07-17-17 MJSP HORIZONTAL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 999 TOWN AND COUNTRY ROAD
TO: Chair Glasgow and
Members of the Planning Commission
THRU: Anna Pehoushek
Assistant Director of Community Development
FROM: Anne Fox
Contract Staff Planner
SUBJECT
CONSENT CALENDAR: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1856-17, Major Site Plan Review
No. 0866-16, Design Review Committee No. 4864-16, Tentative Parcel Map No. 0012-16 and
Administrative Adjustment No. 0254-17 – 999 Town & Country Mixed Use (Westcore Town-
Country, LLC) at 999 Town and Country Road.
SUMMARY
The applicant proposes to develop a horizontal mixed-use development project by constructing (1) a
new five-story, 262-unit residential apartment building surrounding a six-level parking structure, (2)
a new five-level parking structure to serve an existing office building, and (3) related site
improvements providing landscaping and resident amenities on a six -acre project site. The project
also includes a Tentative Parcel Map to divide the property into two lots, and minor adjustments to
development standards that reduce the number of required parking spaces and reduce drive aisle
widths within the parking structures.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 17-17 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.
1856-17 AND APPROVING MAJOR SITE PLAN REVIEW
NO. 0866-16, DESIGN REVIEW NO. 4864-16, TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP NO. 0012-16 AND ADMINISTRATIVE
ADJUSTMENT NO. 0254-17 ALLOWING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A HORIZONTAL MIXED USE
DEVELOPMENT AT 999 TOWN AND COUNTRY ROAD
Planning Commission
Agenda Item
July 17, 2017
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 2
AUTHORIZATION/GUIDELINES
Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Section 17.08.020 authorizes the Planning Commission to review
and take action on Environmental Documentation for a project in conjunction with the review and
action on discretionary applications for Major Site Plan Review, Design Review, Tentative Parcel
Maps and Administrative Adjustments. Further, when more than one type of application is filed for
a single project, the application requiring the highest level of approval shall dictate the review
process for the entire group of applications. In this case, the project requires adoption of a
Mitigated Negative Declaration and the applications include a Major Site Plan Review, both of
which require a final determination at the Planning Commission level. Therefore, the Planning
Commission will make the final determination on all the subject applications. The Planning
Commission’s action may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to the time periods and
requirements established in the OMC for Appeals.
PUBLIC NOTICE
On or before July 5, 2017, the City sent a Public Meeting Notice to a total of 518 property
owners/tenants within a 300-foot radius of the project site, responsible agencies and persons
specifically requesting notice. A notice was also published in the Orange City News newspaper on
July 5, 2017, and the project site was posted in at least two locations with the notification on that
same date.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Mitigated Negative Declaration: The proposed project is subject to environmental review per the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. 1856-17 has been prepared for this project and is provided for the Planning Commission’s
review and consideration (Exhibit B). The Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt this environmental
document was mailed to residents, property owners, and tenants within 300’ of the subject property
and to responsible agencies. Additionally, the site was posted and it was advertised in the Orange
City News on May 3, 2017. The 20-day public review period began on May 3, 2017 and ended on
May 23, 2017.
Staff received seven comment letters during the public review period from responsible agencies,
and responses to those comments have been prepared and were forwarded to the respective authors
in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, in advance of the City’s consideration of any
determination. Copies of the comment letters and responses can be found in Attachment 5 to this
report and must be considered by the Planning Commission prior to taking action.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Applicant: Westcore Town-Country, LLC
Property Owner: Westcore Properties – Nick Marcos
Property Location: 999 Town and Country Road
Existing General Plan
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 3
Land Use Element designation: Urban Mixed Use (UMIX) 1.5-3.0 FAR; 30-60 du/acre
Existing Zoning Classification:
UMIX (Urban Mixed Use)
Old Towne: No
Specific Plan/PC: No
Site Size: 5.99 Acres (261,226 square feet)
Circulation: Ingress/egress to the project site is via Town & Country Road
which is classified as a Primary Arterial with an ultimate right-
of-way of 100 feet.
Existing conditions: The existing six-acre site contains a four-story, 98,551 square
foot office building with surface parking lot areas containing a
total of 449 parking space. The site is fairly rectangular in
shape and is relatively flat. The primary ingress/egress
driveway is located on the southeastern boundary of the site
directly in front of the existing office building. A secondary
right in/right out driveway is located along the southwestern
boundary of the project site.
Surrounding land uses
and Zoning:
Surrounding properties are primarily commercially developed
and are comprised of both office and support retail types of
uses. The property is bounded on the north by the SR-22
freeway and on the west by the east-bound SR-22 on/off ramps.
Continuing further west on the north side of Town & Country
Road is a one-story retail/professional office center and beyond
is a three- and four-story apartment development. Immediately
adjacent on the east side of the project site is a five-story office
building with surface parking lot area. To the south, is the
Town & Country Office Park, which consists of a collection of
small commercial buildings of one- and two-stories with shared
surface parking lot areas. A 16-story office building sits just
southwest of the project site across the shared intersection with
the SR-22 freeway ramps served by a multi-level, above ground
parking garage.
Previous
Applications/Entitlements:
MJSP No. 0480-06, CUP No. 2683-07, CUP No. 2689-07,
TPM No. 2007-118, DRC No. 4178-06, and MND No. 1783-06
for a medical office building and parking structure with a
shared parking agreement approved on November 19, 2007.
Several Time Extensions were granted through State legislation
and the City since that approval, the last of which expired on
October 15, 2015. The entitlements were never vested.
No other historical records were found.
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant proposes the creation of a horizontal mixed-use development project by adding a
separate multi-family residential building to a commercially developed six -acre site that currently
contains a four-story, 98,551 square foot office building surrounded by 449 surface parking spaces
and related landscape/hardscape improvements. New development at the site would also provide
two parking structures, one to serve the new residential component and the other to replace a
majority of the surface level parking that serves the existing office building. The entire site would
be re-landscaped and new hardscape elements and surfaces would also be added to provide either
recreational space for the residents and/or to refurbish the existing commercially developed portion
of the site that will remain.
Specifically, the applicant proposes construction of a new five-level, approximately 316,541-
square-foot, residential building that will provide 262 apartment units. The apartment building is
proposed to wrap around six full levels and one partial level of a 453-parking stall parking structure.
The apartment building will contain a mix of unit types consisting of 60 studio units, 87 one-
bedroom units, 96 two-bedroom units, and 19 three-bedroom units. Access to individual units is
from an interior corridor system that ties in with each of the levels of the parking structure. The
interior system of corridors also provides access to each assigned, lockable storage area associated
with each unit, although two of the unit types (A3 and B3) are provided with their lockable storage
accessible from the private deck area associated with those units. All units have a private
balcony/deck area with views towards interior courtyard areas containing resident recreational
amenities, or are oriented towards Town and Country Road, with ground level units having gated
patios and entry “stoops.” The ground floor of the apartment building also contains a 2,684 -square
foot leasing office with resident mail area; and a 3,359-square foot combination clubhouse/fitness
room.
The existing office building will be retained while portions of the associated surface level parking
and landscape/hardscape areas will be comprehensively refurbished. No changes are proposed to
the office building exterior. A new five level parking structure, providing 345 parking stalls,
covered motorcycle parking, and a trash enclosure will be constructed on the northeastern portion of
the site to serve the existing office tenant/employees. The remaining surface level parking areas
located to the east and south of the existing office building will be restriped to provide an additional
49 parking stalls.
The proposal also includes a request to subdivide the property into two lots for the purposes of
financing and to allow for separate ownership and management of the development’s residential and
commercial components. The subdivision would include reciprocal agreements for ingress/egress,
parking, utilities, water quality features, fire access and for shared maintenance responsibilities of
all site improvements.
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 5
Development Standards
Required Proposed Code Section
Maximum
Building Height
45 feet - Building height may
exceed the allowed maximum
provided no part of the
building exceeds ¼ of the
horizontal distance between
the ground point of the
building and nearest single-
family residential district
boundary.
(Note: building height in
excess of 45’ is allowed
without a Variance or CUP
provided that site is not in
proximity to single family
residential uses.)
72 feet - apartment building
surrounding a 6-level parking
structure
50 feet - 5-level office
building parking structure
17.19.120
Table 17.19.120,
Note (i)
Maximum Fence
Height
42 inches - front yard or corner
side yard.
6 feet - All other areas.
42 inches for front patio walls
at ground-level units
Between 3 to 6 feet fences and
walls in all other area
17.19.140
Residential
Density Dwelling
Units Per Acre
(Net)
Minimum: 30 units
Maximum: 60 units
43.7 du/ac 17.19.120
Floor Area Ratio
(FAR) for non-
residential
Minimum: 1.5
Maximum: 3.0
(Note: Where the proposed
new infill development,
together with existing
development falls below the
required minimum FAR for the
site, the overall development
shall not be required to
conform.)
0.37 FAR 17.19.120
Table 17.10.120,
Note (b)
Landscaping Setbacks and open areas of the
site not occupied by buildings
shall be landscaped, including
surface parking lot areas
28,646 square feet – open
space areas, street-scape,
entries, corridors between
buildings and structures.
14,226 square feet – surface
parking lot areas.
17.19.160
Lot Dimensions
Minimum Lot
Area
Minimum Lot
Width
40,000 square feet
100 feet
Lot 1: 138,598 square feet
Lot 2: 122,628 square feet
308 feet
17.19.120
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 6
Minimum Open
Space
(Residential)
Fifteen percent (15%) of the
total floor area of the dwelling
units shall be provided as
private and/or common open
space = 35,089 square feet.
Common open space to have
recreational amenities at a
ratio of one for every 25 units
= 10 amenity points.
A maximum of twenty-five
percent (25%) of the total open
space requirement may be
satisfied by 40 square foot
private open space = 8,772
square feet.
39,479 square feet total open
space, with 28,646 square feet
as common resident amenities.
12 amenity points for 10
resident amenity types. –
10,833 square feet of
qualifying private open space
17.19.090 D.
Parking
Residential
458 spaces
412 spaces (10% reduction) 1
Table
17.34.060.A
Guest Parking
Residential
52 spaces
47 spaces (10% reduction) 1
Table
17.34.060.A
Parking
Office
394 spaces
4 spaces/1,000 square feet
GFA up to 250,000 square feet
394 spaces total
49 surface level
345 parking structure
Table
17.34.060.B
Setback, Front 10 feet 10 feet (New residential) Table 17.19.120
Setback, Rear 0 feet 12 feet (New residential) Table 17.19.120
Setback, Interior
Side
Setback, Street
Side
0 feet
10 feet
10 feet (New office parking
structure)
40 feet (Caltrans ROW ramp
to new residential)
Table 17.19.120
Building
Separation
25 feet for window wall to
window wall for building
heights 61-80 feet
40 feet between residential and
office building
17.19.090
Lighting Directed and shield to on-site Lighting plan shows shielding
of lighting to on site
17.12.030
Signs Subject to Sign Program
approval by Design Review
Committee
Sign Program approval
deferred – signage shown is
conceptual
17.36.060 A.3
Note 1: Administrative Adjustment to reduce the number provided to serve the residential component of the project is
being requested. A total of 510 parking spaces would be required to serve the unit mix of the 262 apartment units,
including guest spaces. A total of 459 parking spaces will be provided for residents and their guests within the
residential parking structure, a deficiency of 51 spaces or a ten percent (10%) reduction.
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 7
APPLICATION(S) REQUESTED/ REQUIRED FINDINGS
Major Site Plan Review: The applicant is requesting approval of a Major Site Plan to construct a
new five-story, 262-unit residential apartment building surrounding a six-level parking structure, a
new five-level parking structure to serve an existing office building, and related site improvements
creating a horizontal mixed-use development.
Required Findings:
1. The project design is compatible with surrounding development and neighborhoods.
2. The project conforms to City development standards and any applicable special design
guidelines or specific plan requirements.
3. The project provides for safe and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation, both on-
and off-site.
4. City services are available and adequate to serve the project.
5. The project has been designed to fully mitigate or substantially minimize adverse
environmental effects.
Design Review Committee: The applicant is requesting approval of a Design Review application
for the architectural design, landscaping, and streetscape improvements associated with the
proposed horizontal mixed-use development.
Required Finding:
1. The project design upholds community aesthetics through the use of an internally
consistent, integrated design theme and is consistent with all adopted specific plans,
applicable design standards, and their required findings.
Tentative Parcel Map: The applicant is requesting approval of a Tentative Parcel Map to
subdivide a six-acre site to create two parcels.
Required Findings:
1. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan.
2. The design of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development.
4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
5. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems.
7. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 8
Administrative Adjustment: The applicant is requesting approval of an Administrative
Adjustment to reduce the required number of parking spaces overall for the residential component
by 51 spaces (10% reduction) and reduce by one-foot (4% reduction) the width of the drive aisle in
the residential parking structure.
Required Findings:
1. The reduction in standards will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general
welfare of persons residing or working on the subject property or in the vicinity.
2. The issuance of the adjustment does not compromise the intent of the Zoning Code.
ANALYSIS/STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
Issue 1: Integrated Design
Architecture
The proposed architectural style of the new apartment building is contemporary and is designed to
respond to the building’s location and the surrounding architectural forms, particularly the
horizontal character of the existing office building on the site. The design elements of the new
apartment building include finished plaster painted white (Extra White) or black (Iron Ore) with
reveals and limestone of a color that responds to the existing office building which will remain as is.
The other elements include the use of metal railings (Monorail Silver), vinyl windows, aluminum
storefront, and entry stoops. The plans demonstrate the depth of building offsets and features on the
building. The building elevations oriented towards the SR-22 and the on-ramps provide geometric
sculptural elements and include two possible design alternatives to these elevations for the Design
Review Committee’s subsequent consideration prior to the issuance of building permits, included as
a Conditions of Approval.
The proposed architectural style of the office building parking structure is also contemporary with
the concrete painted using the same background color (Extra White) of the new apartment building,
with the horizontal levels painted in a beige tone (Nantucket Dune) to compliment the apartment
building’s limestone accents and to tie in with the existing office building finish.
Landscape
New landscape and hardscape elements tie the existing office building with the newly created
residential building on the western portion of the site to create an integrated appearance consistent
with the OMC design criteria for horizontal mixed-use development. Specifically, the hierarchy of
trees provides visual cues to site and building entry points. The palette includes a large vertical tree
(Lemon Scented Gum), large canopy trees (Olive and London Plane), columnar trees (Giant Timber
Bamboo and Giant Bird of Paradise), a large accent trees (Jacaranda) and Palms (Date and Fern).
These trees form the back-bone for the remaining palette of trees that are more pedestrian-scaled
and provide color. This part of the palette proposes small canopy trees (Crape Myrtle, Dragon,
Southern Magnolia, and Brisbane Box) and a small accent tree (Chitalpa).
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 9
Lighting
The top deck of both parking structures proposes to utilize an LED luminaire fixture mounted on
15-foot high poles located in the center aisle of the parking deck avoiding placement along the roof
edge. Sheet E1.1 provides additional conceptual details regarding other contemporary fixtures
types to be used within the project. However, a condition as requested by the Design Review
Committee has been added to the list of Conditions of Approval concerning the future review of a
lighting plan for the enhanced lighting elements of the project prior to issuance of a building permit.
Amenities
Resident amenities for the proposed apartment building include a pool courtyard, club house, par
course workout path, dog park, gym, barbeque areas, bicycle kitchen and basketball court.
Access and Circulation
The vehicular access for the proposed horizontal mixed-use development is provided via an
existing, full-access driveway off Town and Country Road directly in front of the office building;
with a new, restricted-access driveway right-in/right-out located approximately 125 feet to the west
also off Town and Country Road. The limited use of palm trees is at the primary entry drive to give
emphasis and assist with way-finding as suggested by the Design Review Committee.
The overarching criteria for consideration of Design Review approval is an internally consistent and
integrated design theme, and Staff believes that the applicant’s proposal meets that objective and the
Design Review Committee recommended approval of the design. Two conditions were requested;
both of which have been included in the draft Planning Commission Resolution, provided as
Attachment 1. A copy of the June 7, 2017 minutes is also provided as Attachment 4 for the
Commission’s reference.
Issue 2: Waiver of Certain Parking Requirements
OMC Section 17.34.020 stipulates that parking and loading regulations shall apply to every newly
constructed building, reconstructed or structurally altered building, or buildings used for another
purpose. The standards are considered the minimum requirement. The applicant is seeking relief
from two development standards for the residential component of the horizontal mixed-use
development on the site. The following describes the requests:
For an apartment project, the OMC requires calculation for the total number of required
parking spaces based upon a ratio assigned per unit type associated with the nu mber of
bedrooms. Additionally, regardless of number of bedrooms, all units are to equally be
provided with a fractional guest space. Based upon these requirements and the unit mix, the
residential component of the project is required to provide a total of 510 parking spaces.
The project seeks to reduce the number of spaces provided by ten percent (10%) or 51
spaces, to provide a total of 459. Of the 459, 47 would remain as unassigned spaces, with
412 to be assigned to units. The project applicant has based their request upon the
conclusions drawn from a parking study of similar types of residential apartment buildings
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 10
when located within urban settings to demonstrate the “average” ratio needed. This analysis
is provided as Attachment 3.
In designing a parking lot or structure, the OMC requires a minimum two-way drive aisle
measuring 25 feet in width. The plans show a one-foot reduction for the drive aisle width
within the residential parking structure, which represents a four percent (4%) adjustment.
Staff believes that both of the above requests for Administrative Adjustment can be supported. The
reduction in the overall number of parking spaces is justified by an analysis of similar residential
apartment projects within urban settings where employment centers are in close proximity and
where alternative modes of transportation are readily available. Further, the mixed-use
development combines residential and office uses on the same site, where typical hours that
generate a need for parking spaces are opposite each other. Therefore, residents and their guests
will be able to utilize the office parking spaces on the project site during evenings and weekends.
The reduction in the width of the drive aisles allows for the overall footprint of the building to be
less, providing additional land area for landscaping and resident amenities. With the approval of the
Administrative Adjustment, the issue is considered resolved.
Issue 3: Environmental Impact/Mitigation
The analysis contained in the MND determined that implementation of the project may result in
significant environmental effects without mitigation. Acting as the Lead Agency, the City
determined potential impacts may result from the project related to the following environmental
factors: Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Geology/Soils, Hazards & Hazardous Materials,
Transportation/Traffic, and Tribal Cultural Resources. CEQA Guidelines requires that mitigation
measures be identified for such impacts in an effort to reduce such impacts to a less than significant
level and that mitigation be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
legally binding instruments. The MND includes mitigation measures that have been incorporated
into the conditions of approval as part of the draft Planning Commission Resolution provided as
Attachment 1. Section 4 of the MND provided in Exhibit B summarizes the project’s significant
impact, mitigation measure, and level of significance after mitigation. Incorporation of the
mitigation measures into the project results in a reduction of significant impact to a less than
significant level to the environmental factors listed above. With the adoption of the MND by the
Planning Commission, the issue is considered resolved.
Issue 4: Public Comments
The City received seven comment letters during the public review period for the MND. None of the
comments were from the public at-large. The comments were generated by responsible agencies
that included: Caltrans, Santiago Creek Greenway Alliance, South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD), Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA), Orange County Public Works
(OCPW), Kennedy Commission and Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). Only two of the
commenting agency’s remarks (Caltrans and SCAQMD) required additional analysis or corrections
to the MND. Caltrans requested an analysis of an additional intersection and SCAQMD provided
minor edits to the Mitigation Measures to correct for the referenced year. Staff prepared response
comments to all correspondence received and forwarded those responses in compliance with
CEQA. The comments received and the responses are provided as Attachment 5. With the
Planning Commission Staff Report
July 17, 2017
Page 11
concurrence of the Planning Commission of this information in light of the whole record when
acting to adopt the MND for the project, the issue would be resolved.
ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION
Staff Review:
The Streamlined, Multi-Disciplined, Accelerated Review Team (SMART) originally considered the
formal application along with plans and technical reports on July 8, 2016, September 21, 2016,
January 11, 2017, and again on March 8, 2017, and recommended approval of the proposal subject
to standard conditions.
Design Review Committee:
The Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal on May 3, 2017, continued it to June 7, 2017,
and then recommended approval with conditions by a vote of 4-0, which have been included in the
draft Planning Commission resolution. The minutes from both of these meetings are provided as
Attachment 4 to this report.
ATTACHMENTS/EXHIBITS
Attachments to Report:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 17-17
2. Vicinity Map
3. Linscott, Law & Greenspan – Parking Analysis – December 16, 2016
4. Design Review Committee Minutes, May 3, 2017 and June 7, 2017
5. Comments Received/Responded – MND No. 1856-17
Exhibits provided to the Planning Commission:
A. Submitted Plans date labeled July 17, 2017
B. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1856-17
cc: Nick Markos
Westcore Properties
4435 Eastgate Mall, Suite 300
San Diego, CA 92121
n:\cdd\plng\applications\tentative parcel maps\tpm 0012-16 town & country mu\pc\pc staff report 07-17-17.doc