Margarita
San Clemente
San Juan Capistrano
Seal Beach
Stanton
Tustin
Villa Park
Westminster
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 23
359

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Yorba Linda F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10
Recommendations — 90 Day Response Required
OC Board of Supervisors:

City Councils of:

Aliso Viejo
Anaheim
Brea
Buena Park
Costa Mesa
Cypress
Dana Point
Fountain Valley
Fullerton
Garden Grove
Huntington Beach
Irvine
La Habra
La Palma
Laguna Beach
Laguna Hills
Laguna Niguel
Laguna Woods
Lake Forest
Los Alamitos
Mission Viejo
Newport Beach
Orange
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 24
360

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Placentia
Rancho Santa Margarita
San Clemente
San Juan Capistrano
Seal Beach
Stanton
Tustin
Villa Park
Westminster
Yorba Linda

REFERENCES
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7
California Air Resources Board. (2024). Short -Lived Climate Pollutants. Retrieved from https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/slcp/about
CalRecycle. (2019, October 2). Initial Statement of Reasons Appendix A: Cost Update.

Retrieved from CalRecycle: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Docs/Web/115980 CalRecycle. (2022, December 5). Procurement Questions and Answers. Retrieved from CalRecycle: https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/faq/recycledproducts / CalRecycle. (2023). SB1383 Education and Outreach Resources. Retrieved from CalRecicle: https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/education/ CalRecycle. (2024). 2022 State of Disposal and Recycling Report. Sacramento:

Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Retrieved from https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1732 CalRecycle. (2024). Enforcement Questions and Answers. Retrieved from https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/faq/enforcement/ CalRecycle. (2024). SB 1383 Education and Outreach Resources. Retrieved from https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcD/education/
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 25
361

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Center for Sustainable Behavior & Impact. (2022). Consumer Insights on Packaging, Labels, and Claims for Recycling. The Recycling Partnership. Retrieved from https://recyclingoartnership.org/wo-
content/uploads/dlm uploads/2023/06/Consumer Labeling Research Final.pdf Christian Blanco, C. S. (2023, May 30). America's Broken Recycling System. Retrieved from California Management Review : https://cmr.berkeley.edu/2023/05/america- s-broken-recycling-system/
Christian Blanco, C. S. (2023, May 30). Is it Time to Consider a National Recycling Standard? California Management Review. Retrieved from
https://cmr.berkeley.edu/2023/05/is-it-time-to-consider-a-national-recycling- standard /
Little Hoover Commission. (2023). Reducing California's Landfill Methane Emissions:

SB1383 Implementation. Sacramento: Little Hoover Commission.

Mouchard, A. (2024, May 4). Tech meets trash in Orange County's landfill future.

Orange County Register. Retrieved from
https://www.ocregister.com/2024/05/04/tech-meets-trash-in-orange-countys- landfill-future/
OC Waste & Recycling. (2024). OCW&R. Retrieved from OCW&R:
https://oclandfills.com/sites/ocwr/files/2024-
03/1383%20IMAGINE%20WHAT%20CAN%20BE%20Presentaiton.pdf
Recycling Inside. (2023, June 2). Revolutionizing Recycling: The Relevance of Artificial Intelligence in the Recycling Industry. Retrieved from
https://recyclinginside.com/the-relevance-of-artificial-intelligence-in-the-recycling- industry/
Savage, S. (2023, February 16). Forbes. Retrieved from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensavage/2023/02/16/the-golden-states- circular-economy-goals-is-that-'ust-california-dreamin-or-the- future/?sh=95c357338e58

GLOSSARY
AB
CalRecycle
Assembly Bill
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery 2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 26
362

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Circular Economy Current economic models consist of acquiring materials, making them into products, and then those products become waste. A circular economy reduces material use, redesigns materials and products to be less resource intensive, and recaptures "waste" as a resource to manufacture new materials and products.

Compost Compost is made from a variety of organic materials and is used to add nutrients and improve soil structure by mixing it into the soil.

Mulch Mulch is typically made from a single material like straw, grass clippings, or wood chips and is spread on top of the soil to suppress weeds, retain moisture, regulate soil temperature, and protect plant roots.

MRF Material Recovery Facility
OCGJ Orange County Grand Jury
OCW&R OC Waste & Recycling, a department of the County of Orange Organic Waste Solid wastes originated from living organisms and their metabolic waste products, and from petroleum, which contain naturally produced organic compounds, and which are biologically
decomposable by microbial and fungal action into the constituent compounds of water, carbon dioxide, and other simpler organic compounds. Sometimes called biodegradable waste.

ORNGE Organics to Natural Gas and Energy
POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Work
Recycling Using waste as material to manufacture a new product. Recycling involves altering the physical form of an object or material and making a new object from the altered material.

RNG Renewable Natural Gas
SB Senate Bill
SLCP Short -Lived Climate Pollutants
Solid Waste Discarded or abandoned materials. Solid wastes can be solid, liquid, semi -solid or containerized gaseous material.

Waste Objects or materials for which no use or reuse is intended. 2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 27
363

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - SURVEY RESULTS
Survey participants were asked to mark their progress on a scale from 1 (significant challenges) to 5 (excellent progress) for each of the nine questions. On the following bar graphs, the 'x' axis (horizontal) depicts the rating scale from 1 to 5. The 'y' axis (vertical) represents the number of respondents that gave themselves a particular rating.

Was your city successful in meeting the goal of reducing organic waste disposal 50% by 2020?

2.79 Average Rating
Are you confident that your city will meet the goal of reducing organic waste 75% by 2025?

3.40 Average Rating
10 a
r
5 5
4 3
2 1
0 I
1 2 3
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 28
364

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
How would you rate your city's success in providing organic waste collection services to all residents?

3.97 Average Rating
•a
12 16
5 a
2 How successful is your city in recycling these organic materials?

4.17 Average Rating
14 12
10 6
a
2 U
How would you rate your confidence that city residents have been educated to have sufficient knowledge of the composting requirements (and associated restrictions) with the proper disposal of yard trimmings and food scraps?

3.60 Average Rating
16 a
7 6
5 a
3 2
0 1
M
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 29
365

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
How successful was your city in procuring a quantity of recovered organic waste products annually?
12 3.31
Average Rating
10 a
6 d pp
2 6
r
How would you rate your city's success in meeting the record -keeping requirements associated with SB1383, including but not limited to, inspection and enforcement, compliance reviews, investigation of complaints, and alleged violations?

3.90 Average Rating
7 6
5 4
3 How satisfied are you that your current agreements(s) with the hauler(s) that service your city are adequate to comply with all provisions of residential services required by SB1383?

3.93 Average Rating
15 14
12 10
3 6
4 2 ■6
1 2
IL
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 30
366

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
Are your city's current staffing levels that are, or will become, responsible for all aspects of full SB1383 compliance adequate to meet the tasks at hand?

3.48 Average Rating
7 6
5 4
3 2
1 4
IM
I
The following examples of additional comments or explanations for their answers to the questions above were provided by survey respondents:
"Comprehensive implementation and effective management of SB 1383 would require additional resources and financial support. Despite our [jurisdiction's] proactive approach, including securing a new hauler/franchise agreement . . . that aligns with SB 1383's requirements and achieving near -complete adoption of these guidelines, there remains a widespread reluctance towards organic recycling. Ongoing educational efforts are in place and will continue; however, achieving significant behavioral change and compliance will require additional resources."
"[Our jurisdiction has] been working on compliance regarding SB 1383 with new franchise agreements, building out local infrastructure, meeting the SB 619 procurement targets, providing education and outreach, programs are being implemented to incrementally improve participation and increase diversion. We are increasing staffing levels to help with continued support for compliance as it requires increased effort for more inspections, waste characterizations, more education and outreach, further program development, market creation and development for compost and mulch, inspections, education, and enforcement support. Although meeting the 75% goal requires more heavy lifting, I anticipate we will see incremental improvements from our efforts."
"SB 1383 has proven to challenge the recycling habits of many throughout the [jurisdiction]. Through updated franchise agreements . . . and CalRecycle grant funding, we have been able to educate and encourage change in disposal habits as required via SB 1383. Additional outreach outlining the requirements and benefits of recycling organic material will be key in successfully transitioning residents and business owners to recycle organic material."
"[We] started a new franchise agreement after an RFP process . . . . This allowed us to incorporate all hauler -related SB 1383 compliance activities and select an innovative 2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 31
367

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste
organic waste collection program. We are facing procurement challenges as energy related products are not readily available (particularly) RNG for collection vehicles.

Staffing may prove to be a challenge, depending upon the amount of complaints, inspections, and enforcement actions we are required to address." "Procurement [is our] biggest challenge."
"Our agreement with [the hauler] required that they implement 1383 compliant programming immediately for residential. It also includes education/outreach, contamination monitoring, purchase or compost/mulch on our behalf. Residential 3 -cart was implemented on day one of the agreement. However, even with education, residents are hesitant to participate with food in the organics container due to not being allowed to use compostable bags and therefore attracting bugs and vermin." "Meeting the annual procurement target presents a significant challenge. [The hauler's] collection trucks are fueled with RNG. The RNG purchased is California produced, though not SB 1383 qualified. In addition, the formula used to calculate a jurisdiction's procurement target does not count for density or square miles. Denser areas equal less space to distribute mulch or compost. More people equals higher procurement target." "As with any new program where you need to change habits and behavior, it is going to a long-term project to get adults in the habit of separating their food scraps. State of CA should implement a statewide outreach campaign, and not just rely on local jurisdictions to provide all the outreach."
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 32
368

Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste

APPENDIX B - CIRCULAR ECONOMY STARTS IN YOUR KITCHEN
Food scraps in the organic waste container
Circular Economy at work
Food scraps collected on the
kitchen
Compost resulting from processing
organic waste, including food scraps
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 33
369

The People are the City
Mayor
JEREMY B. YAMAGUCHI
Mayor Pro Tem

KEVIN KIRWIN
Councilmembers:

RHONDA SHADER
WARD L. SMITH
CHAD P. WANKE
401 East Chapman Avenue - Placentia, California 92870
August 20, 2024
The Honorable Maria Hernandez
Presiding Judge, Orange County Superior Court
700 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, CA 92701
City Clerk:

ROBERT S. MCKINNELL
City Treasurer
KEVIN A. LARSON
City Administrator
DAMIEN R. ARRULA
RE: 2023-2024 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT ENTITLED "TALKING TRASH: RECYCLABLES AND ORGANIC WASTE"
Dear Judge Hernandez:

The City of Placentia has reviewed the 2023-2024 Orange County Jury Report, "Talking Trash: Recyclables and Organic Waste." The report made several findings and recommendations on which the City of Placentia must comment, including Findings F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9, F10 and recommendations R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7.

Please consider this letter as the City's official response to these findings.

Finding 1 (F1): The majority of Orange County jurisdictions have not yet required their haulers to distribute residential containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors, leaving legacy and often incorrect or illegible labeling and embossing in place.

City's Response: The City of Placentia partially disagrees with this finding. The City is unaware of the requirements all Orange County jurisdictions impose on their haulers. The City of Placentia has not been able to require its hauler to distribute residential containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors due to the limitations of its current franchise agreement. Since 2020, the City has been actively engaged in contract negotiations with its hauler to amend the City's waste franchise agreement to meet current SB 1383 regulations. The amended agreement will include the requirement of the distribution of standardized colors and labeling as required under Public Resources Code sections 18984.7 and 18984.8.

Finding 2 (F2): While a jurisdiction may not delegate its overall responsibility for compliance with State requirements to a hauler, some jurisdictions have designated the task of imposing and collecting fines from residents to the hauler in accordance with State law. However, not all jurisdictions are clear on who ultimately receives and retains the collected fines.
370

City's Response: The City of Placentia partially disagrees with the finding. The City is unaware of how other Orange County jurisdictions are enforcing the requirements of SB 1383 and collecting fines. The City of Placentia adopted an SB 1383 -compliant ordinance in December 2021. This ordinance defines enforcement actions to be taken by the City.

Finding 3 (F3): All jurisdictions will eventually start collecting fines from residents for non- compliance, but some have not yet determined whether the revenues will go into a waste and recycling enterprise fund or into the jurisdiction's general fund.

City's Response: The City of Placentia agrees with this finding. The City is unaware of how all jurisdictions account for revenue generated from non-compliance fines. The current SB 1383 regulations allowed for enforcement and issuance of administrative penalties for non-compliance. These state regulations do not specify a requirement for the type of fund for collecting these fines. The City of Placentia has not yet decided whether revenues from non-compliance penalties will go into a waste and recycling enterprise fund or the City's general fund. The City will discuss this policy with the City Council when its amended franchise agreement is finalized.

Finding 4 (F4): In most jurisdictions, education and outreach is a joint effort between jurisdiction, hauler, and sometimes consultants, with the jurisdiction reviewing the materials before publication. The methods of dissemination vary by jurisdiction and hauler but frequently rely on a resident actively seeking the information, which requires the resident to have some awareness of the new mandates in the first place. Most efforts primarily revolve around intermittent hard -copy paper mailings.

City's Response: The City of Placentia partially disagrees with this finding. The City agrees that education and outreach are joint efforts between the jurisdiction and hauler in most cities. In some cases, Cities may utilize consultants to assist with this effort. Every city has different circumstances, resources, and franchise agreements that determine how information is disseminated to residents. The City of Placentia is committed to educating and engaging its community on solid waste and recycling through various methods. These include distributing information at City Hall and community events through flyers, in -person interactions, and staffed booths. The City also regularly shares information through its newsletters and social media channels. The City previously created a video series on recycling and SB 1383. The City's website also features dedicated pages on environmental programs. The City has observed its neighboring cities utilizing various outreach and education methods in addition to paper mailings.

Finding 5 (F5): Most jurisdictions currently have no way to accurately determine the effectiveness of their respective education and outreach efforts other than the eventual inspections or audits that will take place.

City's Response: The City of Placentia partially disagrees with this finding. The City is unaware of the evaluation methods by all jurisdictions in Orange County to measure effectiveness.
371

Finding 6 (F6): There is some concern that there are not enough composting facilities in Orange County to process all organic waste, forcing some jurisdictions/haulers to transport it long distances for processing.

City's Response: The City of Placentia agrees with this finding. We are currently in contract negotiations for the City's amended and restated franchise agreement with our waste hauler to comply with SB 1383. During the discussions, the City's hauler informed us of the need to introduce a mixed diversion plan to process all our organic waste. For example, the residential organic waste from the City will need to be sent to multiple composting facilities outside Orange County, as far as the Central Valley, for processing.

Finding? (F7): There is currently no infrastructure in the county that is a State -approved source of Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) and energy from organic waste. Jurisdictions that use vehicles running on RNG procured from non -approved sources cannot count that RNG towards fulfillment of their procurement requirement.

City's Response: The City of Placentia agrees with this finding.

Finding 8 (F8): The formula used by the State to calculate a jurisdiction's procurement target does not account for a jurisdiction's population density or geographic size (square miles). As such, meeting the annual procurement target presents a significant challenge for most jurisdictions.

City's Response: The City of Placentia agrees with this finding. The City's annual procurement target under SB 1383 is 4093.8 tons of organic waste or the equivalent of 2374.42 tons of compost. This is a significant amount for the City to procure effectively.

In 2023, the City needed to procure 30% of the procurement target, which was 1228.15 tons of organic waste for compliance with State law. The City initially attempted to meet this target by procuring compost from OCW&R to give away to its residents for free.

Through these initial efforts, the City could only distribute 19.82 tons of compost, which amounted to 2.78% of the procurement target for 2023. The City could only meet its procurement target by utilizing grant funding from CalRecycle's SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant Program to enter into a direct service provider agreement with Agromin to procure 712 tons of compost.

Finding 9 (F9): Many Orange County jurisdictions were unable to meet the requirement in SB 1383 to reduce organic waste sent to landfills by the 2020 deadline. It is unlikely the required seventy-five percent reduction will be achieved by the 2025 deadline.

City's Response: The City of Placentia agrees with this finding. The City of Placentia has faced challenges meeting these organic waste reduction targets due to delays in implementing a citywide organic recycling program. These delays have stemmed from prolonged contract negotiations between the City and its waste hauler regarding an amended and restated franchise agreement, which has hindered the City's ability to address this mandate effectively.
372

Finding 10 (F10): The current procurement requirements mandated by SB 1383 are unrealistic and likely unachievable by most jurisdictions.

City's Response: The City of Placentia agrees with this finding. The City is actively working on updating its City Purchasing Policy to incorporate all the SB 1383 procurement requirements and exploring all available options to meet the procurement target for 2024 and beyond. However, the City does consider the current procurement requirements mandated by SB 1383 to be unrealistic and likely unachievable without modifying the requirements or receiving additional assistance from the State to meet these needs.

Recommendation 1 (R1): All jurisdictions should expedite the acquisition and distribution of residential containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors. Additionally, until the compliant containers can be distributed, all jurisdictions should ensure the distribution of labeling for non -compliant containers that explain the current SB 1383 requirements applicable to their jurisdiction by June 30, 2025.

City's Response: The recommendation has not yet been implemented. The City of Placentia has not been able to require its hauler to distribute containers that meet the CalRecycle standardized colors and labeling that explain SB 1383 requirements due to the limitations of its current franchise agreement. The City is actively engaged in contract negotiations with its hauler, Republic Services. The City will be able to ensure the distribution of compliant containers and labeling once an amendment to its franchise agreement has been finalized and approved.

Recommendation 2 (R2): By December 31, 2024, all jurisdictions should ensure their waste hauling agreements are in compliance with State statute so that haulers may be designated to perform certain required tasks but are not improperly delegated overall responsibility for compliance. Additionally, all jurisdictions should ensure that any fines collected by a hauler are forwarded to the jurisdiction.

City's Response: This recommendation has not yet been implemented. The City agrees that its waste hauling agreement should be in compliance with State statutes and is actively working on this recommendation. The City is still undergoing SB 1383 contract negotiations with its hauler, Republic Services (Republic), to amend its solid waste franchise agreement to comply with current state regulations. Since April 2021, the City has been diligently engaged in negotiations with Republic to amend our existing agreement in accordance with SB 1383 requirements. Despite our concerted efforts, we have not reached a mutual agreement with Republic on the rates and terms to implement SB 1383. Compounding these challenges, key members of Republic's negotiating team and management staff have turned over, further prolonged the negotiation process, and added to the time and cost incurred by the City to achieve compliance with SB 1383.

Despite our continued negotiations with Republic, an agreement has yet to be reached, and there were delays in receiving an SB 1383 cost proposal for the new agreement from Republic. The City received this proposal on August 15, 2024, and is actively reviewing it.
373

The terms of the final amended and restated franchise waste hauling agreement will dictate the fines collected by a hauler.

Recommendation 3 (R3): The OCGJ recommends that all jurisdictions utilize a dedicated waste and recycling enterprise fund for collection of fines for non-compliance with SB 1383 by December 31, 2024.

City's Response: This recommendation will require further analysis and a policy discussion with the Placentia City Council.

Recommendation 4 (R4): By December 31, 2024, all jurisdictions should diversify the methods and media used for education and outreach to include, among others, various social media platforms, emails to residents, newspaper, television, flyer mailings, community events, and appearances at other public gatherings.

City's Response: This recommendation has been implemented. The City of Placentia already utilizes a diverse approach to providing education and outreach to its community.

The City disseminates relevant solid waste and recycling information throughout the year at City Hall and through various community events. This includes the distribution of flyers, in -person interactions, and staffing booths at events. In addition, the City regularly includes this information in its weekly and quarterly newsletters and social media platforms. The City previously created a video series on recycling and SB 1383. This video series is available to view on the city's YouTube channel. The City maintains and regularly updates webpages on its website dedicated to providing information and resources on environmental programs in the City. The City partners with its waste hauler, Republic Services, to distribute annual mailings to customers, including a dedicated recycling newsletter.

Recommendation 5 (R5): By December 31, 2024, and in order to gauge the effectiveness of their education and outreach efforts, all jurisdictions should develop new methods to engage residents directly to help determine their awareness of the requirements associated with SB 1383, such as surveys, online quizzes, and door-to- door polling.

City's Response: This recommendation has not yet been implemented. The City of Placentia will work on developing new methods to measure the effectiveness of its education and outreach efforts.

Recommendation 6 (R6): By June 30, 2025, the OCGJ recommends that all jurisdictions participate in the OCW&R-led efforts to develop a coordinated county -wide approach to the organics recycling infrastructure and programs as well as procurement requirements associated with SB 1383, working towards creating circular economy as a long-term goal.

City's Response: This recommendation has been implemented. The City of Placentia has an active partnership with OCW&R. City staff meet regularly with OCW&R staff through 374

the OWC&R Recycling Coordinator's Quarterly Meetings and the recently formed OC ReGroup. The City will continue to partner with OCW&R to develop a county -wide approach to organics recycling programming.

Recommendation 7 (R7): By December 31, 2024, the Orange County Board of Supervisors and all Orange County cities should lobby appropriate members of the State Legislature and/or CalRecycle to revise the organic waste diversion targets to better reflect Orange County's waste amounts, revise the jurisdictions' procurement requirements to better represent the limited options currently available for procurement, the jurisdictions' varying populations, population densities, and geographic size, and to delay associated enforcement actions by the State.

City's Response: This recommendation has not yet been implemented, but the City of Placentia supports it. It will require a coordinated effort between the County and all Orange County cities to develop proposed modifications to the current SB 1383 procurement requirements that reflect Orange County's unique landscape. The City is open to partnering with the County and all Orange County cities to accomplish this by December 31, 2024.

Thank you for giving the City this opportunity to comment on the Grand Jury's findings and recommendations. Please do not hesitate to contact my office if you have any questions or need clarification regarding the City's responses.

Sincerely,
Jeremy B. Yamaguchi
Mayor, City of Placentia
cc: Placentia City Council
Damien R. Arrula, City Administrator
Orange County Grand Jury
375

Agenda Item No: 1.k

PLACENTIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: September 3, 2024
Submitted by: Brad Butts
From: Police Department
Subject:

City Response to Grand Jury Report Entitled: Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service
Financial Impact:

Fiscal Impact:

None
Summary:

The Orange County Grand Jury (OCGJ) publicly issued a report on June 5, 2024 entitled "Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service." This report stated that approximately 8.8 million Americans have a severe mental illness such as schizophrenia, severe bi-polar disorder, or major depression with psychiatric features. Almost half of these people are treated on a given day. Without treatment, people with severe mental illness are at risk of experiencing negative outcomes that seriously impact them and the people around them.

Decades ago, law enforcement officers in Orange County became mental health clinicians without proper training. While State legislation has since required police agencies to increase mental health training, Orange County law enforcement agencies have surpassed the State's expectations. The OCGJ believes that law enforcement in Orange County is a model for training law enforcement personnel on mental health crisis intervention techniques and collaborating with behavioral health organizations to improve service and reduce stigma for those affected by mental illness.

The OCGJ said they felt it was vital to research via interviews with law enforcement leaders, law enforcement educators, and mental health professionals how Orange County assists individuals who suffer from mental health illness. It is important to note that this report does not focus on mental health issues that exist within the homeless community, although the OCGJ learned that a significant number of unhoused individuals suffer from mental illness, including substance abuse disorder, which leads to a significant number of police calls for service.
376

The Grand Jury Report (Attachment 1) provides a series of findings for local agencies to address. The City of Placentia, along with all Orange County cities and the other Orange County entities mentioned were directed by the Grand Jury to review and respond to its findings. Pursuant to State law, the City is obligated to provide a response, which is attached to this agenda report for the City Council's review (Attachment 2).

Recommendation:

Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Review the City's response to the Grand Jury Report; and

2. Direct Staff to submit the attached letter to the Presiding Judge of the Orange County Grand Jury, to be signed by Mayor Yamaguchi.

Strategic Plan Statement:

This item is consistent with the City Council approved 5 -Year Strategic Goal #2 to Ensure that Public Safety Continues to be a High Priority.

Discussion:

The method of study by the OCGJ included them conducting thirty-one interviews. These interviews involved key personnel from the law enforcement agencies that provide police services to all cities and unincorporated areas of Orange County, including the policy agency at the University of California, Irvine (UCI). Interviews were also conducted at the Orange County Sheriff's Regional Academy, Golden West College Police Academy, Orange County Health Care Agency's Mental Health and Recovery Services Department, the National Alliance on Mental Illness -Orange County Chapter (NAMI OC), and Project Kinship.

In addition, the OCGJ conducted tours at Orange County Central Jail Complex, including the Intake Release Center (IRC), Men's Jail, Women's Jail, Central Justice Center Holding Facility, James A. Musick Jail, Theo Lacy Jail, Yale Navigation Center and Bridges at Kraemer Place, Orange County Juvenile Hall and Youth Leadership Academy, and Be Well -Orange Campus.

OCGJ members also attended monthly meetings of the Orange County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (OCCJCC), which is a planning body of County government, law enforcement, courts/corrections, and social service agencies responsible for improving public safety on behalf of Orange County residents.

The OCGJ also referred to previous Grand Jury reports, Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) material, police training documents provided by the Orange County Sheriff's Regional Training Academy and Golden West College Police Academy, and local news articles and reports.

California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05 requires any public agency that the Grand Jury reviews to respond to the findings and recommendations of the Grand Jury Report. The City of Placentia is required to respond because it is referenced in the report along with other Orange County cities and other Orange County entities. Staff has reviewed the Grand Jury Report and drafted a response letter for the Mayor's signature on behalf of the City Council for consideration. The proposed response letter in Attachment 2 responds to each of the applicable findings listed on page 14 of the report.
377

Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the City's response to the Grand Jury Report is due on September 4, 2024. Staff recommends that the City Council review the proposed response, provide input to staff, and, if appropriate, authorize the Mayor to sign Attachment 2.

Fiscal Impact Summary:

There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the recommended actions.

Attachments
Attachment 1 - Grand Jury Report Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health.pdf Attachment 2 - OC Grand Jury Law Enforcement Response to Mental Health Calls for Service.pdf
378

Uhi luLli 1 iho

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service

SUMMARY
Approximately 8.8 million Americans have a severe mental illness such as schizophrenia, severe bi-polar disorder, or major depression with psychiatric features.' Almost half of these people are treated on a given day.2 Without proper treatment, people with severe mental illness are at risk of experiencing negative outcomes that seriously impact them and the people around them.

Decades ago, law enforcement officers in Orange County became mental health clinicians without proper training. While State legislation has since required police agencies to increase mental health training, Orange County law enforcement agencies have surpassed the State's expectations. The Orange County Grand Jury (OCGJ) believes that law enforcement in Orange County is a model for training law enforcement personnel on mental health crisis intervention techniques and collaborating with behavioral health organizations to improve service and reduce stigma for those affected by mental illness.

BACKGROUND
In March 2021, two Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD) deputies responded to a call regarding a deaf and autistic male adult named Isaias Cervantes who was experiencing a mental health crisis. When deputies arrived, they asked Cervantes to stand up so he could be handcuffed as a safety precaution, and the incident escalated. Cervantes became combative with the deputies, which resulted in one of the deputies shooting him in the back. Consequently, Cervantes is paralyzed and recently won a $25 million settlement against the County of Los Angeles. The LASD Internal Affairs Bureau concluded that excessive force during this incident was warranted per departmental procedure, although Los Angeles County Risk Management prepared a Summary Corrective Action Plan that focused on numerous root causes for the escalation, including:
• Desk personnel (i.e., dispatch) failed to ask about the nature of Cervantes' mental impairment.
• Desk personnel (i.e., dispatch) failed to send the Mental Evaluation Team as part of the response.3
Treatment Advocacy Center, "Serious Mental Illness by the Numbers," 2022. https://www.treatmentadvocacycenter.org .
2 Ibid.
3 The Times Staff Editorial, "Sheriff's Shooting Cost Taxpayers $25 Million. Where's the Accountability?" Los Angeles Times, April 8, 2024.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 1

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service The OCGJ felt it was vital to research via interviews with law enforcement leaders, law enforcement educators, and mental health professionals how Orange County assists individuals who suffer from mental illness. It is important to note that this report does not focus on mental health issues that exist within the homeless community, although the OCGJ learned that a significant number of unhoused individuals suffer from mental illness, including substance abuse disorder, which leads to a significant number of police calls for service.

METHOD OF STUDY
The OCGJ conducted thirty-one interviews. Twenty-three of these interviews involved key personnel from law enforcement agencies representing all cities and unincorporated areas in Orange County, including the police agency at the University of California, Irvine (UCI). The OCGJ also interviewed representatives from the Orange County Sheriff's Regional Academy and Golden West College Police Academy, Orange County mental health stakeholders including the Orange County Health Care Agency's Mental Health and Recovery Services Department, the National Alliance on Mental Illness — Orange County Chapter (NAMI OC), and Project Kinship. In addition, the OCGJ conducted the following tours:
• Orange County Central Jail Complex, including the Intake Release Center (IRC), Men's Jail, and Women's Jail
• Central Justice Center Holding Facility
• James A. Musick Jail (under construction)
• Theo Lacy Jail
• Yale Navigation Center and Bridges at Kraemer Place
• Orange County Juvenile Hall and Youth Leadership Academy • Be Well, Orange Campus
Members of the OCGJ attended monthly meetings of the Orange County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (OCCJCC), which is a planning body of County government, law enforcement, courts/corrections, and social service agencies responsible for improving public safety on behalf of Orange County residents. These meetings were insightful and provided an understanding of how Orange County leaders collaborate to enhance law enforcement services.

The OCGJ also referred to previous Grand Jury reports, Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) material, police training documents provided by the Orange County Sheriff's Regional Training Academy and Golden West College Police Academy, and local news articles and reports.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 3

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service Learning Domains (LD). One of the topics covered is in LD 37, identified as People with Disabilities. It provides trainees instruction on disability laws, developmental disabilities, physical disabilities, and mental illness.9 While in the academy, recruits learn to recognize general indicators of mental illness so that appropriate actions can be taken.

The following indicators assist recruits in determining whether a behavior is related to mental illness:
• Fearfulness
• Inappropriate Behavior
• Extreme Inflexibility and/or Frustration
• Symptoms of Excitability
• Impaired Self -Care
• Hallucinations and Delusions
• Disorganized Speech, Thought Patterns, or Disorientation • Clinical Depression
• Bipolar Disorder
• Schizophrenia
• Postpartum -Depression
p
• Psychosis '
• Post -traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) L$
• Personality Disorder10
Supervisorial Police Officers
SB 29, which also went into effect on January 1, 2016, requires police officers in supervisory roles who conduct field training to receive twelve hours of behavioral health training, including eight hours of crisis intervention instruction and an additional four hours in the Field Training Officer program, on how to interact with persons with mental illness or intellectual disability.

Innovative Law Enforcement Mental Health Strategies
The OCGJ interviewed high-ranking officers from twenty-three law enforcement agencies representing all cities and unincorporated areas in Orange County, including 9 California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training Website, "Mental Health Training in the Regular Basic Course."
10 California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, Learning Domain 37, People with Disabilities, Version 6.0, Chapter 4.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 5

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service and similar crises.11 In June 2023, the Orange County Board of Supervisors approved the County's budget for Fiscal Year 2023-24; and within its budget, allocated $2.8 million to expand the OCSD Behavioral Health Bureau (BHB).12 The bureau is a specialized crisis response team that consists of nine deputy sheriffs, three PERT deputy sheriffs and one PERT clinician. This specialized team responds to mental health crisis calls including calls related to homelessness and conducts proactive follow- up calls. The goal is to assist with de-escalation and diversion to treatment and services, when appropriate.13
Some police agencies in Orange County are adopting an alternative mental health approach when responding to mental health calls for service. While there is an appeal to the idea of removing police from nonviolent psychiatric crisis calls, the challenge is training 911 dispatchers to gauge these calls and having experienced clinicians available to expediently respond to them. In March 2024, the OCSD, in partnership with the OCHCA, launched a dispatch call diversion program that guides OCSD dispatchers to triage non-violent and non -criminal behavioral health calls (including homelessness) to determine if they can be diverted to OC Links, which is a 24/7 Behavioral Health Line.14 OC Links dispatches counselors to these non-violent and non -criminal calls instead of deputies, freeing up deputies to respond to traditional crime -related calls instead.15
Orange County Intake Release Center (IRC)
The OCSD has partnered with the OCHCA to reduce inmate behavioral health crises.

There are mental health hotlines available around the clock in each County jail so that deputies can report concerns regarding an inmate's mental health or behavior that might lead to self -harm. The IRC is part of the Central Jail complex in Santa Ana and houses inmates who suffer from severe mental illness. The facility can house up to 849 inmates and is staffed by sheriff's deputies frorn the BHB. The cells in the mental health unit have been modified to address safety and self -harm concerns. There are also visiting areas where inmates can use computer tablets for video calls with family, reading e -books, searching for jobs, receiving education, and playing cognitively stimulating games.
11 Orange County Sheriff's Department News Release, "OC Sheriff Partners with the OC Health Care Agency to Support Individuals in Crisis." https//ocsheriff.gov. 12 Minutes of the Orange County Board of Supervisors Meeting on June 27, 2023; Adoption of the Fiscal Year 2034-24 Final Budget Resolution.
93 OC Cares Justice Through Prevention and Intervention, 2025 Quarterly Status Report, October — December 2023, p 16.
14 Orange County Sheriff's Department News Release "OC Sheriff Partners with the OC Health Care Agency to Support Individuals in Crisis," https//ocsheriff.gov. 15 ibid.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 7

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service Orange County Service Planning Areas (SPAs)
Service Planning Areas (SPAs) are divisions of Orange County into North, Central, and South cities to coordinate homeless shelters and services on a regional basis. The North Orange County Service Planning Area (North SPA) is the most active and innovative of the three SPAs. It coordinates collaboration among thirteen cities in North Orange County. In 2018, North SPA was given over $12 million dollars by the State of California to address the crisis of homelessness.17 The North SPA partnership is an effort to comply with a court ruling prohibiting enforcement of anti -camping laws on public property when local shelter beds are not available. The funding was used to open two homeless "Navigation Centers," one in Buena Park and the other in Placentia.

The HOPE Center was opened in 2022 to gain more reliable relief and consistent support for homeless individuals in the North SPA area. The HOPE Center is designed as a central command center for case workers, mental health clinicians, resource providers, and homeless liaison officers working together to address public health issues with an emphasis on homeless individuals. The goal is to end homelessness in the North SPA cities by getting "the right resource to the right person at the right time."18 The HOPE Center mobile office vehicle is used to respond to calls for service. Center clinicians engage in outreach activities when they are not on calls. At the opening of the HOPE Center, State Senator Josh Newman (D-Fullerton/District 29) said the HOPE Center will be "a critical hub for subject matter experts, health care workers, community -based organizations, and local law enforcement to coordinate and deliver resources efficiently under one roof."19
17 "North Orange County Service Planning Area (North SPA) Received $12,062,300 in Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP) Funding to Open Navigation Center in Buena Park and Placentia," November 9, 2018, https://www.buenapark.com/T2 R49.php. 18 HOPE Center Orange County Mission Statement, https://ochopecenter.orq . 99 Tess Sheets and Alicia Robinson, "Governor Gavin Newsom Visits to Help Open New Hub for North Orange County Homeless Services," Orange County Register, October 27, 2022. 2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 9

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service mental health treatment for the residents of Orange County. Insurance is not a requirement to receive treatment.20
The first of three proposed Be Well campuses opened in January 2021 in the City of Orange to serve North Orange County. Funding was provided by the County Board of Supervisors, CalOptima, private donors, and major hospital systems. In October 2023, construction began on the second Be WeII campus located in Irvine's Great Park that will serve South Orange County. This facility will be larger than the Orange Campus and will have the additional ability to support children, youth, and families. The campus is expected to open in 2025. A campus to serve Central Orange County is proposed.

Mind OC was established in 2017 as a California 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. The purpose of the non-profit is to partner with the County of Orange to establish behavioral health campuses in Orange County. When the Be Well Campus in Orange opened, it was under the responsibility of the OCHCA. In January of 2023, Mind OC assumed responsibility for the campus.21
In addition to the Be Well campuses, Be Well OC has a mobile response program. The slogan for the program is Hope Happens Here.22 Identifiable outreach vans with mental health crisis counselors (working in pairs) work in collaboration with law enforcement to respond to mental health calls. The counselors are trained in de-escalation, crisis stabilization, and counseling. Seven municipal police agencies (Anaheim, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Laguna Beach, Newport Beach, and Westminster) and UCI currently have mobile response contracts. Law enforcement agencies without contracts with the mobile response program can transport people in need to the Be Well Orange Campus.

Project Kinship (Hope Lives Here)
In November 2014, California voters approved Proposition 47 that reduced some low- level felonies in the state to misdemeanors. The proposition required the Board of State and Community Corrections to use a portion of the annual savings from Proposition 47 to administer grant programs for diversion, mental health services, or substance abuse treatment.23 Since 2016, Orange County has received $12 million in grants from Proposition 47. Orange County's goal is to reduce the number of people with mild -to - moderate mental health and/or substance use disorders incarcerated in the county jail by reducing recidivism through intensive case management, linkages to treatment, housing and behavioral health services, and community supports upon release.24 2° https://bewelloc.orq/
21 ibid.
22 https://mind-oc.org/
23 Libby Doyle, Leigh Courtney, Bryce Peterson of the Urban Institute, "Evaluation of Orange County's Proposition 47 Grant -Related Services," Executive Summary, September 2021, p.v. 24 Ibid.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 11

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service Table 1: Interview Results with Orange County Law Enforcement Agencies Law Enforcement
Agencies
Be Well
Mobile
Response
Team
PERT
City Net
NorthSpa/Hope
Center
Behavioral
Health
Bureau
Non -Sworn
Crisis Worker
Anaheim
X
X
X
X
Brea
X
Buena Park
X
X
Costa Mesa
X
Cypress
X
Fountain Valley
X
X
'Fullerton
X
X
*
Garden Grove
X
X
Huntington Beach
X
X
X
Irvine
X
X
X
La Habra
X
X
La Palma
X
Laguna Beach
X
X
Los Alamitos
X
X
Newport Beach
X
X
X
Orange
X
X
Placentia
X
X
Santa Ana
X
X
Seal Beach
X
Tustin
X
X
X
UCl
X
X
**
Westminster
X
X
Orange County Sheriff
X
***
X
City of Fullerton is developing a pilot Social Worker Program within its police department.

UCI has several student counseling services on campus.

The cities of Stanton and Yorba Linda are members of North SPA.

COMMENDATIONS
Orange County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (OCCJCC) — The OCCJCC is to be commended for its efforts to improve public safety through greater inter -agency communication, coordination and collaboration regarding law enforcement and administration of justice issues including mental health.28 28 Orange County Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 2001-38, Adopted February 6, 2001, OCCJCC Proposed Reorganization.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 13

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service

RESPONSES
California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official, such official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that official's control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors.

Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows:
(a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, thereof.
(c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or 2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 15

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service Newport Beach
Orange
Placentia
Santa Ana
Seal Beach
Tustin
Westminster
Findings -- 90 Day Response Requested
University of California, Irvine
F'I , F2, F3, F4, F5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5
F1, F2, F4, F5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5
F1, F2, F3, F4, F5

REFERENCES
Be WeII OC website: https://bewelloc.orq/
California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, Learning Domain 37, People with Disabilities, Version 6.0, Chapter 4.

California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training Website, "Mental Health Training in the Regular Basic Course."
"Fullerton Police Department Get $1 Million to Start a Pilot Program," Fullerton Observer, July 22, 2023.

HOPE Center Orange County Mission Statement, https://ochopecenter.org . https://california.public.law/codes/ca penal code section 13515.27 "North Orange County Service Planning Area (North SPA) Received $12,062,300 in Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP) Funding to Open Navigation Center in Buena Park and Placentia," November 9, 2018,
https://www.buenapark.com/T2 R49.php https://www.buenapark.com/T2 R49.php.

Jennifer Peitz and Jesse Bedayn, "Many Big U.S. Cities Now Answer Mental Health Crisis Calls with Civilian Teams — Not Police," Associated Press, August 27, 2023.

Jody M. Litchford, JD., "Partnering with Mental Health Providers to Improve Outcomes," Police Chief, December 2023.
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 17

Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service

GLOSSARY
BHB Behavioral Health Bureau (Orange County Sheriff's Department) BHS Behavioral Health Services
BRU Behavioral Response Unit
CAT Crisis Assessment Team
CIT Crisis Intervention Training
HOPE Homeless Outreach and Proactive Engagement
IRC Intake Release Center
LASD Los Angeles Sheriff's Department
LCSW Licensed Clinical Social Worker
LD Learning Domain
NAMI OC National Alliance on Mental Illness — Orange County Chapter OCCJCC Orange County Criminal Justice Coordinating Council OCGJ Orange County Grand Jury
OCHCA Orange County Health Care Agency
OCSD Orange County Sheriff's Department
PERT Psychiatric Emergency Response Team
POST Peace Officer Standards and Training
SB Senate Bill . `-,

FIDENTIAL
SPA Service Planning Area -'f
UCI University of California, Irvine
2023-2024
Orange County Grand Jury Page 19

California Penal Code Sections §933 and §933.05
(Note: To reduce grand jury requests for additional response information, the grand Jury has bolded those words in §933.05 which should be appropriately included in a response.)
933. (a) Each grand jury shall submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters during the fiscal or calendar year. Final reports on any appropriate subject may be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court at any time during the tern of service of a grand jury. A final report may be submitted for comment to responsible officers, agencies, or departments, including the county board of supervisor's :when annli�ahle upon finding of the presiding iivioP that the repnrt is in compliance_with this title. For 45 days after the end of the term, the foreperson and his or her designees shall, upon reasonable notice, be available to clarify the recommendations of the report. copy -f. p p
...(b). -One oeach: final p_ re ork�together with the responses thereto found to be in compliance with this title shall be • placed on'frle with.the clerk of the'court and remain on file in the office of the clerk. The clerk shall immediately forward a true copy of.the report- and. the.responses to the State Archivist who shall retain that report and all responses in perpetuity.
(c)-Noaater _than 90 days after -the grand jury. submits_ a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority; the governing body of the. -public agency shall comment to the.presiding judge of the superior court - on the-findings_and-recommendations pertaining_to.matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which -the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 :days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the finding and recommendations: pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and • any agency-or_agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor :shall also comment.oit the -findings .and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted.to, the.presiding judge of -.the -:superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand •. jury reports shall be .placed on file.with the_ clerk of.the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor wheri applicable; -and shall remain on file -in those offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years.
(d) As used in this section "agency" includes a department. •933.05. (a). Forpurposes•of-subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
. (2) _The respondent -disagrees wholly. or partially. with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the findingthat, is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) For purposes.of:subdivision.(b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
-The. reco≥nrnendatioil.has.been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2)__The-recommendatio. ihas- not yet:-been.implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.
.(_3,) .;The recommendation .requires further analysis; with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis • •or study; and:a timeframe fo•r`the matter to 'be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed; including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This • timeframe. shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will-not,be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor.
_(c)__-_I_lowever;•-if a. finding-or.recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county :agency or.de.partrnent;headed:by an elected officer;. both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors •shall res-porid if requested:b.y:the :grand jury,; .but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency . orde.p.artment head shall address all -.aspects• of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.
(d) :A grand. jurymay.reques.t_aubj.ect person or entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and _ -discussing the findings of the _grand- jury:report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release.
(e) During an. investigation,••the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own deternination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental.
• (f) A grand jury.shall•provide to the affected agency_a.copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior..to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release. of

The People are the City
Mayor
JEREMY B. YAMAGUCHI
Mayor Pro Tem

KEVIN KIRWIN
Councilmembers:

RHONDA SHADER
WARD L. SMITH
CHAD P. WANKE
401 East Chapman Avenue - Placentia, California 92870
August 21, 2024
The Honorable Maria Hernandez
Presiding Judge, Orange County Superior Court
700 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, CA 92701
City Clerk:

ROBERT S. MCKINNELL
City Treasurer
KEVIN A. LARSON
City Administrator
DAMIEN R. ARRULA
RE: 2023-2024 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT ENTITLED "LAW ENFORCEMENT'S RESPONSE TO MENTAL HEALTH CALLS FOR SERVICE" Dear Judge Hernandez:

The City of Placentia has reviewed the 2023-2024 Orange County Jury Report, "Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service." We thank the volunteer members of the Grand Jury for their time and considerable effort in analyzing the various aspects of Orange County law enforcement's model for training law enforcement personnel on mental health crisis intervention techniques and collaborating with behavioral organizations to improve service and reduce stigma for those affected by mental illness. The report made several findings on which the City of Placentia must comment, including Findings F1, F2, F4, and F5. Please consider this letter as the City's official response to these findings.

Finding 1 (F1): Mental health training for law enforcement officers in Orange County exceeds the State's requirements, resulting in law enforcement applying these skills to better evaluate and handle mental health calls for service.

City's Response: AGREE. All police academies in Orange County meet or exceed the minimum POST requirements. During their field training period, new police officers receive additional mental health training. Supervisors also present and discuss the handling of mental health calls for service during briefing training.

Finding 2 (F2): Law enforcement agencies in Orange County have developed unique ways to deal with mental health calls in their communities based on their particular needs and budgets, enabling law enforcement to better serve their communities.

City's Response: AGREE. One of the ways that Placentia has done this is by having the foresight to build a navigation center that provides a whole host of services and collaborating with outside providers to address homelessness and mental health calls for service. The navigation center in Placentia was the result of Placentia being one of twelve cities that established a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to create the North Orange County Service Planning Area (North SPA). The North SPA was awarded over 391

twelve million dollars in 2018 to address the homelessness crisis. A navigation center was also opened in Buena Park. These navigation centers, in collaboration with Outreach Grid, provide trained personnel to go out into our community to engage people experiencing homelessness and those with mental health issues and provide them with the services and care they need. Outreach Grid developed an app that is a resource database. Outreach Grid facilitates resources from first contact in the field to housing placement. Our outreach workers and police officers access it via cell phones or another device to confirm the availability of the specific resources needed, such as a bed in our navigation center for the individual(s) being contacted. In short, it identifies available resources in real time that can then be provided to those in need. Placentia also has one full-time Homeless Liaison Officer (HLO) and two ancillary HLO's that routinely assist those who are homeless and those with mental health issues. The North SPA was established during the height of the homelessness crisis throughout California. The quality of care provided by this full -service system created by Placentia and other North SPA cities has become a model for other cities to follow nationwide. Placentia is also a member of the North Orange County Public Safety Collaborative, which was formed in 2017. This is a coalition of cities, police agencies, nonprofits, behavioral health practitioners, and community health workers dedicated to providing health and human services to the community. Part of this collaborative was creating the HOPE Center. The HOPE Center's mission is to provide reliable help and consistent support to those experiencing homelessness in the North SPA.

Finding 4 (F4): People with mental illness respond more positively to "soft uniformed" police personnel, which can be effective in de-escalating situations.

City's Response: AGREE. This is practiced in our partnership with Hope Center. Their proactive engagement in our community by fielding behavioral health street practitioners and community health workers dressed in "soft clothes" with a uniformed officer to assist as needed puts this finding into practical application. This mobile approach to those with mental health issues enables those in need to get help directly on the streets. This provides the client with stability, respite, and a welcoming environment. This also includes transportation and ongoing case management. Although this can often be the case, there are many circumstances in which a uniformed police presence may de-escalate situations, too. Being immediately identifiable as the police is essential to letting everyone involved in a call for service or bystanders know that the police have arrived. Wearing uniforms and driving marked units that society can immediately identify as being the police demonstrates stability and additional support to those in need. Society understands the authority of a police presence to resolve complex conflicts while protecting people, including outreach and mental health workers providing initial services in the field. Having both options to respond as needed 24/7 would be an ideal method of practice for an agency with the personnel and fiscal resources to do so.

Finding 5 (F5): Providing follow-up case management is not only necessary but critical for the wellbeing of people experiencing mental health issues.

City's Response: AGREE. This is absolutely the case, and, again, why Placentia has built a Navigation Center and provides or arranges all our services for our homeless and those with mental health issues. The many services offered allow for various care options for those in need. Recognizing the importance of familiarity and stability with those who have 392

mental health issues, family reunification is also offered. The Public Safety Collaborative, which Placentia participates in, also follows through with food and housing vouchers.

Those who enter our Navigation Center receive case management while in residency and for up to nine months to a year after exiting the facility. The North SPA is a success story with metrics that show that it continues to make a real difference in our communities.

Thank you for affording the City this opportunity to comment upon the findings of the Grand Jury. Should you have any questions or need clarification regarding the City's responses contained herein, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Sincerely,
Jeremy Yamaguchi
Mayor, City of Placentia
cc: Placentia City Council
Damien Arrula, City Administrator
Brad Butts, Police Chief
Orange County Grand Jury
393

Agenda Item No: 2.a

PLACENTIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: September 3, 2024
Submitted by: Andrew Gonzales
From: Development Services
Subject:

Resolution No. R-2024-56, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Placentia, recommending denial of GPA 2022-01, SPA 2021-01, and DPR 2021-02 for the Orangethorpe Mixed Use Development Project
Financial Impact:

Fiscal Impact:

It is anticipated the project would generate approximately $1.2 million in one-time revenue to the General Fund in the form of permit fees, however revenue from those fees support the additional work for Staff created directly by the project's construction and would not be available for other City operations. An additional $5.0 million is anticipated from one-time development impact fees which can only be used for future infrastructure projects and are not available to support the daily operations of the City.

Once the project is complete, the project is expected to generate $244,209 in new General Fund revenue annually through a combination of higher property tax, sales tax, and utility users tax. The project is anticipated to require $246,435 in new annual General Fund expenses primarily for increased Police and Fire response to support the new residents. In summary, the project is projected to generate a net annual loss of ($2,226) to the General Fund.

Summary:

On July 9, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA 2022-01), Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2021-01), and Development Plan Review (DPR 2021-02) for a mixed -use development on Orangethorpe Avenue, which aims to introduce a combination of residential and commercial uses, including parking structures. Despite this, the Planning Commission, by majority vote, recommended denial of the GPA, SPA, and DPR to the City Council due to the project's failure to adequately address potential impacts on the surrounding environment, infrastructure, and community.

Concerns were raised about its alignment with the City's long-term sustainability goals, infrastructure capacity, and compatibility with the surrounding area, along with doubts about whether the project could genuinely meet the City's objectives of maintaining a sustainable revenue stream while revitalizing the area. These significant issues suggest that the project may not be in the best interest of the City or its residents. (Please note that the complete Staff Report is provided as an attachment.) 394

Recommendation:

Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Adopt Resolution No. R-2024-56, of the City Council of the City of Placentia, California, denying General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No.

SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02 to modify the General Plan Land Use Element to permit mixed -use (Residential -Commercial Development) as a permissible land use category within Parcel 9 of Specific Plan No. 5 by amending Tables 2 -4 -Specific Plans, Table 2 -5 -General Plan/Zoning Relationship -Specific Plans, and Table 2 -7 -General Plan Land Use Designation — Potential Development Buildout, and amending Specific Plan No. 5 to allow for mixed -use (residential commercial development) within SP -5 Parcel 9 boundaries and establishing development standards for new residential uses, including but not limited to building setbacks, floor area ratio, residential density, dwelling unit size, in conjunction with the development and operation of a five -story mixed -use building consisting of 248 residential units, up to 3,000 square feet of ground floor commercial retail and a six -level parking structure on a 2.72 -acre site, on property located at 777 W. Orangethorpe Avenue and 776 S. Placentia Avenue (APN 339-112-27).

Alternative Recommendation:

1. Adopt Resolution No. R-2024-60, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Placentia, California, adopting Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 2021-01 for a General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02, prepared in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., and the Environmental Guidelines of the City of Placentia; adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and adopting GPA 2022-01 modifying the General Plan Land Use Element to allow mixed -use (residential - commercial development) as a permissible land use category within Parcel 9 of Specific Plan No. 5 by amending Tables 2-4 — Specific Plans, Table 2-5 — General Plan/Zoning Relationship — Specific Plans, and Table 2-7 — General Plan Land Use Designation — Potential Development Buildout, and approving DPR 2021-02 for the development and operation of a five -story mixed use building consisting of 248 residential units, up to 3,000 square feet of ground floor commercial retail and a six -level parking structure on

2.72 -acre site, located at 777 W. Orangethorpe Avenue and 776 S. Placentia Avenue (APN 339-112-27); and

2. Waive full reading, by title only, and introduce for first reading Ordinance No. O-2024-05, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Placentia, California Approving Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, amending Specific Plan No. 5 to permit mixed -use development and parking structures on Parcel 9 and establishing associated development standards on a 2.72 -acre site on property located at 777 W. Orangethorpe Avenue and 776 S. Placentia Avenue (APN 339-112-27).

Strategic Plan Statement:

This item is inconsistent with the City Council adopted 5 -Year Strategic Goals to:

1. ENSURE LONG-TERM FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY as Objective 1.4 is to protect and preserve existing economic development/property nodes throughout the City to maximize revenue opportunities. Additionally, Objective 1.5 is to Continue seeking ways 395

to diversify the City's revenue sources to prevent over -reliance on any one source (Measure U/Property Tax). This agenda item results in permanently removing a commercially designated and historically tax -producing site from the city's inventory of commercial land uses. These commercial uses are vital as they collectively occupy no more than 5% of the city's total land area and potentially provide a sustainable revenue stream for the City's General Fund.

2. PROMOTE COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT as Objective 3.3 is to continue to recruit and attract retail, hotel and other commercial businesses that complement adjacent City assets and attractions (Anaheim Resort District, Cal State Fullerton, OC Vibe and Angel Stadium Projects). This agenda item would permanently remove a commercially designated and historically tax -producing site from the City. This site has attracted the interest of several hoteliers and automobile dealerships since becoming vacant. Removing this property as from the City's commercial land inventory no longer makes it a site to recruit and attract retail, hotel and other commercial businesses that complement adjacent City assets and attractions.

General Plan:

This item is also inconsistent with the following City Council adopted General Plan Elements:
• Land Use
• Mobility
• Economic Development
• Health, Wellness and Environmental Justice
• Safety
• Housing Element
Attachments
Staff_Report_-_GPA_2022-01 SPA_2021-01 DPR_2021-02 M N D_2021- 01_Orangethorpe_Mixed_Use_1 1 1 2_ (2).pdf

1. GPA SPA DPR CC Reso No. R-2024-56- Denial AG JL KS.docx

2. GPA DPR CC Reso No. R-2024-60- Conditions of Approval AG JL KS.docx

3._Ordinance_O-2024-05-_SPA_2021-01_AG_JL_KS (1).docx

4. Preface, IS, MND 2021-01, MMRP, Response to Comments.pdf

5. Project Plans Dated 6-5-24.pdf

6. Development Impact Analysis - Jon Stover & Associates.pdf

7. Public Correspondence.pdf

8. Public Hearing Notification.pdf

9. Vicinity Map; 776 S. Placentia Ave & 777 W Orangethorpe.pdf

10. Site Photographs.pdf

11. Development Proposals of Interest.pdf

12. Applicant & Technical Team Response Comments.pdf

13. PC Draft Minutes from July 9, 2024.pdf

14. PowerPoint (777 W. Orangethorpe) Orangethrope Mixed Use.pdf 396

TO:

VIA:

FROM:

DATE:

SUBJECT:

FISCAL
IMPACT:

SUMMARY:

Placentia Cit
Council

AGENDA REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

CITY ADMINISTRATOR

DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
SEPTEMBER 3, 2024
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2022-01, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. SPA 2021-01, DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW NO. DPR 2021-02, AND ADOPTION OF INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. MND 2021-01 BY AMENDING THE GENERAL

PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT TO ALLOW MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT
(RESIDENTIAL -COMMERCIAL), AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 5 TO PERMIT MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT ON PARCEL 9 AND ESTABLISHING

ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND PERMITTING

DEVELOPMENT OF A FIVE -STORY MIXED -USE BUILDING WITH
248 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UP TO 3,000 SQ. FT. OF RETAIL SPACE, AND A SIX -LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE ON A 2.72 -ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 777 W. ORANGETHORPE AVENUE AND 776 S. PLACENTIA AVENUE.

It is anticipated the project would generate approximately $1.2 million in one-time revenue to the General Fund in the form of permit fees, however revenue from those fees support the additional work for staff created directly by the project's construction and would not be available for other City operations. An additional $5.0 million is anticipated from one-time development impact fees which can only be used for future infrastructure projects and are not available to support the daily operations of the City.

Once the project is complete, the project is expected to generate $244,209 in new General Fund revenue annually through a combination of higher property tax and sales taxes. The project is anticipated to require $246,435 in new annual General Fund expenses primarily for increased Police and Fire response to support the new residents. In summary, the project is projected to generate a net annual loss ($2,226) to the General Fund.

On July 9, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA 2022-01), Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2021-01), and Development Plan Review (DPR 2021-02) for a mixed -use development on Orangethorpe Avenue, which aims to introduce a combination of residential and commercial uses, including parking structures. The 397

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

Planning Commission, by unanimous vote, recommended denial of the GPA, SPA, and DPR to the City Council (Resolution Adopted 5-0-0-2 as recommended) due to the project's failure to adequately address potential impacts on the surrounding environment, infrastructure, and community. Concerns were raised about its alignment with the City's long-term sustainability goals, infrastructure capacity, and compatibility with the surrounding area, along with doubts about whether the project could genuinely meet the City's objectives of maintaining a sustainable revenue stream while revitalizing the area. These significant issues suggest that the project may not be in the best interest of the City or its residents.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions:

1. Open the Public Hearing, concerning General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02; and

2. Receive the Staff Report and consider all Public Testimony; and

3. Close the Public Hearing; and

4. Adopt Resolution No. R-2024-56, of the City Council of the City of Placentia, California, denying General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02 to modify the General Plan Land Use Element to permit mixed -use (Residential -Commercial Development) as a permissible land use category within Parcel 9 of Specific Plan No. 5 by amending Tables 2 -4 -Specific Plans, Table 2 -5 -General Plan/Zoning Relationship -Specific Plans, and Table 2 -7 -General Plan Land Use Designation — Potential Development Buildout, and amending Specific Plan No. 5 to allow for mixed -use (residential commercial development) within SP -5 Parcel 9 boundaries and establishing development standards for new residential uses, including but not limited to building setbacks, floor area ratio, residential density, dwelling unit size, in conjunction with the development and operation of a five -story mixed - use building consisting of 248 residential units, up to 3,000 square feet of ground floor commercial retail and a six -level parking structure on a 2.72 -acre site, on property located at 777 W. Orangethorpe Avenue and 776 S. Placentia Avenue (APN 339-112-27).

ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION:

5. Adopt Resolution No. R-2024-60, a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Placentia, California, adopting Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 2021-01 for a General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02, prepared in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., and the Environmental Guidelines of the City of Placentia; adopt the Mitigation Monitoring 398

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

and Reporting Program; and adopting GPA 2022-01 modifying the General Plan Land Use Element to allow mixed -use (residential -commercial development) as a permissible land use category within Parcel 9 of Specific Plan No. 5 by amending Tables 2-4 — Specific Plans, Table 2-5 — General Plan/Zoning Relationship — Specific Plans, and Table 2-7 — General Plan Land Use Designation — Potential Development Buildout, and approving DPR 2021-02 for the development and operation of a five -story mixed use building consisting of 248 residential units, up to 3,000 square feet of ground floor commercial retail and a six -level parking structure on 2.72 -acre site, located at 777 W. Orangethorpe Avenue and 776 S. Placentia Avenue (APN 339-112-27); and

6. Waive full reading, by title only, and introduce for first reading Ordinance No. O-2024-05, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Placentia, California Approving Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, amending Specific Plan No. 5 to permit mixed -use development and parking structures on Parcel 9 and establishing associated development standards on a 2.72 -acre site on property located at 777 W. Orangethorpe Avenue and 776 S. Placentia Avenue (APN 339-112-27).

STRATEGIC PLAN STATEMENT:

This item is inconsistent with the City Council adopted 5 -Year Strategic Goals to:

1. ENSURE LONG-TERM FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY as Objective 1.4 is to protect and preserve existing economic development/property nodes throughout the City to maximize revenue opportunities. Additionally, Objective 1.5 is to Continue seeking ways to diversify the City's revenue sources to prevent over -reliance on any one source (Measure U/Property Tax).

This agenda item results in permanently removing a commercially designated and historically tax - producing site from the city's inventory of commercial land uses. These commercial uses are vital as they collectively occupy no more than 5% of the city's total land area and potentially provide a sustainable revenue stream for the City's General Fund.

2. PROMOTE COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT as Objective 3.3 is to continue to recruit and attract retail, hotel and other commercial businesses that complement adjacent City assets and attractions (Anaheim Resort District, Cal State Fullerton, OC Vibe and Angel Stadium Projects). This agenda item would permanently remove a commercially designated and historically tax -producing site from the City. This site has attracted the interest of several hoteliers and automobile dealerships since becoming vacant. Removing this property as from the City's commercial land inventory no longer makes it a site to recruit and attract retail, hotel and other commercial businesses that complement adjacent City assets and attractions.

GENERAL PLAN:

This item is also inconsistent with the following City Council adopted General Plan Elements:
■ Land Use
■ Mobility
399

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

■ Economic Development
■ Health Wellness and Environmental Justice
■ Safety
■ Housing Element
BACKGROUND:

The subject property was formally occupied by Premier Chrysler Jeep (PCJ). PCJ officially vacated the site on May 31, 2018, and the site has remained vacant for over six years. During this period between the closure of PCJ and submission of the entitlement application on June 24, 2021, city staff worked diligently in good faith with the property owner, Brian Chuchua, to (a) obtain environmental clearance by the Orange County Health Care Agency to enable the property owner to begin marketing the property, (b) informally market the property for a least one year at real estate conventions, and (c) agreed to pay for half of the cost to market the property using a reliable and professional real estate company with successful hotel brokerage experience. Furthermore, based upon City Council direction, city staff embarked on amending Specific Plan No. 5 to allow up to eight stories (75 feet) and allow hospitality uses as a permitted use on the subject property at the expense of the city. The SPA spared the property owner the cost of the SPA and related environmental clearance, which saved the owner several thousand dollars and the time and effort of submitting a formal entitlement application. The SPA was approved by the City Council on July 23, 2019.

Since the PCJ vacated the site in 2018, city staff has received inquiries from numerous developers interested in using the site for residential or commercial purposes. For residential developers, city staff informed them that the property was not designated for residential use in the General Plan's Land Use Element, nor was it a permissible land use type within SP -5. Consequently, all residential developers decided to pass on the property based on this information.

Several commercial developers, including those interested in auto dealerships and hospitality ventures, also expressed interest in the property. However, they refrained from proceeding with the acquisition due to the asking price, which they considered overvalued.

In 2021, the current applicant entered into an agreement to purchase the property for the proposed mixed -use development, despite ongoing interest from hospitality developers and other users.

Since 2021 and up to the present, these hospitality groups have continually expressed interest in the site but have been unable to proceed due to the existing purchase agreement with the applicant.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
On June 24, 2021, Gilad Ganish, on behalf of Orangethorpe Investment Partners, LLC, submitted applications for a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Specific Plan Amendment (SPA), and Development Plan Review (DPR). The proposal involves demolishing the existing car dealership to develop a five -story mixed -use building. This building will feature 248 market rate residential units, up to 3,000 square feet of ground floor commercial retail space, a six -level parking structure, and 335 onsite parking spaces located both at -grade or within the parking structure (proposed 400

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

project). The 2.72 -acre site is near the northeast corner of S. Placentia Avenue and W.

Orangethorpe Avenue.

The proposed project will demolish the structures of a vacant car dealership, formally occupied by PCJ, and parking lot, paving the way for the construction and operation of the mixed -use development. The market rate units will feature studios, and one- and two -bedroom apartments.

The building will be equipped with various amenities, such as a mail and parcel room, leasing office, fitness area, club room, co -working space, and a central pool courtyard. Additionally, the project proposes to incorporate approximately 37,817 square feet of common open space and 9,584 square feet of private open space. The proposed project would also include ornamental landscaping and decorative furniture on private property only. 1 The residential units will be situated around a central outdoor courtyard, featuring a pool as its focal point. This courtyard will be designed with both active and passive areas, landscaped outdoor amenities, including lounge chairs, seating areas, turf, a game lawn in the western section, and a retreat area equipped with an outdoor kitchen, seating, and a fire pit. Additionally, a proposed retail plaza located to the southeastern area of the project site will offer cafe tables, 401

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

shade trees, pottery, umbrellas, and enhanced paving. A designated dog park is proposed along the eastern part of the site, adjacent to the parking structure. The site will be lined with trees, and there will be a building setback of approximately 10 feet along S. Placentia Avenue. The project will have a density of approximately 91.2 dwelling units per acre.

The project will provide 335 parking stalls for both residential and retail use. Most of these spaces will be housed within a six -level parking structure located in the northeast portion of the site, while the remaining spaces will be at grade near the W. Orangethorpe Avenue and S. Placentia Avenue entrances. According to the proposed SPA, guest parking stalls will be shared with commercial parking stalls. The parking structure will reach a maximum height of 65 feet at its highest point and will be predominantly screened by the five -story residential building as seen from the S. Placentia Avenue and W. Orangethorpe Avenue right-of-way. As demonstrated in the parking analysis of this staff report, the proposed onsite parking is considered deficient by staff.

The project site will feature two points of entry and exit for vehicular circulation: one along S. Placentia Avenue and another along W. Orangethorpe Avenue. The entry and exit driveway on W. Orangethorpe Avenue will offer limited guest and commercial parking for the adjacent commercial unit. However, there will be no direct access from this driveway into the parking structure. The entry on S. Placentia Avenue will provide access to the parking structure, catering to all visitors, future residents, apartment employees, and residents of the project. Both entry points, along W. Orangethorpe Avenue and S. Placentia Avenue, will facilitate ingress and egress via right turns only.

Electrical and telecommunication utility connections are planned to be obtained from existing overhead poles on the west side of S. Placentia Avenue. Gas connections are intended to be made to the existing gas main along S. Placentia Avenue. Sewer, water, and storm infrastructure will be linked to existing systems in S. Placentia Avenue and W. Orangethorpe Avenue.

PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Government Code Compliance — General Plan Amendment
In accordance with Government Code Section 65350, a city may amend their respective General Plans, including the Land Use Element several times per year. Subsequent to such an amendment, in accordance with Government Code Section 65860, the City shall bring its zoning ordinance into consistency with its adopted General Plan. The proposal includes a SPA to allow mixed -use (Residential -Commercial Development) as a permissible land use category within Parcel 9 of Specific Plan No. 5 by amending Tables 2 -4 -Specific Plans, Table 2 -5 -General Plan/Zoning Relationship -Specific Plans, and Table 2 -7 -General Plan Land Use Designation — Potential Development Buildout for the proposed mixed -use development. To retain consistency between the City's General Plan and zoning designations, the existing General Plan Land Use tables need to be amended to allow mixed -use as a permissible land use category. 402

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

Applicable Code Section — Placentia Municipal Code
The subject property currently has a General Plan Land Use Designation of "Specific Plan" and is zoned Specific Plan No. 5 (SP -5). The project will be required to comply with the development standards and use requirements set forth in the Placentia Municipal Code (PMC) for developments located on properties within the SP -5 Zoning District. Since neither the General Plan's land use designation of "Specific Plan" for the project area nor the zoning of SP -5 identify mixed -use (Residential -Commercial Development) and parking structures as allowable land uses, nor do development standards exist to address multifamily residential/mixed-use developments, a SPA is required to amend SP -5 pursuant to Section 23.96.010 of the PMC. Pursuant to PMC Section 23.75.010(a), construction of new buildings requires a DPR to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Furthermore, in accordance with PMC Section 23.96.040, a SPA requires the Planning Commission to review and provide a recommendation of the proposed SPA before it is considered for final action by the City Council. Given the interrelated nature of the GPA, SPA, and DPR, these entitlements have first received a recommendation from the Planning Commission and now await a final decision by the City Council.

Subject Site and Surrounding Land Uses
The table below illustrates the site and surrounding existing land uses, General Plan Land Use designation and zoning:

Location
Existing Land Use
Land Use Element
General Plan
Designation
Zoning Map
Designation
Existing
Vacant Car Dealership
Site
Specific Plan
Specific Plan No. 5
(SP -5)
Proposed
Five -Story, 248 -
Residential -Unit Mixed -
Use Building and Six-
Level Parking
Structure
Specific Plan
SP -5
North
Three -Story Office
Building Containing
Interface Rehab, Inc. &
Maxum Therapy
Specific Plan
SP -5
South
(Adjacent to
the Site &
Across W.

Orangethorpe
Avenue)
Fast Food Restaurant
(Jack in the Box), 7-
Eleven and Gas
Station, Twin Palms
Mobile Home Park
Specific Plan,
Commercial
Manufacturing, &
Low Density
Residential
SP -5, C-1 (Neighborhood
Commercial), & R-1
(MHP) (Single Family
Residential — Mobile
Home Park)
403

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

East
Industrial Uses
Specific Plan &
Industrial
SP -5 & Manufacturing
(M)
West (Across
S. Placentia
Avenue)
City of Fullerton —
Multi -tenant Industrial
Park
City of Fullerton —
Industrial
City of Fullerton —
Commercial
Manufacturing

ZONING COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS
Site Development Standards
The project is located within the Parcel No. 9 Subdistrict of the SP -5 Specific Plan District. Specific Plans are similar to Zoning districts in that they detail permitted uses and development standards among other things. Due to the requested zone change via SPA 2021-01, the proposed project cannot be analyzed under the current SP -5 development requirements, as these regulatory standards do not exist for this type of proposed development.

The applicant has submitted customized development standards specifically for this project.

These standards accommodate the development of a mixed -use building with a parking structure, which are otherwise prohibited land uses within SP -5. The applicant requests incorporating the land uses and development standards into SP -5, including new front, side, and rear building setbacks, commercial floor area ratio, residential density maximum, and reduced onsite parking requirements.

Currently, the proposed mixed -use development is prohibited by code. However, the City Council may approve the GPA and SPA amendments, and DPR. The SPA is intended to address the inconsistency and make the project fully compliant with the development standards, pending the SPA's approval.

The following matrix provides a summary of the development's compliance with the proposed SPA development standards:

APPLICANT'S PROPOSED

AMENDMENT STANDARDS

TOD STANDARDS

APPLICANT'S MIXED USE

PROJECT
Floor Area Ratio

1.0 Commercial FAR Maximum
No Residential FAR Maximum
Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
No FAR
No FAR

0.02 FAR
Complies
Density Range
65 to 95 dwelling units/acre
Density Range
65 to 95 dwelling
units/acre

91.2 dwelling units/acre
Dwelling Unit Size
Studio Unit — 500 sf. min.
1 Bed Unit — 575 sf. min.

Dwelling Unit Size
Studio Unit — 534 sf. (S1A Unit)
1 Bed Unit — 591 sf. (A1A Unit)
404

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

2 Bed Unit — 800 sf. min.

No minimum sf for unit
bedroom type. Max. 3
bedrooms per unit.
2 Bed Unit — 1,026 sf. (B1A
Unit)
Height
75 ft. max.

Height
**5 -stories maximum, not
to exceed 68 ft.
68 ft. 6 in.

Setbacks
Front Yard Setback
10 ft. min.

Side Yard Setback
10 ft. min.

Rear Yard Setback
10 ft. min.*
Setbacks
Front Yard Setback
3 ft. min/15 ft. max.

Side Yard Setback
0 ft.

Rear Yard Setback
10 ft.

Front Yard Setback
10 ft.

Side Yard Setback
12 ft.

Rear Yard Setback
10 ft.

Common or Private Open
Space
Common Open Space
18,600 sf. Min.

Private Open Space — May be
provided in balconies with
minimum depth of 3 ft.

Common Open Space
50 sf/unit @ 12,400 sf
**Private Open Space
64 sf/unit @ 15,872 sf
Approx. 10,250 sf. - Pool Area
6,416 sf. - Interior Amenity
Area
*Total — 16,666 sf. (Not In
Compliance
Private Open Space
6,416 sf
*According to the proposed
development standards,
required setbacks cannot be
counted as common open
space.

Lot Coverage
85% max. (100,760 s.f.)
Lot Coverage
No lot coverage
standard.
68% (80,653 s.f.)
Parking
See table below for parking analysis.
*Subject to the approval of SPA 2021-01
**Does not comply with TOD District development standards 405

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

Other Departments Concerns and Requirements
The Divisions of Planning and Building, Public Works Department, Police Department, and Fire and Life Safety Department have reviewed the application and submitted comments but expressed concerns with the proposal. While all applicable code requirements and conditions of approval were not been incorporated into the draft resolution of the Planning Commission, Resolution No. 2024-60 (Attachment No. 2) includes all applicable code requirements and conditions of approval should City Council approve GPA 2022-01, SPA 2021-01, and DPR 2021-

02. ISSUES ANALYSIS:

INCONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
The General Plan features policies that promote the reinvestment of underutilized properties while being sensitive to the suburban atmosphere and requires new developments to provide adequate improvements and pay impact fees to offset the demand costs on city services and facilities. The proposed development and subdivision are not consistent with the following Land Use, Mobility, Economic Development, Health Wellness and Environmental Justice, Safety, and Housing Elements goals, actions, programs, and policies of the General Plan:

Land Use Element
Goal LU-2: Ensure that new development is compatible with surrounding land uses, the circulation network, and existing development constraints.

Policy LU-2.1: Where residential/commercial Mixed -Use is permitted ensure compatible integration of adjacent uses to minimize conflicts through site planning, development standards, and architectural compatibility.

Policy LU-2.2: Develop residential and commercial design guidelines to both protect existing development and allow for future development that is attractive, compatible, and sensitive to surrounding uses.

Policy LU-2.4: Large, contiguous vacant or underutilized parcels should be comprehensively planned for development to be compatible with adjacent neighborhoods.

Policy LU-2.21: Ensure development provides adequate infrastructure improvements area provided to support new multi -family development, including on -site recreational amenities.

Policy LU-5.6: Improve roadway corridor aesthetics with implementation of a streetscape program that includes median island beautification and enhanced City entry locations.
406

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

The proposed mixed -use development project is unlikely to be compatible with the surrounding land uses. Introducing a high -density, residential mixed -use development into an area primarily characterized by light industrial, hospitality, commercial, and low -density residential uses may lead to conflicts. Inadequate attention has been given to establishing a smooth transition between these diverse land uses. Additionally, there is a noticeable absence of vision planning aimed at accommodating residents intending to live within the project. This includes the creation of a streetscape conducive to walkability and multimodal traffic flow. Given these shortcomings, the project is deemed to conflict with the goals and policies outlined in the General Plan's Land Use Element.

Mobility Element
Policy MOB -2.2: Ensure adequate capacity to accommodate the traffic generated by land uses within the City, while balancing the needs of the pedestrian, cyclists and other multi -modal users.

Policy MOB -2.6: Require new development to conform to the standards and criteria of the City of Placentia and other mandated programs. This includes mitigation of traffic impacts to the surrounding street system as well as ensuring new developments manage their parking onsite with no impact to surrounding public streets.

Policy MOB -2.13: Encourage the development of aesthetic streetscape to promote a positive City image and provide visual relief and traffic calming benefits.

Policy MOB -3.4: Implement adequate sidewalks and crosswalks to meet the requires uses and needs, which serve to encourage alternative modes of transportation.

Policy MOB -4.14: Require that new streets or developments contain adequate right-of-way for bicycle lanes, where appropriate.

Aside from the onsite improvements to accommodate the proposed mixed -use development, there will be minimal public enhancements within the public right-of-way to promote alternative transportation options. A pull-out stop street cutout is provided for emergency vehicles along S. Placentia Avenue, but beyond this, very few public improvements are proposed to protect pedestrians and facilitate multi -modal transportation. The project lacks protected bike lanes, streetlights, street furniture, bicycle racks, and street trees. Despite being adjacent to two major thoroughfares, the development includes minimal improvements to encourage walkability and bicycle ridership in and around the site.

Additionally, the proposed reduction in parking requirements below those specified in the City's TOD District is likely to lead to parking overflow onto neighboring streets and properties. This issue has been observed by city staff in similar developments in areas better suited to encourage walkability and multi -modal transportation. Unlike other developments in the city that were the first 407

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

of their kind, this particular project does not feature any of the master planning efforts that made those developments successful.

Key missing documents include a streetscape master plan, infrastructure planning, transportation/mobility planning, and human/walkability planning. Additionally, the development lacks fiscal planning, as it does not include specialized Development Impact Fees or a Community Facilities District to ensure its long-term fiscal sustainability.

Economic Development Element
Action ED -2.2-1: Placentia's business attraction efforts should be targeted primarily towards businesses which have the following characteristics, in order of priority: 1) Sales tax generating; 2) Property tax enhancement; 3) Other revenue enhancements; and 4) Will result in infrastructure improvement.

The proposed mixed -use development project entails the permanent removal of a sustainable tax -producing property crucial for funding city services and programs. Currently, the city allocates 3-5% of its land area to commercial uses. Converting this land for residential purposes jeopardizes future revenue streams, potentially transitioning from a source of income to an expense for the city in the near future. This proposed project fails to align with the objectives outlined in the General Plan's Economic Development Element, directly conflicting with the plan's aim to uphold and sustain viable revenue streams.

Health, Wellness, & Environmental Justice Element
Policy HW/EJ-4.1: Provide higher -density and infill mixed -use development affordable to all incomes on vacant and underutilized parcels throughout the City.

Policy HW/EJ -5.9: Continue to implement streetscape improvements to enhance access, lighting, safety and experience for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and motorists. Focus improvements in areas with the highest need, such as Old Town, DACs, mixed -use corridors, and key intersections.

Policy HW/EJ -10.1: Promote land use patterns that reduce driving and promote walking, cycling, and transit use.

Policy HW/EJ - 10.2: Discourage locating truck routes on primarily residential streets and in DACs.

Policy HW/EJ- 12.3: Avoid locating new homes, schools, childcare and elder care facilities, and health care facilities within 500 feet of freeways, urban roads with 100, 000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day.

Policy HW/EJ - 12.9: The City shall continue to minimize stationary source pollution through the following:
408

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

• Ensure the industrial and commercial land uses area meeting existing SCAQMD air quality thresholds by adhering to established rules and regulations
• Encourage the use of new technology to neutralize harmful criteria pollutants from stationary sources.
• Reduce exposure of the City's sensitive receptors to poor air quality nodes through smart land use decisions.

Policy HW/EJ -13.10: Promote land use patterns that are transit, bicycle, and pedestrian -oriented and have a mix of uses, especially neighborhood serving businesses, within walking distance of homes and workplaces. Encourage muti- modal transportation with land use patterns that are transit, bicycle and pedestrian -oriented, and have a mix of uses.

The proposed mixed -use development does not align with several city policies aimed at sustainable urban development and public health. Its location in a non-residential improved area, rather than on vacant or underutilized parcels, contradicts Policy HW/EJ-4.1. The project fails to enhance streetscape access, safety, and experience as required by Policy HW/EJ-5.9, due to the absence of essential infrastructure such as protected bike lanes, streetlights, and pedestrian amenities.

Moreover, the project does not support land use patterns that reduce driving and promote walking, cycling, and transit use, falling short of Policies HW/EJ-10.1 and HW/EJ-13.10. Its proximity to major thoroughfares potentially exposes residents to high traffic -related pollution, conflicting with Policy HW/EJ-12.3. Additionally, the development does not adequately address air quality concerns as per Policy HW/EJ-12.9, nor does it consider the policy of discouraging truck routes near residential areas (Policy HW/EJ-10.2). Overall, the project fails to meet the city's goals for higher -density infill development, improved streetscapes, reduced reliance on cars, and protection of public health and safety.

Safety Element
Policy SAF— 4.8: Require enhanced landscaped buffers in industrial -zoned areas that abut residential zones, consisting of more densely planted trees in setback areas.

Policy SAF — 4.9: Prohibit outdoor industrial operations in industrial zones that abut residential areas.

Although these policies are primarily intended to address new industrial uses adjacent to residential areas, the underlying principle is to buffer sensitive land uses from more intense activities, such as those associated with industrial operations. This principle also applies when placing residential uses next to industrial zones. Industrial operations often involve outdoor activities that generate noise, odors, and vibrations, which are incompatible with residential environments.
409

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

Locating residential units adjacent to industrial uses without meaningful buffers exposes residents to disturbances that would otherwise be unacceptable if the situation were reversed. Moreover, this arrangement may unfairly compel existing businesses to alter their operations in response to complaints from new residents, which can be perceived as unjust.

Housing Element
Goal HE -1: Housing Supply and Variety: Develop and maintain an adequate supply of housing that varies sufficiently in cost, size, type, and tenure to meet the economic and social needs of existing and future residents.

Program HE -1.13: Development of Housing for Larger Families: The City shall encourage incorporation of units with 3 or more bedrooms in for -sale and rental housing developments to accommodate the needs of larger families through activities such as technical assistance, expediated processing, and flexibility in development standards.

Goal HE -3: Neighborhood Preservation: Encourage activities that conserve and improve exiting residential neighborhoods including a housing stock that is well maintained and structurally sound, and with adequate services and facilities provided; and having a sense of community identity.

The proposed mixed -use development project lacks provisions for housing that sufficiently cater to varying income levels in terms of affordability, size, and type. There are no affordable units planned, and unit costs will be subject to market forces, exacerbating the scarcity of affordable housing units. Additionally, minimal effort has been made to cultivate a sense of community for future residents. There is a lack of long-term planning to enhance walkability and establish a multimodal streetscape. Furthermore, the development fails to integrate with nearby residential neighborhoods, hindering connectivity and cohesion within the community.

Housing Element
The City of Placentia General Plan was comprehensively updated in October 2019, with the exception of the Housing Element which was adopted in 2014. State planning law mandates that jurisdictions review and update their Housing Elements every eight years in order to remain relevant and useful, and to reflect the community's changing housing needs via their Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The 2021-2029 Housing Element is the "Sixth Cycle" Housing Element addressing the planning period from October 2021 to October 2029. On October 19, 2021, the City Council reviewed the draft Housing Element for the Sixth Cycle and directed Staff to transmit the draft Element to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review. Staff obtained comments from the HCD, and on January 18, 2022, this item was heard by City Council and direction was given to staff regarding strategies for creating additional housing capacity to accommodate the RHNA over the next eight years. The item was continued to March 15, 2022, and at that time, the Housing Element was adopted. On May 16, 2022, HCD issued a findings letter stating that revisions were still necessary to comply with State Housing Element Law. Staff resubmitted several versions of revised Housing 410

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

Elements in August 2023, November 2023 and in January 2024. On February 29, 2024, the City of Placentia received a finding of substantial compliance from HCD regarding the Housing Element.

A crucial component of a city's Housing Element is the Sites Inventory, which is a part of its overall comprehensive plan for housing development. Essentially, the Sites Inventory provides an assessment of available land within the city that is suitable for housing development. This inventory typically includes various types of sites such as vacant land, underutilized properties, and redevelopment opportunities.

The purpose of the Sites Inventory is the following:
• Identify potential locations for new housing development: By cataloging available land parcels, the Sites Inventory helps city planners and policymakers understand where new housing could be built to meet the community's needs.
• Assess the capacity for housing production: The inventory evaluates the suitability of each site for housing development based on factors such as zoning regulations, infrastructure availability, environmental considerations, and market feasibility. • Ensure compliance with state housing requirements: State laws often mandate that cities maintain an adequate supply of land for housing development to accommodate projected population growth and address housing affordability issues. The Sites Inventory helps demonstrate compliance with these legal requirements.
• Inform housing policies and strategies: City officials use the information gathered in the Sites Inventory to formulate housing policies and strategies that promote balanced and equitable housing development across different neighborhoods and demographics. • Overall, the Sites Inventory serves as a foundation for the planning and implementation of housing initiatives within a city, guiding decisions related to land use, zoning, infrastructure investment, and affordable housing programs.

The Sites Inventory was created by identifying existing residentially designated properties that could support higher -density housing, considering their compatibility with surrounding land uses and the potential for adaptive reuse of underperforming sites. For example, in the High Density Residential (R-3) Zoning District, the density factor was raised from 25 du/acre to 30 du/acre to increase housing units and meet affordability income levels set by HCD. Additionally, the expansion of the TOD Zoning District and rezoning of industrial properties helped the city meet the RHNA benchmark.

However, the subject site was not included in the Sites Inventory for several reasons. Firstly, it is situated within a General Plan Land Use designation and Zoning District that does not permit residential uses. Moreover, no long-term planning has addressed the necessary infrastructure for safe pedestrian mobility or land uses that support residential needs, such as open space and 411

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

essential services. Secondly, the city's land area devoted to commercial uses, which generates sustainable tax revenue, comprises only 3-5% of the overall land area. The subject site had been a continuous tax -producing property prior to being vacated by PCJ on May 31, 2018. Losing this revenue stream would impact funding for essential services such as public safety, infrastructure, and parks and recreation. Importantly, if this project is denied, the City will not be inconsistent with any current state legislation or the City's certified Housing Element.

LAND USE COMPATIBILITY
While the project seeks to revitalize a vacant and deteriorated former car dealership property, it's crucial to acknowledge that its design may not harmonize with the surrounding area. This site is bordered by major street thoroughfares lacking multimodal infrastructure, including safe pedestrian pathways or protected bike lanes. Adjacent properties primarily host light industrial uses, offices, hotels, and vehicle -centric developments. South of the property, residential areas consist of single-family homes with a density of 6 dwelling units per acre, but they are disconnected from the development without meaningful street connections. The proposed development's height will overshadow neighboring structures, predominantly single to two-story buildings, creating a visual disruption in the area. Despite aspirations to emulate the success of the Packing House District ("TOD"), the project falls short in implementing physical right-of-way enhancements to achieve its objectives.

The envisioned development is designed to function autonomously from neighboring properties, without integrating improvements to the public right-of-way. This lack of connectivity risks isolating future residents from vital amenities like grocery stores, parks, libraries, and other facilities. The project's planning lacks depth and fails to incorporate conveniences essential for the well-being of future residents.

TOD vs Oranqethorpe Avenue Mixed Use
The proposed mixed -use development and standards for Parcel 9 of SP -5 have been designed to resemble the TOD Zoning District as outlined in PMC Section 23.111.040, Development Standards. In TOD, setbacks vary between 3 to 15 feet to promote high -quality architecture and site design, aiming to activate the sidewalk and streetscape. This activation is supported by a streetscape master plan that mandates public improvements of eight to nine feet wide sidewalks for safe pedestrian walkability, minimizing the overall occurrence of driveways along Crowther Avenue, and incorporating public amenities such as street trees, street furniture (benches and bike racks), designated crosswalks, landscaped street medians, bike lanes, pedestrian and roadway streetlights, decorative trash cans, and on -street parking.

These measures were implemented with the expectation of a nearby Metrolink station at the 100 block of W. Crowther Avenue, a collector street designed to foster pedestrian activity, minimize vehicle use, and reduce speed limits with unsignalized stop signs and bulb -outs. The proximity to the future station justified higher densities, reduced setbacks, minimized parking requirements, increased building height, and various street amenities to enhance overall walkability and promote a multimodal environment.
412

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

However, the proposed mixed -use development does not include any land dedication to expand the sidewalk width or provide the street amenities specified in the TOD Zoning District. The existing property borders high volume arterial streets with varying sidewalk widths on both Placentia Avenue and Orangethorpe Avenue, with some sections as narrow as 4 feet and several existing impediments, including power poles, light poles, and driveways without right-of-way safety features as sidewalk "bulb -outs" used for pedestrian and motorist safety. The applicant has verbally indicated they do not plan to construct or fund additional right-of-way infrastructure to support the proposed development. Without the required sidewalk widening, the project may appear incongruous from a planning perspective, with narrow sidewalks and parkway areas juxtaposed against a five -story high -density residential building.

Parking Analysis
SP -5 does not have parking standards for mixed -use or residential uses. The proposed development mimics the TOD density parking standards and is the only comparative land use type for this project proposal. It should be noted that the TOD has the City's lowest parking standards due to the fact there is a planned Metrolink Station for the Old Town area. The applicant has represented that the proposed development is very similar to the TOD high -density residential area, without being in close proximity to a high transit priority area or being an affordable housing development. In a comparison between the proposed project and the City's TOD parking standards, the proposed development (as currently submitted) does not even meet the minimum parking obligation of the TOD district. As noted below, the minimum amount of parking required with the TOD District for a project of this size, scale, and number of units would be 337 and the maximum would be 469; however, the applicant's current submittal only provides 335 spaces.

Unit
Type/Land
Use
Unit
Quantity/Size
Proposal — Orangethorpe Avenue
Mixed Use
TOD
Proposed
Requirement
Qty
(Min./Max.)
Provided
PMC
Qty
(Min./Max.)
Studio
44 1 min./1 max.
44 44
1 min./1
max.
44 1 -Bedroom
136
1 min./1 max.
136
136
1 min./1.5
max.
136/204
2 -Bedroom
68 max min./1.5
102
102
2 m5min/
102/136
3 -Bedroom
-
2 min./2 max.
-
-
2 min./2.5
max.
0 Guest/Leasing
-
Spaces per 5
units: 1 min./1
max.
50 53
Spaces
per 10
units: 2
min / 3
max.
50/75
Retail
2,500
Retail &
Residential
0 0
Spaces
per 1,000
5/10
413

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

parking may
be shared.

SF: 2 min.
/ 4 max.

TOTAL
248
332
335
337/469
An additional concern is the problematic nature of both commercial patrons and residential guests utilizing the same parking stalls. This approach deviates from the standards outlined in the off-street parking requirements of the PMC, including the TOD Zoning District, which mandates the separation of residential and commercial parking for mixed -use developments. The commingling of parking spaces will increase the demand on parking and likely result in overflow onto adjacent properties and streets such as Hundley Way, Dunn Way, and W. Kimberly Avenue.

The city has experienced similar parking overflow issues with projects like the Herald development at 132 E. Crowther Avenue. Despite fully complying with the TOD parking standards and providing 78 spaces more than the minimum required, the Herald has encountered parking spillage onto neighboring properties and streets. This overflow has caused an inconvenience for residents, visitors, and local businesses, creating a strain on community relations and local infrastructure.

The Herald development includes 215 total units with a density factor of 73 dwelling units per acre within a zoning district specifically designed for high -density, mixed -use developments. Even with these considerations, the project has struggled to manage its parking demands effectively. The proposed development, in contrast, is much larger in scale and is situated in an area that does not provide the necessary amenities and infrastructure to support the proposed density factor and reduced parking rate. Furthermore, all proposed developments approved and/or constructed within the TOD Zoning District have lower density and higher parking standards compared to the proposed development. The table below provides a comparison of the approved projects within the TOD Zoning District in relation to the proposed development.

TOD Parking vs Orangethorpe Avenue Mixed Use
SPECIFIC PLAN 5
TOD
Orangethorpe Mixed Use
(248 Units/ 91 du/ac)
Herald
(215 Units/ 73
du/ac)
Cenza
(418 Units/ 83
du/ac)
Metro at Melrose
(189 units/ 89
du/ac)
Proposed
Req'ts
Provided
TOD
Req'ts
Req'd
(min./
max.)
Provided
Req'd
(min./
max.)
Provided
Req'd
(min./
max.)
Provided
332
335
337/469
316/445
394
591/793
626
257/374
272
The proposed project's significantly higher unit count and density, combined with the lack of infrastructure, suggest that parking challenges will be even more pronounced. The surrounding streets and properties are ill-equipped to handle the additional overflow, which could lead to increased traffic congestion, limited availability of parking for existing residents and businesses, and potential safety hazards.
414

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

Furthermore, the lack of dedicated parking for residents and commercial patrons may deter potential tenants and businesses from occupying the new development, negatively impacting its long-term viability and success. Ensuring adequate and separate parking facilities is essential for maintaining the quality of life for residents, supporting local businesses, and sustaining the overall appeal of the area.

While mixed -use developments are integral to urban growth and sustainability, it is crucial to address parking demands adequately to avoid adverse effects on the community. The proposed development's current parking plan is insufficient and may exacerbate existing issues, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive approach to parking management and infrastructure planning.

Ongoing Operations
The ongoing operations of the proposed development raise concerns related to routine services for both the development itself and its residents. The building's size, scale, and land coverage limit onsite vehicular circulation for oversized vehicles. This will hinder activities such as trash disposal, deliveries (e.g., furniture, UPS, Amazon), and resident move-ins/move-outs due to a lack of designated parking areas for such vehicles.

Additionally, Republic Services noted in a comment letter that the proximity of existing industrial businesses to the proposed residential development requires service adjustments. Early morning pickups (before 7:00 AM) are not allowed due to noise intrusiveness affecting residential areas, impacting overall operations for nearby businesses.

Furthermore, there are limited options for parking oversized vehicles onsite. The applicant has stated that moving trucks will have designated times to minimize onsite traffic. However, coordinating move-ins/move-outs to a specific schedule seems impractical, given the daily lives and schedules of 248 residential units.

Architecture
The architecture of the building reflects a contemporary interpretation of Brownstone style architecture, blending traditional elements with modern design features. While traditional Brownstone buildings, originating in the 19th century, are characterized by brown sandstone facades, stoops, and intricate details, modern interpretations integrate sleeker lines, larger windows, and updated materials.

These modern Brownstone apartment buildings typically comprise multiple floors, each accommodating multiple apartment units. Inside, the layouts are spacious and open, boasting high ceilings and abundant natural light. Amenities such as rooftop terraces, private balconies, fitness centers, and communal spaces are often included, mirroring the proposal's vision. 415

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

Found predominantly in urban areas like New York City, Brooklyn, Boston, and Philadelphia, these buildings offer a blend of historic charm and contemporary living. They attract individuals seeking both classic architectural allure and modern conveniences.

The building's design incorporates numerous facade breaks, providing shade, relief, and transitions in wall materials. The first -floor features high ceilings for commercial storefronts, anchored by approximately 20 ft. high brick veneer. A horizontal course band separates the base from the upper stories, which are treated with either brick veneer or painted stucco. Lighter colors on the upper floors prevent a monolithic appearance. Windows are strategically placed to maximize natural light in each unit. Wrought iron -style balconies reminiscent of 19th -century fire escapes adorn the building.

The parking structure, nestled within the building's structure, is intentionally designed to minimize its visual impact on the overall architecture. Its purpose is to blend discreetly rather than draw attention as a focal point. Additionally, certain blank facades on the building present opportunities for potential murals, which could pay homage to the community's historical fabric and the industries pivotal to its development. However, while the building's design offers aesthetic appeal, its size and scale do not align with the neighborhood context. It would overshadow all existing single -story and two-story buildings in the vicinity, offering minimal connection to the immediate surroundings.
416

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

1 -WEST ELEVATION
F

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS
The City of Placentia engaged Jon Stover & Associates to conduct an economic development impact analysis. The purpose of this analysis is to assess the economic impact of permanently removing a viable commercial tax -producing property in favor of a proposed mixed -use high -density residential development.

The City of Placentia has undertaken extensive planning and research to evaluate the feasibility and impacts of various potential development scenarios for the subject site. This study builds upon the City's prior due diligence, using submitted development proposals to inform assumptions and inputs for the economic, fiscal, and community impact analysis.

The analysis aims to achieve several key objectives. It evaluates the economic impact, assessing potential changes in revenue from property taxes, sales taxes, and other commercial activities resulting from the transition of the site from commercial to residential use. Additionally, it assesses the fiscal implications for the City's budget, considering potential increases in municipal service costs required to support the new residential population. Furthermore, the analysis examines the community impact, analyzing how the proposed residential development aligns with the City's 417

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

long-term planning goals and community needs, including housing availability, infrastructure demands, and overall quality of life for residents.

The impact analysis reveals that a potential hotel development would yield the most significant overall economic, fiscal, and community benefits for the City, compared to a residential development or a new car dealership. Specifically, a hotel development aligns closely with the City's planning objectives by:

1. Diversifying Revenue Streams: A hotel would boost Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue, providing a stable and significant source of income for the City.

2. Attracting New Retail Businesses: The presence of a hotel is likely to draw additional retail establishments, enhancing the local economy.

3. Creating Job Opportunities: A hotel would generate numerous employment opportunities, both during construction and ongoing operations.

4. Adding Mixed -Use Projects to Major Corridors: The development would contribute to the City's goal of enhancing major corridors with mixed -use projects, promoting a vibrant and active community environment.

Furthermore, the hotel development scenario offers the highest fiscal return to the City over a fifteen -year period, reinforcing its suitability as the preferred option.

In contrast, a residential development is projected to have a slight negative annual fiscal impact once operations stabilize. This is due to the increased demand for municipal services required to support new residents. Additionally, this type of development does not conform to the current SP -5 zoning. The City has designated other areas for high -density residential use, which are more pedestrian -friendly, transit -accessible, and closer to retail amenities.

Retaining the site as a car dealership would not meet the City's objectives to densify along major corridors or introduce new community -serving retail. However, a new car dealership would still be beneficial by activating the currently vacant site and generating substantial sales tax revenue.

Based on these considerations, this study recommends prioritizing the redevelopment of the site as a hotel with on -site retail uses. It is crucial to note that this impact analysis is distinct from a market analysis. The impact analysis assumes that each development scenario is financially viable and capable of sustaining operations for at least fifteen years. The City has already received specific proposals for each proposed use, indicating developer interest and suggesting that a City - conducted market analysis may not be necessary (Attachment 11). However, should demand weaken, the City might consider conducting additional market research.

CEQA
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §§ 21000-21177) and pursuant to §15063 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), the City of Placentia, acting in the capacity of Lead Agency, is required to undertake the 418

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

preparation of an Initial Study to determine if the proposed Project would have a significant environmental impact. An initial study was conducted by Harris & Associates, a professional environmental firm. The document evaluated all CEQA issues contained in the latest Initial Study Checklist form. The evaluation determined that either no impact or less than significant impacts would be associated with all environmental categories, excluding Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Tribal Cultural Resources. All require implementation of mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The required mitigation has been proposed in this Initial Study to reduce impacts for these issues to a less than significant impact. The city acquired the services of a third -party environmental consultant, PGN, to review and evaluate the merits of the submitted environmental analysis for completeness and accuracy.

A Notice of Availability and Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (NOI) was issued for this project by the City of Placentia. The Initial Study and Notice of Availability and Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for 30 days of public comment because this project is considered a project of regional significance. This 30 -day review period ran from November 29, 2023, to December 28, 2023, but was extended to January 4, 2024, due to an approximately two-week closure of City Hall resulting from the Christmas and New Year's holidays. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (CEQA) set forth in Title 14 CCR Section 15270, Projects Which Are Disapproved, are determined to be statutorily exempt.

Therefore, the recommendation of denial requires no further environmental action by the City Council.

Should the City Council choose to approve the project and adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) No. MND 2021-01, a comprehensive Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared to ensure that the project will not have a significant environmental impact. The Mitigation Measures, as outlined in the MND, have been incorporated into Resolution No. R-2024-60 as conditions of approval. These measures are specifically designed to reduce any potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level. MND 2021-02 is included as an attachment to this report for the City Council's consideration in adopting the MND.

HOUSING, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AD HOC COMMITTEE On March 2, 2021, and again on March 25, 2021, the Housing, Community, and Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee reviewed the proposed development project for regulatory compliance, consistency with the General Plan, and overall compatibility with the surrounding environment. The project was evaluated in comparison to other land uses that city staff considered more desirable for maintaining a sustainable, ongoing revenue stream for the City to replace the productive use (new car dealership) which previously occupied the site.

During the discussions, Councilmember Wanke expressed concerns about sewer flows and capacity, specifically questioning the differences in sewer demands between residential and hotel uses. Councilmember Shader raised concerns about the viability of the hotel industry, particularly in the aftermath of the global COVID-19 pandemic. Both Councilmembers emphasized the 419

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

importance of objectively evaluating potential alternatives for the site that align with the City's objectives and goals, while also revitalizing the area and assisting the property owner in finalizing the real estate transfer to the applicant. By the end of the meeting, no specific direction was provided, leaving aspects of the project unresolved.

The applicant addressed the concerns raised by both the Committee and City staff. Notably, the applicant expressed refusal to pay Development Impact Fees not currently associated with the project area, such as Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) Development Impact Fees (DIFs), although the impacts to City infrastructure associated with the project had not been properly evaluated. The applicant made it clear that they did not wish to enter into any form of a Development Agreement. It should be noted that proper master planning efforts occurred for similar significant land use/zoning amendments, such as those efforts associated with TOD, Old Town and Chapman Corridor project areas. Staff always recommends master planning efforts to occur prior to or concurrently with a project of the scope and magnitude such as the subject project. Master planning efforts would most likely result in project specific master plans, project area specific DIFs above and beyond existing citywide DIFs, a project area specific CFD and more. Without the applicant agreeing to master planning efforts, nor a Development Agreement, items such as project area specific DIFs, CFD, and proper master planning cannot be addressed.

COMMUNITY MEETING
On Thursday, January 25, 2024, the City hosted a community meeting at the Whitten Community Center to gather public input on the proposed project. The meeting encouraged neighboring property owners, business owners, residents, and stakeholders to share feedback, address concerns, or suggest ideas. Thirteen people attended, including the property owners, applicant, residents, business owners, elected officials, and city staff.

To accommodate those who might feel uncomfortable sharing their thoughts publicly, city staff provided a comment card to all attendees before presenting the project. Most attendees did not offer much feedback and attended primarily to understand the project details. However, one resident provided both verbal and written responses, expressing strong opposition to the project (Attachment 7). The resident argued that the site should remain non-residential to generate income for the city through sales taxes or transient occupancy tax. They contended that rezoning it for residential use would limit revenue and increase demands on city services, raising costs for taxpayers. Past rejections of commercial developments have already cost the city significant sales tax revenue.

The resident also noted interest from hotel groups in the parcel and mentioned that the current owner is in escrow with a developer who may seek city council support to change zoning for their project. Concerns included inadequate parking plans, increased sewer, traffic, water, and power demands, and safety issues related to parking. The area is not suited for Transit Oriented Development, and residential use could exacerbate parking and safety problems. 420

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
A legal notice was published in the Placentia News -Times on August 22, 2024. Notices were also sent to property owners within a 300 -foot radius of the subject property and posted at the Civic Center and on the City website on the same day. As of August 27, 2024, staff received two phone inquiries and written letters from adjacent neighbors expressing concerns about the development project. One phone inquiry came from an adjacent property owner concerned about the potential impact of the development on their tenant's operations. The other was from a representative of a neighboring business seeking additional information about the project and its status.

In addition, four written letters from a nearby resident and neighboring business owners expressed concerns about potential parking overflow onto their properties during both construction and future operations, as well as traffic impacts on S. Placentia Avenue and W. Orangethorpe Avenue (Attachment 7). A fourth letter, sent by a law firm, challenged the merits of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 2021-01. In response, the applicant has provided a rebuttal supporting the MND's conclusions and submitted updated data to reinforce their position (Attachment 12). City staff has no further comments on the fourth letter, as the environmental determinations of the MND have been deemed adequate.

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:

On July 9, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the proposed GPA, SPA, and DPR and to forward a recommendation to the City Council for final action. Through a unanimous vote, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the GPA, SPA, and DPR to the City Council (Resolution Adopted 5-0-0-2 as recommended).

CONCLUSION:

The proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA 2022-01), Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 2021- 01), and Development Plan Review (DPR 2021-02) for the mixed -use development on Orangethorpe Avenue aims to introduce a combination of residential and commercial uses, including parking structures. However, the project fails to adequately address potential impacts on the surrounding environment, infrastructure, and community. It should not be approved due to significant concerns regarding its alignment with the City's long-term sustainability goals, infrastructure capacity, and compatibility with the surrounding built environment. There are unresolved issues regarding whether the project can genuinely meet the City's objectives of maintaining a sustainable revenue stream while revitalizing the area. These concerns strongly suggest that the project may not be in the best interest of the City or its residents.

Attachments:

1. Resolution No. R-2024-56 City Council denial of General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022- 01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02.
421

City Council Agenda
September 3, 2024

2. Resolution No. R-2024-60 City Council Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No.

MND 2021-01 and Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-

02. 3. Ordinance No. O-2024-05 Relating to Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01.

4. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 2021-01, Initial Study, MND 2021-01, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), Public Comments and Responses, and Initial Study Appendix (httD:// www.placentia.org/index.aspx?NID=776)

5. Project Plans including the Site Plan, Floor Plans, Building Elevations, Preliminary Landscape Plan, Open Space Plan, Egress Plan, Fire Access Plan, Colored Renderings, Section Elevation Plans, Lighting Plans, Wall and Fence Plans, Colors Received and Dated June 5, 2024

6. Development Impact Analysis prepared by Jon Stover & Associates dated April 2024

7. Public Correspondence

8. Public Hearing Notification

9. Vicinity Map

10. Site Photographs

11. Development Proposals of Interest for Project Site

12.Applicant and Technical Team Responses/Comments

13. Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for July 9, 2024 422

RESOLUTION NO. R-2024-56

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

PLACENTIA, CALIFORNIA DENYING GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. GPA 2022-01, SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. SPA 2021-01, AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
REVIEW NO. DPR 2021-02 TO MODIFY THE GENERAL PLAN

LAND USE ELEMENT TO PERMIT MIXED -USE
(RESIDENTIAL -COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) AS A
PERMISSIBLE LAND USE CATEGORY WITHIN PARCEL 9 OF
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 5 BY AMENDING TABLES 2 -4 -SPECIFIC
PLANS, TABLE 2 -5 -GENERAL PLAN/ZONING
RELATIONSHIP -SPECIFIC PLANS, AND TABLE 2 -7 -

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION - POTENTIAL

DEVELOPMENT BUILDOUT, AND AMENDING SPECIFIC
PLAN NO. 5 TO ALLOW FOR MIXED -USE (RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) WITHIN SP -5 PARCEL 9

BOUNDARIES AND ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT

STANDARDS FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL USES, INCLUDING

BUT NOT LIMITED TO BUILDING SETBACKS, FLOOR AREA

RATIO, RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, DWELLING UNIT SIZE, IN

CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AND

OPERATION OF A FIVE -STORY MIXED -USE BUILDING
CONSISTING OF 248 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UP TO 3,000

SQUARE FEET OF GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL RETAIL
AND A 6 -LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE ON A 2.72 -ACRE
SITE, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 777 W.

ORANGETHORPE AVENUE AND 776 S. PLACENTIA
AVENUE (APN 339-112-27.

A. Recitals.

WHEREAS, Gilad Ganish, representing Orangethorpe Investment Partners, LLC, ("Applicant" hereinafter), regarding real property located 777 W. Orangethorpe Avenue and 776 S. Placentia Avenue (Attachment "A"), filed applications for approval of General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02, as described in the title of this Resolution.

Hereinafter, in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment and Development Plan Review requests are referred to as the "Applications"; and WHEREAS, on July 9, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Placentia conducted, and concluded, a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, and recommended that the City Council of the City of Placentia, deny General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02; and
Resolution No. R-2024-56

423

WHEREAS, an initial study was prepared to review and consider the environmental impacts of the General Plan Land Use Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, and the construction and operation of a 248 multi -family residential dwelling unit development, with up to 3,000 square feet of commercial retail space and a 6 -level parking structure on 2.72 -acres and associated improvements in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act as codified in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations ("CCR") Section 15000 et. seq., Public Resources Code Section 21000 et.seq. and the City of Placentia Environmental Guidelines; WHEREAS, the City of Placentia provided notice at least 10 days prior to the public hearing in accordance with California Government Code Section 65090 and the City of Placentia Municipal Code Sections 23.75.035 and 23.96.030 by posting at the Civic Center, publication in a local newspaper, and by direct U.S. mail to all property owners within 300 -feet of the proposed project boundaries; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

B. Resolution.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Placentia as follows:

Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds that the Project is incompatible and inconsistent with the City of Placentia General Plan as set forth below:

Land Use Element. The proposed mixed -use development project is unlikely to be compatible with the surrounding land uses. Introducing a high -density, residential mixed -use development into an area primarily characterized by light industrial, hospitality, commercial, and low -density residential uses may lead to conflicts. Inadequate attention has been given to establishing a smooth transition between these diverse land uses. Additionally, there is a noticeable absence of vision planning aimed at accommodating residents intending to live within the project. This includes the creation of a streetscape conducive to walkability and multimodal traffic flow. The proposed development will be inconsistent with the adopted General Plan Land Use designation of the project area of "Specific Plan", General Plan Housing Element and the Parcel No. 9 allowable land uses of SP -5 and Land Use Element Goals and Policies:

A. The project is deemed to conflict with the goals and policies outlined in the City's General Plan Land Use Element as follows:

A. Goal LU-2: Ensure that new development is compatible with surrounding land uses, the circulation network, and existing development constraints.

Resolution No. R-2024-56

424

B. Policy LU-2.1: Where residential/commercial Mixed -Use is permitted ensure compatible integration of adjacent uses to minimize conflicts through site planning, development standards, and architectural compatibility.

C. Policy LU-2.2: Develop residential and commercial design guidelines to both protect existing development and allow for future development that is attractive, compatible, and sensitive to surrounding uses.

D. Policy LU-2.4: Large, contiguous vacant or underutilized parcels should be comprehensively planned for development to be compatible with adjacent neighborhoods.

E. Policy LU-2.21: Ensure development provides adequate infrastructure improvements area provided to support new multi -family development, including on -site recreational amenities.

F. Policy LU-5.6: Improve roadway corridor aesthetics with implementation of a streetscape program that includes median island beautification and enhanced City entry locations.

B. Mobility Element. Aside from the onsite improvements to accommodate the proposed mixed -use development, there will be minimal public enhancements within the public right-of-way to promote alternative transportation options. A pull-out stop street cutout is provided for emergency vehicles along S. Placentia Avenue, but beyond this, very few public improvements are proposed to protect pedestrians and facilitate multi -modal transportation. The project lacks protected bike lanes, streetlights, street furniture, bicycle racks, and street trees. Despite being adjacent to two major thoroughfares, the development includes minimal improvements to encourage walkability and bicycle ridership in and around the site.

Additionally, the proposed reduction in parking requirements below those specified in the City's TOD District is likely to lead to parking overflow onto neighboring streets and properties. This issue has been observed by city staff in similar developments in areas better suited to encourage walkability and multi -modal transportation. Unlike other developments in the city that were the first of their kind, this particular project does not feature any of the master planning efforts that made those developments successful.

Key missing documents include a streetscape master plan, infrastructure planning, transportation/mobility planning, and human/walkability planning.

Additionally, the development lacks fiscal planning, as it does not include specialized Development Impact Fees or a Community Facilities District to ensure its long-term fiscal sustainability.
1) Policy MOB -2.2: Ensure adequate capacity to accommodate the traffic generated by land uses within the City, while balancing the needs of the pedestrian, cyclists and other multi -modal users.

Resolution No. R-2024-56

425

2) Policy MOB -2.6: Require new development to conform to the standards and criteria of the City of Placentia and other mandated programs. This includes mitigation of traffic impacts to the surrounding street system as well as ensuring new developments manage their parking onsite with no impact to surrounding public streets.
3) Policy MOB -2.13: Encourage the development of aesthetic streetscape to promote a positive City image and provide visual relief and traffic calming benefits.
4) Policy MOB -3.4: Implement adequate sidewalks and crosswalks to meet the requires uses and needs, which serve to encourage alternative modes of transportation.
5) Policy MOB -4.14: Require that new streets or developments contain adequate right-of-way for bicycle lanes, where appropriate.

C. Economic Development Element. The proposed mixed -use development project entails the permanent removal of a sustainable tax -producing property crucial for funding city services and programs. Currently, the city allocates 3- 5% of its land area to commercial uses. Converting this land for residential purposes jeopardizes future revenue streams, potentially transitioning from a source of income to an expense for the city in the near future. This proposed project fails to align with the objectives outlined in the General Plan's Economic Development Element, directly conflicting with the plan's aim to uphold and sustain viable revenue streams.
1) Action ED 2.2-1: Placentia's business attraction efforts should be targeted primarily towards businesses which have the following characteristics, in order of priority: 1) Sales tax generating; 2) Property tax enhancement; 3) Other revenue enhancements; and 4) Will result in infrastructure improvement.

D. Housing Element. The proposed mixed -use development project lacks provisions for housing that sufficiently cater to varying income levels in terms of affordability, size, and type. There are no affordable units planned, and unit costs will be subject to market forces, exacerbating the scarcity of affordable housing units. Additionally, minimal effort has been made to cultivate a sense of community for future residents. There is a lack of long-term planning to enhance walkability and establish a multimodal streetscape. Furthermore, the development fails to integrate with nearby residential neighborhoods, hindering connectivity and cohesion within the community.
1) Goal HE -1: Housing Supply and Variety
Resolution No. R-2024-56

426

Develop and maintain an adequate supply of housing that varies sufficiently in cost, size, type, and tenure to meet the economic and social needs of existing and future residents.
2) Program HE -1.13: Development of Housing for Larger Families The City shall encourage incorporation of units with 3 or more bedrooms in for -sale and rental housing developments to accommodate the needs of larger families through activities such as technical assistance, expediated processing, and flexibility in development standards. 3) Goal HE -3: Neighborhood Preservation
Encourage activities that conserve and improve exiting residential neighborhoods including a housing stock that is well maintained and structurally sound, and with adequate services and facilities provided; and having a sense of community identity.

E. Health, Wellness, & Environmental Justice Element. The proposed mixed -use development does not align with several city policies aimed at sustainable urban development and public health. Its location in a non-residential improved area, rather than on vacant or underutilized parcels, contradicts Policy HW/EJ-

4.1. The project fails to enhance streetscape access, safety, and experience as required by Policy HW/EJ-5.9, due to the absence of essential infrastructure such as protected bike lanes, streetlights, and pedestrian amenities.

Moreover, the project does not support land use patterns that reduce driving and promote walking, cycling, and transit use, falling short of Policies HW/EJ-

10.1 and HW/EJ-13.10. Its proximity to major thoroughfares potentially exposes residents to high traffic -related pollution, conflicting with Policy HW/EJ-12.3. Additionally, the development does not adequately address air quality concerns as per Policy HW/EJ-12.9, nor does it consider the policy of discouraging truck routes near residential areas (Policy HW/EJ-10.2). Overall, the project fails to meet the city's goals for higher -density infill development, improved streetscapes, reduced reliance on cars, and protection of public health and safety.
1) Policy HW/EJ-4.1: Provide higher -density and infill mixed -use development affordable to all incomes on vacant and underutilized parcels throughout the City.
2) Policy HW/EJ -5.9: Continue to implement streetscape improvements to enhance access, lighting, safety and experience for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and motorists. Focus improvements in areas with the highest need, such as Old Town, DACs, mixed -use corridors, and key intersections.
3) Policy HW/EJ -10.1: Promote land use patterns that reduce driving and promote walking, cycling, and transit use.

Resolution No. R-2024-56

427

4) Policy HW/EJ - 10.2: Discourage locating truck routes on primarily residential streets and in DACs.
5) Policy HW/EJ- 12.3: Avoid locating new homes, schools, childcare and elder care facilities, and health care facilities within 500 feet of freeways, urban roads with 100, 000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day.
6) Policy HW/EJ - 12.9: The City shall continue to minimize stationary source pollution through the following:

1. Ensure the industrial and commercial land uses area
meeting existing SCAQMD air quality thresholds by
adhering to established rules and regulations

2. Encourage the use of new technology to neutralize
harmful criteria pollutants from stationary sources.

3. Reduce exposure of the City's sensitive receptors to poor air quality nodes through smart land use
decisions.
7) Policy HW/EJ -13.10: Promote land use patterns that are transit, bicycle, and pedestrian -oriented and have a mix of uses, especially neighborhood serving businesses, within walking distance of homes and workplaces. Encourage muti-modal transportation with land use patterns that are transit, bicycle and pedestrian -oriented, and have a mix of uses.

Section 2. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the City Council hereby recommends denial of:

A. GPA 2022-01 General Plan Amendment. Deny an amendment to the City of Placentia General Plan Land Use Element to allow mixed use (residential - commercial development) as a permissible land use category within Parcel No. 9 of Specific Plan No. 5, pertaining to the General Plan Land Use tables referred to as "Table 2-4 Specific Plans", "Table 2-5 General/Zoning Relationship — Specific Plans", and "Table 2-7 General Plan Lans Uses Designation — Potential Development Buildout" as set forth in Exhibit "A" — Amendment of the City of Placentia General Plan Proposed Land Use Tables in accordance with California Government Code Section 65100-65763.

B. SPA 2021-01 Specific Plan Amendment. Deny an amendment of the City of Placentia Municipal Code by modifying Chapter 23.102 SP -5 to allow mixed use (residential -commercial development) within the SP -5 Parcel 9 boundaries and establish development standards for new residential uses, including but not limited to gross lot area, FAR, height, residential density, dwelling unit size, parking, setbacks and lot coverage. An amendment to the SP -5 is also required to allow for parking structures as a permitted use in Parcel 9 of the City of Placentia Municipal Code that said amendment to the specific plan and Resolution No. R-2024-56

428

municipal code will be inconsistent with the latest adopted General Plan, including the certified 6th Cycle of the Housing Element.

C. DPR 2021-02 Development Plan Review. The development does not meet the current requirements of PMC Chapter 23.105 of the Zoning Code (SP -5 Development Standards) and PMC Chapter 23.75 (Development Plan Review). As such, the City Council finds as follows:
1) Without the proposed Specific Plan Amendment, the project fails to align with the criteria set forth in PMC Chapter 23.105 and Section 23.75.020.

Residential and parking structures are not sanctioned land uses under these regulations. Moreover, the proposal for 248 multi -family residential units, coupled with a maximum of 3,000 square feet for commercial retail space and a 6 -level parking structure, deviates from the prescribed development standards for "Parcel No. 9" in terms of setbacks, parking provisions, and maximum building height; and,
2) Conditions of Approval have not been prepared for a recommendation of denial.

Section 3. No further action is required under the California Environmental Quality Act as Public Resources Code section 21800(b)(5) states this division does not apply to any of the following activities: "(5) Projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves."
Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution and/or the documents in support of this resolution is/are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution.

Section 5. The City Council shall:
a. Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
b. Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to the applicant at the address of record set forth in the Application.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of September 2024.

Jeremy Yamaguchi, Mayor
ATTEST:

Resolution No. R-2024-56

429

Robert S. McKinnell, City Clerk
I, Robert S. McKinnell, City Clerk of the City of Placentia, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Placentia held on the 3rd day of June 2024 by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAINED: Councilmembers:

ATTEST:

Robert S. McKinnell, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Christian L. Bettenhausen, City Attorney
Resolution No. R-2024-56

430

RESOLUTION NO. R-2024-60

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

PLACENTIA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING INITIAL
STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. MND
2021-01 FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GPA
2022-01, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. SPA 2021-01,
AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW NO. DPR 2021-02

PREPARED IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ("CEQA"), CALIFORNIA
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE §§ 21000, ET SEQ., AND THE

ENVIRONMENTAL GUIDELINES OF THE CITY OF
PLACENTIA, AND ADOPTING GPA 2022-01 MODIFYING THE

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT TO ALLOW MIXED -

USE (RESIDENTIAL -COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) AS A
PERMISSIBLE LAND USE CATEGORY WITHIN PARCEL 9 OF
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 5 BY AMENDING TABLES 2-4 -
SPECIFIC PLANS, TABLE 2-5 - GENERAL PLAN/ZONING
RELATIONSHIP -SPECIFIC PLANS, AND TABLE 2-7 -

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION - POTENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT BUILDOUT, AND APPROVING DPR 2021-02

FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF A FIVE -
STORY MIXED USE BUILDING CONSISTING OF 248
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UP TO 3,000 SQUARE FEET OF
GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND A 7 -LEVEL
PARKING STRUCTURE ON 2.72 -ACRE SITE, LOCATED AT
777 W. ORANGETHORPE AVENUE AND 776 S. PLACENTIA
AVENUE (APN 339-112-27).

A. Recitals.

WHEREAS, Gilad Ganish, representing Orangethorpe Investment Partners, LLC, ("Applicant" hereinafter), regarding real property located 777 W. Orangethorpe Avenue and 776 S. Placentia Avenue (Attachment "A"), filed applications for approval of General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02, as described in the title of this Resolution.

Hereinafter, in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment and Development Plan Review requests are referred to as the "Applications"; and WHEREAS, on July 9, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Placentia conducted, and concluded, a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, and recommended that the City Council of the City of Placentia, deny General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02; and
WHEREAS, an initial study was prepared to review and consider the environmental impacts of the General Plan Land Use amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, and the construction and operation of a 248 multi -family residential dwelling unit development, with up to 3,000 square feet of commercial retail space and a 7 -level 431

parking structure on 2.72 -acres and associated improvements in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the City of Placentia Environmental Guidelines as codified in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations ("CCR") Section 15000 et. seq., Public Resources Code Section 21000 et.seq. and the City of Placentia Environmental Guidelines;
WHEREAS, the City of Placentia provided notice at least 10 days prior to the public hearing in accordance with California Government Code Section 65090 and the City of Placentia Municipal Code Sections 23.75.035 and 23.96.030 by posting at the Civic Center, publication in a local newspaper, and by direct U.S. mail to all property owners within 300 -feet of the proposed project boundaries; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

B. Resolution.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Placentia as follows:

Section 1. The City Council certifies Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2021- 01 as described in Attachment "A", was prepared in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., and the Environmental Guidelines of the City of Placentia and make the following additional findings:
a. Facts support the above -specified findings are contained in Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 2021-01, the staff report and exhibits, and information provided during the public hearing conducted with respect to the Application and Mitigated Negative Declaration. Mitigation Measures are intended to mitigate and/or avoid environmental effects identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
b. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 2021-01 contains Mitigation Measures and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Attachment "B", and by this reference incorporated herein. By adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No MND 2021-01, the Mitigation Measures and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are also adopted for the project.

Section 2. General Plan Amendment. The City Council approves General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 to the City of Placentia General Plan Land Use Element to allow mixed use (residential -commercial development) as a permissible land use category within Parcel No. 9 of Specific Plan No. 5, pertaining to the General Plan Land Use tables referred to as "Table 2-4 Specific Plans", "Table 2-5 General/Zoning Relationship — Specific Plans", and "Table 2-7 General Plan Lans Uses Designation — Potential Development Buildout" as set forth in Attachment "C" — Amendment of the City of Placentia General Plan Proposed Land Use Tables in accordance with California Government Code Section 65100-65763.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60

432

Section 3. Development Plan Review. The City Council approves Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02, as modified herein, and specifically subject to the conditions set forth in Attachment "D" of this Resolution and by this reference incorporated herein. The development, as modified by the attached Conditions of Approval and Standard Development Requirements (Attachment "D"), meets the overall requirements of PMC Chapter 23.105 of the Zoning Code (SP -5 Development Standards) and PMC Chapter 23.75 (Development Plan Review). As such, this Council finds as follows:
a. The project meets or exceeds the criteria established in PMC Chapter 23.105 and Section 23.75.020. Specifically, it adheres to the minimum setbacks, parking requirements, maximum building height, and maximum density development standards. The amendments to the SP -5, particularly concerning the Parcel No. 9 subarea, have been tailored to fully accommodate all improvements associated with the development. This includes the construction of 248 multi -family residential dwelling units, up to 3,000 square feet of commercial retail space, and a 7 -level parking structure This comprehensive approach ensures that the project not only complies with but surpasses the stipulated standards, providing a well -integrated and sustainable development that meets the needs of the community.; and,
b. Conditions of Approval have been prepared as necessary to prevent: (A) detriment to the health, safety or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed development or within the city, or (B) injurious to the property or improvements within the neighborhood or within the city as a Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program associated with MND 2021-01 contains activities that will mitigate all associated adverse impacts with the mixed -use development project; and,
c. The proposed development will be consistent with the latest adopted General Plan Land Use designation of the project area of "Specific Plan" and the Parcel No. 9 allowable land uses of SP -5 as amended by GPA 2022-01 and SPA 2021-01; and,
d. Conditions necessary to secure the purposes of Section 23.75.020, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, are made part of the development approval.

Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution and/or the documents in support of this resolution is/are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution.

Section 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth herein, the City Council hereby approves General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01 and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02 as modified herein, and specifically subject to the conditions set forth in Attachment "D" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, and recommends adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 2021-01.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60

433

Section 6. The City Council shall:
a. Certify to the adoption of this Resolution; and
b. Forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, to the applicant at the address of record set forth in the Application.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of September 2024.

Jeremy Yamaguchi, Mayor
ATTEST:

Robert S. McKinnell, City Clerk
I, Robert S. McKinnell, City Clerk of the City of Placentia, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Placentia held on the 3rd day of June 2024 by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAINED: Councilmembers:

ATTEST:

Robert S. McKinnell, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Christian L. Bettenhausen, City Attorney
Resolution No. PC -2024-60

434

Attachment A: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 2021-01 for General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, and Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02
( https://placentia.org/DocumentCenter/View/11730/OrangethorpePl acentia-Mixed-Use-Project-IS-MND-Dated-November-29-
2023?bidld=)
Attachment B Appendices — Orangethorpe/Placentia Mixed Use Project — MND 2021-01 ( https://olacentia.org/776/Environmental-Documents) Attachment C Amendment to General Plan Land Use Element Attachment D: Conditions of Approval for Development Plan Review No. DPR 2022- 04 & Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 19250
Resolution No. PC -2024-60

435

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Attachment C
Amendment to General Plan Land Use Element
2 Land Use

CITY OF PLACENTIA
436

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Contents

2.1 Introduction 2-1

2.2 Authority for the Element 2-2

2.3 Summary of Existing Land Uses 2-2

2.4 Relationship to Other Plans and Programs 2-8

2.5 Land Use Plan 2-15

2.6 Land Use Intensity/Density 2-27

2.7 Goals and Policies 2-30
tables & exhibits
Table 2-1. Existing Land Use Designation 2-3
Table 2-2. Summary of Vacant Land by Land Use Designation 2-4 Exhibit 2-1 Existing General Plan Land Use Map 2-5
Exhibit 2-2 Proposed General Plan Land Use Map 2-6
Table 2-3. General Plan/Zoning Relationships 2-9
Table 2-4. Specific Plans 2-10
Exhibit 2-3 Specific Plan Parcels 2-13
Table 2-5. General Plan/Zoning Relationship —Specific Plans 2-15 Table 2-6. Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations 2-16 Exhibit 2-4 Vacant Parcels 2-17
Figure 2-1 Low -Density Residential 2-19
Figure 2-2 Medium -Density Residential 2-20
Figure 2-3 High -Density Residential 2-21
Figure 2-4 Commercial 2-22
Figure 2-5 Old Town 2-23
Figure 2-6 Manufacturing 2-24
Figure 2-7 Open Space 2-26

CITY OF PLACENTIA
437

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Table 2-7. General Plan Land Use Designation — Potential Development Buildout 2-27
2 —ii

CITY OF PLACENTIA
438

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
The majority of vacant residential parcels are located in low -density residential areas.

Table 2-1. Existing Land Use Designation
Land Use Percentage 1 Number of Units
Designation Existing Acreage
Low Density 1266 30% 6,900
Residential
Medium Density 400 9% 3,6762
Residential
High Density 136 3% 2,503
Residential
Commercial 137 3%
Planned Community
(Alta Vista Golf 337 8% 1,614
Course)
Old Town 29 1%* 285
Transit Oriented 22 1%* 11
Development (TOD)
Commercial- 47 1%
Manufacturing
Office 32 1%*
Industrial 327 8%
Schools 212 5%
Park 94 2%
Specific Plan 309 7% 2,281
ROW- Railroad 25 1%*
ROW - Parkway 18 10/0*
Vista
ROW- Local streets 798 19%
ROW - Freeways,
Flood Control, 49 1%
Highway
2-3

CITY OF PLACENTIA
439

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Land Use
Designation
Existing Acreage
Percentage' Number of Units

TOTAL AREA OF

TOTAL AREA OF
3,348
4,238 100% 17,270
' Percentage ages based on 4,238 acres of total land area within City limits, which includes the right of way acreage. %age figures are rounded to closest whole numbers. The symbol means that the %age is less than 1%.
2 569 mobile homes are principally located in the Medium -Density district.

Table 2-2. Summary of Vacant Land by Land Use Designation Land Use Designation
Vacant Areas Vacant Parcels
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Commercial
Old Town
Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
Office
Commercial -Manufacturing
Industrial
Specific Plan

3.6 24

6.1 8

5.2 3

2.3 3

0.2 3

0.4 1

1.4 2

8.4 5

5.7 4

21.2 65
Total

54.5 118
Source: City of Placentia, 2018

CITY OF PLACENTIA
440

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Note: 1.3% of total city is vacant
2-4

CITY OF PLACENTIA
441

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
1 4 7° Fr A A7 ° Al AL Eawce: . d Raomha, C -SOS M!S
Exhibit 2-2
R1rh dRr1 rapr!, Rrlehr Fitturx.

LEGEND
Land Use DE6a rum
n jay, [3ersltyResldeidd 1.1266 aces)
I I JAerfurn Oetidcy Readerflat j333 sags)
iEgh❑ risty IRscl arit4al1151acres)
=Rayed Coninentty @23 axed}
Ogrre [2B acres}
- Conmerdat {137 ages}
Carnmemli-Maraufadrrtrg t4a ales}
rrv-rF.rtat 1315 axes]
- Maras;99 ac¢ESI
n Da OrAayVlE;tafl8aces)
PTO Ralriatl X2.5 awes}
I I uzacisdnsfWkciat 226 dries}
.r�EdtIC Plan 1322 acres)
Cid Towel iZ aaes;
T0D r22 acres;.

9.aoroad
petty 9remdaay
Lard use de:E grsallors a rmitty r+ai
assigned to specmv properles
I I LI *Erx
- Mixed -use
0 1100 --.

Proposed General Plan Land Use Map
2-6

CITY OF PLACENTIA

CITY OF PLACENTIA
442

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
• The Safety Element identifies potential hazards that may occur within the land use planning areas and serves to influence the location of different types of land use to avoid hazardous areas.
• Noise contours identified in the Noise Element are used as a guide to establish the land use patterns to ensure that future development minimizes exposure of residents to excessive noise.

Relationshin to Placentia's Zoning Code
The City of Placentia Zoning Code is a regulatory document that provides a means to implement the policies contained in the City's General Plan. While the General Plan provides long-range and broad categories of land use, the Zoning Code provides specific development requirements, such as density, height, setbacks, lot coverage, and development character. Similar to the General Plan, a Zoning Map accompanies the Zoning Code and defines the boundaries of each Zoning District.

The City of Placentia's Zoning Code (Title 23 of the Placentia Municipal Code) establishes land use zoning districts that provide for uniform regulations to properties similarly situated within each zoning classification. State of California law requires the City's Zoning Code be in conformance with the General Plan. Therefore, any land use designation amendments that will become inconsistent with Title 23 of the Placentia Municipal Code will have to be reconciled. This means that a series of Zoning Map Changes will need to occur to make the zoning of certain properties consistent with the amended land use designation.

The relationship between the General Plan land use designations and zoning districts is shown in Table 2-3, General Plan/Zoning Relationships. The table indicates how properties should be zoned to be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map.

Table 2-3. General Plan/Zoning Relationships
Compatible Zoning District(s)
General Plan Land
Use Designation
Low Density
Residential

H-
O
Li
•Ti
0 I C-2
F
O
O
0 C -M
I PMD
0_o
Z
o
PUD
•
Medium Density
Residential
•
•
-
High Density
Residential
Commercial
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2-9

CITY OF PLACENTIA
443

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Old Town
•
Transit Oriented
Development
•
Mixed -Use I
•
•
•
•
•
•
Live/Work I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Commercial-
Manufacturing
•
Office
•
Industrial I
•
•
•
Schools/
Institutional
•
Parkway Vista
•
Parks
•
Relationship to Specific Planb
Specific Plans are designed to implement General Plan goals and policies by designating land uses, densities, development standards and design standards in more specific detail. A specific plan district addresses smaller areas that have unique qualities and require focused planning attention. The City of Placentia has adopted several specific plan zoning districts in the Zoning Code. These Specific Plan districts are shown in Table 2-4 below and on Exhibit 2-3 and listed below. The relationship between the General Plan land use designations and the specific plan zoning districts is shown in Table 2-5, General Plan/Zoning Relationships - Specific Plans.

Table 2-4. Specific Plans
Name of Specific Plan Description of Specific Plan
Specific Plan 1
The purpose of this specific plan is to permit the
adaptive re -use of an existing pioneer estate house
for commercial purposes in a manner which will
2-10

CITY OF PLACENTIA
444

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Name of Specific Plan Description of Specific Plan
Specific Plan 2
Since the Lewis Lemke House located at 414 North
Placentia Avenue is of local historical architectural
significance and is representative of a significant
period of local history, the purpose of this specific
plan is to provide standards whereby it shall be
renovated, restored, operated and maintained in a
manner to preserve its historical architectural
characteristics.

Specific Plan 3
The purpose of this specific plan is to provide an area for senior citizen board and care facilities and senior apartments which shall be compatible with the
surrounding residential development and is designed
specifically for the needs of the elderly.

Specific Plan 4
The purpose of this specific plan is to provide
apartments in a medium density residential setting
that will be affordable to lower -income families for a minimum of thirty (30) years. Special development
standards are applied to further this purpose and to
allow development of a parcel that is impacted by
considerable physical constraints.

Specific Plan 5
The specific plan is intended to provide a site for
retailers and businesses, which through the
characteristics of their respective services offered,
cater to the entire community. This specific plan will
also -provide sites for hic h -density, mixed -use
residential and commercial development at Parcel 9.

Specific Plan 6
Specific Plan 7
The purpose of this specific plan is to provide single- family detached housing of an alternative design
while maintaining as many R-1 development
standards as possible: to provide private and
common recreation opportunities, mitigate impacts
from noise and oil production and provide safe
vehicle and pedestrian circulation.

The purpose of this specific plan is to assure the
consistent development of the East Placentia
specific plan area in a manner which meets the
growing housing needs of Placentia while adapting to
the special characteristics of the land available for
residential and commercial development
2-11

CITY OF PLACENTIA
445

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Name of Specific Plan Description of Specific Plan
Specific Plan 8
The purpose of this specific plan is to provide for
cluster single-family detached housing units. There
is private fee ownership of the lots in Specific Plan 8, with the majority of the lots configured in a cluster
arrangement, and with many of the remaining row
lots offering a golf course view.

Specific Plan 9
The purpose of this specific plan is to provide an area for a senior apartment complex, which shall be
compatible with the surrounding golf course and
residential development and is designed specifically
for the needs of senior citizens.

Specific Plan 10
The purpose of this specific plan is to provide for a
single-family detached residential neighborhood plus
common area open space and improvements. There
is private fee ownership of the lots in Specific Plan 10 with common areas owned and maintained by a
homeowner's association.
2-12

CITY OF PLACENTIA
446

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Michael Baker

PLACENTIA
Rich Heritage, Bright Future
LEGEND
Specific Plan (322.21 acres)
Other Land Use (3,049.87 acres)
H- I Railroad
I:7 1 City Boundary
0 1100 2200
Feet
Specific Plan Parcels
INTERNATIONAL ' Source: City of Placentia. 2018
2-13

CITY OF PLACENTIA
447

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Table 2-5. General Plan/Zoning Relationship —Specific Plans Compatible Zoning Districts
General Plan Land Use
Designation
Low Density Residential
r;
a
U)
1 N
a
cn
C
a
a
cn
'n
a
cn
`O
a
v)
N-
a
cn
oo
cL
v)
o'
-
cn
o
a
•
Medium Density Residential
•
High Density Residential
•
Office
II
•
Commercial
•
•
Day Care/Assisted Living
•
Oil Extraction
F
•
Open Space
•
Flood Control
•
Source: City of Placentia, May 2018

2.5 LAND USE PLAN
Land Use Designations
General Plan land use designations describe the type and intensity of development allowed in a specific area. While terms like "residential", "commercial", or "industrial" are generally understood, State General Plan law requires a clear and concise description of the land use categories that are depicted on the General Plan Land Use Map (refer to Exhibit 2-4, General Plan Land Use Map). The General Plan Land Use Map indicates the location of the land use designations within the City. The acreages of the various land uses on the General Plan Land Use Map are presented in Table 2-6, General Plan Land Use Designations.
2-15

CITY OF PLACENTIA
448

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Table 2-6. Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use Designation
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Planned Community
Commercial
Old Town
Commercial -Manufacturing
Mixed -Use
Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
Live Work
Office
Industrial
Schools/Industrial
Parks
ROW - Freeways, Flood Control, Highway
ROW - Parkway Vista
ROW- Local streets
ROW- Railroad
Specific Plan

TOTAL AREA OF CITY
Approximate
Acreage
Percentage 1
1266 30%
393
9%
151 4%
320 8%
137
3%
29 1%*
44 1%
0 0%
22 1%*
0 0%
26 1%*
315
7%
225
5%
99 2%
49 1%
18 1%*
798 19%
1%*
25 322
7%
4,238 100%
Source: City of Placentia, May 2018
'Percentages based on 4,238 acres of total land area within City limits, which includes the right of way acreage. %age figures are rounded to closest whole numbers. The symbol means that the %age is less than 1%.

The General Plan Land Use Map indicates the location of General Plan land use designations within the City. Each designation is defined below. It is a State requirement that the land use designations and the City's zoning districts are to be consistent with each other. Therefore, within each land use designation definition are a list of consistent zoning districts.

CITY OF PLACENTIA
449

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
The Parks land use designation is intended for recreational type areas such as City parks. Open space should be located in residential areas so that recreational opportunities can be in close proximity to residents. The Parks designation makes up approximately 99 acres, or 2% of the City's total acreage.

Zoning districts compatible with the Open Space designation include Combining Parkway Vista (P -V) and Combining Oil (O and O-1).

Figure 2-7
• Parkway (P -V). The Parkway Vista classification creates landscaped thoroughfares with common setback requirements for all districts that abut designated thoroughfares.
• Combining Oil (O and O-1). The Combining Oil "O" classification provides for the use of land or the surface thereof in connection with the removal of minerals. The Combining Oil "O-1" classification provides for the use of land or the surface thereof in connection with the removal of minerals, providing for the maintenance and operation of existing wells, but limited from any new surface location.

Specific Plans
Currently, the City has ten specific plan areas, covering approximately 322 acres.

The specific plans are principally for residential development, although two allow for commercial. Two residential specific plans allow for home occupations on the same property as historic structures and two allow for day care or assisted living. Another permits residential in conjunction with oil extraction. The Specific Plan designation 2-26

CITY OF PLACENTIA
450

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE

2.6 LAND USE INTENSITY/DENSITY
State General Plan law requires that the Land Use Element indicate the maximum building intensities/densities allowed in the City. Each land use designation listed above contains corresponding intensity/density standards.

The term "intensity" refers to the degree of development based on a building's characteristics such as, floor area ratio (FAR), building height and lot coverage.

Intensity is most often used to describe non-residential development. The measure of intensity, known as floor area ratio (FAR), provides the most convenient method of describing levels of development. The floor area ratio is the relationship of total gross floor area of all buildings on a lot in square feet to the total land area of the lot in square feet expressed as a ratio. The FAR describes use intensity on a lot, but not the actual building height and lot coverage.

The term "density" is a measure of the population or residential development capacity of a designated land use. Residential density is described in terms of dwelling units per gross area (du/ac). A dwelling unit is a building, or a portion of a building used for human habitation and may vary considerably in size (square footage). For purposes of calculating population, an average number of persons per acre or dwelling unit for all types and sizes of dwelling units is assumed.

Table 2-7 includes the density or intensity standard for each land use designation and the corresponding future development potential. However, given the limited amount of vacant land (54 acres), the level of existing, stable development, and the historical development patterns over the last three decades, the buildout is not likely to be realized.

Table 2-7. General Plan Land Use Designation — Potential Development Buildout
Density
Standard Intensity
Land Use Designation (du/ac) or Standard
Total Acres (FAR) 1
(acs)
Low Density Residential
Medium Density
Residential
6 du/ac
15 du/ac
Ultimate
Buildout
Dwelling
Units2
7,596
Ultimate
Build Out
Square
Footage2
5,895
High Density Residential 25 du/ac 3,775
Commercial 137 acs 1.0 FAR 5,967, 720
Old Town3 30-65 du/ac 810 181,250
2-27

CITY OF PLACENTIA
451

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Density
Standard Intensity
Land Use Designation (du/ac) or Standard
Total Acres (FAR) 1
(acs)
I ransit urlentea
Development (TOD)
Commercial -
Manufacturing
Office
Industrial
Specific Plans5
Residential Planned
Community
65-95 du/ac
44 acs 1.0 FAR
25 acs 1.0 FAR
315 acs 1.0 FAR
322 acs Varies

7.1 du/ac
Ultimate Ultimate
Buildout Build Out
Dwelling Square
Units2 Footage2
564 30,000
1,910,640
1,089, 900
13,721,400
3,690 3 938 570,200
2,272
TOTAL
2',602 24,850 23,471,110
2-28

CITY OF PLACENTIA
452

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Density
Standard Intensity
Land Use Designation (du/ac) or Standard
Total Acres (FAR) 1
(acs)
Ultimate
Buildout
Dwelling
Units2
Ultimate
Build Out
Square
Footage2

CITY OF PLACENTIA
453

Source: City of Placentia,
May 2018 Notes:

I Density standards represent the maximum gross density allowed. Net densities would be lower, dependent on zoning requirements and other regulatory considerations that limit the full development potential. 2 Ultimate dwelling units and square footage estimates based upon existing acreage multiplied by gross density/intensity standards. The realistic buildout for the city is represented in the Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan update.
3 Based on the Negative Declaration, (ND 2017-02), July 2017 the Old Town area would consist of the addition of 525 residential units, 85,000 square feet of commercial use, 40,000 square feet of retail use, and a 501 room hotel to the existing area. The existing number of units is 285. 4 Based on Mitigated Negative Declaration, (MND 2017-01), April 2017, which assumed a 5,000 net vehicle trip cap. The cap of 5,000 vehicle trips (net) at buildout assumes that an estimated 752 dwelling units (DU) could be constructed under an all residential development scenario and stay within the 5,000 -vehicle trip cap or, alternatively, a mix of 75% residential (564 DU) and 25% commercial (30,000 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA)) could also stay within the 5,000 -vehicle trip cap. This table assumes the mix scenario. Any additional development above the 5,000 -trip cap would require further environmental analysis and is not permitted until that is completed.
s Specific Plan category represents both residential and commercial development and was calculated taking potential buildout of each specific plan area and then totaling, as below:

SP 1- SFD=1 Unit
SP 2- SFD =1 Unit
SP 3- Assisted Living - 5.80 45du/ac for 261 units
SP 4- 8 affordable units
SP 5- 19 acres of retail, hotel, dealership 0.5 FAR assumption for 413,820 sf of commercial. 2.72 of the 19 acres also allows mixed -use, commercial/residential development.

SP 6- 4.1 acres, 6 du/ac for 24 units
SP 7- 300 acres residential and commercial:
o Low Density -163.85 ac 6 du/ac = 983 units
o Medium Density -11.40 ac at 15du/ac = 171 units
o Medium -High Density-36.97ac at 20dulac (assumption) =739 units o High Density-37.34ac at 25dulac = 933 units
o Commercial-7.18ac 0.5 FAR (assumption)=156,380sf
SP 8- 7 acres at 10.3 du/ac = 72 units
SP 9- 10.35 ac at 40.5 du/ac = 419 units
SP 10- 7.82 ac at 10 du/ac = 78 units
Resolution No. PC -2023-07
Attachment "A"

454

RICH HERITAGE • BRIGHT FUTURE
Resolution No. PC -2023-07
Attachment "A"

455

Attachment "D"
Special Conditions of Approval and Standard Development Requirements for General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01 and Development Plan Review No.

DPR 2021-02
777 W. Orangethorpe Avenue & 776 S. Placentia Avenue
(APN 339-112-27)

SPECIAL CONDITIONS
If the above referenced application is approved, applicant and/or property owner shall comply with the Special Conditions listed below and the Standard Development Requirements attached.

ALL THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND STANDARD

DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE FULLY COMPLIED WITH FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW TO CONTINUE IN GOOD STANDING.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT - PLANNING DIVISION:

1. Development Plan Review No. DPR 2021-02 is valid for a period of twenty-four (24) months from the date of final determination, unless extended pursuant to Placentia Municipal Code (PMC) Section 23.75.080. If the development of the site and/or use approved by this action is not established by obtaining Building Permits within such a period of time, this approval shall be terminated and shall be null and void, unless an extension is applied for and approved.

2. Failure to abide by and faithfully comply with any and all conditions attached to this action, or with any federal, state, or local law, shall constitute grounds for revocation of said action by the City of Placentia Planning Commission.

3. The applicant shall, as a condition of project approval, at its sole expense, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents and consultants from any claim, action, proceeding, liability or judgment against the City, its officers, employees, agents and/or consultants, which action seeks to set aside, void, annul or otherwise challenge any approval by the City Council, Planning Commission, or other City decision -making body or City staff action concerning applicant's project. The applicant shall pay the City's defense costs, including attorney fees and all other litigation -related expenses, and shall reimburse the City for any and all court costs, which the City may be required to pay as a result of such defense. The applicant shall further pay any adverse financial award which may issue against the City including but not limited to any award of attorney fees to a party challenging such project approval. The City shall retain the right to select its counsel of choice in any action referred to herein. The City agrees to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim filed against the City and to fully cooperate in the defense of any such action.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

456

4. The site plan, floor plans, elevation plans, open space plan, egress plan, fire plan, building composite plan, irrigation plan, lighting plan, conceptual grading plan, conceptual perspectives, and all associated architectural and civil drawings, including the colors and materials palette, dated received on May 20, 2024, shall be the conceptually approved design.

5. Any significant modifications to the approved site plan, floor plans, elevation plans, open space plan, egress plan, fire plan, building composite plan, irrigation plan, lighting plan, conceptual grading plan, conceptual perspectives, including any modifications which will change, expand, or intensify the use(s) shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Development Services. The Director of Development Services or his or her designee may determine if such modifications require approval by the City of Placentia Planning Commission or may be approved administratively by City staff.

6. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Developer and/or property owner must make a one-time payment of $50,000, which will be deposited in a separate account, for a Parking Management Plan, and adhere to the following:
a. One year after the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the City of Placentia will hire a consultant to prepare a Parking Management Plan (PMP). The payment will fund the preparation of the PMP and the costs associated with its implementation by City staff.
b. Annually after initial PMP, all onsite parking will be evaluated under the PMP. This evaluation will continue annually, with reports submitted to the City Council. This process will be funded by an annual $20,000 payment to pay for the costs of staff/consultant time and will persist until the City Council determines that no further evaluations are necessary. c. If any report identifies significant parking issues, the City Council will direct the Director of Development Services to initiate the preparation of an updated PMP to address and mitigate these issues. The updated PMP will be reviewed by the Director of Development Services and the City's Traffic Manager (or their designees) to resolve any parking concerns related to the project. Any costs associated with the updated PMP, including staff and consultant costs, will be paid for by Developer and/or property owner.
d. If the cost of preparing and monitoring the PMP exceeds $20,000, the Developer and/or property owner will be responsible for covering the additional costs. Conversely, if the costs are less than the deposited amount, the Developer and/or property owner will receive a refund for any unexpended funds within the one-year period.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

457

7. Developer shall enter into a Community Benefits Agreement as approved by the City of Placentia City Council.

8. Prior to the submission of building plans, the applicant and/or property owner, and/or their designee shall submit a one-time payment of $4,500 as the applicant and/or property owner's fair share payment required for the City's preparation of a streetscape master plan for Specific Plan No. 5 (SP -5). The amount shall be earmarked in a designated account for the acquisition of a professional consultant who will enter into a professional services agreement with the City of Placentia.

9. Developer and/or property owner agrees to annex into the Community Facilities District No. CFD 2014-01 (Public Services), or any subsequently created Community Facilities District (CFD) (Public Services) pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code Section 53311, et seq. Said annexation shall be fully completed in accordance with California law prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the project. Any subsequently created CFD is intended to replace Community Facilities District No. CFD 2014-01 (Public Services).

10. Developer and/or property owner agrees to annex into the Landscape Maintenance District No. LMD 1992-01 pursuant to the provisions of California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500, et seq. Said annexation into LMD No. 1992-01 shall be fully completed in accordance with California law prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the project.

11. Developer and/or property owner agrees to annex into the Street Lighting District No.

SLD 1981-01 pursuant to the provisions of California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500, et seq. Said annexation into SLD No. 1981-01 shall be fully completed in accordance with California law prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the project.

12. The applicant agrees to be the catalyst project site and initiate the establishment of a new Community Facilities District (CFD), created by the City pursuant to the provision of California Government Code Section 53311, et seq., to fund ongoing maintenance costs of all new public improvements constructed as part of this project prior to issuance of the building permits. The CFD boundary shall encompass the boundaries of SP -5 which is currently generally described as Placentia Avenue to the west, Orangethorpe to the south, 57 Freeway to the east, and Crowther Avenue to the north.

All legal expenses related to initiating, creating, and establishing the new CFD shall be fully funded by the Developer and must be paid in full prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the project.

13. Prior to issuance of building permits, except as otherwise noted, the following shall be completed:

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

458

a. The Developer shall pay in full to the City of Placentia all applicable citywide Development Impact Fees required under Title 5 of the Placentia Municipal Code, including, but not limited to library, signage, civic improvement projects, public safety, parks and traffic mitigation. Developer shall also pay sewer impact fees set forth for the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) area, upon connection to the Crowther Avenue sewer line. Alternatively, if the City Council directs City Staff to establish Specific Plan 5 (SP -5) Development Impact Fees scaled to finance necessary public improvements and mitigate the impacts of new development within the SP -5 area, Developer shall pay those SP -5 Development Impact Fees.
b. Project plans shall be submitted for the review and certification for inclusion into the entitlement file by the Director of Development Services and shall include the following information:
i. All Special Conditions of Approval and Standard Development Requirements of GPA 2022-01, SPA 2021-01, and DPR 2021-02.

Include any project revisions on the applicable sheets of the project plans. Additionally, include separate sheets with approved Special Conditions of Approval and Standard Development Requirements to be printed verbatim on one of the first three pages of all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits (architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical, and plumbing) and shall be referenced in the sheet index. The minimum font size utilized for printed text shall be 12 - point.
ii. Typical cross section views and details through the property and across each property line as directed by the Director of Development Services. iii. Location of transformers, meters, and other aboveground appurtenances.
iv. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director.
c. An exterior lighting (photometric) plan showing location, type of fixtures and areas of illumination shall be submitted and reviewed for compliance with City standards and the Placentia Municipal Code. Lighting shall neither negatively impact adjacent properties nor the public right-of-way. d. Submit landscape and irrigation plans. The applicant must follow the procedure for approval under the MWELO for the proposed landscaping. A MWELO procedure and approval package is available from the front counter in the Development Services Department.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

459

e. Postmaster approval of the location and design of the mailboxes, if applicable. f. All applicable provisions of the Placentia Municipal Code (PMC) shall be met prior to issuance of Building Permits and shall be adhered to at all times.

14. The following conditions shall be completed prior to issuance of a grading permit:
a. The developer shall submit for City approval a construction staging plan that indicates how safe vehicular and pedestrian access to the site will be maintained for the duration of the construction period. The construction stage plan shall include measures such as, but not limited to the following:
i. A telephone number and name of a designated contact person(s) for registering complaints or comments shall be posted in a clearly visible manner along the perimeter of the site.
ii. When construction vehicles accessing the site are expected to obstruct pedestrian and vehicular access along W. Orangethorpe Avenue and S.

Placentia Avenue, a flag person or an approved alternative method shall be employed to direct traffic effectively.
iii. If any sidewalk is blocked during construction, alternate routes for pedestrians and bicycles shall be clearly marked with signs approved by the City.
iv. All access points shall be clearly marked during construction, and if an access point is blocked during construction, a detour sign to an alternate access point shall be clearly posted.
v. A detailed timeline outlining the course of major ground disturbing activities as trenching, excavation, and grading, including all construction work that will take place on the property.

15. During demolition, grading, site development, and/or construction, the following shall be adhered to:
a. Construction equipment shall be maintained in peak operating condition to reduce emissions.
b. Use low sulfur (0.5%) fuel by weight for construction equipment. c. Truck idling shall be prohibited for periods longer than 5 minutes. d. Attempt to phase and schedule activities to avoid high ozone days first stage smog alerts.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

460

e. Discontinue operation during second stage smog alerts. f. Ensure clearly visible signs are posted on the perimeter of the site identifying the name and phone number of a field supervisor to contact for information regarding the development and any construction/ grading activity. g. All Placentia Municipal Code requirements including the Noise Ordinance. All activities including truck deliveries associated with construction, grading, remodeling, or repair shall be limited to Monday — Friday, 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM, and Saturdays 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM. Such activities are prohibited on Sundays and Federal holidays.

16. The final Certificate of Occupancy cannot be approved, and utilities will not be released until the following is completed for each respective portion of the property:
a. The property owner(s) and/or their successor(s) shall annex into those district(s) for the project area and initiate the establishment of a new Community Facilities District for SP -5 identified by Condition Nos. 9-12 above.

If the subject property is sold prior to annexation into the aforementioned districts, the future property owner(s) must complete the annexation and initiation processes and no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued prior to completion of annexation.
b. Submission, approval, and installation of an on -site public art installation shall be required. It is strongly recommended that the chosen public art piece reflects the rich history of the City of Placentia, focusing on significant aspects such as the citrus growing industry or early oil production eras that contributed to the city's development. Alternatively, the artwork may capture the essence and diversity of the city's community fabric. The public art piece will undergo evaluation and approval by the Development Services Director and the Housing, Community, and Economic Development Committee. The public art element shall adhere to the following parameters:
i. The public art element shall not be commercial in nature, a reproduction, or mass produced.
ii. Artwork sitting and its visibility are important project design considerations and shall be clearly visible and accessible to the public. iii. The art piece shall be a permanent part of the development and must remain in place for the life of the development. The work must be fixed and located at or adjacent to the site and accessible to the public. iv. Outdoor artwork must be illuminated sufficiently to ensure clear visibility from the nearby right-of-way during evening hours.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

461

17. The use shall comply with the following:
a. The Developer, property owner(s), and/or respective land management company shall be responsible for maintaining their respective properties, including the landscaped areas, walkways, and all paved surfaces, free from graffiti, debris and liter. Graffiti shall be removed by the property owner(s) within 72 hours of defacement and/or upon notification by the City. b. The primary vehicular access gates and pedestrian gates shall be decorative in nature and fabricated of high gauge metal to withstand continual wear and tear. All walls and gates shall be designed with colors, materials, and of design satisfactory to the Development Services Director or his/her designee. c. The property owner(s), land management company, landlord, or similar entity shall furnish all prospective tenants with a disclosure agreement, informing them of the potential for noise and odor arising from nearby industrial activities or businesses. It is mandatory for all tenants to sign this agreement, thereby acknowledging and accepting the existence of these potential impacts. A copy of the disclosure agreement must be provided to the City's Development Services Department for inclusion in the entitlement file. d. Onsite alcoholic beverage sales for the purposes of either onsite or offsite consumption shall be prohibited unless a Use Permit is submitted, reviewed, and approved by the City of Placentia Planning Commission at a publicly noticed public hearing.

18. CEQA MITIGATION MEASURES
Cultural Resources
CR-1: If evidence of an archaeological site or other suspected historical resource as defined by CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5, including darkened soil representing past human activity ("midden"), that could conceal material remains (e.g., worked stone, fired clay vessels, faunal bone, hearths, storage pits, or burials) are discovered during any project -related earth -disturbing activities, all earth -disturbing activities within 100 feet of the find shall be halted until the City of Placentia is notified. The project applicant shall retain an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology to assess the significance of the find. Any identified cultural resources shall be recorded on the appropriate DPR 523 (A -L) form and filed with the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC).

Construction activities may continue on other parts of the Proposed Project Site while evaluation and treatment of prehistoric archaeological resources takes place.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

462

Geology and Soils
GEO-1: If fossils or fossil bearing deposits are encountered during ground disturbing activities, work within a 25 -foot radius of the find shall halt (buffer area) and a professional vertebrate paleontologist (as defined by the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology) (the Qualified Paleontologist) shall be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. The paleontologist shall have the authority to stop or divert construction, as necessary. Documentation and treatment of the discovery shall occur in accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area. At the Qualified Paleontologist's discretion and to reduce any construction delay, the grading and excavation contractor shall assist in removing rock samples for initial processing and evaluation of the find.

All significant fossils shall be collected by the Qualified Paleontologist. Collected fossils shall be prepared to the point of identification and cataloged before they are submitted to their final repository. Any fossils collected shall be curated at a public, nonprofit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, if such an institution agrees to accept the fossils. If no institution accepts the fossil collection, they shall be donated to a local school in the area for educational purposes. Accompanying notes, maps, photographs, and a technical report shall also be filed at the repository and/or school.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-1: The following are some simple practices that would be included in the Proposed Project and implemented on site:
• Keep potential sources of pollution out of the rain as practicable (e.g., inside a building, covered with plastic or tarps, or sealed tightly in a leak -proof container).
• Clearly identify a protected, lined area for concrete truck washouts. This area should be located away from streams, storm drain inlets, or ditches and should be cleaned out periodically.
• Park, refuel, and maintain vehicles and equipment in one area of the site to minimize the area exposed to possible spills and fuel storage. This area should be well away from streams, storm drain inlets, or ditches. Keep spill kits close by and clean up any spills or leaks immediately, including spills on pavement or earthen surfaces.
• Practice good housekeeping. Keep the construction site free of litter, construction debris, and leaking containers. Keep all waste in one area to minimize cleaning.
• Never hose down paved surfaces to clean dust, debris, or trash. This water could wash directly into storm drains or streams. Sweep up materials and dispose of them in the trash. Never bury trash or debris. • Dispose of hazardous materials properly.

HAZ-2: A California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH/CaIOSHA) Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

463

Certified Asbestos Consultant should be contracted to conduct monitoring and clearance of any removal/abatement of Asbestos -Containing Materials/Asbestos- Containing Construction Materials (ACMs/ACCMs) and materials containing asbestos.

HAZ-3: To protect construction workers contact or ingestion of contaminated soils during grading, the following note shall be placed on grading plans prior to issuance of grading permits: "Disposable gloves shall be worn by personnel who need to have contact with contaminated soil during grading and excavation. Consideration shall be given to the requirement for tear resistant gloves; Overalls shall be worn if there is the potential for contaminated soil to contact other parts of the body (legs, arms etc.); Boot covers shall be worn by personnel who need to traverse contaminated soils during grading and excavation or washable boots worn with a boot wash in place and utilized."
HAZ-4: A soil vapor intrusion barrier with a venting system shall be installed beneath proposed future residential buildings located on the Site, in accordance with Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).

Tribal Cultural Resources
TCR-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground -Disturbing Activities:

A. The project applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the Gabrielef o Band of Mission Indians — Kizh Nation. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any "ground -disturbing activity" for the subject project at all project locations (i.e., both on -site and any off -site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). "Ground - disturbing activity" shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.

B. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground - disturbing activity.

C. The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground -disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground -disturbing activities, soil types, cultural -related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

464

TCRs, including but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or "TCR"), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the project applicant/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe.

D. On -site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the Kizh from a designated point of contact for the project applicant/lead agency that all ground -disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground -disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Kizh to the project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact Kizh TCRs.

E. Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist. The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe's sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.

TCR-2: Prior to issuance of grading permit, the following notes shall be listed on the grading plans for the project:

Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remain and Associated Funerary Object A. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.

B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods discovered or recognized on the project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground -disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98, shall be followed.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

465

C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).

D. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).)
E. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods.

F. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

TCR-3: Prior to issuance of grading permit, the following notes shall be listed on the grading plans or the project:

Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains
A. As the Most Likely Descendant ("MLD"), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term "human remains" encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.

B. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.

C. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.

D. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24 - Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

466

hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.

E. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground -disturbing activities may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.

F. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.

G. The Tribe will work closely with the project's qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall include (at a minimum) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery data recovery -related forms of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does not authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT - BUILDING DIVISION:

19. The development project shall comply with the latest City of Placentia adopted and amended Editions of California Building Codes as CBC, CMC, CPC, CEC, CALGreen, and State Title 24 Energy Standards.

20. Submit approved precise grading plans upon submitting plans to the Building Division.

21.AII public accommodation buildings and their parking stalls for accessibility requirements shall be in compliance with chapter 11B of CBC.

22. The apartments for accessibility requirements shall comply with Chapter 11A of CBC.

23. Shall provide sufficient No. of guest accessible parking stalls per chapters 11A & 11B.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

467

24. The guest parking stalls shall have access to each designated unit on site.

25.AII required site accessibility and accessible parking stalls shall be addressed on the approved precise grading plans.

26. Visitors parking stalls and accessible stalls shall be addressed on the precise grading plans along with the delineated path of access to the building's entry.

27. Complete Building, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, & approved Civil plans are required for building plan check.

28.A photometric plan(s) shall be provided to address access from all apartment units to the public accommodation area(s) on site and to the public right-of-ways.

29. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a complete acoustical report for the project shall be submitted to the Building Division that has been prepared and signed off by a certified acoustical consultant.

30. Submit a complete Geotechnical Investigation Report for the whole project site as part of the plan check submittal for the development project.

31.AII foundation design plans, calculations, and details for conformance with the Geotechnical Report shall be reviewed and verified in writing with submission of two package sets of project plans.

32. The development project shall be equipped with the minimum required photovoltaic systems per the latest State Title 24 Energy Standards Code.

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT:

33.AII improvement and grading plans shall be drawn on twenty-four (24) inch by thirty-six (36) inch Mylar and signed by a registered civil engineer or other registered/licensed professional as required.

34. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, all existing and new utilities including electric power, telephone, telecommunication fiber and/or cable TV in the street adjacent to and on -site shall be placed underground in accordance with the City of Placentia standards and ordinances. All existing utility poles and associated overhead utility lines located along the project/property frontage shall be removed.

35. Prior to recordation of the final map, the public improvement plans as required shall signed by the City Engineer.

36. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the engineer of record shall submit all approved project plans on an approved electronic format to the Public Works Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

468

Department. If the required files are unavailable, the applicant shall pay a scanning fee to cover the cost of scanning the as -built plans.

Demolition

37. Provide a full set of plans for demolition of the existing facilities and utilities, including above ground and underground structures, footings, utilities, vaults, fences, walls, sewer lines, storm drain pipes, waterlines, etc., Plans shall address conditions and procedures, as are necessary, to show that the demolition work will be conducted without creating a hazardous condition, when excavating next to other existing footings, walls and slopes. A separate demolition permit is required from the Building Department, prior to performing any kind of demolition on site. Prepare and submit a Construction and Demolition Waste Management Plan (WMP) for City approval. An approved WMP is required in order to obtain a demolition permit.

38.A copy of the Grant deed and owner's permission on the application for demolition is required at the time of issuance of the permit.

39. The existing sanitary sewer lateral lines must be removed and capped at the property lines. The sewer cap shall be inspected, and shall not be covered until an inspection has been made by the Department of Public Works Inspector. This inspection shall be requested at least 24 hours before the inspection is needed.

40. Provide AQMD Rule 1403 permit number, prior to starting any demolition work

41. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify all utility companies and the City of Placentia for disconnection and removal of the existing utilities, vaults and meters. It is also the applicant's responsibility to ensure applicant notifies the Building Inspection Division that these utilities have been properly disconnected.

42. Provide an erosion control, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) for protection of the site during construction activities.

Grading

43. Prior to the issuance of a precise grading permit, the applicant shall prepare a Low Impact Development (LID) specifically identifying the Best Management Practices (BMP's) that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The plan shall identify the types of structural and/or non-structural measures to be used. The plan shall comply with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and LID Implementation Guideline. Website available at
( http://ocwatersheds.com/publiced/residents/glltd) Particular attention should be addressed to the appendix section "Best Management Practices for priority redevelopment." The LID shall clearly show the locations of structural or Nonstructural BMP's, and assignment of long term maintenance responsibilities. The plan shall be Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

469

prepared to the general form and content and submitted to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer for review and approval.

44. Prior to the issuance of a precise grading permit, the applicant shall prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying the Best Management Practices (BMP's) that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The plan shall identify the types of structural and non-structural measures to be used. The plan shall comply with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP).

Particular attention should be addressed to the appendix section "Best Management Practices for Development." The WQMP shall clearly show the locations of structural BMP's, and assignment of long term maintenance responsibilities (which shall also be included in the Maintenance Agreement). The plan shall be prepared to the general form and content shown in the City of Placentia's WQMP Template and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. Website available at ( http://www.placentia.org/index.aspx?n id=262)

45. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City Engineer that coverage has been obtained under the California's General Permit for Discharge of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number to the City Engineer. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for review a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). A copy of the approved SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and available for review upon request.

46. Prior to the issuance of precise grading permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a precise grading plan prepared by a licensed civil engineer to the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department showing building footprints, new and revised pads and elevations of finished grades, drainage routes, retaining walls, erosion control, slope easements, structural best management practices (BMPs) conforming to the approved water quality management plan, and other pertinent information. The project development shall accept and make provisions for the existing surface water that are the natural flows from the adjacent properties immediately abutting to the development site.

47. Prior to approval of the final design plans and issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall conduct a site -specific geotechnical investigation for the entire site and prepare a report that fully assesses the geologic and soil conditions of the site. As part of the report preparation, soil sampling and any geotechnical testing will be completed at each location where structures are to be erected. The report shall provide grading Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

470

and structural design recommendations for avoiding liquefaction, subsidence or collapse for each of the proposed structures and percolation test for infiltration rate fulfilled per Appendix VII of OCTGD. The recommendations shall be implemented by the Applicant.

48. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, erosion control plans and notes shall be submitted and approved by the Engineering Division of Public Works Department.

49. All private slopes of 4 feet or more in vertical height and of 4:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.

50. The development site shall be graded to drain surface water to the existing City storm drain system with no cross -lot drainage permitted. Drainage shall be indicated on the precise grading plans.

51. Surety and agreement guaranteeing completion of all on -site grading improvements including drainage, structural BMPs, erosion control, grading operations shall be posted and executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits.

52. The final grading plan for the parcels shall be substantially the same, specifically with regard to pad elevations, size, and configuration; as the proposed grading illustrated on the approved site plan. If there is a significant deviation between the two plans, the Community Development Director and the City Engineer will review the plans and determine if a finding of substantial conformance can be made prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The Community Development Director and the City Engineer may refer the matter to the Planning Commission for an opinion before making a decision.

Failure to achieve such a finding will require processing a revised site plan.

53.AII parking, common, and storage areas shall be lit to maintain a minimum of 1 -foot candle power. These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and be on photocell.

54. Prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment or building), the site grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with each other and for consistency with the requirements and standards of the City of Placentia.

55. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit a preliminary title report no older than 90 days.

56. The applicant shall provide a quitclaim or relocation of easement as applicable in plan review process prior to issuance of grading permit.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

471

57. Provide and identify all pavement and driveway paving materials used inside the development areas.

58. Identify all storm drain structures, types, sizes and specifications on the plans.

59. Prior to issuance of occupancy permit, all public improvements shown on the plans shall be constructed to City Standards.

60. Preliminary WQMP shall include a feasibility check to ensure the proposed infiltration BMPs are not proposed to be within 100 feet horizontally of a water supply well and/or non -potable well for the protection of groundwater quality per Orange County TGD.

Public Improvements and Construction

61. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a street improvement plan prepared by a licensed civil engineer to the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department. All public improvements shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City of Placentia standards, ordinances, and policies.

62. Prior to issuance of 1st occupancy permit, all new public improvements shall be constructed satisfactorily to City Standards and match the adjacent public improvements.

63. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall enter into an agreement and post security bond, in a form and amount acceptable to the City Engineer, guaranteeing the construction of public improvements in conformance with the forthcoming referenced SP -5 Streetscape Master Plan, applicable City standards, and City Code, including, but not limited to the following improvements:
a. Street improvements including but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, driveway approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems and other traffic control devices as appropriate b. Storm drain facilities
c. Landscaping
d. Sewer systems
e. Street lighting
f. All streetscape furnishings and other elements
Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

472

64. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy all public improvements listed below shall be constructed and/or installed. all of the public improvements immediately adjacent to and within the boundaries of the project/property area to the centerline of Orangethorpe Avenue and Placentia Avenue are referred to as "on -site" improvements. The applicant shall remove all overhead utility lines and utility poles located along the project frontage and underground said utilities, unless they are determined to be electric transmission lines. All overhead electric distribution lines and other overhead utilities shall be removed and placed underground. All the "on -site" street improvements shall follow and comply with forthcoming referenced SP -5 Streetscape Master Plan, applicable City standards, and City Codes, and the following design standards throughout, including but not limited to tree grates, tree guards, benches, trash receptacles, bike racks, landscaping, street and pedestrian lights, in addition to the following requirements:
a. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Placentia standards and shall be shown on the street improvement plans.
b. Driveways shall be located at a minimum of two (2) feet from the property line prolongation at the curb.
c. Provide a new raised landscape median on Placentia Avenue and on Orangethorpe Avenue.
d. Widened 8' concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along all public street frontages in accordance with City Standards and all curb ramps shall be constructed to current ADA or CBC standards. Applicant will be required to utilize the services of the City's CASp inspector at applicant's expense to provide inspection and certification of that all ADA facilities constructed within the public right-of-way are ADA-compliant.
e. The minimum centerline and flowline grades shall be one percent unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer and Fire Marshall. f. The existing southernmost fire hydrant on the east side of Placentia Avenue shall be relocated to provide for ADA compliance. The relocation of the hydrant shall be approved by the Placentia Fire and Life Safety Department and shall be shown on the Street Improvement Plans.
g. Decorative street/pedestrian combination lights with banner attachment poles shall be provided along Placentia Avenue and Orangethorpe Avenue along the project frontage.
h. Provide irrigation service to the new trees planted in the ROW — the City will Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

473

assume ownership of all the equipment and irrigation costs once installed. i. Provide landscape up -lighting for the new trees in the street medians - the City will own all the related electrical equipment and electricity costs once installed. j. Provide 36 -inch box Drake Chinese Elm Trees in the sidewalk parkways — must include tree grates and tree guards at each tree location. k. Provide 36 -inch box Australian Willow trees in street medians. Subject to change pursuant to forthcoming streetscape master plan.

I. Decorative street/pedestrian combination lights with banner attachment poles. m. Decorative street benches.
n. Decorative trash cans.
o. Decorative bike racks.
p. Provide decorative and enhanced visibility crosswalks at the Orangethorpe/ Placentia Avenue intersection.
q.

Applicant shall provide the development's fair share of the construction cost for the installation of the wayfinding gantry sign on Orangethorpe Avenue, which has been determined to be $60,000. Fair share cost was determined based on the ratio of the subject project's acreage to the total specific plan acreage (approximately 0.15). This ratio was then multiplied by the estimated average cost to construct the gantry sign ($400,000).
r. Two (2) decorative bus shelters. One to be installed on Placentia Avenue and one on Orangethorpe Avenue.
s. The full width of Placentia Avenue and Orangethorpe Avenue along the project frontage shall be repaved.
t. All engineered street and public improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared in accordance with City and County of Orange Standards. Shop drawings and product data shall be provided for the City's review and approval for all the public improvement items listed above, PRIOR to their installation.

65. Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending beyond the project boundaries a minimum distance of 150 feet at a grade and alignment approved by the City Engineer.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

474

Storm Drain Improvements and Construction

66. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director, the project street and lot grading shall be designed in a manner that perpetuates the existing natural drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage area and outlet points.

67. Provided there is adequate capacity in the Placentia Avenue and Orangethorpe Ave. storm drains, the development site shall be graded to drain surface water to the existing City storm drain system with no cross -lot drainage permitted. The storm drain catch basins shall be upsized if there is not adequate capacity. If a drainage crossing a property line is altered and involves the use of drainage pipes, culverts, and V -gutters to conduct the storm water to an approved City storm drain system, a drainage easement shall be established by the recordation of Covenants Agreements and Restrictions for the benefit of each lot. Drainage easement shall be indicated on the precise grading plans.

68. Drainage easements, when required, shall be shown on the grading plans and noted as follows: "Drainage Easement — no buildings, obstructions, or encroachments by landfills are allowed."

69. The project shall be designed to accept and properly dispose of all off -site drainage flowing onto or through the site. The storm drain design and improvements shall be subject to review and approval by City Engineer. The hydraulics and hydrology report shall include detailed drainage studies indicating how the grading, in conjunction with the drainage conveyance systems including applicable swales, channels, street flows, catch basins, storm drains, and flood water retarding, BMP treatment and LID, will allow building pads to be safe from inundation from rainfall runoff which may be expected from all storms up to and including the theoretical 100 -year flood per the Orange County Hydrology Manual.

70. Prior to the approval of the improvement plans, the hydrology study shall show that the 25 -year storm flow will be contained within the street from curb to curb and the 100 - year storm flow shall be contained within the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria are exceeded, additional drainage facilities shall be installed. All analysis shall comply with the Orange County Hydrology Manual and County Local Drainage Manual.

71. Drainage facilities with sump conditions shall be designed to convey the tributary 25 - year storm flows. Secondary emergency flow bypass shall also be provided as approved by City Engineer.

Sewer Line Improvements and Construction

72. The applicant shall prepare a sewer capacity analysis including CCTV to address the future development demands. The developer shall coordinate and incorporate the results of this study into the sanitary sewer development and design. Sewer flow Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

475

calculations justifying sewer line design up to the connection points shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted as part of a sanitary sewer improvement plan for approval by the City Engineer.

73.Onsite water improvement and fire protection plans shall be approved by the Fire Marshal, the local water district, and City Engineer. The water distribution lines and appurtenances shall conform to the applicable laws and adopted regulations enforced by the Golden State Water Company.

74. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall dedicate ingress and egress of the access route within the project site and improve it fully operational as required by the City of Placentia Fire Department and satisfaction to the City Engineer.

75. The applicant shall submit a Will Serve Letter from Orange County Sanitation District and Golden State Water Company.

76. Install new sanitary sewer manholes at the proposed connection to the existing City sewer line.

Traffic

77. Provide new and modify the existing striping modifications on Orangethorpe Ave and on Placentia Avenue based on the results of the traffic impact study.

78. Provide Site Access Analysis and maintain sight distance for vehicles exiting at the public driveway on Orangethorpe Ave and on Placentia Avenue.

79. Parking and on -site circulation requirements shall be maintained at all times. a. All pavement markings and signage including parking spaces, directional designations, no parking designations and fire land designations shall be clearly defined and said signage and markings shall be maintained in good condition at all times.
b. Parking site circulation and street surfaces shall be maintained in good condition at all times and shall be swept at least as frequently as public streets in Placentia.
c. All areas of landscaping shall be permanently and continuously maintained by the property owner.

80. Install Iteris Vantage Next Video Detection System at Placentia/Orangethorpe intersection to improve intersection performance and safety.

81. Install touchless accessible pedestrian system (APS) pushbutton and new pedestrian Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

476

countdown system at Placentia/Orangethorpe intersection, in accordance with the recent federal PROWAG guidelines

82. Replace all obsolete 8 -inch signal indications with 12 -inch indications at Placentia/Orangethorpe intersection

83. Install decorative traffic signal poles and luminaire fixtures at Placentia/Orangethorpe intersection; and increase the luminaire fixtures from 4 fixtures to 8 fixtures to better illuminate the crosswalks at night and in inclement weather

84. To maintain necessary traffic safety on Placentia Avenue, the proposed main access on Placentia must be configured to a right-in/right-out access only with a new median island on Placentia Avenue as well as at the driveway to prohibit vehicles from making left turns in any travel direction at the main access point. Alternatively, the developer may install a new traffic signal at the proposed main access to minimize traffic safety concerns associated with the project access.

FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY DEPARTMENT

85. The project shall comply with all requirements set forth by the California Code Regulations Title 24 Parts 1-12 respectively.

86. The adopted edition of the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Parts 1 through 12, and the Placentia Municipal Code shall apply a t the time the architectural plans are submitted for construction permits.

87. Prior to the issuance of a grading permits, evidence of sufficient fire flow hours shall be provided to the City of Placentia Fire Prevention. The City of Placentia Fire Prevention Water Available/Fire Flow Form shall be utilized.

88.A fire department access road complying with the CFC, Chapter 5 and the approved fire department access plans shall be installed prior to building construction.

89. The fire department access road shall be inspected by Placentia Fire Prevention Bureau prior to building construction.

90. The fire department access road shall remain unobstructed at all times.

91.A fire department connection (FDC) shall be provided and located within 100 feet of a public fire hydrant. The use of a private hydrant may be used with the use of an aboveground check valve to prevent the flow from the FDC back to the fire hydrant, and with the approval of Placentia Fire Prevention Fire Prevention Bureau. The fire hydrant that supports the FDC shall be on the same side of the street. A vehicle access roadway/approach shall not be placed between the FDC and fire hydrant.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

477

92.AII required fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to building construction. All fire hydrants shall remain operational during construction.

93.AII required fire hydrants shall be readily visible and immediately accessible. A clear space of not less than 3 -feet shall be maintained at all times.

94. Prior to construction a temporary address sign shall be posted and clearly visible from the street.

95. The permanent building address shall be provided and either internally or externally lighted during hours of darkness. The address shall be clearly visible from the street fronting the property and comply with California Fire Code Section 505.1 for size and color.

96. Placentia Fire Prevention Bureau approval shall be obtained prior to the storage and/or use of hazardous materials as defined by the California Fire Code.

97. The building shall be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13. Construction plans shall be submitted for review and approval to the City of Placentia Fire Prevention Division prior to installation.

98. The building shall be provided with an automatic fire alarm system in accordance with NFPA 72. Construction plans shall be submitted for review and approval to the City of Placentia Fire Prevention Division prior to installation.

99. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the building shall be provided with a Knox Lock key box located no more than six -feet above the finished surface and near the main entrance door.
100. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the building shall be provided with an emergency radio communication enhancement system. The emergency radio communication enhancement system shall meet the requirements of CFC § 510 and all applicable subsections. The system shall be installed and inspected by the City of Placentia Fire Prevention Bureau prior to the Certificate of Occupancy being issued. 101. A copy of all approved alternate means and methods shall be placed on the architectural plans prior to submitting them for review and approval by the city.

POLICE DEPARTMENT
102. Open bicycle storage areas shall be designed and protected as follows:
a. Located in areas highly visible to users of the facility. b. Bicycle racks in residential complexes shall be protected by see-through metal Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

478

fencing which either fully encloses the racks with fencing or have floor to ceiling fencing, and secured either with an access control system locking device or mechanical door lock. Padlocks are prohibited.
103. Show any vehicle access control gates in the parking structure. 104. Show all pedestrian travel paths.
105. Provide details on fencing and gates.
106. Provide details on the mail/parcel room showing compliance with the Placentia Police Department Standard Development Requirements. Mailboxes not located within a room, in multi -family complexes are to be located in high visible areas adjacent to common area activity amenities and not directly accessed from inside parking structures. Mail rooms are to have glass doors and/or windows to provide visibility into them from the surrounding area. The room is to be always illuminated with a minimum five foot-candles of light on the floor at all times. 107. The dog park shall be secured as follows:
a. The perimeter of the dog park shall have a fence, at least five feet in height, with no more than 40 percent of it being of solid construction. Fencing shall be tubular steel with openings between pickets not more than three inches in width, and designed to prevent dogs from crawling under it. b. Gates shall be a double gated entry system where one gate must be closed before the other can be opened.
c. Access to the dog park is to be controlled by an access control system if park is part of a residential complex.
d. Provide waste bag station and trash container.
e. All surfaces of the park shall be illuminated with a minimum maintained 0.5 foot- candles of light at ground level, during the hours of operation, including one hour thereafter.
f. A site plan shall be provided showing the park, buildings, parking area, walkways, detailed landscaping with tree legend (if pole lights are used) and shrub legend (if bollards are used), fixture schedule, mounting height, lighting ratio and a point -by -point photometric calculation of the required light levels. If the park is equipped with an occupancy sensor, then a point -by -point photometric calculation is required to show it meets the required minimum level of light. Foot-candles shall be measured at grade on a horizontal plane and conform to a uniformity ratio of six to one (6:1) average/minimum. Landscaping Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

479

shall not be planted so as to obscure required light levels with light fixtures exceeding eight feet in height installed at least two feet from a tree's canopy at 70 percent maturity.
108. The parking structure plans indicate shall be submitted concurrently with the remainder of the development project. Separate submittals for the development project and the parking structure shall be prohibited.
109. Provide elevations of all sides of the parking structure. 110. Prior to the issuance of building permits, provide Remote Recreation Area Surveillance Camera Plan showing camera coverage of the Fireside Chat, The Hangout recreations locations and Dog Park. Images are to clearly identify who is using these spaces and be saved on a digital video recorder and stored for at least 30 days.

Resolution No. PC -2024-60
Attachment "D"

480

ORDINANCE NO. O-2024-05

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLACENTIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 5 TO

PERMIT MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT AND PARKING STRUCTURES
ON PARCEL 9 AND ESTABLISHING ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS ON A 2.72 -ACRE SITE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT
777 W. ORANGETHORPE AVENUE AND 776 S. PLACENTIA AVENUE
(APN 339-112-27).

City Attorney's Summary
This Ordinance would result in an amendment to Specific Plan No. 5 of the City of Placentia modifying Chapter 23.105, Specific Plan No. 5 (SP -5) to allow mixed use (residential -commercial development) within the SP -5, Parcel 9 boundaries and will establish development standards for new mixed uses, including but not limited to gross lot area, FAR, height, residential density, dwelling unit size, parking, setbacks and lot coverage of the City of Placentia Municipal Code (PMC), on property located at 777 W.

Orangethorpe Avenue and 776 S. Placentia Avenue (APN 339-112-27).

WHEREAS, the City of Placentia wishes to amend the City of Placentia Municipal Code by modifying Chapter 23.105, SP -5, to modify and expand the existing land use designations allowed within SP -5, of the Parcel No. 9 boundaries (Attachment A, Exhibit 1), establishing development standards for new mixed -use developments (residential - commercial development), including but not limited to gross lot area, FAR, height, residential density, dwelling unit size, parking, setbacks and lot coverage, that said amendment to the specific plan and municipal code will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the city; injurious to property or improvements within the neighborhood or within the city; nor consistent with the latest adopted General Plan. for property located on an approximately 2.72 -acre site along north of W. Orangethorpe Avenue, east of S. Placentia Avenue, (Attachment A) to allow for the construction and operation of a 248 multi -family residential dwelling unit development, with up to 3,000 square feet of commercial retail space and a 7 -level parking structure, and certification of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2021-01 and finds that the MND was prepared in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., and the Environmental Guidelines of the City of Placentia; and
WHEREAS, on or about July 9, 2023, the Planning Commission of the City of Placentia conducted, and concluded, a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, and recommended that the City Council of the City of Placentia deny General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 2021-01, Development Plan Review No. DPR 2022-02; and
Ordinance O-2024-05

481

WHEREAS, the City of Placentia provided notice of the City Council's public hearing in accordance with California Government Code Section 65090 and the City of Placentia Municipal Code Section 23.96.030; and
WHEREAS, on September 6th, 2023, the City Council of the City of Placentia held a duly noticed public hearing at which time it considered all evidence presented, whether written or oral; and
WHEREAS, all other prerequisites to the adoption of this resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF PLACENTIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. In all respects as set forth in the Recitals of this Ordinance.

SECTION 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase in this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional, or invalid, or ineffective, provided the basic purposes of this Ordinance and the benefits to the City and the public are not substantially impaired.

SECTION 3. CEQA. The City has complied with the requirements of CEQA and the City of Placentia Environmental Guidelines. In adopting Resolution No. R-2024-60, the City Council certified and adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2021-01 and finds that the Addendum was prepared in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., and the Environmental Guidelines of the City of Placentia.

SECTION 4. The City Council hereby amends the City of Placentia Municipal Code by modifying Chapter 23.105, Specific Plan No. 5 (SP -5), as set forth in Attachment "B", attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. The property depicted in Attachment "A" is proposed for a site modification to allow additional land uses, including mixed -use developments (residential -commercial), and parking structures. This modification will include establishing development standards for gross lot area, floor area ratio (FAR), building height, residential density, dwelling unit size, parking requirements, setbacks, and lot coverage.

SECTION 5. The City Council finds, in accordance with the requirements of Section 23.96.040 ("Amendments") of the Placentia Municipal Code, that the proposed amendment to the municipal code will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general Ordinance O-2024-05

482

welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the city, and that it will not be injurious to property or improvements within the neighborhood or within the city. The City Council also finds that the amendment is consistent with the latest adopted General Plan.

SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on the 31st day after adoption.

SECTION 7. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify the passage of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be entered in the book of original ordinances of said City; shall make a minute passage and adoption thereof in the records of the meeting at which time the same is passed and adopted; and shall, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption thereof, cause the same to be published as required by law, in a publication of general circulation.

INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Placentia held on the 3rd day of September 2024.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of September 2024.

Jeremey Yamaguchi, Mayor
ATTEST:

Robert S. McKinnell, City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF ORANGE
I, Robert S. McKinnell, City Clerk of the City of Placentia, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Placentia, held on the 3rd day of September 2024 and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Placentia, held on the XX day of September 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Councilmembers:

Councilmembers:

Councilmembers:

Councilmembers:

Ordinance O-2024-05