Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Placentia council approves mixed-use plan for former Donavi/Jeep site after marathon negotiations
Summary
After more than eight hours of presentations, public testimony and line‑by‑line edits to conditions, the Placentia City Council voted 3–2 to adopt a resolution approving a 248-unit mixed‑use development at the former Donavi/Jeep site, subject to a package of traffic, parking and streetscape conditions.
The Placentia City Council narrowly approved a conditional plan to redevelop the former Donavi/Jeep site on Orangethorpe and Placentia Avenue into a mixed‑use project with 248 market‑rate apartments and about 2,700 square feet of ground‑floor retail. The council adopted Resolution R2024-60 after extended public hearings and late‑night negotiation of mitigation and conditions.
Staff had recommended denying the project, citing inconsistency with portions of Specific Plan 5 and several policies in the general plan — especially public‑safety and mobility standards and the absence of on‑site affordable units. City planning staff told the council the draft mitigated negative declaration (MND) found impacts could be mitigated, but also documented concerns about pedestrian infrastructure and the need for a more comprehensive streetscape master plan. "Staff finds the key issues are inconsistency with the general plan, not aligning with several elements," the planning director told the council.
The applicant and its consultants argued the project would catalyze redevelopment of a long‑vacant parcel, deliver development fees and help the city meet RHNA obligations. Developer‑retained economist John Stover, in the city’s peer review, found the hotel and car‑dealership scenarios would yield stronger fiscal gains, but still concluded the proposed residential scenario produced net positive economic output; the applicant’s consultant RSG reached a different fiscal estimate, prompting the council to weigh both analyses. "All three scenarios have a positive economic output," Stover said during his presentation.
Residents, businesses and organized groups offered split testimony. Some adjacent property owners and nearby businesses warned of parking spillage and construction impacts; an environmental group (SAFER) urged that the MND be replaced by an EIR based on air‑quality and health‑risk modeling. Others, including housing advocates, urged approval as a source of housing in a region facing shortages.
The council’s approval included a negotiated package of conditions covering: a parking management plan funded by the developer, payment of citywide development impact fees at the time building permits are pulled, a contribution toward a streetscape study, public‑improvement bonding, utility undergrounding requirements except where high‑voltage transmission lines preclude it, and a requirement that building permits for the apartments not be issued before permits for the parking structure. The ordinance authorizing the specific‑plan change passed first reading and will return for a second reading. The council voted on the resolution and the ordinance first reading on a 3–2 tally (Yes: Shader, Ivanka, Mayor Yamaguchi; No: Smith, Mayor Pro Tem Kerwin).
Council members said the final package attempts to balance long‑term fiscal and safety concerns with practical steps to ensure the project delivers public improvements. The council also directed staff to finalize the exact wording and the final conditions in coordination with the developer and city attorney before the second reading.
