My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 32 - Second Reading of Uncodified Ordinance Amendment No. 2024-07
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2025
>
01/21/2025 Regular & Special SA
>
Item 32 - Second Reading of Uncodified Ordinance Amendment No. 2024-07
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2025 1:37:54 PM
Creation date
1/15/2025 1:23:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Planning & Building
Item #
32
Date
1/21/2025
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
288
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
14 <br />way the building is utilized. Most commercial buildings need an overhaul after 20 or more years to keep <br />the building in suitable condition. Determining whether reinvestment to the properti es has occurred <br />recently involves reviewing both the building -to-land value ratio and building age. The ratio is calculated <br />by comparing the building improvement value (the value of improvements to the structure of the building) <br />to the land value. These nu mbers are derived from the Orange County Assessor Department and are the <br />assessed values for determining property taxes. To calculate assessed property values, all building <br />improvement information from jurisdictions are sent to the Orange County Assessor D epartment during <br />the building permitting process. If the building -to-land value ratio is less than one, it means that the <br />building improvements are worth less than the property value. If building improvements are relatively <br />new or the building is newer, ty pically a building -to- land value ratio can easily go above 2.0 to as high as <br />10.0. If the ratio is below one, or even below 0.5, it is a clear sign that there has not been recent building <br />improvements to improve the condition. If the property has a low bu ilding-to-land value ratio with <br />building over 50 years old, it is likely that building has not improved and deterioration may be occurring <br />to structure, including to the façade, decline of the roof, and equipment and services (e.g., space and <br />heating, ductwork, electrical work, etc.). <br />Table 6 summarizes the sites identified as alternative parcels, which can facilitate a total surplus capacity <br />of 5,853 units. It also identifies if the site meets the suitability criteria for non -vacant sites. These sites <br />comply with AB 2011 site criteria, are located with opportunity areas, have access to public transportation, <br />contain existing commercial and/or residential uses that are of marginal economic viability, are at or near <br />the end of their useful life, and/or the ex isting intensity of development is substantially lower than allowed <br />by existing zoning. The criteria thresholds selected are based on regional trends for redevelopment of <br />residential and mixed-use development. <br />Additionally, sites that are smaller than 0.5 acres have multiple parcels that are adjacent to each other <br />and are appropriate for consolidation into larger development projects, achieving a lot size of at least 0.5 <br />acres. These sites have common ownership, function as a part of a larger site currentl y, such as a <br />commercial building with an adjacent parking lot, and/or are significantly underutilized and have been <br />identified for potential projects. <br />For the purpose of calculating the net surplus capacity as shown in Table 6, individual parcels that mak e <br />up a larger development site were aggregated and assigned a site identifier expressed by a number. The <br />site identifier is shown in the column on the far left of Table 6 titled Lot Consolidation. These are sites that <br />would require lot consolidation to occur to develop at the rates expressed in the table. Those parcels that <br />do not have a Lot Consolidation number, could be developed without lot consolidation and do not include <br />a Lot Consolidation number. The City’s General Plan Land Use Element indicates that when calculating <br />the number of units permitted on a site based on permitted residential densities, the total number of <br />units permitted shall be round ed down in any case where a fraction of a uni t is permissible. For sites with <br />a Lot Consolidation number, the total area of each parcel comprising the development site was aggregated <br />before being multiplied by the permitted density. The product of the density calculation was then rounded <br />down, as is required by the City’s General Plan, and included in the Net Surplus Capacity (consolidated and <br />round down) column . <br />MainPlace Mall Site <br />The net surplus capacities for the MainPlace Mall site, Affordable Alternative/Upzoned Map ID Nos. 19 - <br />25 and Mixed-Income Alternative/Upzoned Map ID Nos. 18 -24 in Table 6 and Table 7 below , utilize a <br />ATTACHMENT 3
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.